HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 104-09
RESOLUTION NO. O 4 0 9
RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC
PARKS AND TRAILS PLAN FOR NORTHEAST BAKERSFIELD
FOR THE CANYONS PROJECT GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH
OF HART MEMORIAL PARK, BOUNDED BY ALFRED HARRELL
HIGHWAY ON THE WEST, NORTH AND EAST SIDES (FILE NO.
03-0337),
WHEREAS, Robert Kapral, representing The Canyons LLC, filed an application requesting a an
amendment to the Specific Parks and Trails Plan for Northeast Bakersfield within the City of Bakersfield
as hereinafter described; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Bakersfield, in accordance with the provisions of
Section 65355 of the Government Code, held a public hearing on May 6, 2009, on Specific Plan
Amendment No. 03-0337 for the proposed amendment to the Specific Parks and Trails Plan for
Northeast Bakersfield, notice of the time and place of public hearing having been given at least ten (10)
calendar days before said hearing by publication in The Bakersfield Californian, a local newspaper of
general circulation; and
WHEREAS, Specific Plan Amendment No. 03-0337, an amendment to the Specific Parks and
Trails Plan for Northeast Bakersfield, is as follows:
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 03-0337:
Robert Kapral, Canyons LLC applied to amend the Specific Parks and Trails Plan for Northeast
Bakersfield in order to provide a public trails system and public parks through the Canyons
development consisting of residential, commercial, and open space uses, which provides
connections beyond the project site.
WHEREAS, the City Council continued the public hearing to the general plan amendment cycle;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Bakersfield in accordance with the provisions of
Section 65355 of the Government Code, held a public hearing on August 19, 2009, on General Plan
Amendment 03-0337 of the proposed amendment to the Land Use Element and Circulation Element of
the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, notice of the time and place of public hearing having been
given at least ten (10) calendar days before said hearing by publication in The Bakersfield Californian, a
local newspaper of general circulation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council continued the public hearing to the September 9, 2009 regular
meeting; and
WHEREAS, for the above described, an Initial Study was conducted and it was determined that
the proposed project would have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
(SCH# 2006031060); and
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield retained the professional consulting services of Michael
Brandman Associates (MBA) to prepare the Initial Study, EIR and related documents; and
o~ 6AKFq
q
p,
r
U CD
ORIGINAL
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and adoption of Environmental
Impact Reports as set forth in CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Bakersfield CEQA
Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by city staff and the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Canyons project site contains approximately 889 acres; and
WHEREAS, the applicant for the property owner has indicated the purpose of the request is to
provide parks, trails, and open space areas to meet the recreational needs of local residents including
both active and passive recreational facilities; and
WHEREAS, the project site shall include local park/staging areas adjacent to open space, trails
and the foothills of northeast Bakersfield where possible to provide local park facilities and enable the
public direct non-motorized access to natural amenities; and
WHEREAS, all impacts from both the project, the alternative site plan, or combination of the
plans, have been reduced to less than significant levels with or without implementation of mitigation
measures, upon implementation of this project or the alternative site plan or combination; and
WHEREAS, implementation of the project, alternative site plan, or combination would meet the
objectives of the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council continued the public hearing to the regularly scheduled City Council
meeting of September 9, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the Council has considered and concurs with the findings made by the Planning
Commission as set forth in Resolution No. 15-09, adopted on April 16, 2009, by which the Commission
recommended approval of Specific Plan Amendment No. 03-0337, subject to the Commission's
recommendation to expand the public park located in the northeast portion of the project site and
remove the two-acre park in the southwest portion of the project site; and
WHEREAS, the Council has certified the Final EIR for the Canyons project and Specific Plan
Amendment No. 03-0337 as set forth in the Council's Resolution adopted on September 9, 2009 as
complete and adequate for consideration of project-related approvals, including Specific Plan
Amendment No. 03-0337, and in said Resolution the Council concluded based on evidence in the
record that all potential environmental effects of the project can be mitigated to a less than significant
level and the Council adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY FOUND AND RESOLVED as follows:
1. The laws and regulations relating to the preparation and adoption of Environmental
Impact Report as set forth in CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of
Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by the city; and
2. All required public notices have been given; and
3. The provisions of CEQA have been followed regarding consideration and approval of
Specific Plan Amendment No. 03-0337; and
4. The amendment to the Specific Parks and Trails Plan for Northeast Bakersfield as
shown in the attached Exhibit B is compatible with the land use and circulation
designations of surrounding properties and is internally consistent with the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan, subject to prior approval of General Plan Amendment No. 03-
0337.
m
r
- 2 - °'GINAL
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY FURTHER FOUND AND RESOLVED as follows:
1. The above recitals and findings incorporated herein by reference are true and correct
and constitute the findings of the City Council in this matter.
2. The report of the Planning Commission, including maps and all reports and papers
relevant thereto, transmitted by the Secretary of the Planning Commission to the City
Council, is hereby received, accepted and approved.
3. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid
or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR, as
documented by evidence in the record and the exhibits to this Resolution.
4. That Specific Plan Amendment No. 03-0337 to the Specific Parks and Trails Plan for
Northeast Bakersfield is hereby approved as recommended by the Planning Commission
and shown on the Specific Plan Amendment Map in Exhibit B, subject to the Mitigation
Measures/Conditions of Approval for the project as shown in Exhibit A and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted in the Final Environmental Impact Report as
shown in Exhibit D.
5. Attached CEQA Findings of Facts shown in Exhibit C, and Monitoring and Reporting
Program shown in Exhibit D are appropriate and incorporated into the project.
6. City staff is directed to file a Notice of Determination of said approval with the County
Clerk and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research
-000........
o
~ m
v o
ORIGINAL
-3-
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 SE129 by the
following vote:
AYE COUNCILMEMBERt^U~,rSOn ► ~~►arrt 1 r CC,%Aq% 4.1h1ran $Scy-, rLg v
ICES: COUNCILMEMBER mil' .61st .
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER LW2!SR
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER I'N rrrNe
V
PAMELA A. McCARTHY, C C
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio ler of the
Council of the City of Bakersfie d
SEP 0 9 2009
APPROVED
ALL
HARVEY L. O 4a
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form:
VIRGINIA GENNARO
City Attorney
By:
EXHIBIT A Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures
B Specific Parks and Trails Plan for Northeast Bakersfield Amendment Map
C CEQA Findings of Fact
D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Jeng\ S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CC_Reso Park PIan.DOC
August 18, 2009
~ 3AKF9J
.n
t rn
r-
c,' O
ORIGINAL
-4-
EXHIBIT A
GPA/ZC 03-0337 - THE CANYONS
SPECIFIC PARKS AND TRAILS PLAN FOR NORTHEAST BAKERSFIELD
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1 Subdivider/developer shall provide a Tamarack Ridge Way as a public street and terminate in a
cul-de-sac northeast of Lot 23, Phase 15. The land consisting of the area north of Tamarack
Ridge Way (north of Lot 23, Phase 15) shown as View Point Court, and the land on both sides of
View Pointe Court including the residential lots shall be dedicated to the City of Bakersfield for
public park purposes. The dedication shall be by approved agreement with the City prior to
recordation of the first final parcel or tract map of the Canyons project. This area shall be
designated as OS-HD (Open Space-Hillside Development) zone. Subdivider/developer shall
rough grade the land north of Tamarack Ridge Way along the frontage of the property to be
dedicated to the City for parkland to similar elevations as the Tamarack Ridge Way cul-de-sac at
its north terminus (north of Lot 23, Phase 15). The rough grade elevations shall allow for future
vehicle access to the park. Grading shall be approved by the City Engineer. (Replaces
Mitigation Measure 5.1. B. 5)
2 The 2-acre land reservation for park located in the southwest corner of the project site, west of
Granite Ridge Way (shown as a 2-acre Open Space lot) shall be removed and allowed to be
subdivided for single family residential lots in accordance with local Subdivision and Hillside
Development Ordinances.
3 With recordation of each phase, public access easements shall be dedicated for the trails within
private street subdivisions. The homeowners association shall be responsible for maintaining the
trails along the private streets. The trails along public roads will be dedicated to the City of
Bakersfield and will be maintained by the City. Subdivider/developer is responsible for
construction of all trails and trails shall comply with trail cross sections (widths, design,
improvements). Note: The street cross section for Clearwater Canyon Place shall be required to
include a sidewalk and an 8-foot wide landscape strip on the non-trail side of the street.
4. Mitigation measures approved as part of the Canyons GPA/ZC 03-0337 shall apply to the
approval, development and operation and maintenance of parks and trails.
Jeng / S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091EX Con trails. doc A K~r
August 18, 2009
m
O
'PfGINAL
EXHIBIT B
• C/)
<~y4
A
•1I
.O°6
} LFRED HARRELL HY~ .r~•• . ^ ^
i
~ ~ e ~ ~ Br t ~ z
0 .0
! r
Cf)
02 a) **Moo
00
; 00
- - m
CD O Z
i ■ a~~ ~1
■ N
~p k°qs ~1
-4
RIVA
m o
i 9 4fj
0 j O -J ; ♦
+ ----1-------------------- ♦ :
03
i
m T . ♦ m
;0 2 ;o la p ;a
Ap
C) G)
C c rn 'Vi'i
c z
n
r C r N <~j D
m
I---------------
U) 5 m ~ 1 i'~ I r
m ;o
N ~ ~ 7C Z • ♦
O r j
j= en
N CA
ORIGINAL
EXHIBIT C
CEQA Findings of Fact
for the
The Canyons
Prepared for:
City of Bakersfield
Development Services Department
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
661.326.3043
Prepared by:
Michael Brandman Associates
220 Commerce, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92602
714.508.4100
Contact: Michael E. Houlihan, AICP, Project Director
N&WA MIN
Michael Brandman Associates
January 23, 2008
(As edited by City staff for September 9, 2009 City Council adoption.)
3 r~ KF
' m
O
`HIGINAL
The Canyons
CEQA Findings of Fact Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: Introduction 1-1
1.1 - Background 1-1
1.2 - Project Location 1-3
1.3 - Project Components 1-3
1.4 - Project Objectives 1-3
1.5 - Record of Proceedings 1-4
1.6 - Custodian and Location of Records 1-5
1.7 - Environmental Review and Public Participation 1-6
1.8 - General Findings 1-7
1.9 - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan 1-8
1.10 - Environmental Impacts Determined not to be Significant 1-8
Section 2: Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which Can Be
Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance 2-10
2.1 - Project Specific 2-11
2. 1.1 - Land Use and Planning 2-11
2.1.2 - Air Quality 2-24
2.1.3 - Biological Resources 2-32
2.1.4 - Cultural Resources 2-53
2.1.5 - Geology and Soils 2-56
2.1.6 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials 2-66
2.1.7 - Hydrology and Water Quality 2-71
2.1.8 - Noise 2-80
2.1.9 - Public Services 2-86
2.1.10 - Traffic and Transportation 2-88
2. 1.11 - Utilities and Service Systems 2-106
2.1.12 - Aesthetics 2-141
2.1.13 - Mineral Resources 2-145
2.2 - Cumulative 2-146
2.2.1 - Land Use and Planning 2-146
2.2.2 - Air Quality 2-149
2.2.3 - Biological Resources 2-154
2.2.4 - Cultural Resources 2-165
2.2.5 - Hydrology and Water Quality 2-166
2.2.6 - Public Services 2-169
2.2.7 - Traffic and Transportation 2-170
2.2.8 - Utilities and Service Systems 2-180
2.2.9 - Aesthetics 2-215
2.2.10 - Mineral Resources 2-217
Section 3: Proiect Alternatives 3-1
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1-1: Impact Fee Programs Intersection and Roadway Segment Improvements 2-102
3Af(F~
Michael Brandman Associates iii J'n
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc - rn
r-
)PIGlNAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 - Background
In compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Public
Resources Code Section 21000 et seq and the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Bakersfield has
conducted an environmental review of The Canyons development. A Notice of Preparation (NOP)
was released for public review in March 2006. In January 2007, the Draft Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) was released. After the close of the public comment period, the City determined that,
"significant" new information was required to be added to the EIR. Therefore, in accordance with
Section 15088.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a Recirculated
Draft EIR was distributed to the public. A Recirculated Final EIR was prepared that included
responses to comments provided on both the Draft EIR and the Recirculated Draft EIR. During its
public hearing on the Recirculated Final EIR, the Planning Commission received evidence that a
portion of the project site was subject to a Williamson Act contract and Agricultural Preserve
designation. The City prepared and circulated for public review a new Section 5.17 of the EIR plus
edits to other sections of the EIR to address in more detail the project's potential effect on agricultural
resources (the "Recirculated Portions of the EIR"). The Recirculated Portions of the EIR found no
new significant impacts or increased severity of significant impacts as a result of the new evaluation
of agricultural resources. Responses were prepared to comments received on both the Recirculated
Final EIR and the Recirculated Portions of the EIR, in writing and orally. The Final EIR includes the
verbatim comments received on the Draft EIR, Recirculated Draft EIR, Recirculated Final EIR, and
Recirculated Portions of the EIR, a list of persons, entities, and agencies providing comments, the
City's responses to the significant environmental points raised in the comment, review and
consultation process, and the various written responses to the comments prepared by the City's
technical consultants and the City. These Findings are based upon the information contained in the
record of proceedings, including all the EIR documents produced during the above-described process
and their technical appendices, and the comments and responses thereto, as well as staff reports, the
project applicant's materials, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the testimony
presented at public hearings, and all of the materials set forth in the Record of Proceedings, including
Section 1.5, below.
CEQA provides that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible
alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant
environmental effects of such projects[.]" (Public Resources Code Section 21002 [emphasis added].)
The procedures required by CEQA "are intended to assist public agencies in systematically
identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible
mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects." (Public
Resources Code Section 21002.)
o ~PKF9~
s
Michael Brandman Associates-1
r
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc D Q
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
CEQA provides that a public agency has an obligation to balance a variety of public objectives,
including economic, environmental, and social factors and in particular, the goals of providing
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, and providing a satisfying living environment
for every Californian. (Public Resources Code Section 21081; CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code of
Regulations, Section 15021(d).) CEQA also provides that "in the event [that] specific economic,
social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures,
individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof." (Public
Resources Code Section 21002.) CEQA requires decision-makers to balance the benefits of a
proposed project against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, and, if the
benefits of a proposed project outweigh the significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts,
the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts may be considered "acceptable" by adopting a
"Statement of Overriding Considerations." (CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code of Regulations,
Section 15093.) Because the proposed project would not result in significant unavoidable adverse
impacts, a Statement of Overriding Considerations for The Canyons is not required.
CEQA's mandates and principles are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies
adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. For each significant
environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a
written finding reaching one or more of three conclusions: (1) that "[c]hanges or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect as identified in the final EIR," (2) "[s]uch changes or alterations are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding [and]
[s]uch changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other
agency," or (3) "[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR." (Public Resources Code Section 21081;
CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15091.) CEQA defines "feasible" to
mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time,
taking into account economic, legal, environmental, social and technological factors." (Public
Resources Code Section 21061.1; CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations Section
15364.)
Because the Recirculated Draft EIR identified significant effects that may occur as a result of the
project, and in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council
of the City of Bakersfield hereby adopts these Findings and Findings of Fact. For each of the
significant effects identified in Section 2, as set forth in greater detail in these Findings below, the
City Council makes the finding under Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(]) and/or (a)(2). The
City Council is not required to make the finding under Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3)
because The Canyons project will not result in significant unavoidable adverse impacts.
O
rn
1.2 Michael Brandman Associates u
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
In accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council of the City
of Bakersfield has independently reviewed the record of proceedings and based on the evidence in the
Record of Proceedings adopts these Findings of Fact.
1.2 - Project Location
The approximately 890-acre project site is located in the northeastern portion of the City of
Bakersfield in Kern County, California. The site is bounded by Alfred Harrell Highway to the west,
north and east, and vacant land immediately on the north, south, and east. The Kern River is located
to the north of Alfred Harrell Highway, and the future alignment of Morning Drive is located
immediately east of the project site.
1.3 - Project Components
The proposed project includes the development of a new community with residential, commercial,
and recreational land uses. The proposed mixed-use project is primarily residential and includes the
development of I 1 private gated communities with 1,112 private gated residences and 222 non-gated
residences. Overall, the proposed project consists of 1,000 single-family residential lots on
approximately 461.93 acres, 214 single family lots on approximately 46.68 acres, 120 multi-family
dwelling units on approximately 28.18 acres, and approximately 65,000 square feet of general
commercial on approximately 8.15 acres. The project also includes a private recreational center on
5.2 acres. In addition to this center, three areas are proposed for parks totaling 17.33 gross acres
(12.97 net useable acres). These three parks include (1) a 8.5 gross acre (6.34 net useable acre) park
in the northeast portion of the project site, (2) a 6.83 gross acre (4.63 net useable acre) park in the
east-central portion of the site and immediately south of Clearwater Canyon Parkway, and (3) a 2-
acre (gross and net) lot proposed adjacent to a future City of Bakersfield park located southwest of the
project site and east of Mooncrest Place. The project plan includes 9.66 miles of public trails and
1.43 miles of Class I bike path, totaling approximately 11.09 miles. Approximately 284.41 acres will
be retained as open space while approximately 42 acres will be maintained as common areas.
The implementation of the proposed project will require an amendment to the existing Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan land use designation from OS-S (Open Space-Steep Slopes) and LR (Low-
Density Residential) to OS-S (Open Space-Steep Slopes), LR (Low-Density Residential), LMR
(Low-Medium Density Residential), and GC (General Commercial). Additionally, the project will
require amendments to the existing General Plan Circulation Element to extend off-site collector
street alignments to and within the proposed project site and to extend off-site bike paths to and
within the project site.
1.4 - Project Objectives
The proposed project meets the following project objectives. G 3AK~~
o cn-n
Michael Brandman Associates FV3 i~
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciRSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
I . Provide residential uses to meet the housing demand specified in the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Land Use Element.
2. Provide neighborhood parks, open space areas, bikepaths, trails and other improvements
which satisfy or exceed park dedication requirements and help achieve the goals of the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Open Space Element and the 2003 Specific Parks and
Trails Plan for northeastern Bakersfield, thus serving recreational needs of local residents
and the general public, including both active and passive parkland.
3. Supply housing to meet growth projections in the northeast Bakersfield area.
4. Provide an efficient street system that minimizes impacts on adjacent residential
neighborhoods and environmentally sensitive areas.
5. Locate development to meet anticipated growth in areas of relatively lesser environmental
sensitivity, accommodating growth while balancing environmental considerations.
6. Provide a residential development of sufficient scale to permit master-planning of
infrastructure, parks, open space, and public services to achieve the greatest possible
efficiencies and synergies.
7. Preserve scenic resources of the project site for the benefit of the surrounding community.
1.5 - Record of Proceedings
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the proposed project
consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum:
• The Notice of Preparation (NOP) and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction
with the proposed project;
• The Final Environmental Impact Report for the proposed project which consists of the
Recirculated Draft EIR, the technical appendices, the Recirculated Portions of the EIR, and the
multiple sets of comments and responses;
• The Recirculated Draft EIR;
• All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public on the Draft EIR,
Recirculated Draft EIR, Recirculated Final EIR, and Recirculated Portions of the EIR;
• All responses to written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public on the
Draft EIR, Recirculated Draft EIR, Recirculated Final EIR, and Recirculated Portions of the
EIR ;
• All written and verbal public testimony presented during a noticed public hearing for the
proposed project at which such testimony was taken, and responses to such testimony;
~.,~PKF9
Z), sT
1-4 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc U C7
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
e The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP);
e The documents, reports and technical memoranda included or referenced in the technical
appendices of the Final EIR;
e All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the Recirculated
Draft EIR, Recirculated Portions of the EIR, and Final EIR;
e The Ordinances and Resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the proposed project,
and all documents incorporated by reference therein;
e Matters of common knowledge to the City, including but not limited to federal, state and local
laws and regulations and policy documents;
e Written correspondence submitted to the City in connection with the project;
e All documents, City Staff Reports, City studies, and all written or oral testimony provided to
the City in connection with the project;
e Any documents expressly cited in these Findings;
e The City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Hillside Development Ordinance, and any
applicable plans adopted by the City;
e All public documents prepared by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
relating to the project and any and all testimony received by the San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District in connection with the project;
e All testimony and deliberations received or held in connection with the project;
e Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources
Code Section 21167.6(e) (excluding privileged materials), including materials submitted to the
City by the applicant.
1.6 - Custodian and Location of Records
The documents and other materials which constitute the administrative record for the City's actions
related to the project are located at the City of Bakersfield Development Services Department -
Planning Division, located at 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California 93301, Beale Library
located at 701 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301, Kern County Law Library, 1415
Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301, and many of the documents that constitute the
record may be accessed on the City's website at www.bakersfieldcity.us. The City Planning
Department is the custodian of the record of proceedings for the project. Copies of these documents,
which constitute the record of proceedings, are and at all relevant times have been and will be
available upon request at the office of the Planning Department. This information is provided in
3AK~
Michael Brandman Associates ~"g 1
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc - m
?RIGIN,~L.
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guideline Section
15091(e).
1.7 - Environmental Review and Public Participation
The City prepared an Initial Study (IS) for the proposed project in March 2006. Based on that IS, the
City determined that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment and that
an EIR should be prepared to analyze the potential impacts associated with approval and
implementation of the proposed project.
On March 13, 2006 in accordance with Section 15082 of the Guidelines, the City distributed a Notice
of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report to the State Clearinghouse, local and
regional responsible agencies and other interested parties. The City held an advertised, public
scoping meeting on the project on March 31, 2006 to provide (i) information regarding the proposed
project and (ii) an opportunity for public input regarding project issues that should be addressed in the
EIR. This scoping meeting as well as additional comments provided by the public and City staff
resulted in a decision to analyze additional environmental factors and to expand the scope of the
environmental review of the project.
A total of eighteen agencies and other interested parties responded to the NOP. A copy of the IS,
NOP, and the responses received during the 30-day public review period, are contained in Appendix
A-1, Notice of Preparation/Initial Study and Appendix A-2, Notice of Preparation Comments, of the
Recirculated Draft EIR.
Subsequently, the Draft EIR for the proposed project was then prepared and circulated for review and
comment by the public, agencies and organizations for a 45-day public review period that began on
January 14, 2008 and ended on February 29, 2008. After the close of the public comment period, the
City determined that, "significant" new information was required to be added to the EIR. Therefore,
in accordance with Section 15088.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines,
a Recirculated Draft EIR was distributed to the public for an approximately 90-day public review
period that began on July 23, 2008 and ended on October 27, 2008. Subsequently, the City received
new information regarding agricultural resources that led to preparation of a Recirculated Portions of
the EIR document that was distributed to the public for an approximately 45-day review period that
began on February 4, 2009 and ended on March 23, 2009. Notices of Completion of the Draft EIR,
Recirculated Draft EIR and Recirculated Portions of the EIR were sent to the State Clearinghouse and
the Draft EIR, Recirculated Draft EIR and Recirculated Portions of the EIR were circulated to State
agencies for review through the State Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and Research (SCH. No.
2005061168). Notices of availability of the Draft EIR, Recirculated Draft EIR and Recirculated
Portions of the EIR for review were mailed to property owners and tenants within a 300 ft radius of
the project site and to interested parties who had requested notification regarding project EIR issues.
During the public review periods, comment letters were received on the Draft EIR, Recirculated Draft
1-6 Michael Srandman Associates ti `n
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
O
OF-M-3INAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
EIR, responses to those comments (which were published in a Recirculated Final EIR document) and
the Recirculated Portions of the EIR, as well as in testimony during public hearings. All of the
written and oral comments received were responded to in writing in several Response to Comments
documents that are included in the Final EIR.
The Draft EIR, Recirculated Draft EIR and Recirculated Portions of the EIR were made available for
public inspection on the City's web site, at the City of Bakersfield Planning Services Department,
located at 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301, Beale Library, located at 701
Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301, and the Kern County Law Library, 1415 Truxtun
Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301 during the public review periods.
1.8 - General Findings
The City hereby finds as follows:
• The City is the "Lead Agency" for the proposed project evaluated in the Final EIR;
• The Recirculated Draft EIR, Recirculated Portions of the EIR and the Final EIR were prepared
in compliance with CEQA and the Guidelines;
• The City has independently reviewed and analyzed the Recirculated Draft EIR, Recirculated
Portions of the EIR and the Final EIR, including all the responses to comments, and these
documents reflect the independent judgment of the Council/Agency;
• An MMRP has been prepared requiring mitigation measures and/or the changes to the
proposed project, which the City has adopted and made a condition of approval of the proposed
project. The MMRP is incorporated herein by reference and is considered part of the record of
proceedings for the proposed project;
• The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of
mitigation; the City will serve as the MMRP Coordinator;
• In determining whether the proposed project has a significant impact on the environment, and
in adopting these Findings pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA, the City has complied with
CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2;
• The impacts of the proposed project have fully been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time
of certification of the Final EIR;
• The City reviewed the comments received during the EIR process, and the responses thereto
and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments
add significant new information regarding environmental impacts to the CEQA documents
already circulated for public review. The City has based its actions on full appraisal of all
viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of these Findings,
concerning the environmental impacts identified and analyzed in the Final EIR; ~~KF9
o' `fr
R~
Michael Brandman Associates 1n T
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
ORIGINAL.
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
• The comments received during the EIR process and the responses thereto, which are contained
in the Final EIR, merely clarify and amplify the analysis in the Recirculated Draft EIR and the
Recirculated Portions of the EIR;
• Having reviewed the information contained in the Recirculated Draft EIR, Recirculated
Portions of the EIR, Final EIR and the record of proceedings, as well as the requirements of
CEQA and the Guidelines regarding recirculation, and having analyzed the changes in the
Recirculated Draft EIR and the Recirculated Portions of the EIR which have occurred since the
close of their respective public review periods, the City finds that there is no new significant
information in the Final EIR or other circumstances warranting recirculation under CEQA and
finds that recirculation is not required;
• The City has made no decisions that constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources
toward the proposed project prior to certification on the Final EIR, nor has the City previously
committed to a definite course of action with respect to the proposed project;
• The City has independently analyzed the project and the EIR prepared for the project, and has
independently considered the imposition of mitigation measures and all other matters related
thereto;
• Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the Final EIR are and have been
available upon request at all times at the offices of the City, custodian of record for such
documents or other materials.
Having received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the record, the City
hereby conditions the proposed project as set forth in the Conditions of Approval and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program and finds as stated in these Findings of Fact.
1.9 - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the City has prepared a mitigation monitoring
and reporting plan (MMRP) for the proposed project. The MMRP is designed to ensure that the
project applicant implements the mitigation measures identified in the findings below during
construction and operation of the proposed project. The MMRP is set forth in the "The Canyons
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan," which is adopted by the City in the same resolution that
has adopted these finding and is incorporated herein by this reference.
1.10 - Environmental Impacts Determined Not To Be Significant
A lead agency is required to make written findings of fact concerning each of the potential significant
environmental impacts of the proposed project. Written findings of fact are not required for potential
environmental impacts which the lead agency has determined are not significant and do not require
any mitigation. The City has determined, based on evidence in the record, that a number of topics
3 AKF9
1-8 Michael Brandman Associates F
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc U
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
and issues do not represent potential significant impacts. That evidence and determination may be
based on evaluation in the Initial Study, analysis in the various documents constituting the Final EIR,
or testimony and public official discussions during public hearings held by the Planning Commission
or City Council. The following findings are made regarding several of these topics due to the
controversy or special concern they generated during review of the Canyons project or their expanded
coverage in the Final EIR. Addressing these topics but omitting similar findings for others shall not
be interpreted to question or undermine the validity of the City's determination that any other
potential impact is less than significant.
1.10.1- Agricultural Resources. The facts in support of the determination that the proposed project
would have a less than significant impact on Agricultural Resources originally were contained in
section 1.2.2 of the Recirculated Draft EIR and in the Notice of Preparation/Initial Study which is
included in the Final EIR as Appendix A-1. Subsequent to circulation of the Recirculate Draft EIR,
the City discovered that a portion of the project site is subject to a Williamson Act agricultural
conservation contract, and is within an agricultural preserve designation adopted by the County
related to the Williamson Act contract. The City consequently prepared a Recirculated Portions of
the EIR, which contained a new Section 5.17 analysis of potential project impacts on agricultural
resources and revised other sections of the Recirculated Draft EIR as appropriate to consider the new
information, and circulated the Recirculated Portions of the EIR for a new round of public review -
on which no substantive comments were submitted. The Recirculated Draft EIR concluded that the
existence of a Williamson Act contract and agricultural preserve designation did not lead to any new
potential significant impacts, any increased severity of an already identified impact, or any
inconsistency with the General Plan, and no comment has questioned that conclusion. In addition, the
State agency responsible for dealing with Williamson Act contracts and agricultural preservation
informed the City that it had no comments or concerns. Based on that analysis, and taking into
consideration all the evidence in the record including documents and oral testimony presented at
public hearings, the City finds that even with the existence of the contract and preserve designation
and their potential removal as a consequence of the project, the project still would have a less than
significant impact on Agricultural Resources, both as a project and on a cumulative basis. No credible
evidence has been submitted sufficient to rebut this conclusion and finding.
1.10.2 - Electric and Magnetic Fields. The facts in support of the determination that the proposed
project would have a less than significant impact on Electric and Magnetic Fields are contained in
section 1.2.2 of the Final EIR and in the Notice of Preparation/Initial Study which is included in the
Final EIR as Appendix A-]. No credible evidence has been submitted sufficient to rebut this
conclusion and finding.
1.10.3 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions. CEQA does not presently require a lead agency to perform
detailed quantitative environmental review of a proposed project's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Although SB97 requires the Governor's Office of Planning and Research to adopt CEQA Guidelines
concerning the effects and mitigation of GHG emissions, the new guidelines are not required to be
adopted until January 1, 2010, and have not yet been adopted. A lead agency is not required to
consider proposed or draft regulations when evaluating a project and CEQA expressly prohibits its
provisions from being interpreted in a manner which imposes procedural or substantive requirements
beyond those explicitly stated in its statutory provisions or the CEQA Guidelines. Nonetheless, the
City analyzed the potential impacts of the proposed project on GHG emissions and global climate
change in the Final EIR and determined that they would be less than significant, both on a project
basis and cumulatively. The facts in support of the determination that the proposed project would
have a less than significant impact on GHG emissions and global climate change are contained in
section 5.2.4 of the Final EIR (pp. 5.2-77 - 5.2-90), along with the lengthy and detailed responses to
several comments submitted on the question that are part of the Final EIR. The City acknowledges
43AK~
O' ~CIP
Michael Brandman Associates m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r
O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
that there is considerable controversy regarding the appropriate methodology for studying GHG
emissions from this project, the thresholds that should apply to determine impact significance, and the
mitigation measures that should be imposed, and recognizes that regulations and guidelines are being
drafted and reviewed on these questions at the present time. The City finds that the analysis and
conclusions relied on by the Final EIR are appropriate and sufficient to satisfy legal requirements in
effect at this time as they apply to this EIR and this project. Based on that analysis, and taking into
consideration all the evidence in the record including documents and oral testimony presented at
public hearings, the City finds that the project as designed, and taking into consideration other factors
including but not limited to the applicant's voluntary agreement with the Air District to offset
emissions in order to improve regional air quality by measures that also will serve to reduce GHG
emissions, would have a less than significant impact on Greenhouse Gas Emissions, both as a project
and on a cumulative basis. No credible evidence has been submitted sufficient to rebut this conclusion
and finding. In this regard the City also notes its authority under CEQA to choose between
conflicting evidence and testimony when there is a disagreement among experts as to the appropriate
methods of analysis and conclusions.. There is no legal requirement under CEQA or any other
applicable regulation that the City must impose every suggested condition that might further reduce
GHG emissions, including without limitation mandating solar panels on every house. There is no
legal requirement that the City must mandate design changes and conditions to ensure that the project
will achieve zero net GHG emissions.
1.10.4 - Hart Park Traffic Impacts. Written comments and testimony suggested that the Canyons
project might produce traffic causing congestion impacts on Hart Park, particularly during special
events such as Easter or other holidays when increased use of Hart Park occasionally leads to
congestion and even closure of the portion of Alfred Harrell Highway that passes through the park.
The City finds that responses by City staff, traffic consultants and others provide sufficient evidence
to conclude that such potential impact will be less than significant, both on a project basis and
cumulatively. This conclusion is supported by a number of facts and analyses, including without
limitation the existing capacity of the road and current traffic volumes, the infrequent occurrence of
such problems, the small volume of project traffic projected to use that portion of road, the fact that
project-generated peak traffic will occur during weekday commute times while park usage peaks
during holidays, and the fact that such congestion and closure is more a result of heavy use of the
park itself interfering with traffic flow rather than increased through traffic.
SECTION 2: ADVERSE PROJECT-SPECIFIC AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE
The Final EIR identified significant project-specific and cumulative adverse impacts of the proposed
project and proposed mitigation measures to avoid or substantially lessen those impacts. Those
impacts and mitigation measures are identified in the following sections. The Bakersfield City
Council finds, based on the facts set forth in the record, which include but are not limited to the facts
as set forth below, that the incorporation of the identified mitigation measures will mitigate the
following identified significant project-specific and cumulative adverse impacts to a level that is
considered less than significant.
~ ~~KF9
O'
2-10 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
2.1 - Project Specific
2.1.1 - Land Use and Planning
Impact 5.1.B: The proposed project conflicts with the applicable goals and policies within the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan.
2.1.1.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to Goal 7 of the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Land Use Element.
Goal 7 of the City's General Plan Land Use Element provides that the City "establish a built
environment which achieves a compatible functional and visual relationship among individual
buildings and sites." The lands surrounding the proposed project site consists of vacant land and open
space. The proposed project would be located on a terrace at the top of steep bluffs, the bluffs and the
associated ridgeline are highly visible and prominent local features. Parts of the proposed residential
development would be visible and would be considered a substantial change to the existing visual
environment. The commercial land use of the proposed project would be designated as Planned
Commercial Development (PCD), which allows for flexibility in design standards, but ensures that
cohesive designs and development standards are integrated into the overall development concept.
Due to the visibility of a portion of the proposed residential structures from Alfred Harrell Highway
and Morning Drive in the northwest and southeast portions of the project site, the project would not
be consistent with this goal.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.13.A.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall confirm conformance
with the Hillside Development Ordinance as it relates to the Visual Resource Areas.
Based on current plans, houses on Lots 41-43 in Phase 36 and Lots 18-23 in Phase 15
shall be limited to 24 feet high unless the applicant documents that a taller house will
be consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, based on site-specific cross-
section analyses from Viewshed Observation Points. The applicant may consider
design changes such as deeper setbacks from ridgelines, stepped upper stories, or `~KFr
t~
Michael Brandman Associates 2-11
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc 7 r "
0
IRiGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
installation of visual screens such as landscaping or berms as may be allowed under
the Hillside Development Ordinance.
5.13.A.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall demonstrate the
softening of the appearance of Pebble Creek Court as viewed from Morning Drive by
implementing the following, (a) limit grading to the upper portion of the SPA beyond
the ridgeline located approximately 220 feet up the SPA, (b) grade the upper hillside
in the manner shown in exhibit 5.13-13, (c) contour and revegetate the fill area to
provide a natural appearance similar to the lower portion of the SPA, and (d) install a
berm approximately six feet tall along the edge of Pebble Creek Court so that cars on
the road are not visible from cars on Morning Drive, as measured from four feet
above the Morning Drive centerline.
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.13.A. I and 5.13.A.4 would limit the visual impact of
the portions of the project site visible from surrounding properties and roadways; thus achieving a
compatible functional and visual relationship among individual buildings and sites. In addition, the
identified mitigation measures would ensure compliance with the City's Hillside Development
Ordinance, thereby fully mitigating any impacts associated with the Ordinance. With the visual
impact of the development reduced, the Project would be consistent with Goal 7 of the City's General
Plan Land Use Element.
References: Pages 5.1-11 through 5.1-14 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5. 1, Land Use and Planning, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.1.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to Policy 2 of the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Open Space Element regarding ridgelines.
Policy 2 of the City's General Plan Open Space Element provides that the "development of ridgelines
within the planning area should consider natural topographic constraints." The proposed project
includes residential development adjacent to and at existing ridgelines. Two Class II Visual Resource
Areas are located within the northwestern portion of the project site, where residential structures are
proposed. One of the two Class II areas can be viewed from Alfred Harrell Highway northeast of the
project site. These views are limited there is one viewshed observation point that provides a limited
view of this Class 11 resource area. The view of these residential structures is estimated to include at
least 50 percent of their structural height and within a distance of one mile from the viewshed
observation point 27 along Alfred Harrell Highway. Due to the potential view of 50 percent of the
height of the residential structures, the proposed project would be considered not consistent with this
policy.
o`aAKF9~
2-12 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings9-9-09.doc ro
)RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Additionally, the project site contains areas that are designated as Slope Protection Areas within the
Hillside Development Ordinance. There are six proposed residential lots located on the southeast
portion of the project site that are located in an area that is designated as a Slope Protection Area;
these units will be visible from Morning Drive. Because the project is proposing development within
a Slope Protection Area, the project is not consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.13.A.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall confirm conformance
with the Hillside Development Ordinance as it relates to the Visual Resource Areas.
Based on current plans, houses on Lots 41-43 in Phase 36 and Lots 18-23 in Phase 15
shall be limited to 24 feet high unless the applicant documents that a taller house will
be consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, based on site-specific cross-
section analyses from Viewshed Observation Points. The applicant may consider
design changes such as deeper setbacks from ridgelines, stepped upper stories, or
installation of visual screens such as landscaping or berms as may be allowed under
the Hillside Development Ordinance.
5.13.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project landscape architect shall submit
a revegetation plan for approval, which will reduce erosion on the face of slopes,
constructed or otherwise altered by the project, including erosion due to drainage
features.
5.13.A.3 Prior to approval of a final tract map, Lots 46 through 50 in Phase 6 that front onto
Pebble Creek Court shall be eliminated.
5.13.A.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall demonstrate the
softening of the appearance of Pebble Creek Court as viewed from Morning Drive by
implementing the following, (a) limit grading to the upper portion of the SPA beyond
the ridgeline located approximately 220 feet up the SPA, (b) grade the upper hillside
in the manner shown in exhibit 5.13-13, (c) contour and revegetate the fill area to
provide a natural appearance similar to the lower portion of the SPA, and (d) install a
berm approximately six feet tall along the edge of Pebble Creek Court so that cars on
3~Kr
Michael Brandman Associates 2-13
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc _
rn
r
G
'?R;GiNAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
the road are not visible from cars on Morning Drive, as measured from four feet
above the Morning Drive centerline.
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.13.A.I through 5.13.A.4 would reduce the visual
impact of the portions of the project site visible from surrounding properties and roadways.
Additionally, the identified mitigation measures would conform to the natural topographic
constraints, thus ensuring compliance with the City's Hillside Development Ordinance thereby fully
mitigating any impacts associated with the Ordinance. With the visual impact of the development
reduced and with compliance with the Hillside Development Ordinance, the project would be
consistent with Policy 2 of the General Plan Open Space Element.
References: Pages 5.1-11 through 5.1-26 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5. 1, Land Use and Planning, in
Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR.
2.1.1.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to Policy 3 of the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Open Space Element regarding hillside developments.
Policy 3 of the City's General Plan Open Space Element provides that the "hillside development
should exhibit sensitivity and be complimentary to the natural topography." The proposed project
would result in an estimated visibility of 50 percent or more of the residential structures proposed
within the northwestern portion of the project site that may result in significant impacts to a Class II
Visual Resource area. Therefore, the proposed project will not be consistent with this policy.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.13.A.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall confirm conformance
with the Hillside Development Ordinance as it relates to the Visual Resource Areas.
Based on current plans, houses on Lots 41-43 in Phase 36 and Lots 18-23 in Phase 15
shall be limited to 24 feet high unless the applicant documents that a taller house will
be consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, based on site-specific cross-
section analyses from Viewshed Observation Points. The applicant may consider
design changes such as deeper setbacks from ridgelines, stepped upper stories, or
o~ ~ A KF9~
2-14 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc F- M
U r
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
installation of visual screens such as landscaping or berms as may be allowed under
the Hillside Development Ordinance.
5.13.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project landscape architect shall submit
a revegetation plan for approval, which will reduce erosion on the face of slopes,
constructed or otherwise altered by the project, including erosion due to drainage
features.
5.13.A.3 Prior to approval of a final tract map, Lots 46 through 50 in Phase 6 that front onto
Pebble Creek Court shall be eliminated.
5.13.A.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall demonstrate the
softening of the appearance of Pebble Creek Court as viewed from Morning Drive by
implementing the following, (a) limit grading to the upper portion of the SPA beyond
the ridgeline located approximately 220 feet up the SPA, (b) grade the upper hillside
in the manner shown in exhibit 5.13-13, (c) contour and revegetate the fill area to
provide a natural appearance similar to the lower portion of the SPA, and (d) install a
berm approximately six feet tall along the edge of Pebble Creek Court so that cars on
the road are not visible from cars on Morning Drive, as measured from four feet
above the Morning Drive centerline.
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.13.A.1 through 5.13.A.4 would reduce the visual
impact of the portions of the project site visible from surrounding properties and roadways and would
ensure that the project conforms to the natural topography of the site.
References: Pages 5.1-11 through 5.1-28 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.1, Land Use and Planning, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.1.4 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to Policy 4 of the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Open Space Element regarding grading.
Policy 4 of the City's General Plan Open Space Element provides that the City shall "Require the use
of grading techniques in hillside areas that preserve the form of natural topography and ridge lines."
The proposed project includes residential development adjacent to and at existing ridgelines. One
viewshed observation area location has the potential to be significantly affected within the
northwestern portion of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project will be inconsistent with this
policy.
Michael Brandman Associates 2-15
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r
U O
nRIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(]), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.13.A.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall confirm conformance
with the Hillside Development Ordinance as it relates to the Visual Resource Areas.
Based on current plans, houses on Lots 41-43 in Phase 36 and Lots 18-23 in Phase 15
shall be limited to 24 feet high unless the applicant documents that a taller house will
be consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, based on site-specific cross-
section analyses from Viewshed Observation Points. The applicant may consider
design changes such as deeper setbacks from ridgelines, stepped upper stories, or
installation of visual screens such as landscaping or berms as may be allowed under
the Hillside Development Ordinance.
5.13.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project landscape architect shall submit
a revegetation plan for approval, which will reduce erosion on the face of slopes,
constructed or otherwise altered by the project, including erosion due to drainage
features.
5.13.A.3 Prior to approval of a final tract map, Lots 46 through 50 in Phase 6 that front onto
Pebble Creek Court shall be eliminated.
5.13.A.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall demonstrate the
softening of the appearance of Pebble Creek Court as viewed from Morning Drive by
implementing the following, (a) limit grading to the upper portion of the SPA beyond
the ridgeline located approximately 220 feet up the SPA, (b) grade the upper hillside
in the manner shown in exhibit 5.13-13, (c) contour and revegetate the fill area to
provide a natural appearance similar to the lower portion of the SPA, and (d) install a
berm approximately six feet tall along the edge of Pebble Creek Court so that cars on
the road are not visible from cars on Morning Drive, as measured from four feet
above the Morning Drive centerline.
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.13.A.I through 5.13.A.4 would reduce the visual
impact of the portions of the project site visible from surrounding properties and roadways and would
ensure that the contour grading of the project site would conform to the natural topography of the site.
3AKF
2-16 Michael Brandman Associates 9
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciRSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
- m
- r-
= c,
^)rr-3IGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
References: Pages 5.1-11 through 5.1-29 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5. 1, Land Use and Planning, in
Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR.
2.1.1.5 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to Policy 6 of the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Open Space Element regarding bluff areas.
Policy 6 of the City's General Plan Open Space Element provides that "development on or adjacent to
bluff areas should complement the natural topographic integrity of such areas." Due to the potential
significant visual effect from an observation point as described above, the proposed project would not
fully complement the natural topographic integrity of the onsite bluff areas. Furthermore, the
proposed project includes grading and development in an area identified as Slope Protection Area.
Therefore, the proposed project would not be consistent with this policy.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.13.A.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall confirm conformance
with the Hillside Development Ordinance as it relates to the Visual Resource Areas.
Based on current plans, houses on Lots 41-43 in Phase 36 and Lots 18-23 in Phase 15
shall be limited to 24 feet high unless the applicant documents that a taller house will
be consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, based on site-specific cross-
section analyses from Viewshed Observation Points. The applicant may consider
design changes such as deeper setbacks from ridgelines, stepped upper stories, or
installation of visual screens such as landscaping or berms as may be allowed under
the Hillside Development Ordinance.
5.13.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project landscape architect shall submit
a revegetation plan for approval, which will reduce erosion on the face of slopes,
constructed or otherwise altered by the project, including erosion due to drainage
features.
5.13.A.3 Prior to approval of a final tract map, Lots 46 through 50 in Phase 6 that front onto
Pebble Creek Court shall be eliminated. 4 aAKF9
o1 T
Michael Brandman Associates 2-17 V__ 17'
r-
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-0%CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc CG
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
5.13.A.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall demonstrate the
softening of the appearance of Pebble Creek Court as viewed from Morning Drive by
implementing the following, (a) limit grading to the upper portion of the SPA beyond
the ridgeline located approximately 220 feet up the SPA, (b) grade the upper hillside
in the manner shown in exhibit 5.13-13, (c) contour and revegetate the fill area to
provide a natural appearance similar to the lower portion of the SPA, and (d) install a
berm approximately six feet tall along the edge of Pebble Creek Court so that cars on
the road are not visible from cars on Morning Drive, as measured from four feet
above the Morning Drive centerline.
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.13.A.I through 5.13.A.4 would reduce the visual
impact of the portions of the project site visible from surrounding properties and roadways and would
ensure that the project complements the natural topography of onsite and surrounding bluff areas.
References: Pages 5.1-11 through 5.1-29 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5. 1, Land Use and Planning, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.1.6 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to Goal 5 of the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Park Element.
Goal 5 of the City's General Plan Parks Element provides that the City should "coordinate
development of park facilities and trails systems throughout the plan area which enhance the centers
concept and compliment unique visual or natural resources." The trail system proposed by the project
incorporates the 2003 Specific Parks and Trails Plan for Northeast Bakersfield into the trail network.
The trail network incorporates and links the commercial and residential components of the project site
and provides access to the open space system to the north and east of the project site. There are three
trail segments located adjacent to local collectors within private gated communities. Specifically, the
segments are located adjacent to Aspen Meadows Place connecting Spring Canyon Parkway and the
42-acre common area, and Aspen Meadows Place connecting Copper Ridge Loop to the 42-acre
common area near the southeastern open space area connecting the proposed east-central public park.
Because there are areas of public trail that are not accessible to the public, the project is inconsistent
with this goal.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
2-18 Michael Brandman Associates `Pr
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
ORI(iINAL.
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.1.B.1 If private gated communities are approved, public access easements shall be recorded
over trail alignments/trail cross sections prior to the issuance of building permits to
allow public use of trails.
5.1.8.2 Prior to the recordation of a final subdivision map for each phase, the proposed
public trails that are planned to extend through private communities shall design
entrances/exits to/from the private communities to allow unrestricted equestrian and
pedestrian access to trails.
5.1.8.3 Prior to recordation of a final subdivision map for each phase, the private, gated
communities that will have public trails shall include a provision on their Covenants,
Conditions, and Restrictions that the portion of the public trails extending through the
private gated communities shall be maintained by the homeowners associations.
5.1.B.4 Prior to the recordation of a final subdivision map in the southwestern portion of the
project site (Phase 32), a public road access shall be provided to the future City park
located at the southwest portion of the project area. This access shall be provided
either through a public street within The Canyon's project or an improved public road
through county property as approved by the City.
5.1.B.5 Original Mitigation Measure 5.l .B.5 states: "Prior to recordation of a final
subdivision map in Phase 15 the Tamarak Ridge Community which is located in the
northeastern portion of the project site, View Point Court shall be converted to a
public street from a private street. View Point Court shall be extended to the southern
boundary of the proposed park from Tamarak Ridge Way to provide adequate public
access to the best useable area of the proposed park. Park shall be dedicated with
recordation of a final map for Phase 15 or recordation of the 20th phase, whichever
occurs first."
Mitigation Measure 5.1.13.5 has been superseded by the following which is more
restrictive and achieves a greater community and environmental benefit. The
following is included as a condition of approval for the project.
Subdivider/developer shall provide a Tamarack Ridge Way as a public street and
terminate in a cul-de-sac northeast of Lot 23, Phase 15. The land consisting of the
Ak,-
Michael Brandman Associates 2-19)
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc Jn
m
r
"lr;►NAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
area north of Tamarack Ridge Way (north of Lot 23, Phase 15) shown as View Point
Court, and the land on both sides of View Pointe Court including the residential lots
shall be dedicated to the City of Bakersfield for public park purposes. The dedication
shall be by approved agreement with the City prior to recordation of the first final
parcel or tract map of the Canyons project. This area shall be zoned OS-HD (Open
Space-Hillside Development). Subdivider/developer shall rough grade the land north
of Tamarack Ridge Way along the frontage of the property to be dedicated to the City
for parkland to similar elevations as the Tamarack Ridge Way cul-de-sac at its north
terminus (north of Lot 23, Phase 15). The rough grade elevations shall allow for
future vehicle access to the park. Grading shall be approved by the City Engineer.
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.1.B.1 through 5.1.B.5, as amended, would ensure that
the construction of gated communities on the project site will not prevent public access to and from
public trails. Therefore impacts associated with public trails would be mitigated to less than
significant levels.
References: Pages 5.1-11 through 5.1-32 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5. 1, Land Use and Planning, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.1.7 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to Goal 6 of the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan.
Goal 6 of the City's General Plan Parks Element provides that the City should "ensure that all park
and recreation facilities are adequately designed, landscaped and maintained." As currently designed,
the northeastern portion of the proposed development restricts access to the 8.5-acre park located in
the area. The park located in the southwestern portion of the project is also limited by access to the
private roadways. Therefore, the project is not consistent with this goal.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
~ 3AK~9
2-20 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
r
O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance
5.1.6.4 Prior to the recordation of a final subdivision map in the southwestern portion of the
project site (Phase 32), a public road access shall be provided to the future City park
located at the southwest portion of the project area. This access shall be provided
either through a public street within The Canyon's project or an improved public road
through county property as approved by the City.
5.12.5 Original Mitigation Measure 5.1.B.5 states: "Prior to recordation of a final
subdivision map in Phase 15the Tamarak Ridge Community which is located in the
northeastern portion of the project site, View Point Court shall be converted to a
public street from a private street. View Point Court shall be extended to the southern
boundary of the proposed park from Tamarak Ridge Way to provide adequate public
access to the best useable area of the proposed park. Park shall be dedicated with
recordation of a final map for Phase 15 or recordation of the 20`i' phase, whichever
occurs first."
Mitigation Measure 5.1.B.5 has been superseded by the following which is more
restrictive and achieves a greater community and environmental benefit. The
following is included as a condition of approval for the project.
Subdivider/developer shall provide a Tamarack Ridge Way as a public street and
terminate in a cul-de-sac northeast of Lot 23, Phase 15. The land consisting of the
area north of Tamarack Ridge Way (north of Lot 23, Phase 15) shown as View Point
Court, and the land on both sides of View Pointe Court including the residential lots
shall be dedicated to the City of Bakersfield for public park purposes. The dedication
shall be by approved agreement with the City prior to recordation of the first final
parcel or tract map of the Canyons project. This area shall be zoned OS-HD (Open
Space-Hillside Development). Subdivider/developer shall rough grade the land north
of Tamarack Ridge Way along the frontage of the property to be dedicated to the City
for parkland to similar elevations as the Tamarack Ridge Way cul-de-sac at its north
terminus (north of Lot 23, Phase 15). The rough grade elevations shall allow for
future vehicle access to the park. Grading shall be approved by the City Engineer.
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.1.B.4and 5.1.B.5 would ensure that adequate public
access is provided to the two parks, thereby mitigating any project-specific impacts to Goal 6 of the
City's General Plan Parks Element to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.1-11 through 5.1-33 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5. 1, Land Use and Planning, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
~'aKF9
o s
Michael Brandman Associates 2-21
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciHSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc -
O
)RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Impact 5.1.C: The proposed project would conflict with the applicable zoning regulations within
the Bakersfield Municipal Code.
2.1.1.8 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to the applicable zoning regulations
within the Bakersfield Municipal Code] 7.66.010 Purpose and Intent.
The project would conflict with Section 17.66.0 10 of the Hillside Development Ordinance because
approximately six lots in the southeast corner of the Project site are located within an area identified
as being a slope protection area and because one area of the project site may be impacted from a
viewpoint.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.13.A.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall confirm conformance
with the Hillside Development Ordinance as it relates to the Visual Resource Areas.
Based on current plans, houses on Lots 41-43 in Phase 36 and Lots 18-23 in Phase 15
shall be limited to 24 feet high unless the applicant documents that a taller house will
be consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, based on site-specific cross-
section analyses from Viewshed Observation Points. The applicant may consider
design changes such as deeper setbacks from ridgelines, stepped upper stories, or
installation of visual screens such as landscaping or berms as may be allowed under
the Hillside Development Ordinance.
5.13.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project landscape architect shall submit
a revegetation plan for approval, which will reduce erosion on the face of slopes,
constructed or otherwise altered by the project, including erosion due to drainage
features.
5.13.A.3 Prior to approval of a final tract map, Lots 46 through 50 in Phase 6 that front onto
Pebble Creek Court shall be eliminated.
aAkF
9
2-22 Michael Brandman Associates
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc M
r
U
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.13.A.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall demonstrate the
softening of the appearance of Pebble Creek Court as viewed from Morning Drive by
implementing the following, (a) limit grading to the upper portion of the SPA beyond
the ridgeline located approximately 220 feet up the SPA, (b) grade the upper hillside
in the manner shown in exhibit 5.13-13, (c) contour and revegetate the fill area to
provide a natural appearance similar to the lower portion of the SPA, and (d) install a
berm approximately six feet tall along the edge of Pebble Creek Court so that cars on
the road are not visible from cars on Morning Drive, as measured from four feet
above the Morning Drive centerline.
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.13.A.I through 5.13.A.4 would limit the visual impact
of the portions of the project site visible from surrounding properties and roadways. With the visual
impact of the development reduced, the Project would be consistent with Section 17.66.010 of the
Hillside Development Ordinance.
References: Pages 5.1-34 through 5.1-38 in Section 5 of the Recirculated Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5. 1, Land Use and Planning, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.1.9 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to the applicable zoning regulations
within the Bakersfield Municipal Code 17.66 090 Emergency Secondary Access.
The project would conflict with Section 17.66.090 of the Ordinance because the proposed project
does not provide emergency secondary access in the southeastern portion of the site.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.9.A.1 Prior to recordation of a final map for Phase 6 located in the southeast corner of the
project site, secondary emergency access shall be provided via Stone Canyon Way to
the south.
The implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.9.A. I as revised would meet the emergency access
requirements of the Fire Code (Ref.: 2007 CA Fire Code sec. D107.1). The original mitigation
measure required fire sprinklers for the 50 homes in this location. However, fire sprinklers are not
Michael Brandman Associates 2-23
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciASept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
O
RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
now required because the project as revised per staff's recommendation extends Clearwater Canyon
Place to Morning Drive and provides primary road access to this 50-home area by a connector to
Clearwater Canyon Place, with secondary emergency access to be provided to the south via Stone
Canyon Way. The inclusion of Mitigation Measure 5.9.A.1 into the project design would reduce the
physical environmental effects associated with this issue to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.1-34 through 5.1-40 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5. 1, Land Use and Planning, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.2 - Air Quality
Impact 5.2.A: The project may conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air
Quality Management Plan.
2.1.2.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to the applicable Air Quality
Management Plan.
Without both the Indirect Source Review and the Voluntary Emission Reduction Agreement, the
project would not comply with the attainment plans for reduction of ozone, PMio and NO,, in the San
Joaquin Valley Air Basin.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.2.8.1 Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City
of Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that all
construction activities and operations will comply with local zoning codes, and
District Regulation VIII (Rules 8011-8081), and Rule 9510. These regulations
include, but not limited to, the following:
• During all phases of construction, construction equipment shall be properly
and routinely maintained, as recommended by manufacturer manuals, to
control exhaust emissions.
`3AKF9
2-24 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
r
(J U
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• During all phases of construction, all contractors shall follow all the rules in
Regulation VIII.
• During all phases of construction, all contractors shall restrict equipment and
vehicle idling to five minutes or less.
• The project applicant shall develop a ride-share incentive program for
construction workers. The program shall be submitted to the City for review
and approval.
• On-site electrical hook ups shall be installed for electric hand tools such as
saws, drills, and compressors, to substantially decrease the need for fuel
powered electric generators and other fuel-powered equipment.
• During construction, only low volatility paints and coatings shall be used. All
paints shall be applied using either high volume low-pressure (HVLP) spray
equipment or by hand application.
• During construction of the proposed structures, the off-road construction
equipment (i.e., cranes and lifts) shall use California Air Resources Board
verified Level Three diesel particulate filters
(www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm) to accomplish an 85 percent
reduction in PM 10 emissions.
5.2.C.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation II, specifically, the
project will be subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part
of the SJVAPCD permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's
offsetting thresholds would have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary
source by stationary source basis.
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply in all respects
with developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement
approved by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance
with the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of
ROG, NOx, and PM 10 net emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully
mitigate the project's air quality impacts to the extent that the development of the
project will result in no net increase in criteria.pollutant emissions over the criteria
pollutant emissions which would otherwise exist without the development of the
project, all to be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the Voluntary Emissions
Reduction Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net emissions
by 23.81 tons per year (from 23.81 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NOx net
emissions by 24.60 tons per year (from 24.60 tons per year to 0 tons per year);
reduce PM 10 net emissions by 25.12 tons per year (from 25.12 tons per year to 0 tons
c 3Ak~c
Michael Brandman Associates 2-25 O` 9N
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc f_' r
tT!
n~~c~NAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
per year); and reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 5.71 tons per year (from 5.71 tons per
year to 0 tons per year). The following additional design features for the project shall
be implemented:
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
• Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
• Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
1. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission
reduction projects
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
Compliance with Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1, 5.2.C.1, and 5.2.C.2, including the implementation of
the Indirect Source Review and the project-specific Voluntary Emission Reduction Agreement to
reduce ozone precursors and particulate matter in the air basin to the extent that the development of
the project will result in no net increase and would provide mitigation of impacts associated with the
basin's air quality management plan to reduce impacts to less than significant.
AkF
2-26 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
r
~R►GINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
References: Pages 5.2-51 through 5.2-55 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.2, Air Quality, in Section 5 of
Chapter I of the Final EIR, and Response to Comment G-I in the chapter 2 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.2.B: The construction of the project may potentially violate air quality standards or
contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.
2.1.2.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to the applicable air quality standards
or a projected air quality violation during project construction.
During the construction of the proposed project, onsite stationary sources, heavy-duty construction
vehicles, construction worker vehicles, energy use, and asphalt paving would generate emissions of
criteria pollutants. In addition, fugitive dust would be generated by grading and construction
activities. Other aspects of the individual building projects could include architectural coatings
applied to the proposed land uses as well as mobile emissions from workers arriving and leaving the
construction site.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.2.6.1 Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City
of Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that all
construction activities and operations will comply with local zoning codes, and
District Regulation VIII (Rules 8011-8081), and Rule 9510. These regulations
include, but not limited to, the following:
• During all phases of construction, construction equipment shall be properly
and routinely maintained, as recommended by manufacturer manuals, to
control exhaust emissions.
• During all phases of construction, all contractors shall follow all the rules in
Regulation VIII.
• During all phases of construction, all contractors shall restrict equipment and
vehicle idling to five minutes or less.
Michael Brandman Associates 2-27 >
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
U O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
• The project applicant shall develop a ride-share incentive program for
construction workers. The program shall be submitted to the City for review
and approval.
• On-site electrical hook ups shall be installed for electric hand tools such as
saws, drills, and compressors, to substantially decrease the need for fuel
powered electric generators and other fuel-powered equipment.
• During construction, only low volatility paints and coatings shall be used. All
paints shall be applied using either high volume low-pressure (HVLP) spray
equipment or by hand application.
• During construction of the proposed structures, the off-road construction
equipment (i.e., cranes and lifts) shall use California Air Resources Board
verified Level Three diesel particulate filters
(www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm) to accomplish an 85 percent
reduction in PM 10 emissions.
5.2.C.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation II, specifically, the
project will be subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part
of the SJVAPCD permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's
offsetting thresholds would have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary
source by stationary source basis.
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply in all respects
with developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement
approved by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance
with the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of
ROG, NOx, and PM 10 net emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully
mitigate the project's air quality impacts to the extent that the development of the
project will result in no net increase in criteria pollutant emissions over the criteria
pollutant emissions which would otherwise exist without the development of the
project, all to be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the Voluntary Emissions
Reduction Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net emissions
by 23.81 tons per year (from 23.81 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NOx net
emissions by 24.60 tons per year (from 24.60 tons per year to 0 tons per year);
reduce PM 10 net emissions by 25.12 tons per year (from 25.12 tons per year to 0 tons
per year); and reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 5.71 tons per year (from 5.71 tons per
year to 0 tons per year). The following additional design features for the project shall
be implemented:
3 AKF
o9
2-28 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciRSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
'-aRIGINA,L
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel.
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
• Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
• Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
1. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission
reduction projects
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
Compliance with Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1, 5.2.C.1 and 5.2.C.2, including the implementation of
the Indirect Source Review and the project-specific Voluntary Emission Reduction Agreement to
reduce ozone precursors and particulate matter in the air basin would mitigate impacts associated with
construction-related emissions pollutants for which the SJVAPCD is in nonattainment to less than
significant levels.
References: Pages 5.2-55 through 5.2-60 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.2, Air Quality, in Section 5 of
Chapter i of the Final EIR, and Response to Comment G-I in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR.
3A/fF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-29-
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc M
)RIG c,
FINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Impact 5.2.C The operation of the project may potentially violate air quality standards or
contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.
2.1.2.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed project has identified a project-specific impact to the applicable air quality standards
or a projected air quality violation during project operation.
During operation of the proposed project, emissions would be generated by area sources and mobile
sources as a result of normal day-to-day activities on the project site after occupation.
Implementation of the proposed project would result in operational emissions of ROG and NOX that
exceed the SJVAPCD significance thresholds.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.2.C.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation II, specifically, the
project will be subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part
of the SJVAPCD permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's
offsetting thresholds would have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary
source by stationary source basis.
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building pen-nits, the applicant shall comply in all respects
with developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement
approved by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance
with the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of
ROG, NOx, and PM 10 net emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully
mitigate the project's air quality impacts to the extent that the development of the
project will result in no net increase in criteria pollutant emissions over the criteria
pollutant emissions which would otherwise exist without the development of the
project, all to be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the Voluntary Emissions
Reduction Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net emissions
by 23.81 tons per year (from 23.81 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NOx net
emissions by 24.60 tons per year (from 24.60 tons per year to 0 tons per year);
2-30 Michael Brandman Associates ~`fn
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
' MGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
reduce PM 10 net emissions by 25.12 tons per year (from 25.12 tons per year to 0 tons
per year); and reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 5.71 tons per year (from 5.71 tons per
year to 0 tons per year). The following additional design features for the project shall
be implemented:
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel.
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
• Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
• Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
1. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission
reduction projects
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
Compliance with the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of ROG,
NOx, and PM 10 net emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully mitigate the project's air
quality impacts to the extent that the development of the project will result in no net increase in
criteria pollutant emissions over the criteria pollutant emissions which would otherwise exist without
the development of the project. Compliance with Mitigation Measures 5.2.C.1 and 5.2.C.2 would
LgAKF~
Michael Brandman Associates 2-310'
S103-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
r-
U O
ORIGINAL.
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
reduce emissions of ROG and NOx to levels below the SIVAPCD significance thresholds, thereby
mitigating impacts associated with operational emissions to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.2-61 through 5.2-68 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.2, Air Quality, in Section 5 of
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, and Response to Comment G-I in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR.
2.1.3 - Biological Resources
Impact 5.3.A: The proposed project has the potential to result in a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
2.1.3.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact on the federal and California
endangered Bakersfield cactus.
During focused field surveys of the project site, 313 clumps of Bakersfield cactus were determined to
occupy the project site. A comparison of the project impact area with the locations of each clump of
Bakersfield cactus within the project site determined that project development would result in the
removal of 108 clumps of Bakersfield cactus, which is considered a direct significant impact to a
federal and State endangered species.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.3.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a Habitat
Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code and the Implementation/Management Agreement for the MBHCP or
equivalent program or measure as approved by the wildlife agencies.
5.3.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with all
appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP regarding Bakersfield cactus. In
order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below, the
project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City agency (as identified by
2-32 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
r--
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented. Impacts to
Bakersfield cactus and its habitat is permitted by the MBHCP with payment of
Habitat Mitigation Fees.
The proposed impact area occurs in the immediate vicinity of Bakersfield cactus
specimens, and open space areas within the proposed project design includes land
that will be occupied by this species. To avoid potential impacts to any Bakersfield
cactus specimens located outside the proposed project impact area and within open
space areas or offsite locations, the following avoidance measures shall be
implemented during project construction and project operation. If CDFG and the
Project Applicant cannot reach agreement, and the City Planning Director determines
based on documentation that a good faith effort has been made by the Project
Applicant, and CDFG has not responded in a reasonable manner within 90 days, the
Planning Director, in consultation with a qualified biologist, may approve an
alternative relocation strategy.
Salvage and Relocation
Although not required to further reduce direct impacts to the Bakersfield cactus after
the implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.3.A.1, the project Project Applicant
proposes to relocate salvaged Bakersfield cactus.
• Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Project Applicant shall enter into
an agreement with the CDFG to fund the relocation of salvaged Bakersfield
cactus clumps located within areas proposed to be impacted. The Project
Applicant shall prepare a translocation plan to be submitted for review and
approval by the CDFG. The CDFG shall review and provide comments to the
translocation plan within a reasonable timeframe or manner. The translocation
plan shall include details of the location of the recipient site, and proposed
methodology of the relocation effort, as agreed upon by the Project Applicant
and the CDFG. The relocation could occur along the northern boundary of the
project site adjacent to the proposed detention basin and/or the existing
Bakersfield Cactus Preserve (Hart Park Cactus Preserve) to the north of the
site. Additional recipient sites for the relocation could include suitable areas
within the project site that are proposed as part of the project's open space.
Construction Mitigation Measures
• Prior to any construction activities for the project, all Bakersfield cactus that
occur outside the proposed limits of grading, including off-site cactus clumps
that may be impacted during the course of upgrading infrastructure, shall be
identified and demarcated by a qualified biologist with construction flagging
or other standard construction method. Prior to any construction activities for
the project and following the direction of the qualified biologist and project
Michael Brandman Associates 2-33 O~ A KF9cr
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
F-- m
r
U O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
construction supervisor, temporary construction silt fencing shall be installed
by the project construction crew around all Bakersfield cactus that were
demarcated by the qualified biologist, and determined to occur outside the
proposed limits of grading. Those specimens determined to occur within the
proposed limits of grading shall be included as specimens to be salvaged and
relocated per the translocation plan for the proposed project. The qualified
biologist shall be responsible for ensuring that the temporary construction silt
fencing is installed adequately to protect the enclosed cactus. No
encroachment shall be permitted into the temporary enclosures for the
Bakersfield cactus during construction activities. The temporary construction
silt fencing shall be inspected by the project construction supervisor or
construction crew regularly for structural integrity. Any failures in the
structural integrity of the temporary construction silt fencing shall be repaired
immediately. At the completion of all construction activities, the temporary
construction silt fencing shall be removed and disposed of properly at the
direction of the project construction supervisor.
Operation Mitigation Measures
• Encroachment into areas containing Bakersfield cactus shall be prevented
during the operation phase of the project to ensure the long-term protection of
cactus specimens. Permanent fencing shall be installed by the project
proponent around all Bakersfield cactus that are preserved onsite. Long-term
maintenance of the permanent fencing shall be provided for by the Home
Owner's Association during the operational phase of the project. The
conditions, covenants, and restrictions provided in Mitigation Measure 5.3.A.9
will further ensure the long-term protection of biological resources that are
preserved onsite.
5.3.A.6 The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered
under the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, shall
be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected
species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately
to the USFWS and CDFG.
5.3.A.7 An environmental liaison shall be retained by the project proponent and identified in
writing to USFWS, CDFG and the City of Bakersfield. The environmental liaison's
qualifications shall consist of the following (minimum requirements), completion of
at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and
has demonstrated field experience in the San Joaquin Valley. The environmental
4aAKF9
2-34 Michael Brandman Associates Q)`PI
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc Fri
J Q
'ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
liaison will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the environmental mitigation
and take avoidance measures. Subject to the approval of the appropriate City
Agency, the environmental liaison shall draft and prepare an Environmental
Education and Compliance Plan that is consistent with the mitigation measures
presented herein. The Environmental Education and Compliance Plan will be used to
train employees and contractors to ensure that the required environmental compliance
measures are implemented. A pre-construction training session shall be held to
ensure all responsible parties are aware of what the environmental protection and
mitigations are and how to ensure that they are implemented. The project proponent
shall submit to the City of Bakersfield proof of attendance by site employees of the
pre-construction training session within 10 days of the training session.
On a monthly basis, the environmental liaison shall prepare a report that details the
implementation of the environmental protection and mitigation measures. Any
failure of measures to be effective shall be reported as they occur. The liaison shall
suggest improvements and changes as possible, and will coordinate any revision of
environmental protection and mitigation measures with the Applicant, the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, as appropriate.
5.3.A.8 The following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented
during all construction phases of the proposed project to further reduce potential
direct and indirect impacts to special status species and their habitat to less than
significant:
• Prior to any grading activities, the project proponent shall install the
appropriate fencing adjacent to all designated open space areas delineating the
limits of grading. This includes the installation of construction snow fencing,
silt fencing, and/or temporary chain-linked or other such fencing around the
perimeter of any active construction zone adjacent to designated open space
areas. Fencing shall be installed by the project proponent, inspected for
efficacy (by a qualified biologist), and repaired by the project proponent on an
on-going basis during all phases of development.
• Construction vehicles shall carry fire distinguishers or other fire retardants to
enhance the prevention and control of any unplanned man-caused fires.
5.3.A.9 Due to the projects adjacency to areas designated as open space and habitat where
known sensitive species occur, the following mitigation measures shall be adhered to.
Prior to recordation of a final map, the Project Applicant shall record the following
conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CC&Rs) in the Office of the County
Recorder. These CC&Rs shall apply to all property and property owners (including
multi-family and commercial properties). The CC&Rs shall be prepared and
A
Michael Brandman Associates 2-35 ,Y
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
rrr
r
O
`"~RIC~INAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
enforced by the project's Home Owner's Association (HOA) during the operation
phase of the project:
• The Project Applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the City of Bakersfield
for review and approval. The landscape plan shall include a planting screen
adjacent to designated open space areas. Native trees, shrubs, forbs, and
grasses shall be planted to help provide protective cover and minimize
potential adverse indirect impacts resulting from night lighting for the
development. Lighting shall be further shaded and directed away from
designated open space areas.
• A management plan shall be prepared and implemented to ensure the proper
management of open space areas containing Bakersfield cactus specimens and
other sensitive resources. The management plan shall include avoidance
measures to prevent long-term impacts to resources within open space areas.
These would include, at minimum, education measures to ensure the proper
identification of Bakersfield cactus specimens within open space areas, and
measures to prevent inadvertent damage to cactus specimens during any
maintenance or recreational activities within or adjacent to open space areas.
• All domestic pets shall be leashed and prohibited from entering protected
habitat areas on the project site.
• Prohibit the use of herbicides or pesticides on trails or open space areas where
they may adversely affect plants or protected wildlife. Use of these chemicals
under a plan approved by CDFG and the USFWS would be excepted.
• Prohibit the dumping of any material over the bluffs or outside the individual
lot.
• Prohibit off-trail hiking or bike riding on the bluffs and within open space
areas, as appropriate to prevent erosion and impacts to protected species.
• Prohibit the pumping of pool water or drainage over the bluffs and within open
space areas.
• Require the immediate repair of erosion on the bluffs and open space areas that
may be caused by broken water mains, etc. or failure to comply with the
CC&Rs.
• Ensure that the management of the parks, open space and common areas will
be accomplished in a manner that ensures take avoidance measures for the San
Joaquin kit fox will be implemented described in Mitigation Measure 5.3A.3.
• Require that the HOA ensure that necessary repairs to project fencing along
the border between the proposed project and the Hart Park Cactus Preserve be
completed in a timely manner.
yAKe
2-36 Michael Brandman Associates O' 19J,~
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
V
'")RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Impacts to Bakersfield cactus and its habitat is permitted by the MBHCP and considered mitigated
with payment of Habitat Mitigation Fees. However, impacts to Bakersfield cactus will be further
mitigated during construction by clearly marking populations of the species and avoidance to the
maximum extent possible during clearing and grading operations. Additionally, the construction of
permanent fencing around all Bakersfield cactus preserved onsite will mitigate any potential impacts
during the operation of the proposed project. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures
5.3.A.1, 5.3.A.2 and 5.3.A.6 through 5.3.A.9, impacts to Bakersfield cactus would be considered
mitigated to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.3-21 through 5.3-40 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in Section
5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, and Response to Comment C-8 and C-9 in Chapter 2 of the Final
EIR.
2.1.3.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact on the federal and California
endangered San Joaquin kit fox.
The San Joaquin kit fox is a federally endangered and California State threatened species and various
known (presumed or confirmed active or occupied) and potential (potentially active or occupied) dens
for this species were determined to occur on the site. Suitable foraging opportunities for this species
occurs on the project site as well. Habitat removal resulting from on and offsite development would
displace the San Joaquin kit fox from occupied dens or burrows. Consequently, the foxes could be
displaced or crushed and killed in their burrows during site excavation and preparation. Mobile
displaced individuals unable to locate suitable habitat may die or be killed by predators. Direct
impacts to a federally endangered and California State endangered wildlife species and its habitat is
considered potentially significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.3.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a Habitat
Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield
Michael Brandman Associates 2-3~
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
v o
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Municipal Code and the Imp] ementation/Management Agreement for the MBHCP or
equivalent program or measure as approved by the wildlife agencies.
5.3.A.3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with all
appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP regarding San Joaquin kit fox. In
order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below, the
project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City agency (as identified by
the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented. Impacts to
San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat are permitted by the MBHCP, however, the
MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin kit fox,
including known dens for this species. The MBHCP and USFWS guidelines
regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox
in dens. The following specific measures during pre-construction and the
construction phase of the project shall be implemented:
Pre-Construction Survey Mitigation Measures
• Preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days
and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or
construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin
kit fox. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
prior to site grading to identify active dens of protected species and to ensure
appropriate and necessary take avoidance measures are implemented for the
San Joaquin kit fox. A qualified biologist means any person who has
completed at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a
related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification
and life history of the San Joaquin kit fox. If active San Joaquin kit fox dens
are identified during the pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist shall
submit to the City of Bakersfield a protection and avoidance plan that
incorporates the USFWS standardized recommendations for protection and
avoidance to ensure that no San Joaquin kit fox are entrapped in the occupied
den.
• Written results of preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be submitted to the
City within five days after survey completion and prior to the start of ground
disturbance and/or construction activities. No clearing, grubbing or grading
shall commence until the preconstruction surveys are finalized and submitted
to the City for approval. Specific measures for protection and avoidance for
San Joaquin kit fox are provided below.
Pre-Construction Avoidance Mitigation Measures
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
~ AkF
9U,
2-38 Michael Brandman Associates
fT,
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciASept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
"~~IGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), circular exclusion zones shall be established by a
qualified biologist around all potential San Joaquin kit fox dens identified and
shall include a radius of no less than 50 feet. This radius shall be expanded to
100 feet for all known dens. If the pre-construction survey identifies any natal
or pupping dens, the qualified biologist shall contact the USFWS. Natal or
pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and
adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the USFWS. For
known dens, exclusion zone fencing shall be maintained until all construction
related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all
fencing shall be removed to avoid attracting subsequent attention to the den.
For potential and atypical dens, placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 feet from
the den entrance shall demarcate the location of the den. The exclusion zone
for potential and atypical dens do not require fencing, however the exclusion
area shall be observed by the biologist. No construction, vehicle operation,
material storage, or any other type of surface disturbing activity shall be
allowed within the exclusion zones.
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), disturbance to all San Joaquin kit fox dens should be
avoided to the maximum extent possible. Limited destruction of kit fox dens
may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative. If no reasonable
alternative is feasible other than the destruction of the den, the known kit fox
dens located on the project site that will be destroyed shall be excavated and
destroyed under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist. Prior to the
destruction of dens, the dens shall be monitored for at least three (3)
consecutive days to determine whether the den is active or dormant. Activity
at the den can be monitored by placing tracking medium at den entrances and
by spot lighting. If no den activity is observed during this period, the den
should be destroyed immediately pursuant to the den destruction procedures
set forth below.
- Destruction of dens shall be accomplished by careful excavation with hand
tools until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den shall be fully
excavated and back filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes
cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period.
- If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal
shall be allowed to escape unhindered, or, to the extent feasible,
representatives from CDFG and/or USFWS shall be contacted to attempt to
relocate kit fox pursuant to the MBHCP. As part of the Implementation
Trust to the MBHCP, the City, CDFG, and/or USFWS are required to gather
` , P,
s
Michael Brandman Associates 2-395 ~ m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
t> O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
data on the success of relocation activities from those engaged in relocation.
The City, CDFG, and/or USFWS may encourage relocation activities to
include radio collaring or other monitoring research by the Endangered
Species Recovery Program (ESRP) in the gathering of data on the success of
relocation.
Construction Mitigation Measures
• The project proponent shall provide for a sensitive species identification and
avoidance education program for all construction employees that consists of a
consultation in which persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative
protection shall explain endangered species protocols, habitat needs, and the
measures and conditions of approval being taken to reduce impacts to the
species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet
conveying this information shall be prepared for distribution to all contractors,
their employees, and any and all other personnel who are working on the
construction site. A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent
who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might
inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped
individual. The representative will be identified during the employee
education program. The representative's name and telephone number shall be
provided to the USFWS.
• To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes during the construction phase
of the project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet
deep shall be covered by construction site personnel, and under the direction of
the construction supervisor, at the close of each working day by plywood or
similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of
earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall
be fully inspected for trapped kit foxes by construction site personnel. If at
any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, representatives from CDFG
or USFWS, or permitted and qualified biologists from local research groups
such as the ESRP, shall be contacted immediately to attempt to relocate the kit
fox pursuant to the MBHCP, and if encouraged by the CDFG or USFWS,
attempt to collar the kit fox pursuant to applicable protocol. In the case of
trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to
allow trapped animals to escape.
• The construction site manager shall ensure that all pipes, culverts, or similar
structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater shall be kept capped or
otherwise covered to prevent injury of kit foxes. If such pipes, culverts or
similar structures are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected
~3AKF9
2-40 Michael Brandman Associates `PT
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r m
J Q
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
daily prior to burial or closure to prevent entrapment of kit fox or other
sensitive species.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that all food, garbage in plastic shall
be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the site to
minimize attracting kit foxes and other sensitive species to the site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that no dogs, cats, or other animals
are permitted on the project site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that a zinc phosphide based
rodenticide shall be used, if rodent control is deemed necessary during
construction.
• Night time construction shall be prohibited. In addition, all construction
vehicles shall observe a 20 mph speed limit on the project site and developer
shall create established staging, parking and storage areas to ensure the
prevention of accidental direct impacts and takes of kit foxes.
5.3.A.6 The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered
under the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, shall
be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected
species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately
to the USFWS and CDFG.
5.3.A.7 An environmental liaison shall be retained by the project proponent and identified in
writing to USFWS, CDFG and the City of Bakersfield. The environmental liaison's
qualifications shall consist of the following (minimum requirements), completion of
at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and
has demonstrated field experience in the San Joaquin Valley. The environmental
liaison will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the environmental mitigation
and take avoidance measures. Subject to the approval of the appropriate City
Agency, the environmental liaison shall draft and prepare an Environmental
Education and Compliance Plan that is consistent with the mitigation measures
presented herein. The Environmental Education and Compliance Plan will be used to
train employees and contractors to ensure that the required environmental compliance
measures are implemented. A pre-construction training session shall be held to
ensure all responsible parties are aware of what the environmental protection and
mitigations are and how to ensure that they are implemented. The project proponent
shall submit to the City of Bakersfield proof of attendance by site employees of the
pre-construction training session within 10 days of the training session.
On a monthly basis, the environmental liaison shall prepare a report that details the
implementation of the environmental protection and mitigation measures. Any
AKF9cP
-n
Michael Brandman Associates 2-41
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciRSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc CJ>
ORIGIN A
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
failure of measures to be effective shall be reported as they occur. The liaison shall
suggest improvements and changes as possible, and will coordinate any revision of
environmental protection and mitigation measures with the Applicant, the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, as appropriate.
5.3.A.8 The following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented
during all construction phases of the proposed project to further reduce potential
direct and indirect impacts to special status species and their habitat to less than
significant:
• Prior to any grading activities, the project proponent shall install the
appropriate fencing adjacent to all designated open space areas delineating the
limits of grading. This includes the installation of construction snow fencing,
silt fencing, and/or temporary chain-linked or other such fencing around the
perimeter of any active construction zone adjacent to designated open space
areas. Fencing shall be installed by the project proponent, inspected for
efficacy (by a qualified biologist), and repaired by the project proponent on an
on-going basis during all phases of development.
• Construction vehicles shall carry fire distinguishers or other fire retardants to
enhance the prevention and control of any unplanned man-caused fires.
5.3.A.9 Due to the projects adjacency to areas designated as open space and habitat where
known sensitive species occur, the following mitigation measures shall be adhered to.
Prior to recordation of a final map, the Project Applicant shall record the following
conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CC&Rs) in the Office of the County
Recorder. These CC&Rs shall apply to all property and property owners (including
multi-family and commercial properties). The CC&Rs shall be prepared and
enforced by the project's Home Owner's Association (HOA) during the operation
phase of the project:
• The Project Applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the City of Bakersfield
for review and approval. The landscape plan shall include a planting screen
adjacent to designated open space areas. Native trees, shrubs, forbs, and
grasses shall be planted to help provide protective cover and minimize
potential adverse indirect impacts resulting from night lighting for the
development. Lighting shall be further shaded and directed away from
designated open space areas.
• A management plan shall be prepared and implemented to ensure the proper
management of open space areas containing Bakersfield cactus specimens and
other sensitive resources. The management plan shall include avoidance
measures to prevent long-term impacts to resources within open space areas.
These would include, at minimum, education measures to ensure the proper
3 A KF9
2-42 Michael Brandman Associates `rn
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
r
J CD
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
identification of Bakersfield cactus specimens within open space areas, and
measures to prevent inadvertent damage to cactus specimens during any
maintenance or recreational activities within or adjacent to open space areas.
• All domestic pets shall be leashed and prohibited from entering protected
habitat areas on the project site.
• Prohibit the use of herbicides or pesticides on trails or open space areas where
they may adversely affect plants or protected wildlife. Use of these chemicals
under a plan approved by CDFG and the USFWS would be excepted.
• Prohibit the dumping of any material over the bluffs or outside the individual
lot.
• Prohibit off-trail hiking or bike riding on the bluffs and within open space
areas, as appropriate to prevent erosion and impacts to protected species.
• Prohibit the pumping of pool water or drainage over the bluffs and within open
space areas.
• Require the immediate repair of erosion on the bluffs and open space areas that
may be caused by broken water mains, etc. or failure to comply with the
CC&Rs.
• Ensure that the management of the parks, open space and common areas will
be accomplished in a manner that ensures take avoidance measures for the San
Joaquin kit fox will be implemented described in Mitigation Measure 5.3A.3.
- Require that the HOA ensure that necessary repairs to project fencing along
the border between the proposed project and the Hart Park Cactus Preserve
be completed in a timely manner.
The MBHCP established programmatic habitat mitigation through the establishment of a Habitat
Mitigation Fee. The MBHCP was expressly designed to mitigate impacts resulting from loss of
habitat incurred through authorized development activity. Habitat Mitigation Fees are collected by
the applicable local lead agency and are used for the acquisition, preservation, and protection of
habitats for endangered species covered by the MBCHP, such as open grassland for the San Joaquin
kit fox. Land that is acquired by MBHCP Habitat Mitigation Fees would also indirectly provide
preservation and protection of habitats for common and special-status plant and wildlife species not
covered under the MBHCP, an additional benefit of regional habitat conservation plans such as the
MBHCP. The MBHCP has a very pronounced and successful track record of implementing the
acquisition strategies set forth in the MBHCP. Since the approval of the MBHCP in late 1994, the
Implementation Trust has acquired, using the proceeds of the Habitat Mitigation Fees collected,
approximately 13,973 acres of endangered species habitat in accordance with the acquisition
strategies contained in the MBHCP.
A /(6-
Michael Brandman Associates 2-431), SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
r
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Compliance with MBHCP mitigation fee payment requirements will mitigate for impacts resulting
from the loss of potential San Joaquin kit fox habitat onsite. Additionally, compliance with the
MBHCP and USFWS guidelines described above regarding tracking and excavation would ensure
that prior to ground disturbance activities any potential locations of kit fox dens on the site would be
clearly identified and that appropriate measures would be taken to avoid disturbance to the dens. The
mitigation measures would also ensure that the removal of dens would be conducted in such a manner
as to eliminate the potential of harming kit foxes that have not vacated the dens. Finally, the
mitigation measures would provide reduce the likeliness that kit foxes would be harmed through
incidental activities related to construction, such as the accidental entrapment of foxes, and would
provide for a protocol in the case that incidental contact is made with San Joaquin kit foxes by
construction personnel during the construction of the proposed project. As such, Mitigation Measures
5.3.A.1, 5.3.A.3 and 5.3.A.6 through 5.3.A.9 are considered to mitigate impacts related to the San
Joaquin kit fox to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.3-21 through 5.3-40 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, and Responses to Comments C-8 and C-9 in Chapter 2 of the
Final EIR.
2.1.3.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact on the federal and California
endangered Blunt-Nosed Leopard Lizard.
The blunt-nosed leopard lizard is a federally endangered and California state endangered and fully
protected species that was previously determined to occupy the project site. This species is currently
presumed to be absent from the project site, however suitable habitat for this species exists within
portions of the site. In the unlikely event that the blunt-nosed leopard lizard is present on the portion
of the project site planned for development prior to construction activities, implementation of the
project would result in a significant direct impact on this species.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
`3AKr9
2-44 Michael Brandman Associates O' cP~
S903-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doe m
f?RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.3.A.4 The proposed project has executed take avoidance measures in accordance with the
requirements of the CFG Code Section 5050 through the implementation of the
project-specific Blunt-Nosed Leopard Lizard Avoidance Plan (EDAW 2004 in M.H.
Wolfe and Associates, December 2007). The blunt-nosed leopard lizard was
determined to be absent from the project site after the completion of the Blunt-Nosed
Leopard Lizard Avoidance Plan, and no direct impacts to this species are expected.
In order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below,
the project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City Agency (as identified
by the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented.
• Prior to any project grading of suitable habitat for the blunt-nosed leopard
lizard, including all suitable habitat to be cleared or grubbed or used as points
or travel routes for construction, protocol surveys shall be conducted by
qualified biologists according to recent survey methodology approved by the
CDFG. The results of protocol surveys are considered valid for up to one year,
and shall be repeated as necessary if grading of the target area for the survey is
not completed within the one-year timeline. If it is determined that blunt-
nosed leopard lizards occupy any portions of the site during protocol surveys,
the CDFG shall be notified immediately for further consultation and
consideration of an avoidance plan.
• All employees who will be on the site will be instructed as to the take
avoidance regulations and educated on basic recognition of the species by a
qualified biologist prior to construction.
• Pursuant to CFG Code Section 5050, take of any blunt-nosed leopard lizard as
a result of project implementation is not permitted and will not be authorized.
If a blunt-nosed leopard lizard is identified on the project site during
construction, the lizard shall be avoided and all construction activities in the
vicinity of the lizard shall stop. A qualified biologist shall be notified
immediately to confirm the presence/absence of blunt-nosed leopard lizards on
the site. If it is determined that blunt-nosed leopard lizards occupy any
portions of the site, CDFG shall be notified immediately for further
consultation and consideration of an avoidance plan.
Compliance with the mitigation measure identified above would ensure that construction activities
would not result in the take of blunt-nosed lizard, if the species is identified as occurring on the site
during construction. Additionally, the measure would provide for appropriate protocols in the event
that the species is encountered during construction activities. With adherence to Mitigation Measure
5.3.A.4, the project will avoid adverse impacts to the blunt-nosed leopard lizard and therefore will not
result in significant impacts to the species.
c AKt9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-45 Q
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc F= rn
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
References: Pages 5.3-21 through 5.3-40 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in Section
5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.3.4 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact on the burrowing owl, a
federally protected species and California State species of special concern.
Two individual burrowing owls were observed on the site during surveys in 2003, and a total of six
potential burrowing owl burrows were determined to occupy the project site and immediate vicinity.
The proposed project could result in potential direct impacts to this species during project
construction, in addition to potential indirect impacts through the loss of nesting and foraging habitat.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.3.AA Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a Habitat
Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code and the Implementation/Management Agreement for the MBHCP or
equivalent program or measure as approved by the wildlife agencies.
5.3.A.5 Implementation of the following mitigation measures will ensure compliance with
the MBTA and CFG Code for protected nesting bird species. Prior to the issuance of
a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with the following measures
regarding nesting migratory bird species, including the burrowing owl, protected
under the MBTA and CFG Code:
• If site grading is proposed during the general breeding season for nesting birds
that are protected under the MBTA and CFG Code (February 1 through
August 31), a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist within 30 days prior to grading activities within any project impact
area in order to identify all active nests in areas impacted throughout project
construction and implementation. If an active nest is identified during the pre-
construction survey, no construction activity shall take place within a
minimum of 200 feet of any active nest until the young have fledged (as o?'OX6.90T
m
2-46 Michael Brandman Associated o
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciASept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc{-OR1GINI\L
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
determined by a qualified biologist) and the nest is no longer determined to be
active, or until another distance is recommended by a qualified biologist, and
approved by the Planning Director. This distance shall be expanded to 500
feet for any nesting raptor species excluding the burrowing owl, for which
specific mitigation is provided below. Construction activity in the vicinity of
any active nest shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring
biologist who may reduce the size of a buffer otherwise required by this
measure for individual nests. Nesting habitat that must be removed as a result
of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding season,
which is defined herein as approximately September 1 through January 31.
Habitat may be removed at any time during the breeding or non-breeding
season if a qualified biologist determines after a pre-construction survey that
there are no active nests and no nesting birds in the area that could potentially
be affected by construction activities in violation of the MBTA and CFG Code.
• Pre-construction surveys shall include a survey for burrowing owl and
according to recommended protocol by the California Burrowing Owl
Consortium and CDFG (CBOC 1993). If active burrowing owl burrows are
detected during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), no
construction activity shall take place within 250 feet of any active nest until it
is determined by a qualified biologist that all juvenile burrowing owls
associated with any active nest are foraging independently and capable of
independent survival. Construction activity in the vicinity of any active nest
shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring biologist.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside of breeding season (September
1 through January 31), passive relocation efforts may be undertaken in accordance
with recommended protocol by the California Burrowing Owl Consortium and
CDFG (CBOC 1993).
5.3.A.6 The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered
under the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, shall
be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected
species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately
to the USFWS and CDFG.
5.3.A.7 An environmental liaison shall be retained by the project proponent and identified in
writing to USFWS, CDFG and the City of Bakersfield. The environmental liaison's
qualifications shall consist of the following (minimum requirements), completion of
at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and
43AK~r
O ~c1-n
Michael Brandman Associates 2-4;t
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc U m
O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
has demonstrated field experience in the San Joaquin Valley. The environmental
liaison will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the environmental mitigation
and take avoidance measures. Subject to the approval of the appropriate City
Agency, the environmental liaison shall draft and prepare an Environmental
Education and Compliance Plan that is consistent with the mitigation measures
presented herein. The Environmental Education and Compliance Plan will be used to
train employees and contractors to ensure that the required environmental compliance
measures are implemented. A pre-construction training session shall be held to
ensure all responsible parties are aware of what the environmental protection and
mitigations are and how to ensure that they are implemented. The project proponent
shall submit to the City of Bakersfield proof of attendance by site employees of the
pre-construction training session within 10 days of the training session.
On a monthly basis, the environmental liaison shall prepare a report that details the
implementation of the environmental protection and mitigation measures. Any
failure of measures to be effective shall be reported as they occur. The liaison shall
suggest improvements and changes as possible, and will coordinate any revision of
environmental protection and mitigation measures with the Applicant, the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, as appropriate.
5.3.A.8 The following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented
during all construction phases of the proposed project to further reduce potential
direct and indirect impacts to special status species and their habitat to less than
significant:
• Prior to any grading activities, the project proponent shall install the
appropriate fencing adjacent to all designated open space areas delineating the
limits of grading. This includes the installation of construction snow fencing,
silt fencing, and/or temporary chain-linked or other such fencing around the
perimeter of any active construction zone adjacent to designated open space
areas. Fencing shall be installed by the project proponent, inspected for
efficacy (by a qualified biologist), and repaired by the project proponent on an
on-going basis during all phases of development.
• Construction vehicles shall carry fire distinguishers or other fire retardants to
enhance the prevention and control of any unplanned man-caused fires.
5.3.A.9 Due to the projects adjacency to areas designated as open space and habitat where
known sensitive species occur, the following mitigation measures shall be adhered to.
Prior to recordation of a final map, the Project Applicant shall record the following
conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CC&Rs) in the Office of the County
Recorder. These CC&Rs shall apply to all property and property owners (including
j. 9CIP
2-48 Michael Brandman Associates r
5903-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
0
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
multi-family and commercial properties). The CC&Rs shall be prepared and
enforced by the project's Home Owner's Association (HOA) during the operation
phase of the project:
• The Project Applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the City of Bakersfield
for review and approval. The landscape plan shall include a planting screen
adjacent to designated open space areas. Native trees, shrubs, forbs, and
grasses shall be planted to help provide protective cover and minimize
potential adverse indirect impacts resulting from night lighting for the
development. Lighting shall be further shaded and directed away from
designated open space areas.
• A management plan shall be prepared and implemented to ensure the proper
management of open space areas containing Bakersfield cactus specimens and
other sensitive resources. The management plan shall include avoidance
measures to prevent long-term impacts to resources within open space areas.
These would include, at minimum, education measures to ensure the proper
identification of Bakersfield cactus specimens within open space areas, and
measures to prevent inadvertent damage to cactus specimens during any
maintenance or recreational activities within or adjacent to open space areas.
• All domestic pets shall be leashed and prohibited from entering protected
habitat areas on the project site.
• Prohibit the use of herbicides or pesticides on trails or open space areas where
they may adversely affect plants or protected wildlife. Use of these chemicals
under a plan approved by CDFG and the USFWS would be excepted.
• Prohibit the dumping of any material over the bluffs or outside the individual
lot.
• Prohibit off-trail hiking or bike riding on the bluffs and within open space
areas, as appropriate to prevent erosion and impacts to protected species.
• Prohibit the pumping of pool water or drainage over the bluffs and within open
space areas.
- Require the immediate repair of erosion on the bluffs and open space areas
that may be caused by broken water mains, etc. or failure to comply with the
CC&Rs.
- Ensure that the management of the parks, open space and common areas will
be accomplished in a manner that ensures take avoidance measures for the
San Joaquin kit fox will be implemented described in Mitigation Measure
5.3A.3.
• Require that the HOA ensure that necessary repairs to project fencing along
the border between the proposed project and the Hart Park Cactus Preserve be
completed in a timely manner.
4 A K~c9
v
Michael Brandman Associates 2-49
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc b
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.1, 5.3.A.5, 5.3.A.6, 5.3.A.7, 5.3.A.8 and 5.3.A.9 will
mitigate impacts to the burrowing owl to less than significant. Compliance with MBHCP mitigation
fee payment requirements will mitigate for impacts resulting from the loss of potential burrowing owl
habitat onsite. Implementation of the mitigation measures ensures that no owl will be taken in
violation of the MBTA and Fish & Game Code.
References: Pages 5.3-21 through 5.3-40 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, and Response to Comment S-12 in Chapter 2 of the Final
EIR.
Impact 5.3.C: The proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on federally-
or State-protected waters or wetlands as defined by Section 404 and Section 401 of
the Clean Water Act, State Porter-Cologne Water Duality Act, or Section 1600 of the
California Fish and Game Code (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, riparian etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means.
2.1.3.5 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to jurisdictional waters
during the construction and operation phases of the proposed project in violation of Section 401 of
the Clean Water Act and the State Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act.
Construction activities could contribute pollutants to ground water and surface water resources, and
increase erosion and sedimentation potentially entering jurisdictional waters. Construction-phase
activities could generate pollutants such as increased silts, ground rubber, oils from automobiles,
debris, litter, chemicals, dust, and dissolved solids related to grading, building construction, painting,
and construction equipment and vehicle maintenance activities. Grading, excavation, filling, and
slope manufacturing activities could result in decreased slope stability and increased erosion and
sedimentation potentially entering jurisdictional waters. Long-term operations of the proposed
project would increase the potential of stormwater runoff transporting contaminants from roadway
surfaces, lawns, driveways, parking lots, and other exposed impervious, structural, and landscape
surfaces into the storm drain system, and potentially entering jurisdictional waters.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The project-specific significant environmental 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.
43AKt
~ cP,
2-50 Michael Brandman Associates O' 9
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
U
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of Bakersfield for
review and approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort has been made by the
Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a reasonable manner within 90 days, as
determined by the City Engineer, the City may proceed with review and approval of the
SWPPP.The SWPPP shall include a specific list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that
will be used to prevent construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and prevent all
products of erosion from moving off site into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project
applicant shall provide evidence that the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the State Water
Resources Control Board. The NOI is a mechanism to establish responsible parties,
dischargers, and scope of the proposed operations. The BMPs that will be included, but will be
finalized with the preparation of the SWPPP, include the following.
• Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be perfonned on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
3 A
(Y 1fr1~s
1
Michael Brandman Associates 2-51
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ~ m
)RIG)NAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
- Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via
storm water. Solid waste will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 includes measures for the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) relating to soil stabilization, slope
stability, dust control/dust suppressants, contaminants, construction water, sanitary facilities, and
solid waste disposal. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 would reduce potential
construction and long-term impacts to water quality pursuant to Section 401 of the federal Clean
Water Act and State Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.3-41 through 5.3-42 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in Section
5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.3.6 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to California Department of
Fish and Game (CDFG) regulated waters potentially occurring onsite.
The project site contains a number of drainage features that may be considered jurisdictional waters
regulated by the CDFG pursuant to Section 1600 of the CFG Code. Construction of the proposed
project could result in the direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other potentially
adverse action to CDFG regulated waters potentially occurring onsite.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
`3AKF9
2-52 Michael Brandman Associates Q)`P-;
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
v o
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Facts in Support of Finding
The project-specific significant environmental 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.C.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall provide proof of
a Section 1600 notification as submitted to the CDFG and proof of issuance of a
Streambed Alteration Agreement for potential impacts to any drainage features
subject to CDFG jurisdiction or evidence that the developer has satisfied the Section
1600 notification process and the statutory period for CDFG to respond has expired.
Specific habitat and/or water quality mitigation will be conditioned by the CDFG
and/or other regulatory agencies to adequately mitigate potential impacts to any
drainage features subject to CDFG jurisdiction to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure 5.3.C.1 ensures that project avoidance and specific mitigation for potential
impacts to CDFG regulated waters will be defined through submittal of appropriate permit
applications. Accordingly, this measure would reduce impacts associated with CDFG regulated
waters to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.3-41 through 5.3-42 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.4 - Cultural Resources
Impact SAC: The project could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource.
2.1.4.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to a unique paleontological
resource.
The presence of previously recorded fossil sites on and near the project site suggest that there is a
very high potential for similar fossil remains to be uncovered during construction activities, most
notably excavation. All stratigraphic units exposed in the project site and along the project access
roads have the potential to be significantly impacted during construction.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
,;,KF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-53 ~c
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
r
O
'~GINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.4.CA Prior to the start of any ground disturbance related to project development and as
needed during on-going ground disturbance, construction personnel involved with
earth moving activities shall be informed that fossils may be encountered, and shall
be educated on the appearance of fossils, the laws protecting fossils, the
consequences of not abiding those laws, and the proper notification procedures in the
event that a fossil is discovered. This construction personnel training shall be
conducted by a qualified paleontologist, retained by the project applicant and
approved by the City of Bakersfield, and upon completion, proof of training shall be
submitted to the City of Bakersfield.
5.4.C.2 Upon the commencement of any ground disturbance related to project development,
a professionally trained and experienced paleontologist, retained by the project
applicant and approved by the City of Bakersfield shall implement a paleontological
resource impact mitigation and monitoring program during project-related earth
moving activities. This paleontological resource impact mitigation and monitoring
program shall follow Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standard guidelines
(see Appendix D-3 of this Recirculated Recirculated Draft EIR) and include: pre-
construction coordination; construction monitoring; emergency discovery
procedures; sampling and data recovery; preparation; identification; and analysis of
any fossil specimens salvaged; museum storage of any specimens and data recovered;
and preparation of a final report to be delivered to the City of Bakersfield and other
interested parties.
5.4.C.3 During construction, earth moving activities shall be monitored by a qualified
paleontologist where the earth moving activities will disturb previously undisturbed
sediment potentially containing significant fossils. Monitoring shall be performed by
a qualified paleontological monitor retained by the project applicant and approved by
the City of Bakersfield, under the supervision of the project paleontologist.
Following SVP standard guidelines, once one-half of excavations are completed, if
no fossils have been discovered, monitoring can be reduced to half-time, quarter-
time, spot-checking, or suspended. Monitoring is not required in areas that sediments
have been previously disturbed. In areas where potential fossilferous sediments will
be buried, but not otherwise disturbed, a paleontological monitor shall examine
surface exposures prior to their being buried and the monitor shall salvage any
exposed fossils.
`r ~6 AKr~
2-34 Michael Brandman Associates Gam,
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc f- rn
c> r
'ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Mitigation Measures 5.4.C.1 through 5A.C.3 will ensure that construction personnel is adequately
informed as to the potential presence of paleontological resources and the proper procedures
necessary to protect the resources. Additionally, ground disturbing activities will be monitored by an
experienced paleontologist in order to identify and preserve any discovered paleontological resources.
Therefore, associated impacts would be fully mitigated and would be considered less than significant
levels.
References: Pages 5.4-9 through 5.3-11 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, in Section 5 of Chapter
I of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.4.D: The proposed project could result in the disturbance of human remains.
Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to human remains.
Discovery of human remains did not occur during the field investigations conducted for the proposed
project. However, there is potential for unknown human remains to be discovered during
construction activities.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.4.D.1 The project applicant shall immediately suspend any further excavation or
disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent
human remains and shall contact the Kern County Coroner should the discovery or
recognition of human remains occur. The following actions shall be undertaken.
. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby
area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
- The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered must be
contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is
required, and
- If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
0 The coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours.
Michael Brandman Associates 2-55~ 3AK~~~
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
r
C~
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
0 The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be
the most likely descended from the deceased Native American.
0 The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for
means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the
human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or
• Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized
representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated
grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject
to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98(e).
- The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent.
- The most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC, fails to make a
recommendation within 24 hours of being granted access to the site; or
- The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation
of the descendant, and a mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures
acceptable to the landowner.
Mitigation Measure 5A.D.1 would fully mitigate any impacts to undiscovered human remains that are
encountered during construction activities to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.4-9 through 5.3-11 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, in Section 5 of Chapter
I of the Final EIR.
2.1.5 - Geology and Soils
Impact 5.5.C: The proposed project may expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related
ground failure, including liquefaction, or seismic-induced settlement.
2.1.5.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to people or structures
related to seismic-related ground failure.
The proposed project will most likely experience moderate ground shaking as a result of seismic
activity originating from regional faults. Based on subsurface conditions, the loose fill materials at
the site could be vulnerable to seismic-induced settlement, in the occurrence of an earthquake.
2-56 Michael Brandman Associates OF .3 A ~~'9S
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
r
__J O
~`RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.5.C.1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the grading plans shall comply with the
applicable provisions of the Hillside Development Ordinance and include the
recommendations set forth in the Earthwork Specifications and Standard Grading
Specifications - Slope Conditions that are located in the Geotechnical Engineering
Investigation and Addendum II, Appendices E-1 and E-2 to reduce potential seismic-
induced settlement and post-construction differential settlement. The specifications
within the geotechnical investigations include, but not limited to the following:
• The sandy soils will be suitable for re-use as non-expansive Engineered Fill,
provided it is cleansed of excessive organics, debris and fragments larger than
4 inches in diameter. The fill material should be moisture conditioned as
necessary and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density
based on ASTM Test Method 01557. Prior to fill placement, Krazan &
Associates, Inc. shall inspect the bottom of the excavation to verify no
additional excavation will be required.
• Any buried structures encountered during construction should be removed
and/or relocated. The resulting excavations shall be excavated to firm native
ground and backfilled with Engineered Fill.
• In order to minimize post-construction differential settlement, all structures
that are in a cut/fill transition zones shall be cut to a minimum of 3 feet. This
excavation shall extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond structural elements or to a
minimum distance equal to the depth of over-excavation, which ever is greater.
• The proposed cut and fill slopes shall be constructed to 2:1 (horizontal to
vertical). In lieu of the slopes, a retaining wall may be used. Cut and fill
slopes for the slab area shall not exceed to 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Cut and
fill slopes may be revised as recommended by the Soils Engineer upon his
review of a more definite site plan.
• Where fills greater than 8 feet are to be constructed on original ground that
slopes at inclinations exceeding 6:1 (horizontal to vertical), benches shall be
cut into the natural slope as the filling operations proceed. Each bench shall
consists of a level terrace a minimum of 8 feet wide, with the rise to the next
{ -6A 1CF
Michael Brandman Associates 2-57 ' m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
G
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
bench held for 4 feet or less. Where fills of comparable height will be
constructed on ground slopes at an inclination exceeding 4:1 (horizontal to
vertical), a keyway shall be provided in addition to the benches. Each keyway
shall consist of level trench at least 8 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, with
side slopes not exceeding 1: 1 (horizontal to vertical), cut into the natural
slope.
• Rough grading, specific building/structure setbacks shall be addressed in
individual lot investigations.
• Public utilities must be at least 50 feet from the slope face. Regrading the top
or bottom of the slopes shall be analyzed by a qualified Soils Engineer prior to
construction. The top of the slopes shall be graded away from the slope face.
It is recommended that the site be graded so that water does not flow over the
slopes, to minimize the overflow of surface water over the slopes face and
cause erosion.
• Several washout areas are located within the slope faces. Some of the washout
areas have been backfilled with debris and loosely placed soil. Therefore, the
debris and loosely placed soil shall be removed from the washout areas. The
washout excavations shall be backfilled with Engineered Fill. The debris
cannot be used for reuse as Engineered Fill.
• Where cohesionless soils occur onsite shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls
may be required within these sandy and gravelly soils.
Mitigation Measure 5.5.C.1 would ensure that onsite structures are not exposed to seismic-induced
settlement and post-construction differential settlement. Therefore, with implementation of
Mitigation Measure 5.5.C.1, associated impacts would be mitigated to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.5-9 through 5.5-10 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, in Section 5 of
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.5.13: The proposed project could expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides.
2.1.5.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to slope failure.
Existing, steep slopes onsite are susceptible to minor to moderate seismic-induced slope failures;
however, it is not anticipated that a catastrophic major slope failure will occur. Additionally, minor to
moderate slope instability is associated with the steep northwest slope faces located in the
southwestern portion of the site.
,Z). s~
F_. rn
Michael Brandman Associates
2-58
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r)R I G i N AL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.5.D.1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the grading plans shall comply with the
applicable provisions of the Hillside Development Ordinance and specify structure
setbacks from the toe or top of the slopes as appropriate, in accordance with the
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation and Addendum II. Building setbacks from
the toe of slopes shall be half the height of the slope to a maximum setback of
20 feet. Setbacks from the top of slopes less than 10 feet in height shall have
minimum setback of half the slope height. All slope setbacks shall be delineated on
the final subdivision maps.
With compliance with Mitigation Measure 5.5.D.1, appropriate setbacks would ensure that slope
failure would not impact the proposed structures on the project site and associated impacts would be
less than significant.
References: Pages 5.5-10 through 5.5-11 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, in Section 5
of Chapter I of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.5.E: The proposed project could result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
2.1.5.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to soil erosion due to
construction activities.
The proposed project site is located within a hilly topographical area. Construction activities
associated with the proposed project will result in the mass grading of the entire site, which will leave
the soils exposed. Under this condition, there is a potential for erosion and loss of topsoil. Runoff
from the site during construction could contain soils and sediment. Additionally, during a storm
event, soil erosion and loss of topsoil could occur at an accelerated rate.
Ak'~q
Michael Brandman Associates 2-59
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ~ m
U U
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort
has been made by the Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a
reasonable manner within 90 days as detennined the City Engineer, the City may
proceed with review and approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a
specific list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent
construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of
erosion from moving off site into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project
applicant shall provide evidence that the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the
State Water Resources Control Board. The NOI is a mechanism to establish
responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of the proposed operations. The BMPs
that will be included, but will be finalized with the preparation of the SWPPP,
include the following.
e Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
2-60 Michael Brandman Associates AKF9,
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ~Q)~n
t-- m
r
t CD
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
- Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via
storm water. Solid waste will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 would ensure that adequate measures are in place on
the project site during construction activities to effectively reduce soil erosion impacts to a level that
is less than significant.
References: Pages 5.5-12 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final
EIR.
Impact 5.5.F: The proposed project is located on a geologic unit or soil that could be unstable, or
that could become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or
off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.
2.1.5.4 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to slope instability.
6,
Michael Brandman Associates 2-61 m
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Councimept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ~
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
The project site includes several unstable slope faces throughout the project site. Construction
activities will encounter unstable soils through the proposed development area, resulting in a
potentially significant impact.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.5.C.1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the grading plans shall comply with the
applicable provisions of the Hillside Development Ordinance and include the
recommendations set forth in the Earthwork Specifications and Standard Grading
Specifications - Slope Conditions that are located in the Geotechnical Engineering
Investigation and Addendum II, Appendices E-1 and E-2 to reduce potential seismic-
induced settlement and post-construction differential settlement. The specifications
within the geotechnical investigations include, but not limited to the following:
• The sandy soils will be suitable for re-use as non-expansive Engineered Fill,
provided it is cleansed of excessive organics, debris and fragments larger than
4 inches in diameter. The fill material should be moisture conditioned as
necessary and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density
based on ASTM Test Method 01557. Prior to fill placement, Krazan &
Associates, Inc. shall inspect the bottom of the excavation to verify no
additional excavation will be required.
• Any buried structures encountered during construction should be removed
and/or relocated. The resulting excavations shall be excavated to firm native
ground and backfilled with Engineered Fill.
• In order to minimize post-construction differential settlement, all structures
that are in a cut/fill transition zones shall be cut to a minimum of 3 feet. This
excavation shall extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond structural elements or to a
minimum distance equal to the depth of over-excavation, which ever is greater.
• The proposed cut and fill slopes shall be constructed to 2:1 (horizontal to
vertical). In lieu of the slopes, a retaining wall may be used. Cut and fill
slopes for the slab area shall not exceed to 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Cut and
fill slopes may be revised as recommended by the Soils Engineer upon his
review of a more definite site plan.
AKF9
2-62 Michael Brandman Associates
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Councit\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc }
m
U p
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• Where fills greater than 8 feet are to be constructed on original ground that
slopes at inclinations exceeding 6:1 (horizontal to vertical), benches shall be
cut into the natural slope as the filling operations proceed. Each bench shall
consists of a level terrace a minimum of 8 feet wide, with the rise to the next
bench held for 4 feet or less. Where fills of comparable height will be
constructed on ground slopes at an inclination exceeding 4:1 (horizontal to
vertical), a keyway shall be provided in addition to the benches. Each keyway
shall consist of level trench at least 8 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, with
side slopes not exceeding 1: 1 (horizontal to vertical), cut into the natural
slope.
• Rough grading, specific building/structure setbacks shall be addressed in
individual lot investigations.
• Public utilities must be at least 50 feet from the slope face. Regrading the top
or bottom of the slopes shall be analyzed by a qualified Soils Engineer prior to
construction. The top of the slopes shall be graded away from the slope face.
It is recommended that the site be graded so that water does not flow over the
slopes, to minimize the overflow of surface water over the slopes face and
cause erosion.
• Several washout areas are located within the slope faces. Some of the washout
areas have been backfilled with debris and loosely placed soil. Therefore, the
debris and loosely placed soil shall be removed from the washout areas. The
washout excavations shall be backfilled with Engineered Fill. The debris
cannot be used for reuse as Engineered Fill.
• Where cohesionless soils occur onsite shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls
may be required within these sandy and gravelly soils.
Compliance with Mitigation Measure 5.5.C.1 would ensure that development in the vicinity of
unstable slope faces encountered on the project site would not result in significant impacts relating to
slope instability. Consequently, impacts would be less than significant with the incorporation of the
mitigation measure.
References: Pages 5.5-12 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final
EIR.
Impact 5.5.G: The proposed project could be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property.
2.1.5.5 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to expansive soil.
3HKF
Michael Brandman Associates 2-63 9J
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rn
V
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Site investigations identified expansive soils occurring throughout the project site. Additionally, fill
soils of varying strength characteristics are scattered across the site in numerous piles and mounds,
predominantly in southwestern and southeastern corners of site.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.5.C.1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the grading plans shall comply with the
applicable provisions of the Hillside Development Ordinance and include the
recommendations set forth in the Earthwork Specifications and Standard Grading
Specifications - Slope Conditions that are located in the Geotechnical Engineering
Investigation and Addendum II, Appendices E-1 and E-2 to reduce potential seismic-
induced settlement and post-construction differential settlement. The specifications
within the geotechnical investigations include, but not limited to the following:
• The sandy soils will be suitable for re-use as non-expansive Engineered Fill,
provided it is cleansed of excessive organics, debris and fragments larger than
4 inches in diameter. The fill material should be moisture conditioned as
necessary and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density
based on ASTM Test Method 01557. Prior to fill placement, Krazan &
Associates, Inc. shall inspect the bottom of the excavation to verify no
additional excavation will be required.
• Any buried structures encountered during construction should be removed
and/or relocated. The resulting excavations shall be excavated to firm native
ground and backfilled with Engineered Fill.
• In order to minimize post-construction differential settlement, all structures
that are in a cut/fill transition zones shall be cut to a minimum of 3 feet. This
excavation shall extend a minimum of 5 feet beyond structural elements or to a
minimum distance equal to the depth of over-excavation, which ever is greater.
• The proposed cut and fill slopes shall be constructed to 2:1 (horizontal to
vertical). In lieu of the slopes, a retaining wall may be used. Cut and fill
slopes for the slab area shall not exceed to 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Cut and
fill slopes may be revised as recommended by the Soils Engineer upon his
review of a more definite site plan.
aAkF
2-64 Michael Brandman Associates 9s
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc _ -n
M
O
")RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• Where fills greater than 8 feet are to be constructed on original ground that
slopes at inclinations exceeding 6:1 (horizontal to vertical), benches shall be
cut into the natural slope as the filling operations proceed. Each bench shall
consists of a level terrace a minimum of 8 feet wide, with the rise to the next
bench held for 4 feet or less. Where fills of comparable height will be
constructed on ground slopes at an inclination exceeding 4:1 (horizontal to
vertical), a keyway shall be provided in addition to the benches. Each keyway
shall consist of level trench at least 8 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, with
side slopes not exceeding 1: 1 (horizontal to vertical), cut into the natural
slope.
• Rough grading, specific building/structure setbacks shall be addressed in
individual lot investigations.
• Public utilities must be at least 50 feet from the slope face. Regrading the top
or bottom of the slopes shall be analyzed by a qualified Soils Engineer prior to
construction. The top of the slopes shall be graded away from the slope face.
It is recommended that the site be graded so that water does not flow over the
slopes, to minimize the overflow of surface water over the slopes face and
cause erosion.
• Several washout areas are located within the slope faces. Some of the washout
areas have been backfilled with debris and loosely placed soil. Therefore, the
debris and loosely placed soil shall be removed from the washout areas. The
washout excavations shall be backfilled with Engineered Fill. The debris
cannot be used for reuse as Engineered Fill.
• Where cohesionless soils occur onsite shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls
may be required within these sandy and gravelly soils.
Compliance with Mitigation Measure 5.5.C.1 would ensure that structures proposed by the project
would not be located on expansive soils, thereby mitigating any impacts associated with such soils.
References: Pages 5.5-15 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Geology and Soils, in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final
EIR.
~ ~ ~ Kr9
C Y Michael Brandman Associates 2-6 m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc j
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
2.1.6 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact 5.6.13: Past oil and mining activities may create hazards to the public or the environment
through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment.
2.1.6.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to the public or the
environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment from the former asphalt-concrete batch plant.
A portion of the project site was historically used as a asphalt-batch facility. Soil samples from the
vicinity of the former asphalt-batch site showed elevated concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons
to a depth of five feet.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.6.D.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, including all or portions of the following
location, the project applicant shall remediate the TPH-diesel from the former
asphalt-concrete batch plant in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local
laws and regulations and obtain a determination from the City of Bakersfield Fire
Department that no further action is needed.
Mitigation Measure 5.6.D.1 would ensure that any potential hydrocarbon contamination discovered
during project grading and construction would be remediated to acceptable levels. Accordingly,
compliance with the mitigation measure identified above would reduce impacts associated with
hydrocarbon contamination to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.6-12 through 5.6-14 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.6, Hazards and Hazardous Waste,
in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
o,~Kc9
2-66 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rm
O
)HIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignit'icance
2.1.6.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to the public or the
environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment from the abandoned oil wells.
There are eight abandoned oil wells on the project site. The eight abandoned wells could potentially
have hydrocarbon contamination.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.6.D.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, if hydrocarbon contamination associated
with the abandoned oil wells in Section 1 T295, R28E, MDB is encountered during
property development, the impacted soils shall be properly characterized and
removed for disposal or recycling by a qualified licensed engineer in compliance
with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, including the
requirements of the City of Bakersfield Fire Department. Prior to the continuation of
grading in the area where hydrocarbon contamination is found, the project applicant
shall receive a determination from the City of Bakersfield Fire Department that no
further action is needed.
Mitigation Measure 5.6.D.2 would ensure that any potential hydrocarbon contamination discovered
during project grading and construction would be remediated to acceptable levels. Accordingly,
compliance with the mitigation measure identified above would reduce impacts associated with
hydrocarbon contamination to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.6-12 through 5.6-14 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.6, Hazards and Hazardous Waste,
in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.6.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to the public or the
environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environmentfrom past oilfield operations.
~ aaK~9
o'
Michael Brandman Associates 2-6% m
r-
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc O
UHIGINA,L
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Finally, portions of road alignments that are associated with the project are located within the Kern
Bluff Oil Field. There is potential for hydrocarbon contamination associated with the oil field
operations to be encountered during road construction.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.6.D.3 If at time of improvement plan check or during ground disturbance, hydrocarbon
contamination associated with the soil field operations is encountered during road
construction, the impacted soils will be properly characterized by a registered
environmental assessor and removed for disposal or recycling by a qualified licensed
engineer in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws and
regulations, including accordance with the requirements of the City of Bakersfield
Fire Department. Prior to the continuation of grading in the area where hydrocarbon
contamination is found, the project applicant shall obtain a determination from the
City of Bakersfield Fire Department that no further action is needed.
Mitigation Measure 5.6.D.3 would ensure that any potential hydrocarbon contamination discovered
during road construction would be remediated to acceptable levels. Accordingly, compliance with the
mitigation measure identified above would reduce impacts associated with hydrocarbon
contamination to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.6-12 through 5.6-14 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.6, Hazards and Hazardous Waste,
in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.6.J: The project may create a significant public health hazard through activities
involving the release of airborne materials into the environment.
2.1.6.4 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to the public health through
activities involving the release of Valley Fever (Coccidiodes immitis).
Preconstruction grading activities and construction on the project site could expose construction
workers and nearby residents to the Coccidioides immitis spores associated with persons contracting
Al(F9
2-68 Michael Brandman Associates J'n
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc - m
s O
")RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Valley Fever. Additionally, upon buildout of the project site, it is possible that new residents will
inhabit the site that have never been exposed to the Coccidioides immitis, making them more
susceptible to contracting Valley Fever.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.6.J.1 The project proponent or construction crew supervisor shall ensure that during the
project's preconstruction meeting educational materials will be provided to
construction crews regarding Valley Fever including but not limited information
containing the risks of acquiring Valley Fever, recognition of the symptoms, the
importance of prompt medical attention, proper protection measures and how to
obtain a Valley Fever skin test.
5.6.J.2 Prior to the commencement of any grading activities, the construction crew leader
shall ensure that sufficient wetting of the soil will occur prior to grading activities to
reduce fugitive emissions from the project site.
5.6.J.3 During periods of high wind activity, grading shall be limited and construction
workers shall use dust masks in extremely windy conditions.
5.6.J.4 When practicable, roads on which construction equipment travels and which lead to
construction activities shall be paved to reduce fugitive dust emissions.
5.6.J.5 The project will comply with SJVACPD's Regulation VIII, (Rules 8011, 8041, 8051,
8071, 8081) concerning reduction of duct/dirt generated by human activity, including
construction and demolition, bulk materials Additional dust control measures
Mitigation Measures carrying construction, paved and unpaved roads, carryout and
track.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort
has been made by the Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a
reasonable manner within 90 days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may
proceed with review and approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a
specific list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent
3aKr9
o'
Michael Brandman Associates 2-69
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc v
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of
erosion from moving off site into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project
applicant shall provide evidence that the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the
State Water Resources Control Board. The NOI is a mechanism to establish
responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of the proposed operations. The BMPs
that will be included, but will be finalized with the preparation of the SWPPP,
include the following.
• Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
4 ~,AICt9
O' 11P
2-70 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciRSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
- Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via
storm water. Solid waste will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Mitigation Measures 5.6.J.1 through 5.6.J.5 and Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 would disclose the risks
associated with Valley Fever to construction workers on the site, as well as provide preventative and
treatment information. Additionally, the measures would reduce the likeliness that the spores would
be transmitted through soil stabilization measures. Compliance with the identified mitigation
measures would reduce the potentially significant impact related to Valley Fever to less than
significant levels.
References: Pages 5.6-16 through 5.6-18 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.6, Hazards and Hazardous Waste,
in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.7 - Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact 5.7.A: The proposed project could violate water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements.
2.1.7.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final E1R identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements.
The proposed project has the potential to cause increased runoff, erosion and sedimentation that
would not otherwise occur because an urban landscape has the potential to produce detrimental
pollutants, such as fertilizer, pesticides, heavy metals, oils, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances,
and bacteria. During construction, short term impacts could occur resulting in the generation of
pollutants such as increased silts, ground rubber, oils from automobiles, debris, litter, chemicals, dust,
and dissolved solids during ground disturbing and construction activities.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
J9s-n
Michael Brandman Associates 2-71--
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rm
- D
")RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort
has been made by the Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a
reasonable manner within 90 days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may
proceed with review and approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a
specific list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent
construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of
erosion from moving off site into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project
applicant shall provide evidence that the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the
State Water Resources Control Board. The NOI is a mechanism to establish
responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of the proposed operations. The BMPs
that will be included, but will be finalized with the preparation of the SWPPP,
include the following.
• Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
`gAKF
2-72 Michael Brandman Associates O 9J,~
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciASept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
J ~
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
- Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via
storm water. Solid waste will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 includes measures for the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) relating to soil stabilization, slope
stability, dust control/dust suppressants, contaminants, construction water, sanitary facilities, and
solid waste disposal. These measures would effectively reduce impacts associated with water quality
during construction of the site to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.7-13 through 5.7-18 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.7, Hydrology and Water Quality,
in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.7.C: The proposed project could substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or a river, in a
manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite.
2.1.7.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact relating to the substantial
alteration of the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation onsite.
4 ~ AKF9
C),
Michael Brandman Associates 2-73 ;T,
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc 7 U
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Implementation of the proposed project includes the addition of impervious surfaces that will
permanently alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site. The alteration of the existing
drainage pattern of the project site may lead to significant onsite erosion and siltation.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort
has been made by the Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a
reasonable manner within 90 days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may
proceed with review and approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a
specific list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent
construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of
erosion from moving off site into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project
applicant shall provide evidence that the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the
State Water Resources Control Board. The NOI is a mechanism to establish
responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of the proposed operations. The BMPs
that will be included, but will be finalized with the preparation of the SWPPP,
include the following.
• Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
<~aKF9
s~
81
2-74 Michael Brandman Associates - m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r
O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
- Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via
storm water. Solid waste will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 includes measures for the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) relating to soil stabilization, slope
stability, dust control/dust suppressants, contaminants, construction water, sanitary facilities, and
solid waste disposal. These measures would control onsite erosion and siltation, thereby reducing
associated impacts to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.7-19 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 5.7, Hydrology and Water Quality, in Section 5 of Chapter 1
of the Final EIR.
t, ~AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc t- rn
O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Impact 5.7.E: The project could potentially create or contribute runoff water that would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide
additional sources of polluted runoff.
2.1.7.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to providing
additional sources ofpolluted runoff.
During grading and construction activities, urban pollutants generated on the project site can
potentially enter surface water flows. Some of those pollutants include disturbed soil, vehicle fuels
and lubricants, chemicals associated with building construction, and building materials.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort
has been made by the Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a
reasonable manner within 90 days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may
proceed with review and approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a
specific list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent
construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of
erosion from moving off site into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project
applicant shall provide evidence that the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the
State Water Resources Control Board. The NO] is a mechanism to establish
responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of the proposed operations. The BMPs
that will be included, but will be finalized with the preparation of the SWPPP,
include the following.
• Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
jt~~Kfi9s
T
m
2-76 Michael Brandman Associates r--
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc d
r)RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic niaterials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
- Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via
storm water. Solid waste will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 includes measures for the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) relating to soil stabilization, slope
stability, dust control/dust suppressants, contaminants, construction water, sanitary facilities, and
Michael Brandman Associates 2-77 ~4 A KF9J,
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc a
r- m
O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
solid waste disposal. These measures would effectively reduce impacts associated with water quality
during construction of the site to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.7-20 through 5.7-21 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.7, Hydrology and Water Quality,
in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.7.F: The proposed project could substantially degrade water quality.
2.1.7.4 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to water quality during
construction of the proposed project.
During grading and construction activities, urban pollutants generated on the project site can
potentially enter surface water flows. Some of those pollutants include disturbed soil, vehicle fuels
and lubricants, chemicals associated with building construction, and building materials.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort
has been made by the Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a
reasonable manner within 90 days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may
proceed with review and approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a
specific list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent
construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of
erosion from moving off site into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project
applicant shall provide evidence that the Notice of Intent (NO]) was filed with the
State Water Resources Control Board. The NOI is a mechanism to establish
responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of the proposed operations. The BMPs
that will be included, but will be finalized with the preparation of the SWPPP,
include the following.
G3AKF9
2-78 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc F rr'n_
U O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
8-
r n
Michael Brandman Associates 2+79 r-
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc v O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
- Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via
storm water. Solid waste will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 includes measures for the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Best Management Practices (BMPs) relating to soil stabilization, slope
stability, dust control/dust suppressants, contaminants, construction water, sanitary facilities, and
solid waste disposal. These measures would effectively reduce impacts associated with water quality
during construction of the site to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.7-21 through 5.7-22 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.7, Hydrology and Water Quality,
in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.8 - Noise
Impact 5.8.A: Construction activities associated with the proposed project could result in
substantial temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels.
2.1.8.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to substantial
temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels due to on-site construction.
Construction activities would generate noise levels at various locations within and outside of the
project site throughout the 9-year build-out of the project. During construction, noise from onsite
project development and offsite construction of roads and utilities that are associated with the project
would potentially affect noise-sensitive land uses in the immediate area. As development is phased
throughout the site, construction activities will continually be moved so that no one home that is part
of early phases of the project would be continually exposed to construction noise throughout the 9-
year project build-out period. Due to the continual movement of construction activities, onsite
residents would be temporarily exposed to construction noise. Although the noise exposure to
construction activities would be temporary, this is considered a potentially significant short-term
impact on future onsite residents.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
4 A KF
v• 9
2-80 Michael Brandman Associates y.
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.8.A.1 The project applicant shall ensure that all construction activities associated with
development of the shall comply with Section 9.22.050 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code, which limits construction to the hours of 6 AM to 9 PM on
weekdays, and between 8 AM and 9 PM on weekends, where construction occurs
less than 1,000 feet from residences.
5.8.A.2 The project applicant shall ensure construction equipment shall be equipped with
mufflers and maintained in accordance with the equipments' factory specifications.
During construction activities, the construction equipment muffler and maintenance
records shall be on the construction site.
5.8.A.3 Mobile noise-generating equipment and machinery shall be shut off when not in use.
5.8.A.4 Construction vehicles accessing the construction site shall use the shortest possible
route to and from local freeways, provided the routes do not expose additional
receptors to noise.
5.8.A.5 Residences within 500 feet of construction areas will be notified of the construction
schedule in writing prior to construction. The project applicant and the construction
contractor will designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for
responding to complaints regarding construction noise. A contact telephone number
for the noise disturbance coordinator will be conspicuously posted on construction
site fences and will be included in written notification of construction schedule sent
to nearby residents.
Mitigation Measures 5.8.A.1 through 5.8.A.5 would limit the times that noise would be generated
during construction activities and would provide proper notice to nearby residences that construction
noise will be generated. Moreover, these measures would reduce the noise that will be generated
during construction activities, further reducing the impacts associated with construction noise. With
compliance with the identified measures, construction noise impacts are considered less than
significant.
References: Pages 5.8-10 through 5.8-12 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.8, Noise, in Section 5 of Chapter 1
of the Final EIR.
2.1.8.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to substantial
temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels due to off-site construction.
Two of the water supply alternatives include a proposed water line adjacent to existing residences.
As the water line is constructed, construction activities will continually move so that no one home
would be continually exposed to construction noise. Due to the continual movement of construction
activities, these offsite residents would be temporarily exposed to construction noise. Although the 43NKF~
O' c5'~
Michael Brandman Associates m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc t
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
noise exposure to construction activities would be temporary, this is considered a potentially
significant short-term impact on these offsite residents.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.A.1 The project applicant shall ensure that all construction activities associated with
development of the shall comply with Section 9.22.050 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code, which limits construction to the hours of 6 AM to 9 PM on
weekdays, and between 8 AM and 9 PM on weekends, where construction occurs
less than 1,000 feet from residences.
5.8.A.2 The project applicant shall ensure construction equipment shall be equipped with
mufflers and maintained in accordance with the equipments' factory specifications.
During construction activities, the construction equipment muffler and maintenance
records shall be on the construction site.
5.8.A.3 Mobile noise-generating equipment and machinery shall be shut off when not in use.
5.8.A.4 Construction vehicles accessing the construction site shall use the shortest possible
route to and from local freeways, provided the routes do not expose additional
receptors to noise.
5.8.A.5 Residences within 500 feet of construction areas will be notified of the construction
schedule in writing prior to construction. The project applicant and the construction
contractor will designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for
responding to complaints regarding construction noise. A contact telephone number
for the noise disturbance coordinator will be conspicuously posted on construction
site fences and will be included in written notification of construction schedule sent
to nearby residents.
Mitigation Measures 5.8.A.1 through 5.8.A.5 would limit the times that noise would be generated
during construction activities and would provide proper notice to nearby residences that construction
noise will be generated. Moreover, these measures would reduce the noise that will be generated
during construction activities, further reducing the impacts associated with construction noise. With
3Ak,cq
2-82 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rn
O
')RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
compliance with the identified measures, construction noise impacts are considered less than
significant.
References: Pages 5.8-10 through 5.8-12 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.8, Noise, in Section 5 of Chapter 1
of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.8.13: Construction activities associated with the proposed project could expose persons
to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration levels.
2.1.8.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to excessive
groundborne vibration levels.
During construction activities, onsite and offsite residences could be temporarily exposed to
groundborne vibration generated by construction equipment, resulting in a potentially significant
short term impact.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.A.1 The project applicant shall ensure that all construction activities associated with
development of the shall comply with Section 9.22.050 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code, which limits construction to the hours of 6 AM to 9 PM on
weekdays, and between 8 AM and 9 PM on weekends, where construction occurs
less than 1,000 feet from residences.
5.8.A.2 The project applicant shall ensure construction equipment shall be equipped with
mufflers and maintained in accordance with the equipments' factory specifications.
During construction activities, the construction equipment muffler and maintenance
records shall be on the construction site.
5.8.A.5 Residences within 500 feet of construction areas will be notified of the construction
schedule in writing prior to construction. The project applicant and the construction
contractor will designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for
4 ~~KF9
Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc F- m
J ~
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
responding to complaints regarding construction noise. A contact telephone number
for the noise disturbance coordinator will be conspicuously posted on construction
site fences and will be included in written notification of construction schedule sent
to nearby residents.
Mitigation Measures 5.8.A.1, 5.8.A.2, and 5.8.A.5 would limit the times that groundborne vibration
would be generated during construction activities and would provide proper notice to nearby
residences that construction-related vibration will be generated. Moreover, these measures would
reduce the groundborne vibration that will be generated during construction activities, further
reducing the associated impacts. With compliance with the identified measures, groundborne
vibration impacts are considered less than significant.
References: Pages 5.8-12 through 5.8-13 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.8, Noise, in Section 5 of Chapter 1
of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.8.E: The proposed project could experience noise levels from future onsite commercial
activities.
2.1.8.4 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to noise levels from
future onsite commercial activities.
The proposed project includes a neighborhood retail center and associated commercial uses that may
generate noise levels that create a significant impact on adjacent sensitive land uses within the project
site.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.8.E.1 With application for the site plan review, the project applicant shall demonstrate to
the City's planning department that noise levels associated with project commercial
use meets the City's noise level performance standards. These standards could be
met through set-backs, sound barriers or a combination of both. Furthermore, these
?'AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates
2-84
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc f1.. m
U Or
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
standards could be met by mounting fans and blowers on the roofs, limiting hours of
truck deliveries, and limiting delivery truck idling.
Mitigation Measures 5.8.E.1 requires the city to ensure that future commercial development on the
project site would not result in significant increases in noise levels. Therefore, impacts associated
with noise from commercial development on the site would be less than significant with the
incorporation of the mitigation measure.
References: Pages 5.8-16 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 5.8, Noise, in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.8.F: The proposed project could experience excessive noise levels from future onsite
recreational areas.
2.1.8.5 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to excessive noise
levels from future onsite recreational areas.
The proposed project includes parks, open spaces, and recreational facilities which may generate
noise levels that exceed the City's noise standard.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.8.F.1 With application for the site plan review, the project applicant shall demonstrate to
the City's planning department that noise levels associated with the project's
recreational areas meets the City's noise level performance standards. These
standards could be met through set-backs, sound barriers, or a combination of both.
Mitigation Measures 5.8.F.1 requires the city to ensure that future recreational facilities on the project
site would not result in noise levels that exceed the City's noise ordinance. Therefore, impacts
associated with noise from recreational facilities on the site would be less than significant with the
incorporation of the mitigation measure.
sue,
Michael Brandman Associates 2-l~ m
~ r
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc v U
ORIGINAL.
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
References: Pages 5.8-16 through 5.8-17 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.8, Noise, in Section 5 of Chapter 1
of the Final EIR.
2.1.9 - Public Services
Impact 5.9.A: The project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision or need of new or physically altered fire protection facilities.
2.1.9.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to the provision or need of
new or physically altered fire protection facilities.
In the southeastern portion of the project site, the proposed project includes the construction of 50
residential units with one access via Stone Creek Canyon Way. This access design is not consistent
with the City of Bakersfield Fire Department policy which states that no more than 25 residential
units may be constructed in a cul-de-sac, unless the cul-de-sac residential units include fire sprinklers
or the cul-de-sac has a secondary emergency vehicle access.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.9.A.1 Prior to recordation of a final map for Phase 6 located in the southeast corner of the
project site, secondary emergency access shall be provided via Stone Canyon Way to the
south.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.9.A.1 as revised would ensure project compliance with City
of Bakersfield Fire Department policy regarding developments of 25 or more homes built on a cul-de-
sac. The Mitigation Measure originally required fire sprinklers in the area because it lacked
secondary access. However, per staff's recommended changes to the project the area now will have
both primary access and secondary emergency access, making the sprinklers unnecessary. Therefore,
compliance with Mitigation Measure 5.9.A.1 would fully mitigate this impact.
~,FK699
2-86 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r
U CD
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
References: Pages 5.9-5 through 5.9-6 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.9, Public Services, in Section 5 of Chapter 1
of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.9.C: The project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision or need of new or physically altered school facilities.
2.1.9.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to the provision or need of
new or physically altered school facilities
The development of residential uses will result in a substantial increase in population in the project
vicinity and the corresponding generation of school children will exceed the capacity of existing
school facilities, thereby creating an increase in the demand for school facilities. The increase in the
demand for school facilities is regarded as a potentially significant effect.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.C.1 In accordance with SB 50 and Proposition IA, prior to the issuance of building
permits, the project applicant shall pay Bakersfield City School District and Kern
High School District adopted development impact fees in accordance with the
statutory fees that are in effect at the time of issuing each permit.
To accommodate the demand for increased school facilities, school fees are required in accordance
with Senate Bill (SB) 50 and Proposition IA, the latter of which was approved by the statewide voters
in 1998. SB 50 would provide school districts with fees that could be used to fund K-12 facilities,
modernize older schools, fund for districts in hardship situations, and funding for class size reduction.
SB 50 impact fees are the exclusive mechanism by which impacts to schools may be mitigated.
Through payment of these fees, identified by Mitigation Measure 5.9.C.1, the implementation of the
project would result in a less than significant effect on school facilities.
References: Pages 5.9-7 through 5.9-9 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.9, Public Services, in Section 5 of Chapter 1
of the Final EIR.
4~AKE9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-87
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
r
U p
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
2. 1.10 - Traffic and Transportation
Impact 5.11.A: The project would cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system, and individually exceed a
LOS standard established by the county congestion management agency for
designated roadways or highways.
2.1.10.1 -Potentially Significant Impact
At full project buildout (year 2016), it is estimated that the project will generate a total of
approximately 15,036 average daily trips, of which 1,141 will be AM peak hour trips and 1,593 will
be PM peak hour trips.
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project specific significant impact at five unsignalized
intersections and one signalized intersection under the Existing plus Project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.11-8, in Section 5 of the Final EIR, five unsignalized intersections and one
signalized intersection will be significantly impacted after project generated traffic is added to
existing volumes for Existing plus Project Conditions. These intersections are as follows:
• Morning Drive and Spring Canyon Parkway (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades to
LOS F)
• Morning Drive and Paladino Drive (Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and Panorama Drive (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades from LOS A to
LOS F)
• Morning Drive and SR 178 (Westbound: Morning peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS E
and Evening peak hour degrades from LOS C to LOS F)
• Masterson Street and SR 178 (Southbound: Morning peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS
D and Evening peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS E)
• Fairfax Road and SR 178 (Evening peak hour degrades from LOS C to LOS D)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
~ ~AKF
2-88 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc M
O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed below.
Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Program
The Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee was adopted by both the City of Bakersfield
and County of Kern in 1992. The fee program is known as the Regional Transportation Impact Fee
(RTIF) Program. The impact fee is imposed on new development and includes a Regional
Transportation Facilities List and a Transportation Impact Fee Schedule. The Facilities List includes
many of the facilities needed to maintain a LOS C or better for new growth or to prevent the
degradation of facilities which are currently operating below LOS C as shown in the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Circulation Element. The Fee Schedule sets forth the fees to be collected
from new development to pay for each development's fair share cost of the facilities.
The RTIF Program was last updated in 2005 and the Facilities List was expanded to include
additional roadway segments and traffic signals. The RTIF pays for the construction of both regional
and local facilities that are required to maintain, where possible, LOS C for the Metropolitan
Bakersfield transportation system or to prevent the degradation of facilities which are currently below
LOS C, where possible. Projects involving General Plan amendments are evaluated by adding traffic
to the projected 20-year traffic forecast to determine if the RTIF improvements could accommodate
the project involving the General Plan amendment. Improvements required beyond those identified
within the RTIF Program are categorized as Local Mitigation and are covered by the Local Mitigation
Impact Fee Program, which is discussed below.
The RTIF is imposed on new development through the application of the Transportation Impact Fee
Ordinance and collected at the building permit stage for any development that produces additional
vehicular trips over that attributed to the land being developed before the new development is in
place. The Facilities List includes those improvements needed on the regional transportation network
for the long term time horizon year based on socioeconomic data provided by the KernCOG.
After the impact fees are collected, they are placed in a separate interest bearing account in a
Transportation Development Fund, per the requirements of the Government Code sections 66000 et
seq. The timing to use the transportation funds is established through the 5-year Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) which the City's Public Works Department oversees. Periodically (i.e., each year), the
City conducts traffic counts, reviews traffic accidents, and reviews traffic trends throughout the City.
The City uses this data to determine the timing for the improvements listed on the Facilities List and
to ensure that the construction of needed improvements occurs prior to or concurrent with the time at
which the LOS is forecasted to fail to achieve the performance levels established by the City. In this
way, improvements are typically constructed before the LOS falls below the City's performance
standards to ensure that significant impacts are avoided. Improvements are identified within each of
the 5 year CIP period and reviewed periodically to determine if improvements should be shifted into
4 AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rn
r
v O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
another year based on the traffic counts, accidents, and trends. The CIP establishes a timeframe to
fund the improvement, design improvements, and to fund the requisite costs related to hiring
contractors to build the improvements.
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program
The City of Bakersfield has established a Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program for traffic
improvements that are not listed on the RTIF Project Facilities List. These improvements are
typically associated with collector streets but may also be associated with local streets. Furthermore,
if an improvement is required for a specific project, and it was beyond what was contemplated within
the RTIF Program, then the improvement is required as a Local Mitigation requirement.
Similar to the RTIF Program, after the impact fees are collected, they are placed in a separate interest
account, per the requirements of the Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. The timing to use the
transportation funds is determined similarly to the RTIF Program. The timing is established through
the 5-year Capital Improvement Program. This program is also overseen by the City's Public Works
Department. Periodic traffic counts, review of traffic accidents, and review of traffic trends
throughout the City are also performed by City staff. The City uses this data to determine the timing
for the improvements listed on the Facilities List. Improvements are identified within each of the 5
years and reviewed periodically to determine if improvements should be shifted into another year
based on the traffic counts, accidents, and trends. The City uses this data to determine the timing for
the improvements listed on the Facilities List and to ensure that needed improvements are constructed
prior to that time at which the LOS is forecast to fall below the performance levels established by the
City. In this way, improvements are constructed before the LOS falls below the City's performance
standards to ensure that significant impacts are avoided. The Capital Improvement Program
establishes a timeframe to fund the improvement as well as design improvements and for the City to
hire a contractor to build the improvements.
The City has an established, proven track record with respect to implementing the RTIF and the Local
Mitigation Fee and Transportation Improvement Programs. Many of the streets included within the
study area for this report are at various stages of widening and improvement based on the City's
collection of fees. Under these programs, as a result of its continual monitoring of the local
circulation system, the City ensures that RTIF and non-RTIF improvements are constructed prior to
when the LOS would otherwise fall below the City's established performance criteria. In its
comment letter on the EIR, the California Department of Transportation noted that it was cognizant of
the City's successful implementation of the RTIF and Local Fee programs to mitigate traffic impacts.
Tables 7 and 8 of the Traffic Study located in Appendix J-1, identify the incremental intersection and
roadway improvements needed by the years 2016 and 2030, and the total improvements needed by
the year 2030 to maintain, where possible, LOS C. These tables identify which of the total 2030
improvements are covered by the Local Mitigation Fee Program as opposed to the RTIF program.
`aAKF9
2-90 Michael Brandman Associates O, 1
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
v O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
The project's proportionate share responsibility for the cost of local mitigation improvements in the
year 2030 is calculated according to the equation identified in the Traffic Impact Study (Appendix J).
This equation has been adopted by the City of Bakersfield and is utilized by Caltrans and other
agencies throughout the state. It provides for a reasonably conservative estimate of the cost of local
mitigation since it takes only future traffic into consideration and does not account for other
transportation fees or sources of income.
The improvements listed in, Section 5.11, under Mitigation Measures, of the Final EIR, are comprised
of lane additions, installation of signals and signal modifications. Lane additions are shown as the
number of lanes required and the direction of travel. For example, LEBT indicates one additional
eastbound through-lane. Depending upon the width of existing pavement and right-of-way, these
improvements may involve only striping modifications or they may involve construction of additional
pavement width. Specific signal modifications which are identified involve changing the operational
characteristics of selected right turn movements from being permitted during the red phase to also
including a green arrow to allow a protected phase during the overlapping left turn of the intersecting
street.
5.11.A.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Regional Transportation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for
regional improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.I in Section 5.11 of
the Final EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in Mitigation
Measure 5.11.A.1 of the Final EIR will be constructed pursuant to the fee program at
that point in time necessary to avoid identified significant impacts on traffic.
Existing With Project (Assumes no growth in project vicinity)
Intersections
• Morning Drive and Paladino Drive - Install signal and construct one eastbound
left turn lane, one eastbound through lane, one westbound left turn lane, one
westbound through lane, one northbound left turn lane, one northbound
through lane, one southbound left turn lane, and one southbound through lane.
• Morning Drive and Panorama Drive - Install signal and construct one
northbound left turn lane and one southbound left turn lane.
• Morning Drive and SR 178 (Westbound) - Install signal.
• Masterson Street and SR 179 - Install signal and construct one eastbound
through lane, one westbound through lane, and one southbound left turn lane.
5.11.A.2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for local
improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 in Section 5.11 of the
Recirculated Draft EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in
`,PKF9
s~
Michael Brandman Associates 2-
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
J ~
,7RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 of the Recirculated Draft EIR will be constructed
pursuant to the fee program at that point in time necessary to avoid identified
significant impacts on traffic.
Existing With Project (Assumes no growth in project vicinity)
Intersections
• Morning Drive and Spring Canyon Parkway - Install signal and construct one
eastbound right turn lane and two northbound left turn lanes.
• Morning Drive and Panorama Drive - Construct one westbound left turn lane.
• Fairfax Road and SR 178 - Construct one eastbound left turn lane, one
northbound through lane, one southbound left turn lane and one southbound
through lane.
5.11.A.3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant's funding calculations for the
improvements associated with the local mitigation improvement fee program shall be
submitted to the City for review and approval.
The implementation of the improvements at the above mentioned intersections identified in Section
5.11, under Mitigation Measures, of the Final EIR for existing project scenarios will reduce the
potential significant impacts at the intersections that are listed above to less than significant (see
Table 2.10-1). The intersection improvements include installation of signals and through/turning
lanes. The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.11.A.I through 5.11.A.3 will ensure that
impacts on the aforementioned intersections will be less than significant. The technical traffic impact
analysis underlying the Final EIR and the Final EIR were reviewed by Caltrans and KernCOG. These
agencies approved of the methodologies and conclusions contained in the traffic impact analysis and
the Final EIR, and also agreed that implementation of the City's two fee programs will mitigate the
identified intersections to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.11-12 through 5.11-29 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.11, Traffic and Transportation, of
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.10.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to 2 roadway segments under
the Existing plus project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.11-9 in Section 5 of the Final EIR, two roadway segments will experience
significant impacts under the Existing plus project conditions. These roadway segments are:
• Morning Drive - Spring Canyon Parkway to Paladino Drive (Degraded to LOS F)
• SR 178 - Fairfax Road to Morning Drive (Degraded from LOS B to LOS E)
3 AKF9
2-92 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
- m
r
' O
'PIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.11.A.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Regional Transportation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for
regional improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.1 in Section 5.11 of
the Final EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in Mitigation
Measure 5.1 LA. I of the Final EIR will be constructed pursuant to the fee program at
that point in time necessary to avoid identified significant impacts on traffic.
Existing With Project (Assumes no growth in project vicinity)
Roadway Segments
• Morning Drive - Spring Canyon Parkway to Paladino Drive - Add two lanes.
• SR 178 - Fairfax Road to Morning Drive - Add two lanes.
5.11.A.2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for local
improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 in Section 5.11 of the
Recirculated Draft EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in
Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 of the Recirculated Draft EIR will be constructed
pursuant to the fee program at that point in time necessary to avoid identified
significant impacts on traffic.
Year 2016 With Project (Assumes average annual growth rates)
Roadway Segments
• No additional improvements beyond those identified under 5.11.A.1
5.11.A.3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant's funding calculations for the
improvements associated with the local mitigation improvement fee program shall be
submitted to the City for review and approval.
The implementation of the improvements at the above mentioned roadways identified in Section 5.11,
under Mitigation Measures, of the Final EIR for existing project scenarios will reduce the potential
significant impacts at the intersections that are listed above to less than significant (see Table 2.10-1).
1'1 A
~T
Michael Brandman Associates ?43
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Seyn 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rn
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed above. The implementation of
Mitigation Measures 5.11.A.1 through 5.11.A.3are required to ensure that the impacts on the
aforementioned roadways would be mitigated to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.11-12 through 5.11-29 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.11, Traffic and Transportation, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.10.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project specific significant impact for nine unsignalized
intersections under the 2016 plus project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.11-10, in Section 5 of the Final EIR, nine unsignalized intersections will be
significantly impacted after project generated traffic is added to existing volumes for 2016 plus
Project Conditions. These intersections are as follows:
• Morning Drive and Spring Canyon Parkway (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades to
LOS F)
• Fairfax Road and Paladino Drive (Eastbound: Evening peak hours degrade from LOS E to
LOS F and Westbound: Evening peak hours degrade from LOS E to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and Paladino Drive (Evening peak hour degrades from LOS C to LOS F)
• Vineland Road and Paladino Drive (Northbound: Evening peak hours degrades from LOS C to
LOS E)
• Morning Drive and Panorama Drive ( Eastbound: Evening peak hours degrades from LOS C to
LOS F)
• Morning Drive and Auburn Street (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades from LOS B to
LOS F)
• Morning Drive and SR 178 (Westbound: Evening peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS E)
• Morning Drive and SR 178 (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and College Avenue (Eastbound: Evening peak hour LOS C degrades to
LOS D)
s~
o``~AK~9.~,
2-94 Michael Brandman Associates 1
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc U C:1
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the mitigation measures identified in
5.11.A.I and 5.11.A.2 in Section 5.11 of the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.11.A.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Regional Transportation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for
regional improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.1 l.A.I in Section 5.11 of
the Final EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in Mitigation
Measure 5.11.A. I of the Final EIR will be constructed pursuant to the fee program at
that point in time necessary to avoid identified significant impacts on traffic.
Year 2016 With Project (Assumes average annual growth rates)
Intersections
The following intersection improvements are required in addition to those
improvements identified under the existing with project scenario above.
• Vineland Road and Paladino Drive - Install signal and construct one eastbound
left turn lane and one westbound left turn lane.
• Fairfax Road and Paladino Drive - Install signal.
• Morning Drive and Auburn Street - Install signal and construct one northbound
left turn lane
• Morning Drive and SR 178 (Eastbound) - Install signal.
5.11.A.2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for local
improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 in Section 5.11 of the
Recirculated Draft EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in
Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 of the Recirculated Draft EIR will be constructed
pursuant to the fee program at that point in time necessary to avoid identified
significant impacts on traffic.
Year 2016 With Project (Assumes average annual growth rates)
The following intersection improvements are required in addition to those
improvements identified under the existing with project scenario above.
Intersections
• Fairfax Road and Paladino Drive - Construct one eastbound left turn lane.
aAKF9
Michael Brandman Associates - 5
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rn
r
O
"`RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
• Vineland Road and Paladino Drive - Construct one northbound left turn lane
and one southbound left turn lane.
• Morning Drive and Auburn Street - Construct one eastbound right turn lane.
• Morning Drive and College Avenue - Construct one eastbound through lane.
5.11.A.3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant's funding calculations for the
improvements associated with the local mitigation improvement fee program shall be
submitted to the City for review and approval.
The implementation of the improvements at the above mentioned roadways identified in Section 5.11,
under Mitigation Measures, of the Final EIR for existing project scenarios will reduce the potential
significant impacts at the intersections that are listed above to less than significant (see Table 2.10-1).
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed above. The implementation
of Mitigation Measures 5.11.A. I through 5.11.A.3 are required to ensure that the impacts on the
aforementioned intersections would be mitigated to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.11-12 through 5.11-29 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.11, Traffic and Transportation, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.10.4 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to two roadway segments
under the 2016 plus project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.11-11 in Section 5 of the Final EIR, two roadway segments will experience
significant impacts under the 2016 plus project conditions. These roadway segments are:
• Morning Drive - Spring Canyon Parkway to Paladino Drive (Degraded from LOS A to LOS F)
• Morning Drive - Paladino Drive to SR 178 (Degraded from LOS A to LOS F)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
s
2-96 Michael Brandman Associates
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
C7
)RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.11.A.I Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Regional Transportation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for
regional improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.I in Section 5.11 of
the Final EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in Mitigation
Measure 5.11.A.1 of the Final EIR will be constructed pursuant to the fee program at
that point in time necessary to avoid identified significant impacts on traffic.
Year 2016 With Project (Assumes average annual growth rates)
Roadway Segments
The following intersection improvements are required in addition to those
improvements identified under the existing with project scenario above.
• Morning Drive - Paladino Drive to SR 178 - Add two lanes.
5.11.A.2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for local
improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 in Section 5.11 of the
Recirculated Draft EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in
Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 of the Recirculated Draft EIR will be constructed
pursuant to the fee program at that point in time necessary to avoid identified
significant impacts on traffic.
Year 2016 With Project (Assumes average annual growth rates)
Roadway Segments
No additional improvements beyond those identified under 5.11.A.1.
5.11.A.3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant's funding calculations for the
improvements associated with the local mitigation improvement fee program shall be
submitted to the City for review and approval.
The implementation of the improvements at the above mentioned roadways identified in Section 5.11,
under Mitigation Measures, of the Final EIR for existing project scenarios will reduce the potential
significant impacts at the intersections that are listed above to less than significant (see Table 2.10-1).
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed above. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures 5.11.A.I through 5.11.A.3 are required.
References: Pages 5.11-12 through 5.11-29 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.11, Traffic and Transportation, in
Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR.
~3AK~9
o' r
Michael Brandman Associates 2-P R,
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
CD O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
2.1.10.5 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project specific significant impact for two unsignalized
intersections and one signalized intersections scenarios under the 2030 plus project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.11-12, in Section 5-of the Final EIR, two unsignalized intersections and one
signalized intersection will be significantly impacted after project generated traffic is added to
existing volumes for 2030 plus Project Conditions. These intersections are as follows:
• Morning Drive and Spring Canyon Parkway (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades to
LOS F)
• Morning Drive and SR 178 WB (Westbound: Morning peak hour traffic degrades from LOS D
to LOS F)
• Fairfax Road and Niles Street (Evening peak hour traffic degrades from LOS E to LOS F)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.11.A.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Regional Transportation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for
regional improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.I in Section 5.11 of
the Final EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in Mitigation
Measure 5.11.A.I of the Final EIR will be constructed pursuant to the fee program at
that point in time necessary to avoid identified significant impacts on traffic.
Year 2030 With Project (Assumes average annual growth rate and implementation
of cumulative development)
Intersections
• No additional improvements beyond those identified under the existing with
project and 2016 with project scenarios above.
5.11.A.2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for local
improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 in Section 5.11 of the
Recirculated Draft EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in
KCi
C) r1
2-98 Michael Brandman Associates ~
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc U C.
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 of the Recirculated Draft EIR will be constructed
pursuant to the fee program at that point in time necessary to avoid identified
significant impacts on traffic.
Year 2016 With Project (Assumes average annual growth rate and implementation
of cumulative development) -
Intersections
• The following intersection improvements are required in addition to those
improvements identified under the existing with project and 2016 with project
scenario above.
• Fairfax Road and Niles Street - Construct one eastbound left turn lane, one
eastbound right turn lane, one westbound left turn lane, one westbound right
turn lane, one northbound left turn lane and one southbound left turn lane.
5.11.A.3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant's funding calculations for the
improvements associated with the local mitigation improvement fee program shall be
submitted to the City for review and approval.
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed above The implementation of
Mitigation Measures 5.11.A.I through 5.11.A.3 are required to ensure that the impacts on the
aforementioned roadways would be mitigated to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.11-12 through 5.11-29 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.11, Traffic and Transportation, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.10.6 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to one roadway segment
under the 2030 plus project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.11-13 in Section 5 of the Final EIR, one roadway segments will experience
significant impacts under the 2030 plus project conditions. This roadway segment is:
• Fairfax Road - Panorama Drive to Auburn Street (LOS D degraded to LOS E)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
P, KF9
~
8~a
s
Michael Brandman Associates 2-991-
r
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc v o
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.11.A.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Regional Transportation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for
regional improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.I in Section 5.11 of
the Final EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in Mitigation
Measure 5.11.A.I of the Final EIR will be constructed pursuant to the fee program at
that point in time necessary to avoid identified significant impacts on traffic.
Year 2030 With Project (Assumes average annual growth rate and implementation
of cumulative development)
Roadway Segments
e Morning Drive - Paladino Drive to SR 178 - Add to lanes
5.11.A.2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program and pay the project's fair share for local
improvements as outlined in Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 in Section 5.11 of the
Recirculated Draft EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in
Mitigation Measure 5.11.A.2 of the Recirculated Draft EIR will be constructed
pursuant to the fee program at that point in time necessary to avoid identified
significant impacts on traffic.
Year 2016 With Project (Assumes average annual growth rate and implementation
of cumulative development)
Roadway Segments
e Fairfax Road - Panorama Drive to Auburn Street - Add two lanes.
5.11.A.3 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant's funding calculations for the
improvements associated with the local mitigation improvement fee program shall be
submitted to the City for review and approval.
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed above. The implementation of
Mitigation Measures 5.11.A. I through 5.11.A.3 are required to ensure that the impacts on the
aforementioned roadway would be mitigated to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.11-21 through 5.11-28 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.11, Traffic and Transportation, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, and Response to Comment E-4 in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR.
o`` 0 AKF9~
2-100 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc J m
O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Impact 5.11.D: The proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access.
2.1.10.7 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to inadequate
emergency access.
The design of the access in the southeastern portion of the project site could result in inadequate
emergency access because more than 25 residential units are proposed with only one access, Stone
Creek Canyon Way. The proposed design of the access to these residential units is not consistent
with existing City of Bakersfield Fire Department policy.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.A.1 Prior to recordation of a final map for Phase 6 located in the southeast corner of the
project site, secondary emergency access shall be provided via Stone Canyon Way to
the south.
3AK~9
T
m
Michael Brandman Associates 2-161 o
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ` r I NAL
V .._f..._. _ W o
p D I M 00 N et N
o 00 0 oo v
o; f oo ea
N M
a i f m a
ro
f
0 A
g
a U.
N ~ F- OC U
d D i ~r i GQ
~(D acc, a w coo 3 3
(D o aon Z 13 3W I
p
at
CIO
3w~ w I
a c I j
m.__.........,............___._.._....._.._...
1....
r
o N
~w /yT ♦ i
CO)
iN 33~ 3 z3 I
94
V as ' cG !era 'aa W[-''Z
c z z 3 ~wz w 3 3~ - z
N {
F W W W Z W W j W i _ W
C ~i I N E
o I i 1
d En ao € ownn 3 al ao ~n o°^n
L 1
~ r c c c3 cZ c c c
rr z i..i
~ ~ ! W w !pa~~ Wv~ ~3..a~ W
a~ ) ~z z ~z
o to 00.1
Z
C6 `n3Za ~
w IM
N Swzv~ I 1
d .......................:...............................................<................................................._..............1....................................._... ...................i........................................................_............
i
i° c
I a ~o
~a a °c i C° o I
Q ° 'b a U)
0 c,,
d8 &d de 0
~ t A•=° o oWQ ~i o A ~ o ~A o
bn x r~ rx a, as o ) oA a" to
x 00 x I ~ s= x ~
wxlwxU'w 1~1 `>1QwAL1w
1 d
_.l.._ ...E
v _ ................_.._.....E..................
Irl
all
N
m
O
")RIGINAL
d N 9
I
O c~~ ~ ~ ~ o o to c coepp i ~
FM
\ i i o0 O O~ L to o e I I Q eb
co
- 'y t!1 T~ l~ M ~t 00 i C
~c 3E~ I # . N 00
I ii
Q J d m e
w~ 0 0. ~_.....i ca
V w C E 1 C i Z n'
V sn'
m r.
10
0)
Q42 d a~ z ' i 13 1~aG~O Ea A A
N a j a I I T
Z
r N
FL ( ~ ' ^ w CQ ~ ~ 'C7 i T3 I 1 I ( ~
I ,
' I i s I W ~0 ~ # j { I
cn
N I w w w !3 3
j~
° ~ paa ~ aaa ~ 1 ~ 1 ,ppaaappaaS ~ , ~
° ~ z 3 z wz w ~3 3v~, ~
0.1 ~ ~ ~ paq i ~ Gaa ~ a G~ al Gn $ ~ j y ~ a`C~i ayi ~
A A ( c~
H as ~;~alaaca acaa tij-o b
m cc "a
E m
pp~~ W z y p~ W rn W z o v -o -o v
6-1) CA -0
Q
d a g 1
CO~ H I
a m$ E; H C'n ca mo a a
Z cn~ r, j o~ b b
~ ~ ~ id I F I ~ N
3
k d ......i . . ........................I...................... I
'
N
00
CG 1 1 0
~ 00 I n- Qi cd bOA cn
O I ❑ 1
c En
yy ~j G (U r~i y ' p O
04
00 cd
C~ C/n o~j o~j x U I z U O O
4) Old i C~3 4.)
Cd as
O i c
c ao' i o x ao' i 04 u; a j ~n I a A
SIII 5 Io3 ° o Q aI ai
A o o c~ oo t o 43
o r o m Cd!'
-r A rr o o I Ca O ~1
Q--wQl~Qw ono on (
c M ; c' G g 24
K
I G x .
C ! A o A o o I ~~cn
V ~ ~ i N I M ~ c0 I
N ni
11
_ O
?RIGINAL
j o ( u?
$ I c
V 'y N p ~ N ! M N
G •~j, M N E 00 C
, Flo
y N ! E O I C a
qq~~ U
? ' f 4
CJ aJ ca
y ~p 3 W c
0 I V
E i ( 1 I g-
a ( I G ! i o
U
~ E f f i
v 0 U-
c c~ I t E U
N N N i N
v O ~m •c ~•o f-o{-df M
U I I i 3
J t
E E
CD I
N
c ~
~a
E (f f `i
'W E i 4 r' g
~ a a a~a~a~a
H $ N N ~ N V ~
~ ~ b E b b '~C ~ b E '~C
O 0s
` ~ t
CL S
G~~Gff T
j N
I N S N I ~ CG
c ' I Q a ~ O i
Q E ~ N ~ E N€
'b 1
V ~ E b ~ •4•
I ¢ N Q
1 a i
I2 i
cr E~
i~ ; ~ ~ I ~ aFcG w;
ti o
~I II a li
rm-
u C,
on E a! 0 b b
0 r.
00 E 00 00 00 06
j Z cn 3 w ei.7' xF9
ck7 f~ t~ f~ x x o C 1 w o r T- ~
w
a~ w ¢ w cn cn ul cn cn z z I v~
J>RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
The implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.9.A.1 as revised would meet the emergency
access requirements of the Fire Code (Ref: 2007 CA Fire Code sec. D107.1). The
Mitigation Measure originally required fire sprinklers in the area because it lacked secondary
access. However, per staff s recommended changes to the project the area now will have
both primary access and secondary emergency access, making the sprinklers unnecessary.
The inclusion of Mitigation Measure 5.9.A.1 into the project design would reduce the
physical environmental effects associated with inadequate emergency access to less than
significant.
References: Pages 5.11-29 through 5.11-30 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.11, Traffic and Transportation, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.11.F: The proposed project may conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks).
2.1.10.8 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to alternative
transportation.
The project design does not interfere with current bus service; however, there are no provisions for
future bus service to the project site or carpools. Due to the design and density of the proposed
project, Golden Empire Transit will not be providing service. Specifically, GET stated that at least
five single-family homes per acre is a requirement of providing service. The proposed project will
have approximately two single-family homes per acre. The nearest bus service route to the project
site is located approximately two miles north of Golden Empire Transit, Route 6 - East Hills, which
runs along Panorama Drive easterly towards Morning Drive. Due to the project's distance from
Route 6, the project will not impact existing alternative transportation systems, such as the Golden
Empire Transit bus system; however, the project may conflict with adopted policies to provide public
transportation. Therefore, alternative transportation impacts could be significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
Michael Brandman Associates 2-105 ~T
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc _ rt1
O
'?RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
5.11.F.I Prior to the approval of a building permit for the commercial area, the project
applicant shall provide parking spaces for carpools in the parking area for the
commercial center.
The implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.11.F. I would meet the necessary need
for alternative modes of transportation. The inclusion of Mitigation Measure
5.11.F.I into the project design would reduce the significant impact to alternative
transportation to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.11-30 through 5.11-31 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.11, Traffic and Transportation, in
Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.11 - Utilities and Service Systems
Impact 5.12.6 The project would require and result in the construction of new domestic water
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects.
2.1.11.1 -Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies potentially project-specific significant impacts to air quality, biological
resources, cultural resources, and water quality due to the expansion of existing domestic water
facilities.
According to the WSA in Appendix G-3 of this Recirculated Recirculated Draft EIR, the proposed
project will result in a water demand of approximately 900 acre-feet (1.01 mgd) of water per year.
The project includes three alternative systems to deliver water service to the project site. A detailed
discussion of the three alternative systems is provided in Section 3.4, Project Characteristics.
According to the Domestic Water Supply Study in Appendix K-1 of this Recirculated Recirculated
Draft EIR, the implementation of any of the three alternative systems would be adequate to serve the
proposed project. One of the alternatives includes receiving water originating from existing Rio
Bravo No. 2 Tank, a second alternative includes receiving water from the existing Panorama Tanks,
and a third alternative includes receiving water from both the Rio Bravo No. 2 Tank and the
Panorama Tanks. Each of the three alternatives includes the need to construct onsite and offsite water
lines and pump stations outside of the project boundaries. The water lines and pump stations are
proposed within planned roadway rights-of-way. The environmental effects associated with the
proposed roadways as well as the water facilities have been addressed as part of the project in Section
5, Project Impacts, and Section 6, Cumulative Impacts, of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR. The potential
environmental effects associated with the proposed water facilities include air quality, biological
resources, cultural resources, and water quality. These potential air quality, biological resources,
cultural resources, and water quality impacts are considered significant.
2-106 Michael Brandman Associates b A K~c9
O cP~
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
r
O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1, 5.2.C.1, and 5.2.C.2 are required to reduce potential
air quality impacts.
5.23.1 Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City
of Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that all
construction activities and operations will comply with local zoning codes, and
District Regulation VIII (Rules 8011-8081), and Rule 9510. These regulations
include, but not limited to, the following:
5.2.C.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation II, specifically, the
project will be subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part
of the SJVAPCD permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's
offsetting thresholds would have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary
source by stationary source basis.
In addition to adherence to SJVAPCD rules and regulations, the following mitigation measure/design
feature has been designed to reduce emissions to below a level of significance:
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply in all respects with
developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by
the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and entered into by and
between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance with the Voluntary
Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of ROG, NO,,, and PMIO net
emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully mitigate the project's air quality impacts
to the extent that the development of the project will result in no net increase in criteria
pollutant emissions over the criteria pollutant emissions which would otherwise exist without
the development of the project, all to be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the
Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net
emissions by 23.81 tons per year (from 23.81 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NO,,
net emissions by 24.60 tons per year (from 24.60 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce
PMIo net emissions by 25.12 tons per year (from 25.12 tons per year to 0 tons per year); and
AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2~ 7 cP~
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
~ O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative CEQA Findings of Fact
impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance
reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 5.71 tons per year (from 5.71 tons per year to 0 tons per year).
The following additional design features for the project shall be implemented:
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel.
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
• Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
• Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
1. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission
reduction projects
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.1, 5.3.A.3, and 5.3.A.5 through 5.3.A.8 are required to
reduce potential biological resources impacts.
5.3.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a Habitat
Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code and the Implementation/Management Agreement for the MBHCP or
equivalent program or measure as approved by the wildlife agencies.
2-108 Michael Brandman Associates 3AK~
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9.9-09.doc Q) 9J'T
a
F,
O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.3.A.3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with all
appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP regarding San Joaquin kit fox. In
order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below, the
project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City agency (as identified by
the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented. Impacts to
San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat are permitted by the MBHCP, however, the
MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin kit fox,
including known dens for this species. The MBHCP and USFWS guidelines
regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox
in dens. The following specific measures during pre-construction and the
construction phase of the project shall be implemented:
Pre-Construction Survey Mitigation Measures
• Preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days
and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or
construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin
kit fox. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
prior to site grading to identify active dens of protected species and to ensure
appropriate and necessary take avoidance measures are implemented for the
San Joaquin kit fox. A qualified biologist means any person who has
completed at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a
related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification
and life history of the San Joaquin kit fox. If active San Joaquin kit fox dens
are identified during the pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist shall
submit to the City of Bakersfield a protection and avoidance plan that
incorporates the USFWS standardized recommendations for protection and
avoidance to ensure that no San Joaquin kit fox are entrapped in the occupied
den.
• Written results of preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be submitted to the
City within five days after survey completion and prior to the start of ground
disturbance and/or construction activities. No clearing, grubbing or grading
shall commence until the preconstruction surveys are finalized and submitted
to the City for approval. Specific measures for protection and avoidance for
San Joaquin kit fox are provided below.
Pre-Construction Avoidance Mitigation Measures
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), circular exclusion zones shall be established by a
qualified biologist around all potential San Joaquin kit fox dens identified and
shall include a radius of no less than 50 feet. This radius shall be expanded to ~,AKF
s~
Michael Brandman Associates 2-109 o
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc -IRIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
100 feet for all known dens. If the pre-construction survey identifies any natal
or pupping dens, the qualified biologist shall contact the USFWS. Natal or
pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and
adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the USFWS. For
known dens, exclusion zone fencing shall be maintained until all construction
related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all
fencing shall be removed to avoid attracting subsequent attention to the den.
For potential and atypical dens, placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 feet from
the den entrance shall demarcate the location of the den. The exclusion zone
for potential and atypical dens do not require fencing, however the exclusion
area shall be observed by the biologist. No construction, vehicle operation,
material storage, or any other type of surface disturbing activity shall be
allowed within the exclusion zones.
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), disturbance to all San Joaquin kit fox dens should be
avoided to the maximum extent possible. Limited destruction of kit fox dens
may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative. If no reasonable
alternative is feasible other than the destruction of the den, the known kit fox
dens located on the project site that will be destroyed shall be excavated and
destroyed under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist. Prior to the
destruction of dens, the dens shall be monitored for at least three (3)
consecutive days to determine whether the den is active or dormant. Activity
at the den can be monitored by placing tracking medium at den entrances and
by spot lighting. If no den activity is observed during this period, the den
should be destroyed immediately pursuant to the den destruction procedures
set forth below.
Destruction of dens shall be accomplished by careful excavation with hand
tools until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den shall be fully
excavated and back filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes
cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period.
If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal
shall be allowed to escape unhindered, or, to the extent feasible, representatives
from CDFG and/or USFWS shall be contacted to attempt to relocate kit fox
pursuant to the MBHCP. As part of the Implementation Trust to the MBHCP,
the City, CDFG, and/or USFWS are required to gather data on the success of
relocation activities from those engaged in relocation. The City, CDFG, and/or
USFWS may encourage relocation activities to include radio collaring or other
2.110 Michael Brandman Associates 0 A KF9
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
r
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
monitoring research by the Endangered Species Recovery Program (ESRP) in
the gathering of data on the success of relocation.
Construction Mitigation Measures
• The project proponent shall provide for a sensitive species identification and
avoidance education program for all construction employees that consists of a
consultation in which persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative
protection shall explain endangered species protocols, habitat needs, and the
measures and conditions of approval being taken to reduce impacts to the
species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet
conveying this information shall be prepared for distribution to all contractors,
their employees, and any and all other personnel who are working on the
construction site. A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent
who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might
inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped
individual. The representative will be identified during the employee
education program. The representative's name and telephone number shall be
provided to the USFWS.
• To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes during the construction phase
of the project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet
deep shall be covered by construction site personnel, and under the direction of
the construction supervisor, at the close of each working day by plywood or
similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of
earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall
be fully inspected for trapped kit foxes by construction site personnel. If at
any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, representatives from CDFG
or USFWS, or permitted and qualified biologists from local research groups
such as the ESRP, shall be contacted immediately to attempt to relocate the kit
fox pursuant to the MBHCP, and if encouraged by the CDFG or USFWS,
attempt to collar the kit fox pursuant to applicable protocol. In the case of
trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to
allow trapped animals to escape.
• The construction site manager shall ensure that all pipes, culverts, or similar
structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater shall be kept capped or
otherwise covered to prevent injury of kit foxes. If such pipes, culverts or
similar structures are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected
daily prior to burial or closure to prevent entrapment of kit fox or other
sensitive species.
AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-11~ `PI
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
r-
O
-)RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that all food, garbage in plastic shall
be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the site to
minimize attracting kit foxes and other sensitive species to the site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that no dogs, cats, or other animals
are permitted on the project site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that a zinc phosphide based
rodenticide shall be used, if rodent control is deemed necessary during
construction.
Night time construction shall be prohibited. In addition, all construction vehicles shall observe a 20
mph speed limit on the project site and developer shall create established staging, parking and storage
areas to ensure the prevention of accidental direct impacts and takes of kit foxes.
5.3.A.5 Implementation of the following mitigation measures will ensure compliance with
the MBTA and CFG Code for protected nesting bird species. Prior to the issuance of
a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with the following measures
regarding nesting migratory bird species, including the burrowing owl, protected
under the MBTA and CFG Code:
• If site grading is proposed during the general breeding season for nesting birds
that are protected under the MBTA and CFG Code (February 1 through
August 3 1), a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist within 30 days prior to grading activities within any project impact
area in order to identify all active nests in areas impacted throughout project
construction and implementation. If an active nest is identified during the pre-
construction survey, no construction activity shall take place within a
minimum of 200 feet of any active nest until the young have fledged (as
determined by a qualified biologist) and the nest is no longer determined to be
active, or until another distance is recommended by a qualified biologist, and
approved by the Planning Director. This distance shall be expanded to 500
feet for any nesting raptor species excluding the burrowing owl, for which
specific mitigation is provided below. Construction activity in the vicinity of
any active nest shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring
biologist who may reduce the size of a buffer otherwise required by this
measure for individual nests. Nesting habitat that must be removed as a result
of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding season
which is defined herein as approximately September I through January 31.
Habitat may be removed at any time during the breeding or non-breeding
season if a qualified biologist determines after a pre-construction survey that
2-112 Michael Brandman Associates ~AKF9
SA03-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
r
v o
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
there are no active nests and no nesting birds in the area that could potentially
be affected by construction activities in violation of the MBTA and CFG Code.
e Pre-construction surveys shall include a survey for burrowing owl and
according to recommended protocol by the California Burrowing Owl
Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995). If active burrowing owl burrows are
detected during the breeding season (February l through August 31), no
construction activity shall take place within 250 feet of any active nest until it
is determined by a qualified biologist that all juvenile burrowing owls
associated with any active nest are foraging independently and capable of
independent survival. Construction activity in the vicinity of any active nest
shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring biologist.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside of breeding season (September 1 through
January 31), passive relocation efforts may be undertaken in accordance with recommended protocol
by the California Burrowing Owl Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995).
5.3.A.6 The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered
under the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, shall
be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected
species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately
to the USFWS and CDFG.
5.3.A.7 An environmental liaison shall be retained by the project proponent and identified in
writing to USFWS, CDFG and the City of Bakersfield. The environmental liaison's
qualifications shall consist of the following (minimum requirements), completion of
at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and
has demonstrated field experience in the San Joaquin Valley. The environmental
liaison will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the environmental mitigation
and take avoidance measures. Subject to the approval of the appropriate City
Agency, the environmental liaison shall draft and prepare an Environmental
Education and Compliance Plan that is consistent with the mitigation measures
presented herein. The Environmental Education and Compliance Plan will be used to
train employees and contractors to ensure that the required environmental compliance
measures are implemented. A pre-construction training session shall be held to
ensure all responsible parties are aware of what the environmental protection and
mitigations are and how to ensure that they are implemented. The project proponent
shall submit to the City of Bakersfield proof of attendance by site employees of the
pre-construction training session within 10 days of the training session.
Michael Brandman Associates 2-19
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc H- rn
V ~
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
On a monthly basis, the environmental liaison shall prepare a report that details the
implementation of the environmental protection and mitigation measures. Any
failure of measures to be effective shall be reported as they occur. The liaison shall
suggest improvements and changes as possible, and will coordinate any revision of
environmental protection and mitigation measures with the Applicant, the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, as appropriate.
5.3.A.8 The following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented
during all construction phases of the proposed project to further reduce potential
direct and indirect impacts to special status species and their habitat to less than
significant:
• Prior to any grading activities, the project proponent shall install the
appropriate fencing adjacent to all designated open space areas delineating the
limits of grading. This includes the installation of construction snow fencing,
silt fencing, and/or temporary chain-linked or other such fencing around the
perimeter of any active construction zone adjacent to designated open space
areas. Fencing shall be installed by the project proponent, inspected for
efficacy (by a qualified biologist), and repaired by the project proponent on an
on-going basis during all phases of development.
Construction vehicles shall carry fire extinguishers or other fire retardants or equipment to enhance
the prevention and control of any unplanned man-caused fires.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.4.C.1 through 5.4.C.3 and 5.3.D.I are required to reduce
potential cultural resources impacts.
5.4.C.1 Prior to the start of any ground disturbance related to project development and as
needed during on-going ground disturbance, construction personnel involved with
earth moving activities shall be informed that fossils may be encountered, and shall
be educated on the appearance of fossils, the laws protecting fossils, the
consequences of not abiding those laws, and the proper notification procedures in the
event that a fossil is discovered. This construction personnel training shall be
conducted by a qualified paleontologist, retained by the project applicant and
approved by the City of Bakersfield, and upon completion, proof of training shall be
submitted to the City of Bakersfield.
5.4.C.2 Upon the commencement of any ground disturbance related to project development,
a professionally trained and experienced paleontologist, retained by the project
applicant and approved by the City of Bakersfield shall implement a paleontological
resource impact mitigation and monitoring program during project-related earth
moving activities. This paleontological resource impact mitigation and monitoring
2-114 Michael Brandman Associates a A KFq
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09-doc J'n
r
U p
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
program shall follow Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standard guidelines
(see Appendix D-3 of this Recirculated Recirculated Draft EIR) and include: pre-
construction coordination; construction monitoring; emergency discovery
procedures; sampling and data recovery; preparation; identification; and analysis of
any fossil specimens salvaged; museum storage of any specimens and data recovered;
and preparation of a final report to be delivered to the City of Bakersfield and other
interested parties.
5.4.C.3 During construction, earth moving activities shall be monitored by a qualified
paleontologist where the earth moving activities will disturb previously undisturbed
sediment potentially containing significant fossils. Monitoring shall be performed by
a qualified paleontological monitor retained by the project applicant and approved by
the City of Bakersfield, under the supervision of the project paleontologist.
Following SVP standard guidelines, once one-half of excavations are completed, if
no fossils have been discovered, monitoring can be reduced to half-time, quarter-
time, spot-checking, or suspended. Monitoring is not required in areas that sediments
have been previously disturbed. In areas where potential fossilferous sediments will
be buried, but not otherwise disturbed, a paleontological monitor shall examine
surface exposures prior to their being buried and the monitor shall salvage any
exposed fossils.
5.4.D.1 The project applicant shall immediately suspend any further excavation or
disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent
human remains and shall contact the Kern County Coroner should the discovery or
recognition of human remains occur. The following actions shall be undertaken.
• There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby
area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
- The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered must be
contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is
required, and
- If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
0 The coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours.
0 The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be
the most likely descended from the deceased Native American.
0 The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for
means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the
human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or
• Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized
representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated
`3AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-113
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
•3 O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject
to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98(e).
- The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent.
- The most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC, fails to make a
recommendation within 24 hours of being granted access to the site; or
The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and a
mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 is required to reduce potential water quality impacts.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. The SWPPP will also be submitted to the
California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment to the City prior to
City approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort has been made by the
Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a reasonable manner within 90
days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may proceed with review and
approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a specific list of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent construction pollutants
from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of erosion from moving off site
into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project applicant shall provide evidence that
the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the State Water Resources Control Board.
The NOI is a mechanism to establish responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of
the proposed operations. The BMPs that will be included, but will be finalized with
the preparation of the SWPPP, include the following.
• Soil Stabilization
Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on
all slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating
and fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to
become established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds
and soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early
germination and die-off without plant-establishment.
` A\ 9
2-116 Q),
Michael Brandman Associates >
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc `
o
"?RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion
of construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots
will drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots
will not drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary
sediment traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic
locations within the streets until such time as final street improvements
are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will
be stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include
products to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes,
and compost blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal
of contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic
materials or potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the
construction area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via storm water. Solid waste
will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Impacts listed under the aforementioned 5.12.B impact statement can be reduced to less than
significant by implementing the necessary mitigation measures listed above. These mitigation
measures will reduce potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and
water quality to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.12-7 through 5.12-8 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.12, Utilities and Service Systems,
in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
aAKF
Michael Brandman Associates 2-117 ~C 9
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciRSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc 01
m
r-
U
')RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Impact 5.12.C The implementation of the proposed project would increase the generation of
wastewater on the project site and would require new and expanded facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects.
2.1.11.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies potentially project-specific significant impacts to air quality, biological
resources, cultural resources, and water quality due to the expansion of existing domestic water
facilities, more specifically, the construction of the I8" sewer line.
The offsite sewer lines and pump station are proposed within planned roadway rights-of-way. Except
for the future 18-inch line that will parallel the existing Northeast Sewer trunk, the environmental
effects associated with the planned roadways as well as the sewer facilities have been addressed as
part of the project in Section 5, Project Impacts, and Section 6, Cumulative Impacts, of Chapter 1 of
the Final EIR. The environmental effects associated with the planned 18-inch sewer line that will
parallel the existing Northeast Sewer trunk have been addressed by the City at the time the
Bakersfield City Council approved the construction of the 18-inch sewer line. The potential
environmental effects associated with the proposed sewer facilities include air quality, biological
resources, cultural resources, and water quality. These potential air quality, biological resources,
cultural resources, and water quality impacts are considered significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1, 5.2.C.1, and 5.2.C.2 are required to reduce potential
air quality impacts.
5.2.6.1 Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City of
Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that all construction
activities and operations will comply with local zoning codes, and District Regulation VIII
(Rules 8011-8081), and Rule 9510. These regulations include, but not limited to, the
following:
5.2.0.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin Valley
Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation II, specifically, the project will be
subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part of the SJVAPCD
2-118 Michael Brandman Associates 4 A 1(e
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
T
M
v C
ORIGINAL
i
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's offsetting thresholds would
have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary source by stationary source basis.
In addition to adherence to SJVAPCD rules and regulations, the following mitigation measure/design
feature has been designed to reduce emissions to below a level of significance:
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply in all respects with
developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by
the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and entered into by and
between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance with the Voluntary
Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of ROG, NOX, and PMio net
emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully mitigate the project's air quality impacts
to the extent that the development of the project will result in no net increase in criteria
pollutant emissions over the criteria pollutant emissions which would otherwise exist without
the development of the project, all to be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the
Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net
emissions by 23.81 tons per year (from 23.81 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NOX
net emissions by 24.60 tons per year (from 24.60 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce
PM10 net emissions by 25.12 tons per year (from 25.12 tons per year to 0 tons per year); and
reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 5.71 tons per year (from 5.71 tons per year to 0 tons per year).
The following additional design features for the project shall be implemented:
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel.
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
• Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
• Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
1. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
Michael Brandman Associates 2-19 O aAKF9~~
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc y
- m
r-
O
7RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission reduction
projects
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.1, 5.3.A.3, and 5.3.A.5 through 5.3.A.8 are required to
reduce potential biological resources impacts.
5.3.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a Habitat Mitigation
Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code and the
Implementation/Management Agreement for the MBHCP or equivalent program or measure
as approved by the wildlife agencies.
5.3.A.3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with all
appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP regarding San Joaquin kit fox. In
order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below, the
project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City agency (as identified by
the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented. Impacts to
San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat are permitted by the MBHCP, however, the
MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin kit fox,
including known dens for this species. The MBHCP and USFWS guidelines
regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox
in dens. The following specific measures during pre-construction and the
construction phase of the project shall be implemented:
Pre-Construction Survey Mitigation Measures
• Preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days
and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or
construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin
kit fox. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
prior to site grading to identify active dens of protected species and to ensure
appropriate and necessary take avoidance measures are implemented for the
San Joaquin kit fox. A qualified biologist means any person who has
completed at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a
related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification
< ,a A KF
2-120 Michael Brandman Associates 8<
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
M
- r
p
")RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
and life history of the San Joaquin kit fox. If active San Joaquin kit fox dens
are identified during the pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist shall
submit to the City of Bakersfield a protection and avoidance plan that
incorporates the USFWS standardized recommendations for protection and
avoidance to ensure that no San Joaquin kit fox are entrapped in the occupied
den.
• Written results of preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be submitted to the
City within five days after survey completion and prior to the start of ground
disturbance and/or construction activities. No clearing, grubbing or grading
shall commence until the preconstruction surveys are finalized and submitted
to the City for approval. Specific measures for protection and avoidance for
San Joaquin kit fox are provided below.
Pre-Construction Avoidance Mitigation Measures
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), circular exclusion zones shall be established by a
qualified biologist around all potential San Joaquin kit fox dens identified and
shall include a radius of no less than 50 feet. This radius shall be expanded to
100 feet for all known dens. If the pre-construction survey identifies any natal
or pupping dens, the qualified biologist shall contact the USFWS. Natal or
pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and
adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the USFWS. For
known dens, exclusion zone fencing shall be maintained until all construction
related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all
fencing shall be removed to avoid attracting subsequent attention to the den.
For potential and atypical dens, placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 feet from
the den entrance shall demarcate the location of the den. The exclusion zone
for potential and atypical dens do not require fencing, however the exclusion
area shall be observed by the biologist. No construction, vehicle operation,
material storage, or any other type of surface disturbing activity shall be
allowed within the exclusion zones.
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), disturbance to all San Joaquin kit fox dens should be
avoided to the maximum extent possible. Limited destruction of kit fox dens
may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative. If no reasonable
alternative is feasible other than the destruction of the den, the known kit fox
dens located on the project site that will be destroyed shall be excavated and
destroyed under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist. Prior to the
~ ~,AKF
C)9(P
Michael Brandman Associates 2-121
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciESept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc D
O
")RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
destruction of dens, the dens shall be monitored for at least three (3)
consecutive days to determine whether the den is active or dormant. Activity
at the den can be monitored by placing tracking medium at den entrances and
by spot lighting. If no den activity is observed during this period, the den
should be destroyed immediately pursuant to the den destruction procedures - -
set forth below.
Destruction of dens shall be accomplished by careful excavation with hand
tools until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den shall be fully
excavated and back filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes
cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period.
If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal
shall be allowed to escape unhindered, or, to the extent feasible, representatives
from CDFG and/or USFWS shall be contacted to attempt to relocate kit fox
pursuant to the MBHCP. As part of the Implementation Trust to the MBHCP,
the City, CDFG, and/or USFWS are required to gather data on the success of
relocation activities from those engaged in relocation. The City, CDFG, and/or
USFWS may encourage relocation activities to include radio collaring or other
monitoring research by the Endangered Species Recovery Program (ESRP) in
the gathering of data on the success of relocation.
Construction Mitigation Measures
• The project proponent shall provide for a sensitive species identification and
avoidance education program for all construction employees that consists of a
consultation in which persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative
protection shall explain endangered species protocols, habitat needs, and the
measures and conditions of approval being taken to reduce impacts to the
species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet
conveying this information shall be prepared for distribution to all contractors,
their employees, and any and all other personnel who are working on the
construction site. A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent
who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might
inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped
individual. The representative will be identified during the employee
education program. The representative's name and telephone number shall be
provided to the USFWS.
• To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes during the construction phase
of the project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet
deep shall be covered by construction site personnel, and under the direction of
the construction supervisor, at the close of each working day by plywood or
2-122 Michael 8randman Associates O~ 3 A KF9~
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc T
m
O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of
earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall
be fully inspected for trapped kit foxes by construction site personnel. If at
any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, representatives from CDFG
or USFWS, or permitted and qualified biologists from local research groups
such as the ESRP, shall be contacted immediately to attempt to relocate the kit
fox pursuant to the MBHCP, and if encouraged by the CDFG or USFWS,
attempt to collar the kit fox pursuant to applicable protocol. In the case of
trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to
allow trapped animals to escape.
• The construction site manager shall ensure that all pipes, culverts, or similar
structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater shall be kept capped or
otherwise covered to prevent injury of kit foxes. If such pipes, culverts or
similar structures are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected
daily prior to burial or closure to prevent entrapment of kit fox or other
sensitive species.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that all food, garbage in plastic shall
be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the site to
minimize attracting kit foxes and other sensitive species to the site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that no dogs, cats, or other animals
are permitted on the project site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that a zinc phosphide based
rodenticide shall be used, if rodent control is deemed necessary during
construction.
Night time construction shall be prohibited. In addition, all construction vehicles shall observe a 20
mph speed limit on the project site and developer shall create established staging, parking and storage
areas to ensure the prevention of accidental direct impacts and takes of kit foxes.
5.3.A.5 Implementation of the following mitigation measures will ensure compliance with
the MBTA and CFG Code for protected nesting bird species. Prior to the issuance of
a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with the following measures
regarding nesting migratory bird species, including the burrowing owl, protected
under the MBTA and CFG Code:
• If site grading is proposed during the general breeding season for nesting birds
that are protected under the MBTA and CFG Code (February 1 through
August 31), a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist within 30 days prior to grading activities within any project impact
area in order to identify all active nests in areas impacted throughout project
construction and implementation. If an active nest is identified during the pre-4 Q AKF
Michael Brandman Associates 2.#3
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r
O
")RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
construction survey, no construction activity shall take place within a
minimum of 200 feet of any active nest until the young have fledged (as
determined by a qualified biologist) and the nest is no longer determined to be
active, or until another distance is recommended by a qualified biologist, and
approved by the Planning Director. This distance shall be expanded to 500
feet for any nesting raptor species excluding the burrowing owl, for which
specific mitigation is provided below. Construction activity in the vicinity of
any active nest shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring
biologist who may reduce the size of a buffer otherwise required by this
measure for individual nests. Nesting habitat that must be removed as a result
of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding season
which is defined herein as approximately September 1 through January 31.
Habitat may be removed at any time during the breeding or non-breeding
season if a qualified biologist determines after a pre-construction survey that
there are no active nests and no nesting birds in the area that could potentially
be affected by construction activities in violation of the MBTA and CFG Code
• Pre-construction surveys shall include a survey for burrowing owl and
according to recommended protocol by the California Burrowing Owl
Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995). If active burrowing owl burrows are
detected during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), no
construction activity shall take place within 250 feet of any active nest until it
is determined by a qualified biologist that all juvenile burrowing owls
associated with any active nest are foraging independently and capable of
independent survival. Construction activity in the vicinity of any active nest
shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring biologist.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside of breeding season (September 1 through
January 31), passive relocation efforts may be undertaken in accordance with recommended protocol
by the California Burrowing Owl Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995).
5.3.A.6 The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered
under the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, shall
be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected
species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately
to the USFWS and CDFG.
5.3.A.7 An environmental liaison shall be retained by the project proponent and identified in
writing to USFWS, CDFG and the City of Bakersfield. The environmental liaison's
qualifications shall consist of the following (minimum requirements), completion of
< -6
2-124 Michael Brandman Associates 91PP
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
0
IRIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and
has demonstrated field experience in the San Joaquin Valley. The environmental
liaison will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the environmental mitigation
and take avoidance measures. Subject to the approval of the appropriate City
Agency, the environmental-liaison shall draft and prepare an Environmental
Education and Compliance Plan that is consistent with the mitigation measures
presented herein. The Environmental Education and Compliance Plan will be used to
train employees and contractors to ensure that the required environmental compliance
measures are implemented. A pre-construction training session shall be held to
ensure all responsible parties are aware of what the environmental protection and
mitigations are and how to ensure that they are implemented. The project proponent
shall submit to the City of Bakersfield proof of attendance by site employees of the
pre-construction training session within 10 days of the training session.
On a monthly basis, the environmental liaison shall prepare a report that details the
implementation of the environmental protection and mitigation measures. Any
failure of measures to be effective shall be reported as they occur. The liaison shall
suggest improvements and changes as possible, and will coordinate any revision of
environmental protection and mitigation measures with the Applicant, the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, as appropriate.
5.3.A.8 The following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented
during all construction phases of the proposed project to further reduce potential
direct and indirect impacts to special status species and their habitat to less than
significant:
• Prior to any grading activities, the project proponent shall install the
appropriate fencing adjacent to all designated open space areas delineating the
limits of grading. This includes the installation of construction snow fencing,
silt fencing, and/or temporary chain-linked or other such fencing around the
perimeter of any active construction zone adjacent to designated open space
areas. Fencing shall be installed by the project proponent, inspected for
efficacy (by a qualified biologist), and repaired by the project proponent on an
on-going basis during all phases of development.
Construction vehicles shall carry fire extinguishers or other fire retardants or equipment to enhance
the prevention and control of any unplanned man-caused fires.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5 A.C.1 through 5.4.C.3 and 5.3.D.1 are required to reduce
potential cultural resources impacts.
u a`~K~9
o' sr
Michael Brandman Associates 2-1 m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc CD
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
5.4.C.1 Prior to the start of any ground disturbance related to project development and as
needed during on-going ground disturbance, construction personnel involved with
earth moving activities shall be informed that fossils may be encountered, and shall
be educated on the appearance of fossils, the laws protecting fossils, the
consequences of not abiding those laws, and the proper notification procedures in the
event that a fossil is discovered. This construction personnel training shall be
conducted by a qualified paleontologist, retained by the project applicant and
approved by the City of Bakersfield, and upon completion, proof of training shall be
submitted to the City of Bakersfield.
5.4.C.2 Upon the commencement of any ground disturbance related to project development,
a professionally trained and experienced paleontologist, retained by the project
applicant and approved by the City of Bakersfield shall implement a paleontological
resource impact mitigation and monitoring program during project-related earth
moving activities. This paleontological resource impact mitigation and monitoring
program shall follow Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standard guidelines
(see Appendix D-3 of this Recirculated Recirculated Draft EIR) and include: pre-
construction coordination; construction monitoring; emergency discovery
procedures; sampling and data recovery; preparation; identification; and analysis of
any fossil specimens salvaged; museum storage of any specimens and data recovered;
and preparation of a final report to be delivered to the City of Bakersfield and other
interested parties.
5A.C.3 During construction, earth moving activities shall be monitored by a qualified
paleontologist where the earth moving activities will disturb previously undisturbed
sediment potentially containing significant fossils. Monitoring shall be performed by
a qualified paleontological monitor retained by the project applicant and approved by
the City of Bakersfield, under the supervision of the project paleontologist.
Following SVP standard guidelines, once one-half of excavations are completed, if
no fossils have been discovered, monitoring can be reduced to half-time, quarter-
time, spot-checking, or suspended. Monitoring is not required in areas that sediments
have been previously disturbed. In areas where potential fossilferous sediments will
be buried, but not otherwise disturbed, a paleontological monitor shall examine
surface exposures prior to their being buried and the monitor shall salvage any
exposed fossils.
5.4.D.1 The project applicant shall immediately suspend any further excavation or
disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent
human remains and shall contact the Kern County Coroner should the discovery or
recognition of human remains occur. The following actions shall be undertaken.
`aAxF
Q), 9sT
2-126 Michael Brandman Associates R,
SA03-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc p
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby
area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
- The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered must be
contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is
required, and
- If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
0 The coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours.
0 The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be
the most likely descended from the deceased Native American.
0 The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for
means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the
human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or
• Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized
representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated
grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject
to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98(e).
- The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent.
- The most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC, fails to make a
recommendation within 24 hours of being granted access to the site; or
The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and a
mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 is required to reduce potential water quality impacts.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. The SWPPP will also be submitted to the
California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment to the City prior to
City approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort has been made by the
Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a reasonable manner within 90
days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may proceed with review and
approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a specific list of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent construction pollutants
from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of erosion from moving off site
into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project applicant shall provide evidence that
the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the State Water Resources Control Board.
The NOI is a mechanism to establish responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of
Michael Brandman Associates 2-127 O~ aAKF9J,
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc a
t- _rn
v U
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
the proposed operations. The BMPs that will be included, but will be finalized with
the preparation of the SWPPP, include the following.
• Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.B.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
3AKE~
2-128 Michael Brandman Associates O'
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
v cv
~)RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via storm water. Solid waste
will be collected, contained and hauled away.
5.12.C.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a final sewer
study to the City Engineer to determine capacity and design of the Northeast Sewer
truck line and ability to serve the project. If the City Engineer determines there is not
adequate capacity, Mitigation Measure 5.12.C.I as follows shall be required.
If the City Engineer determines there is not adequate capacity, the following shall be
required: If prior to the issuance of building permits, the 18-inch sewer trunk line shown
in the City's Master Plan to parallel the existing Northeast Sewer trunk along Paladino
Drive, Vineland Road, and Kern Canyon Road has not been constructed by adjacent
developments, the developer of the proposed project shall be responsible for the
construction of this sewer trunk line. This trunk line must be complete prior to the
issuance of the first building permit within the development. The developer shall
participate in the formation of a Planned Sewer Area (PSA) for this line and may receive
credit against his required PSA fees for the improvement he has constructed.
Impacts listed under the aforementioned 5.12.C impact statement can be reduced to less than
significant by implementing the necessary mitigation measures listed above. These mitigation
measures will reduce potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and
water quality to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.12-8 through 5.12-10 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.12, Utilities and Service Systems,
in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.12.E The project would require and result in the construction of new domestic water
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects.
2.1.11.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies potentially project-specific significant impacts to air quality, biological
resources, cultural resources, and water quality due to construction on off-site culverts.
Due to the proposed offsite roadways, culverts are proposed to allow storm flows within drainage
courses to traverse under the proposed roads. Two culverts are proposed along Spring Canyon
Michael Brandman Associates 2-129 O `nn
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc t- m
U O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Parkway and one along Solitude Canyon Way. Water quality inlets (i.e., catch basins are proposed to
promote sedimentation of coarse materials and separation of free oil from stormwater. For each
offsite culvert a water quality inlet is proposed to reduce nonpoint source pollution such as coarse
materials and oil) from entering the proposed stormwater conveyance system. The proposed offsite
culvert and water quality inlet facilities are proposed within planned roadway rights-of-way. The
environmental effects associated with the proposed roadways as well as the drainage facilities have
been addressed as part of the project in Section 5, Project Impacts, and Section 6, Cumulative
Impacts, of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR. The potential environmental effects associated with the
proposed offsite culvert and water quality inlet facilities include air quality, biological resources,
cultural resources, and water quality. These potential air quality, biological resources, cultural
resources, and water quality impacts are considered significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1, 5.2.C.1, and 5.2.C.2 are required to reduce potential
air quality impacts.
5.2.8.1 Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City
of Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that all
construction activities and operations will comply with local zoning codes, and
District Regulation VIII (Rules 8011-8081), and Rule 9510. These regulations
include, but not limited to, the following:
5.2.C.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation 11, specifically, the
project will be subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part
of the SJVAPCD permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's
offsetting thresholds would have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary
source by stationary source basis.
In addition to adherence to SJVAPCD rules and regulations, the following mitigation measure/design
feature has been designed to reduce emissions to below a level of significance:
~ ~Akfi9
2-130 Michael Brandman Associates J~
SA03-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
o
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply in all respects
with developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement
approved by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance
with the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of
ROG, NO,,, and PM10 net emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully mitigate
the project's air quality impacts to the extent that the development of the project will
result in no net increase in criteria pollutant emissions over the criteria pollutant
emissions which would otherwise exist without the development of the project, all to
be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the Voluntary Emissions Reduction
Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net emissions by 23.81
tons per year (from 23.81 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NO,, net emissions
by 24.60 tons per year (from 24.60 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce PMI() net
emissions by 25.12 tons per year (from 25.12 tons per year to 0 tons per year); and
reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 5.71 tons per year (from 5.71 tons per year to 0 tons
per year). The following additional design features for the project shall be
implemented:
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel.
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
• Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
• Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
1. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission
reduction projects
~AKF
Michael Brandman Associates 2-1
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciASept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
~ O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.1, 5.3.A.3, and 5.3.A.5 through 5.3.A.8 are required to
reduce potential biological resources impacts.
5.3.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a Habitat
Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code and the Implementation/Management Agreement for the MBHCP or
equivalent program or measure as approved by the wildlife agencies.
5.3.A.3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with all
appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP regarding San Joaquin kit fox. In
order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below, the
project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City agency (as identified by
the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented. Impacts to
San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat are permitted by the MBHCP, however, the
MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin kit fox,
including known dens for this species. The MBHCP and USFWS guidelines
regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox
in dens. The following specific measures during pre-construction and the
construction phase of the project shall be implemented:
Pre-Construction Survey Mitigation Measures
• Preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days
and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or
construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin
kit fox. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
prior to site grading to identify active dens of protected species and to ensure
appropriate and necessary take avoidance measures are implemented for the
San Joaquin kit fox. A qualified biologist means any person who has
completed at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a
related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification
and life history of the San Joaquin kit fox. If active San Joaquin kit fox dens
are identified during the pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist shall
submit to the City of Bakersfield a protection and avoidance plan that
incorporates the USFWS standardized recommendations for protection and
< gAKF9
C), s~
2-132 Michael Brandman Associates
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc o
`nIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
avoidance to ensure that no San Joaquin kit fox are entrapped in the occupied
den.
• Written results of preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be submitted to the
City within five days after survey completion and prior to the start of ground
disturbance and/or construction activities. No clearing, grubbing or grading
shall commence until the preconstruction surveys are finalized and submitted
to the City for approval. Specific measures for protection and avoidance for
San Joaquin kit fox are provided below.
Pre-Construction Avoidance Mitigation Measures
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), circular exclusion zones shall be established by a
qualified biologist around all potential San Joaquin kit fox dens identified and
shall include a radius of no less than 50 feet. This radius shall be expanded to
100 feet for all known dens. If the pre-construction survey identifies any natal
or pupping dens, the qualified biologist shall contact the USFWS. Natal or
pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and
adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the USFWS. For
known dens, exclusion zone fencing shall be maintained until all construction
related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all
fencing shall be removed to avoid attracting subsequent attention to the den.
For potential and atypical dens, placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 feet from
the den entrance shall demarcate the location of the den. The exclusion zone
for potential and atypical dens do not require fencing, however the exclusion
area shall be observed by the biologist. No construction, vehicle operation,
material storage, or any other type of surface disturbing activity shall be
allowed within the exclusion zones.
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), disturbance to all San Joaquin kit fox dens should be
avoided to the maximum extent possible. Limited destruction of kit fox dens
may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative. If no reasonable
alternative is feasible other than the destruction of the den, the known kit fox
dens located on the project site that will be destroyed shall be excavated and
destroyed under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist. Prior to the
destruction of dens, the dens shall be monitored for at least three (3)
consecutive days to determine whether the den is active or dormant. Activity
at the den can be monitored by placing tracking medium at den entrances and o43~KF9~
s
m
Michael Brandman Associates 2-133 0 p
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
by spot lighting. If no den activity is observed during this period, the den
should be destroyed immediately pursuant to the den destruction procedures
set forth below.
Destruction of dens shall be accomplished by careful excavation with hand
tools until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den shall be fully
excavated and back filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes
cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period.
If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal
shall be allowed to escape unhindered, or, to the extent feasible,
representatives from CDFG and/or USFWS shall be contacted to attempt to
relocate kit fox pursuant to the MBHCP. As part of the Implementation
Trust to the MBHCP, the City, CDFG, and/or USFWS are required to gather
data on the success of relocation activities from those engaged in relocation.
The City, CDFG, and/or USFWS may encourage relocation activities to
include radio collaring or other monitoring research by the Endangered
Species Recovery Program (ESRP) in the gathering of data on the success of
relocation.
Construction Mitigation Measures
• The project proponent shall provide for a sensitive species identification and
avoidance education program for all construction employees that consists of a
consultation in which persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative
protection shall explain endangered species protocols, habitat needs, and the
measures and conditions of approval being taken to reduce impacts to the
species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet
conveying this information shall be prepared for distribution to all contractors,
their employees, and any and all other personnel who are working on the
construction site. A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent
who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might
inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped
individual. The representative will be identified during the employee
education program. The representative's name and telephone number shall be
provided to the USFWS.
• To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes during the construction phase
of the project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet
deep shall be covered by construction site personnel, and under the direction of
the construction supervisor, at the close of each working day by plywood or
similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of
2-134 Michael Brandman Associates
rn
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc o
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall
be fully inspected for trapped kit foxes by construction site personnel. If at
any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, representatives from CDFG
or USFWS, or permitted and qualified biologists from local research groups
such as the ESRP, shall be contacted immediately to attempt to relocate the kit
fox pursuant to the MBHCP, and if encouraged by the CDFG or USFWS,
attempt to collar the kit fox pursuant to applicable protocol. In the case of
trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to
allow trapped animals to escape.
• The construction site manager shall ensure that all pipes, culverts, or similar
structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater shall be kept capped or
otherwise covered to prevent injury of kit foxes. If such pipes, culverts or
similar structures are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected
daily prior to burial or closure to prevent entrapment of kit fox or other
sensitive species.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that all food, garbage in plastic shall
be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the site to
minimize attracting kit foxes and other sensitive species to the site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that no dogs, cats, or other animals
are permitted on the project site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that a zinc phosphide based
rodenticide shall be used, if rodent control is deemed necessary during
construction.
Night time construction shall be prohibited. In addition, all construction vehicles shall observe a 20
mph speed limit on the project site and developer shall create established staging, parking and storage
areas to ensure the prevention of accidental direct impacts and takes of kit foxes.
5.3.A.5 Implementation of the following mitigation measures will ensure compliance with
the MBTA and CFG Code for protected nesting bird species. Prior to the issuance of
a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with the following measures
regarding nesting migratory bird species, including the burrowing owl, protected
under the MBTA and CFG Code:
e If site grading is proposed during the general breeding season for nesting birds
that are protected under the MBTA and CFG Code(February 1 through August
31), a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
within 30 days prior to grading activities within any project impact area in
order to identify all active nests in areas impacted throughout project
construction and implementation. If an active nest is identified during the pre-
construction survey, no construction activity shall take place within a
~AIf
Michael Brandman Associates 2-10 ~r
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc _ rn
L' O
DRIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
minimum of 200 feet of any active nest until the young have fledged (as
determined by a qualified biologist) and the nest is no longer determined to be
active, or until another distance is recommended by a qualified biologist, and
approved by the Planning Director. This distance shall be expanded to 500
feet for any nesting raptor species excluding the burrowing owl, for which
specific mitigation is provided below. Construction activity in the vicinity of
any active nest shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring
biologist who may reduce the size of or eliminate a buffer otherwise required
by this measure for individual nests. Nesting habitat that must be removed as a
result of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding
season which is defined herein as approximately September 1 through January
31. Habitat may be removed at any time during the breeding or non-breeding
season if a qualified biologist determines after a pre-construction survey that
there are no active nests and no nesting birds in the area that could potentially
be affected by construction activities in violation of the MBTA and CFG Code.
• Pre-construction surveys shall include a survey for burrowing owl and
according to recommended protocol by the California Burrowing Owl
Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995). If active burrowing owl burrows are
detected during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), no
construction activity shall take place within 250 feet of any active nest until it
is determined by a qualified biologist that all juvenile burrowing owls
associated with any active nest are foraging independently and capable of
independent survival. Construction activity in the vicinity of any active nest
shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring biologist.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside of breeding season (September 1 through
January 31), passive relocation efforts may be undertaken in accordance with recommended protocol
by the California Burrowing Owl Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995).
5.3.A.6 The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered
under the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, shall
be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected
species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately
to the USFWS and CDFG.
5.3.A.7 An environmental liaison shall be retained by the project proponent and identified in
writing to USFWS, CDFG and the City of Bakersfield. The environmental liaison's
qualifications shall consist of the following (minimum requirements), completion of
at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and
~ AkF
2-136 Michael Brandman Associates
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity Council%Sept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
t-- m
Q)
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
has demonstrated field experience in the San Joaquin Valley. The environmental
liaison will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the environmental mitigation
and take avoidance measures. Subject to the approval of the appropriate City
Agency, the environmental liaison shall draft and prepare an Environmental
Education and Compliance Plan that is consistent with the mitigation measures
presented herein. The Environmental Education and Compliance Plan will be used to
train employees and contractors to ensure that the required environmental compliance
measures are implemented. A pre-construction training session shall be held to
ensure all responsible parties are aware of what the environmental protection and
mitigations are and how to ensure that they are implemented. The project proponent
shall submit to the City of Bakersfield proof of attendance by site employees of the
pre-construction training session within 10 days of the training session.
On a monthly basis, the environmental liaison shall prepare a report that details the
implementation of the environmental protection and mitigation measures. Any
failure of measures to be effective shall be reported as they occur. The liaison shall
suggest improvements and changes as possible, and will coordinate any revision of
environmental protection and mitigation measures with the Applicant, the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, as appropriate.
5.3.A.8 The following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented
during all construction phases of the proposed project to further reduce potential
direct and indirect impacts to special status species and their habitat to less than
significant:
• Prior to any grading activities, the project proponent shall install the
appropriate fencing adjacent to all designated open space areas delineating the
limits of grading. This includes the installation of construction snow fencing,
silt fencing, and/or temporary chain-linked or other such fencing around the
perimeter of any active construction zone adjacent to designated open space
areas. Fencing shall be installed by the project proponent, inspected for
efficacy (by a qualified biologist), and repaired by the project proponent on an
on-going basis during all phases of development.
Construction vehicles shall carry fire extinguishers or other fire retardants or equipment to enhance
the prevention and control of any unplanned man-caused fires.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5A.C.1 through 5.4.C.3 and 5.3.D.1 are required to reduce
potential cultural resources impacts.
5.4.C.1 Prior to the start of any ground disturbance related to project development and as
needed during on-going ground disturbance, construction personnel involved with
~ g AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-137 O' s"
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc t rn
~J O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
earth moving activities shall be informed that fossils may be encountered, and shall
be educated on the appearance of fossils, the laws protecting fossils, the
consequences of not abiding those laws, and the proper notification procedures in the
event that a fossil is discovered. This construction personnel training shall be
conducted by a qualified paleontologist, retained by the project applicant and
approved by the City of Bakersfield, and upon completion, proof of training shall be
submitted to the City of Bakersfield.
5.4.C.2 Upon the commencement of any ground disturbance related to project development,
a professionally trained and experienced paleontologist, retained by the project
applicant and approved by the City of Bakersfield shall implement a paleontological
resource impact mitigation and monitoring program during project-related earth
moving activities. This paleontological resource impact mitigation and monitoring
program shall follow Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standard guidelines
(see Appendix D-3 of this Recirculated Recirculated Draft EIR) and include: pre-
construction coordination; construction monitoring; emergency discovery
procedures; sampling and data recovery; preparation; identification; and analysis of
any fossil specimens salvaged; museum storage of any specimens and data recovered;
and preparation of a final report to be delivered to the City of Bakersfield and other
interested parties.
5.4.C.3 During construction, earth moving activities shall be monitored by a qualified
paleontologist where the earth moving activities will disturb previously undisturbed
sediment potentially containing significant fossils. Monitoring shall be performed by
a qualified paleontological monitor retained by the project applicant and approved by
the City of Bakersfield, under the supervision of the project paleontologist.
Following SVP standard guidelines, once one-half of excavations are completed, if
no fossils have been discovered, monitoring can be reduced to half-time, quarter-
time, spot-checking, or suspended. Monitoring is not required in areas that sediments
have been previously disturbed. In areas where potential fossilferous sediments will
be buried, but not otherwise disturbed, a paleontological monitor shall examine
surface exposures prior to their being buried and the monitor shall salvage any
exposed fossils.
5.4.D.1 The project applicant shall immediately suspend any further excavation or
disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent
human remains and shall contact the Kern County Coroner should the discovery or
recognition of human remains occur. The following actions shall be undertaken.
• There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby
area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
~~,AKF9
2-138 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc FTI
U CD
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
- The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered must be
contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is
required, and
- If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
0 The coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours:
0 The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be
the most likely descended from the deceased Native American.
0 The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for
means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the
human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or
• Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized
representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated
grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject
to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98(e).
- The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent.
- The most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC, fails to make a
recommendation within 24 hours of being granted access to the site; or
The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and a
mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.I is required to reduce potential water quality impacts.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. The SWPPP will also be submitted to the
California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment to the City prior to
City approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort has been made by the
Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a reasonable manner within 90
days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may proceed with review and
approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a specific list of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent construction pollutants
from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of erosion from moving off site
into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project applicant shall provide evidence that
the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the State Water Resources Control Board.
The NO] is a mechanism to establish responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of
the proposed operations. The BMPs that will be included, but will be finalized with
the preparation of the SWPPP, include the following.
g AKF9~,
Michael Brandman Associates 2-139
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc - rrn
U O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
• Soil Stabilization
• Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition, seeding
will be performed on any areas where completion of final subdivision
improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost,
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.B.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
2-140 Michael Brandman Associates OAKF,9
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc cP~
m
v O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via storm water. Solid waste
will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Impacts listed under the aforementioned 5.12.E impact statement can be reduced to less than
significant by addressing the necessary mitigation measures listed above. These mitigation measures
will reduce potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and water quality
to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.12-10 through 5.12-11 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.12, Utilities and Service Systems,
in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.12 - Aesthetics
Impact 5.13.A The project could potentially substantially alter the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings.
2.1.12.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to the visual
character of the project site.
Two Class I areas are located along prominent ridgelines in the western portion of the project site.
The ridgelines provide the western boundary of the proposed structural development. A public trail
system is proposed along this ridgeline, providing a buffer between the lots and the ridgelines.
According to the Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the project, development of
residential structures requires a minimum 100-foot setback from these ridgelines. As a result of this
setback, the proposed project is not visible from outside observation points within this viewshed area
with the exception of Lots 41 through 43, Phase 36 as viewed from VOP No. 18. A portion of a 35-
foot high, two story house on these three lots might be visible. Houses on these lots are approximately
2,493 feet from the Visual Observation Point (147 feet inside the one-half mile Class I Visual
Resource Area "no visibility" zone under the Hillside Development Ordinance. Visibility of houses
on Lots 41 through 43, in Phase 36 would not be consistent with the Hillside Development
Ordinance, constituting a significant visual impact.
There are two Class 11 Visual Resource Areas ridgelines located along the eastern portion of the
project site. The northernmost Class II area is adjacent to proposed residential structures and west of
the Kern River Soccer Park. A public trail system is proposed along this ridgeline, providing a buffer
between the lots and the ridgeline. According to the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation,
development of residential structures along this ridgeline require a minimum 70-foot setback from the
ridgeline. As a result of this setback, less than 50% of house elevations on lots in this area would be
visible from outside observation points within this viewshed area, with the exception of Lots 18
G ~AK~9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-1
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc , r
')RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
through 23 in Phase 15, as viewed from Viewshed Observation Point No. 46. On those six lots, more
than 50% of a 35-foot high, two-story house might be visible. Houses on these lots would be
approximately 5,016 feet from the VOP - 264 feet inside the one-mile Class Il VRA "50% visibility"
zone under the HD Ordinance. Visibility of more than 50% of house elevations on Lots 18-23 in
Phase 15 would not be consistent with the HD Ordinance, constituting a significant visual impact.
The southeastern corner of the project is shown in a cross-section from VOP No. 74. Five lots
fronting on Pebble Creek Court (Lots 46-50 in Phase 6) are located in an area that is designated by the
HD Ordinance as a Slope Protection Area. The SPA extends 300 feet from future Morning Drive.
The City HD Ordinance does not allow structures or fences on the slope face within a Slope
Protection Area, therefore, as proposed, the five lots with residential structures and fences are not
consistent with the City HD Ordinance, which constitutes a significant visual impact.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.5.D.1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the grading plans shall comply with the
applicable provisions of the Hillside Development Ordinance and specify structure
setbacks from the toe or top of the slopes as appropriate, in accordance with the
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation and Addendum 11. Building setbacks from
the toe of slopes shall be half the height of the slope to a maximum setback of 20
feet. Setbacks from the top of slopes less than 10 feet in height shall have minimum
setback of half the slope height. All slope setbacks shall be delineated on the final
subdivision maps.
5.13.A.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall confirm conformance
with the Hillside Development Ordinance as it relates to the Visual Resource Areas.
Based on current plans, houses on Lots 41-43 in Phase 36 and Lots 18-23 in Phase 15
shall be limited to 24 feet high unless the applicant documents that a taller house will
be consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, based on site-specific cross-
section analyses from Viewshed Observation Points. The applicant may consider
design changes such as deeper setbacks from ridgelines, stepped upper stories, or
installation of visual screens such as landscaping or berms as may be allowed under
the Hillside Development Ordinance.
2-142 Michael Brandman Associates gAl(F"
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
F- m
U Or
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.13.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project landscape architect shall submit
a revegetation plan for approval, which will reduce erosion on the face of slopes,
constructed or otherwise altered by the project, including erosion due to drainage
features.
5.13.A.3 Prior to approval of a final tract map, Lots 46 through 50 in Phase 6 that front onto
Pebble Creek Court shall be eliminated.
5.13.A.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall demonstrate the
softening of the appearance of Pebble Creek Court as viewed from Morning Drive by
implementing the following, (a) limit grading to the upper portion of the SPA beyond
the ridgeline located approximately 220 feet up the SPA, (b) grade the upper hillside
in the manner shown in exhibit 5.13-13, (c) contour and revegetate the fill area to
provide a natural appearance similar to the lower portion of the SPA, and (d) install a
berm approximately six feet tall along the edge of Pebble Creek Court so that cars on
the road are not visible from cars on Morning Drive, as measured from four feet
above the Morning Drive centerline.
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.5.D.1 and 5.13.A.1 through 5.13.A.4 will reduce the
impact of the visual characteristics of the site and surrounding areas to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.13-30 through 5.13-60 in Section 5 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.13, Aesthetics, in Section 5 of
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.13.B The project could potentially have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.
2.1.12.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to the visual
character of the project site.
The City of Bakersfield has established Class I and Class 11 Visual Resources Areas (VRA) within the
Hillside Development Ordinance. The VRAs that are located on the project site are ridgelines located
on the west and east sides of the project site. In addition, the City has established Visual Observation
Points (VOPs) along Alfred Harrell Highway and Morning Drive within the Hillside Development
Ordinance. These VOPs could represent scenic vistas from public roadways. These observation points
provide views to the Class I and Class II VRAs. According to the Hillside Development Ordinance no
portion of a structure within a Class I VRA should be visible within a one-half mile from any VOP,
and no more than 50% of the height of any structure within a Class II VRA should be visible within
one mile from any VOP. Based on the information from the discussion above in Impact 5.13.A, the
proposed project includes nine lots where houses could exceed the visibility standard and result in a `aarrF
SLIP
2-143 M
Michael Brandman Associates 3 c~
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
significant visual impact. In addition, the Hillside Development Ordinance also establishes Slope
Protection Areas. The proposed project area includes five lots in the southeaster portion of the project
site were houses would be located within the Slope Protection Area, would not be consistent with the
Hillside Development Ordinance, and result in a significant visual impact. Therefore, the proposed
project would result in a significant effect on scenic vistas along Alfred Harrell Highway and
Morning Drive in the vicinity of the project.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.5.13.1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the grading plans shall comply with the
applicable provisions of the Hillside Development Ordinance and specify structure
setbacks from the toe or top of the slopes as appropriate, in accordance with the
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation and Addendum II. Building setbacks from
the toe of slopes shall be half the height of the slope to a maximum setback of 20
feet. Setbacks from the top of slopes less than 10 feet in height shall have minimum
setback of half the slope height. All slope setbacks shall be delineated on the final
subdivision maps.
5.13.A.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall confirm conformance
with the Hillside Development Ordinance as it relates to the Visual Resource Areas.
Based on current plans, houses on Lots 41-43 in Phase 36 and Lots 18-23 in Phase 15
shall be limited to 24 feet high unless the applicant documents that a taller house will
be consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, based on site-specific cross-
section analyses from Viewshed Observation Points. The applicant may consider
design changes such as deeper setbacks from ridgelines, stepped upper stories, or
installation of visual screens such as landscaping or berms as may be allowed under
the Hillside Development Ordinance.
5.13.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project landscape architect shall submit
a revegetation plan for approval, which will reduce erosion on the face of slopes,
constructed or otherwise altered by the project, including erosion due to drainage
features.
~gAKF9
2-144 Michael Brandman Associates p cry
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-09%CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc > rn
r
U p
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance
5.13.A.3 Prior to approval of a final tract map, Lots 46 through 50 in Phase 6 that front onto
Pebble Creek Court shall be eliminated.
5.13.A.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall demonstrate the
softening of the appearance of Pebble Creek Court as viewed from Morning Drive by
implementing the following, (a) limit grading to the upper portion of the SPA beyond
the ridgeline located approximately 220 feet up the SPA, (b) grade the upper hillside
in the manner shown in exhibit 5.13-13, (c) contour and revegetate the fill area to
provide a natural appearance similar to the lower portion of the SPA, and (d) install a
berm approximately six feet tall along the edge of Pebble Creek Court so that cars on
the road are not visible from cars on Morning Drive, as measured from four feet
above the Morning Drive centerline.
The implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.5.D.1 and 5.13.A.1 through 5.13.A.4 will reduce the
impact of the visual characteristics of the site and surrounding areas to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.13-30 through 5.13-60 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.13, Aesthetics, in Section 5 of
Chapter I of the Final EIR.
2.1.13 - Mineral Resources
Impact 5.15.A The project will result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
may be of value to the region and the residents of the state.
2.1.13.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact related to the loss of known
mineral resources.
The project site has previously been mined for mineral resources, the development of the proposed
project will result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource; however, since the project
site has not been mined for approximately 20 years, the loss of the mineral resource would be less
than significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
3AKF9~
2 115 m
Michael Brandman Associates _
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
5.15.A.1 Prior to the recordation of a final parcel map or final tract map on the project site,
whichever occurs first, the project applicant shall complete one of the following and
provide the City of Bakersfield Planning Department a letter from the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) that one of the following has been completed.
1. Acquired the 240-acre mineral estate from the Untied States
2. Removed the 240-acre mineral estate through an exchange approved by the
BLM; or
3. Other BLM approved method that removes surface entry rights and restricts
minerals rights to a depth below 500 feet from the ground surface.
Completion of one of the three aforementioned items within Mitigation Measure 5.15.A.1, with proof
of letter from the BLM to the City of Bakersfield will lessen the impact of the loss of availability of
known mineral resources to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.15-3 through 5.15-4 in Section 5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any
documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.15, Mineral Resources, in Section
5 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.2 - Cumulative
2.2.1 - Land Use and Planning
Impact 6.3.1.B The proposed project could contribute to a cumulative potential conflict with any
applicable land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigation an environmental effect, or with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan.
2.2.1.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact related to inconsistencies with the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan (MBGP) and the Hillside Development Ordinance.
The proposed project is not consistent with the goals and policies of the Metropolitan Bakersfield
General Plan (MBGP) and the Hillside Development Ordinance but is consistent with the
Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan (MBHCP). The project's inconsistency with the
General Plan goals and policies and Hillside Development Ordinance would result in significant
effects on the regulations, as discussed in Section 5.1 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR. Since the
proposed project would result in significant impacts due to the inconsistencies, the project's
contribution to cumulative impacts due to conflicts with the City's goals and policies and the Hillside
Development Ordinance would be cumulatively significant.
3 AKF9
2-146 Michael Brandman Associates
-n
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.1.B.1 If private gated communities are approved, public access easements shall be recorded
over trail alignments/trail cross sections prior to the issuance of building permits to
allow public use of trails.
5.1.8.2 Prior to the recordation of a final subdivision map for each phase, the proposed
public trails that are planned to extend through private communities shall design
entrances/exits to/from the private communities to allow unrestricted equestrian and
pedestrian access to trails.
5.1.8.3 Prior to recordation of a final subdivision map for each phase, the private, gated
communities that will have public trails shall include a provision on their Covenants,
Conditions, and Restrictions that the portion of the public trails extending through the
private gated communities shall be maintained by the homeowners associations.
5.1.B.4 Prior to the recordation of a final subdivision map in the southwestern portion of the
project site, a public road access shall be provided to the future City park located at
the southwest portion of the project area (Phase 32). This access shall be provided
either through a public street within The Canyon's project or an improved public road
through county property as approved by the City.
5.1.B.5 Original Mitigation Measure 5.1.B.5 stated: "Prior to recordation of a final
subdivision map in Phase 15the Tamarak Ridge Community which is located in the
northeastern portion of the project site, View Point Court shall be converted to a
public street from a private street. View Point Court shall be extended to the southern
boundary of the proposed park from Tamarak Ridge Way to provide adequate public
access to the best useable area of the proposed park. Park shall be dedicated with
recordation of a final map for Phase 15 or recordation of the 20th phase, whichever
occurs first."
Mitigation Measure 5.1.B.5 has been superseded by the following which is more
restrictive and achieves a greater community and environmental benefit. The
following is included as a condition of approval for the project. :S'< P, K, 9q
"
m
Michael Brandman Associates 2-147
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc J 0
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Subdivider/developer shall provide a Tamarack Ridge Way as a public street and
tenninate in a cul-de-sac northeast of Lot 23, Phase 15. The land consisting of the
area north of Tamarack Ridge Way (north of Lot 23, Phase 15) shown as View Point
Court, and the land on both sides of View Pointe Court including the residential lots
shall be dedicated to the City of Bakersfield for public park purposes. The dedication
shall be by approved agreement with the City prior to recordation of the first final
parcel or tract map of the Canyons project. This area shall be zoned OS-HD (Open
Space-Hillside Development). Subdivider/developer shall rough grade the land north
of Tamarack Ridge Way along the frontage of the property to be dedicated to the City
for parkland to similar elevations as the Tamarack Ridge Way cul-de-sac at its north
terminus (north of Lot 23, Phase 15). The rough grade elevations shall allow for
future vehicle access to the park. Grading shall be approved by the City Engineer.
5.13.A.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall confirm conformance
with the Hillside Development Ordinance as it relates to the Visual Resource Areas.
Based on current plans, houses on Lots 41-43 in Phase 36 and Lots 18-23 in Phase 15
shall be limited to 24 feet high unless the applicant documents that a taller house will
be consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, based on site-specific cross-
section analyses from Viewshed Observation Points. The applicant may consider
design changes such as deeper setbacks from ridgelines, stepped upper stories, or
installation of visual screens such as landscaping or berms as may be allowed under
the Hillside Development Ordinance.
5.13.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project landscape architect shall submit
a revegetation plan for approval, which will reduce erosion on the face of slopes,
constructed or otherwise altered by the project, including erosion due to drainage
features.
5.13.A.3 Prior to approval of a final tract map, Lots 46 through 50 in Phase 6 that front onto
Pebble Creek Court shall be eliminated.
5.13.A.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall demonstrate the
softening of the appearance of Pebble Creek Court as viewed from Morning Drive by
implementing the following, (a) limit grading to the upper portion of the SPA beyond
the ridgeline located approximately 220 feet up the SPA, (b) grade the upper hillside
in the manner shown in exhibit 5.13-13, (c) contour and revegetate the fill area to
provide a natural appearance similar to the lower portion of the SPA, and (d) install a
berm approximately six feet tall along the edge of Pebble Creek Court so that cars on
the road are not visible from cars on Morning Drive, as measured from four feet
above the Morning Drive centerline.
~~AkF9
2-148 Michael Brandman Associates y s~
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc n
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.I .B.1 through 5.1.B.5 and 5.13.A.1 through 5.13.A.4 will
ensure that the project is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan (MBGP) and the
Hillside Development Ordinance. Therefore, after project mitigation, the projects cumulative impact
would be considered less than significant.
References: Pages 6-13 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6 of Chapter I of
the Final EIR.
2.2.2 - Air Quality
Impact 6.3.2.A The project could contribute to a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria
pollutants and therefore could result in cumulative health effects from criteria
pollutant exposure.
2.2.2.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact related to health effects of
criteria pollutants.
The project would result in a significant cumulative impact from ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 exposure.
This would result in cumulative health impacts from ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 to those in the San
Joaquin Valley Air Basin.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.2.8.1 Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City
of Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that all
construction activities and operations will comply with local zoning codes, and
District Regulation VIII (Rules 8011-8081), and Rule 9510. These regulations
include, but not limited to, the following:
• During all phases of construction, construction equipment shall be properly
and routinely maintained, as recommended by manufacturer manuals, to
control exhaust emissions.
G 3AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates
- m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc = Or
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
• During all phases of construction, all contractors shall follow all the rules in
Regulation VIII.
• During all phases of construction, all contractors shall restrict equipment and
vehicle idling to five minutes or less.
• The project applicant shall develop a ride-share incentive program for
construction workers. The program shall be submitted to the City for review
and approval.
• On-site electrical hook ups shall be installed for electric hand tools such as
saws, drills, and compressors, to substantially decrease the need for fuel
powered electric generators and other fuel-powered equipment.
• During construction, only low volatility paints and coatings shall be used. All
paints shall be applied using either high volume low-pressure (HVLP) spray
equipment or by hand application.
• During construction of the proposed structures, the off-road construction
equipment (i.e., cranes and lifts) shall use California Air Resources Board
verified Level Three diesel particulate filters
(www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm) to accomplish an 85 percent
reduction in PM 10 emissions.
5.2.C.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation Il, specifically, the
project will be subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part
of the SJVAPCD permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's
offsetting thresholds would have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary
source by stationary source basis.
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply in all respects
with developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement
approved by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance
with the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of
ROG, NOX, and PM,o net emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully mitigate
the project's air quality impacts to the extent that the development of the project will
result in no net increase in criteria pollutant emissions over the criteria pollutant
emissions which would otherwise exist without the development of the project, all to
be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the Voluntary Emissions Reduction
Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net emissions by 23.81
tons per year (from 23.81 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NOX net emissions
by 24.60 tons per year (from 24.60 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce PMIo net
emissions by 25.12 tons per year (from 25.12 tons per year to 0 tons per year); and
~ AKF9
2-150 Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
O
')RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 5.71 tons per year (from 5.71 tons per year to 0 tons
per year). The following additional design features for the project shall be
implemented:
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel.
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
• Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
• Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
1. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission
reduction projects
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
Compliance with Mitigation Measure 5.2.13.1, 5.2.C.1 and 5.2.C.2, where the project applicant enters
a Voluntary Emissions Reduction agreement with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District will lessen the impact of criteria pollutants, reducing them to a net-zero production.
Therefore, cumulative health effects in regards to criteria pollutants would be less than significant.
References: Pages 6-14 through 6-16 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6
of Chapter I of the Final EIR.
L AKF
Michael Brandman Associates 2-151 O' 91-c~
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rrt
U O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Impact 6.3.2.C The project would contribute to potential significant cumulative visibility impacts.
2.2.2.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact related to visibility impacts
caused by criteria pollutant PMio.
Since cumulative development will contribute PM,o to an air basin that is in non-attainment of PM1o,
development of the cumulative projects, including the proposed project would result in a significant
visibility impact. The project's contribution to the cumulative visibility impact is considered
cumulatively considerable and is considered significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.2.6.1 Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City
of Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that all
construction activities and operations will comply with local zoning codes, and
District Regulation VIII (Rules 8011-8081), and Rule 9510. These regulations
include, but not limited to, the following:
• During all phases of construction, construction equipment shall be properly
and routinely maintained, as recommended by manufacturer manuals, to
control exhaust emissions.
• During all phases of construction, all contractors shall follow all the rules in
Regulation VIII.
• During all phases of construction, all contractors shall restrict equipment and
vehicle idling to five minutes or less.
• The project applicant shall develop a ride-share incentive program for
construction workers. The program shall be submitted to the City for review
and approval.
• On-site electrical hook ups shall be installed for electric hand tools such as
saws, drills, and compressors, to substantially decrease the need for fuel
powered electric generators and other fuel-powered equipment.
G a xr9
Michael Brandman Associates Q)2-152
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc J
0
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• During construction, only low volatility paints and coatings shall be used. All
paints shall be applied using either high volume low-pressure (HVLP) spray
equipment or by hand application.
• During construction of the proposed structures, the off-road construction
equipment (i.e., cranes and lifts) shall use California Air Resources Board
verified Level Three diesel particulate filters
(www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/verdev/vt/cvt.htm) to accomplish an 85 percent
reduction in PM10 emissions.
5.2.C.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation II, specifically, the
project will be subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part
of the SJVAPCD permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's
offsetting thresholds would have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary
source by stationary source basis.
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply in all respects
with developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement
approved by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance
with the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of
ROG, NOX, and PM10 net emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully mitigate
the project's air quality impacts to the extent that the development of the project will
result in no net increase in criteria pollutant emissions over the criteria pollutant
emissions which would otherwise exist without the development of the project, all to
be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the Voluntary Emissions Reduction
Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net emissions by 23.81
tons per year (from 23.81 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NO,, net emissions
by 24.60 tons per year (from 24.60 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce PM10 net
emissions by 25.12 tons per year (from 25.12 tons per year to 0 tons per year); and
reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 5.71 tons per year (from 5.71 tons per year to 0 tons
per year). The following additional design features for the project shall be
implemented::
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel.
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
43AKtc9
CY ~T
Michael Brandman Associates 245p m
v O
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
. Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
. Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
1. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission
reduction projects
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
Compliance with Mitigation Measures 5.1.8.1, 5.1.C.1, and 5.2.C.2 will lessen the impact criteria
pollutant PMio will have on the cumulative visibility effect it would potentially create. After
mitigation, the cumulative impact on visibility due to PMio would be considered less than significant.
References: Pages 6-17 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of
the Final EIR.
2.2.3 - Biological Resources
Impact 6.3.3.A The proposed project will contribute to a significant cumulative impact to biological
resources that is considered cumulatively considerable.
2.2.3.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact on biological resources.
Implementation of the proposed project, in conjunction with future development associated with the
General Plan buildout, would contribute to the loss of habitat in the region, resulting in a decline of
2-154 Michael Brandman Associates G 0AKF9
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
F m
v ~
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance
biological resources and species diversity. Participation in the MBHCP ensures that buildout of the
project and other projects within the MBHCP that may result in impacts to special-status plant and
wildlife species that are covered species under the MBHCP, and their habitat, will be mitigated in full
through execution of MBHCP mitigation requirements.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a Habitat
Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code and the Imp lementation/Management Agreement for the MBHCP or
equivalent program or measure as approved by the wildlife agencies.
5.3.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with all
appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP regarding Bakersfield cactus. In
order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below, the
project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City agency (as identified by
the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented. Impacts to
Bakersfield cactus and its habitat is permitted by the MBHCP with payment of
Habitat Mitigation Fees.
The proposed impact area occurs in the immediate vicinity of Bakersfield cactus
specimens, and open space areas within the proposed project design includes land
that will be occupied by this species. To avoid potential impacts to any Bakersfield
cactus specimens located outside the proposed project impact area and within open
space areas or offsite locations, the following avoidance measures shall be
implemented during project construction and project operation. If CDFG and the
Project Applicant cannot reach agreement, and the City Planning Director determines
based on documentation that a good faith effort has been made by the Project
Applicant, and CDFG has not responded in a reasonable manner within 90 days, the
Planning Director, in consultation with a qualified biologist, may approve an
alternative relocation strategy.
Salvage and Relocation
,,gAKF
~ r
Michael Brandman Associates 2-1 M
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Although not required to further reduce direct impacts to the Bakersfield cactus after
the implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.3.A.1, the project Project Applicant
proposes to relocate salvaged Bakersfield cactus.
• Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Project Applicant shall enter into
an agreement with the CDFG to fund the relocation of salvaged Bakersfield
cactus clumps located within areas proposed to be impacted. The Project
Applicant shall prepare a translocation plan to be submitted for review and
approval by the CDFG. The CDFG shall review and provide comments to the
translocation plan within a reasonable timeframe or manner. The translocation
plan shall include details of the location of the recipient site, and proposed
methodology of the relocation effort, as agreed upon by the Project Applicant
and the CDFG. The relocation could occur along the northern boundary of the
project site adjacent to the proposed detention basin and/or the existing
Bakersfield Cactus Preserve (Hart Park Cactus Preserve) to the north of the
site. Additional recipient sites for the relocation could include suitable areas
within the project site that are proposed as part of the project's open space.
Construction Mitigation Measures
• Prior to any construction activities for the project, all Bakersfield cactus that
occur outside the proposed limits of grading, including off-site cactus clumps
that may be impacted during the course of upgrading infrastructure, shall be
identified and demarcated by a qualified biologist with construction flagging
or other standard construction method. Prior to any construction activities for
the project and following the direction of the qualified biologist and project
construction supervisor, temporary construction silt fencing shall be installed
by the project construction crew around all Bakersfield cactus that were
demarcated by the qualified biologist, and determined to occur outside the
proposed limits of grading. Those specimens determined to occur within the
proposed limits of grading shall be included as specimens to be salvaged and
relocated per the translocation plan for the proposed project. The qualified
biologist shall be responsible for ensuring that the temporary construction silt
fencing is installed adequately to protect the enclosed cactus. No
encroachment shall be permitted into the temporary enclosures for the
Bakersfield cactus during construction activities. The temporary construction
silt fencing shall be inspected by the project construction supervisor or
construction crew regularly for structural integrity. Any failures in the
structural integrity of the temporary construction silt fencing shall be repaired
immediately. At the completion of all construction activities, the temporary
\3AK
2-156 Michael Brandman Associates F9~,
SA03-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc -n
in
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance
construction silt fencing shall be removed and disposed of properly at the
direction of the project construction supervisor.
Operation Mitigation Measures
• Encroachment into areas containing Bakersfield cactus shall be prevented
during the operation phase of the project to ensure the long-term protection of
cactus specimens. Permanent fencing shall be installed by the project
proponent around all Bakersfield cactus that are preserved onsite. Long-term
maintenance of the permanent fencing shall be provided for by the Home
Owner's Association during the operational phase of the project. The
conditions, covenants, and restrictions provided in Mitigation Measure 5.3.A.9
will further ensure the long-term protection of biological resources that are
preserved onsite.
5.3.A.3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with all
appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP regarding San Joaquin kit fox. In
order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below, the
project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City agency (as identified by
the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented. Impacts to
San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat are permitted by the MBHCP, however, the
MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin kit fox,
including known dens for this species. The MBHCP and USFWS guidelines
regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox
in dens. The following specific measures during pre-construction and the
construction phase of the project shall be implemented:
Pre-Construction Survey Mitigation Measures
• Preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days
and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or
construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin
kit fox. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
prior to site grading to identify active dens of protected species and to ensure
appropriate and necessary take avoidance measures are implemented for the
San Joaquin kit fox. A qualified biologist means any person who has
completed at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a
related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification
and life history of the San Joaquin kit fox. If active San Joaquin kit fox dens
are identified during the pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist shall
submit to the City of Bakersfield a protection and avoidance plan that
incorporates the USFWS standardized recommendations for protection and
4 ~3 AKFy
Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-0%CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc t R
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
avoidance to ensure that no San Joaquin kit fox are entrapped in the occupied
den.
• Written results of preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be submitted to the
City within five days after survey completion and prior to the start of ground
disturbance and/or construction activities. No clearing, grubbing or grading
shall commence until the preconstruction surveys are finalized and submitted
to the City for approval. Specific measures for protection and avoidance for
San Joaquin kit fox are provided below.
Pre-Construction Avoidance Mitigation Measures
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), circular exclusion zones shall be established by a
qualified biologist around all potential San Joaquin kit fox dens identified and
shall include a radius of no less than 50 feet. This radius shall be expanded to
100 feet for all known dens. If the pre-construction survey identifies any natal
or pupping dens, the qualified biologist shall contact the USFWS. Natal or
pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and
adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the USFWS. For
known dens, exclusion zone fencing shall be maintained until all construction
related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all
fencing shall be removed to avoid attracting subsequent attention to the den.
For potential and atypical dens, placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 feet from
the den entrance shall demarcate the location of the den. The exclusion zone
for potential and atypical dens do not require fencing, however the exclusion
area shall be observed by the biologist. No construction, vehicle operation,
material storage, or any other type of surface disturbing activity shall be
allowed within the exclusion zones.
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), disturbance to all San Joaquin kit fox dens should be
avoided to the maximum extent possible. Limited destruction of kit fox dens
may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative. If no reasonable
alternative is feasible other than the destruction of the den, the known kit fox
dens located on the project site that will be destroyed shall be excavated and
destroyed under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist. Prior to the
destruction of dens, the dens shall be monitored for at least three (3)
consecutive days to determine whether the den is active or dormant. Activity
`,AkF
2-158 Michael Brandman Associates 91
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
~ o
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
at the den can be monitored by placing tracking medium at den entrances and
by spot lighting. If no den activity is observed during this period, the den
should be destroyed immediately pursuant to the den destruction procedures
set forth below.
Destruction of dens shall be accomplished by careful excavation with hand
tools until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den shall be fully
excavated and back filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes
cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period.
If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal
shall be allowed to escape unhindered, or, to the extent feasible, representatives
from CDFG and/or USFWS shall be contacted to attempt to relocate kit fox
pursuant to the MBHCP. As part of the Implementation Trust to the MBHCP,
the City, CDFG, and/or USFWS are required to gather data on the success of
relocation activities from those engaged in relocation. The City, CDFG, and/or
USFWS may encourage relocation activities to include radio collaring or other
monitoring research by the Endangered Species Recovery Program (ESRP) in
the gathering of data on the success of relocation.
Construction Mitigation Measures
• The project proponent shall provide for a sensitive species identification and
avoidance education program for all construction employees that consists of a
consultation in which persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative
protection shall explain endangered species protocols, habitat needs, and the
measures and conditions of approval being taken to reduce impacts to the
species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet
conveying this information shall be prepared for distribution to all contractors,
their employees, and any and all other personnel who are working on the
construction site. A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent
who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might
inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped
individual. The representative will be identified during the employee
education program. The representative's name and telephone number shall be
provided to the USFWS.
• To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes during the construction phase
of the project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet
deep shall be covered by construction site personnel, and under the direction of
the construction supervisor, at the close of each working day by plywood or
similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of
earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall
C~aAK~c9~
n
Michael Brandman Associates 2. PS
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rm
R.,. d
ON r. INA
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
be fully inspected for trapped kit foxes by construction site personnel. If at
any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, representatives from CDFG
or USFWS, or permitted and qualified biologists from local research groups
such as the ESRP, shall be contacted immediately to attempt to relocate the kit
fox pursuant to the MBHCP, and if encouraged by the CDFG or USFWS,
attempt to collar the kit fox pursuant to applicable protocol. In the case of
trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to
allow trapped animals to escape.
• The construction site manager shall ensure that all pipes, culverts, or similar
structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater shall be kept capped or
otherwise covered to prevent injury of kit foxes. If such pipes, culverts or
similar structures are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected
daily prior to burial or closure to prevent entrapment of kit fox or other
sensitive species.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that all food, garbage in plastic shall
be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the site to
minimize attracting kit foxes and other sensitive species to the site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that no dogs, cats, or other animals
are permitted on the project site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that a zinc phosphide based
rodenticide shall be used, if rodent control is deemed necessary during
construction.
• Night time construction shall be prohibited. In addition, all construction
vehicles shall observe a 20 mph speed limit on the project site and developer
shall create established staging, parking and storage areas to ensure the
prevention of accidental direct impacts and takes of kit foxes.
5.3.A.4 The proposed project has executed take avoidance measures in accordance with the
requirements of the CFG Code Section 5050 through the implementation of the
project-specific Blunt-Nosed Leopard Lizard Avoidance Plan (EDAW 2004 in M.H.
Wolfe and Associates, December 2007). The blunt-nosed leopard lizard was
determined to be absent from the project site after the completion of the Blunt-Nosed
Leopard Lizard Avoidance Plan, and no direct impacts to this species are expected.
In order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below,
the project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City Agency (as identified
by the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented.
• Prior to any project grading of suitable habitat for the blunt-nosed leopard
lizard, including all suitable habitat to be cleared or grubbed or used as points
or travel routes for construction, protocol surveys shall be conducted by
~AKF9
2-160 Michael Brandman Associates `p"
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
J O
`)RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
qualified biologists according to recent survey methodology approved by the
CDFG. The results of protocol surveys are considered valid for up to one year,
and shall be repeated as necessary if grading of the target area for the survey is
not completed within the one-year timeline. If it is determined that blunt-
nosed leopard lizards occupy any portions of the site during protocol surveys,
the CDFG shall be notified immediately for further consultation and
consideration of an avoidance plan.
• All employees who will be on the site will be instructed as to the take
avoidance regulations and educated on basic recognition of the species by a
qualified biologist prior to construction.
• Pursuant to CFG Code Section 5050, take of any blunt-nosed leopard lizard as
a result of project implementation is not permitted and will not be authorized.
If a blunt-nosed leopard lizard is identified on the project site during
construction, the lizard shall be avoided and all construction activities in the
vicinity of the lizard shall stop. A qualified biologist shall be notified
immediately to confirm the presence/absence of blunt-nosed leopard lizards on
the site. If it is determined that blunt-nosed leopard lizards occupy any
portions of the site, CDFG shall be notified immediately for further
consultation and consideration of an avoidance plan.
5.3.A.5 Implementation of the following mitigation measures will ensure compliance with
the MBTA and CFG Code for protected nesting bird species. Prior to the issuance of
a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with the following measures
regarding nesting migratory bird species, including the burrowing owl, protected
under the MBTA and CFG Code:
• If site grading is proposed during the general breeding season for nesting birds
that are protected under the MBTA and CFG Code(February 1 through August
31), a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
within 30 days prior to grading activities within any project impact area in
order to identify all active nests in areas impacted throughout project
construction and implementation. If an active nest is identified during the pre-
construction survey, no construction activity shall take place within a
minimum of 200 feet of any active nest until the young have fledged (as
determined by a qualified biologist) and the nest is no longer determined to be
active, or until another distance is recommended by a qualified biologist, and
approved by the Planning Director. This distance shall be expanded to 500
feet for any nesting raptor species excluding the burrowing owl, for which
specific mitigation is provided below. Construction activity in the vicinity of
any active nest shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring
C~aAKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-161-
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rm-
C7
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
biologist who may reduce the size of or eliminate a buffer otherwise required
by this measure for individual nests. Nesting habitat that must be removed as a
result of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding
season which is defined herein as approximately September 1 through January
31. Habitat may be removed at any time during the breeding or non-breeding-
season if a qualified biologist determines after a pre-construction survey that
there are no active nests and no nesting birds in the area that could potentially
be affected by construction activities in violation of the MBTA and CFG Code
• Pre-construction surveys shall include a survey for burrowing owl and
according to recommended protocol by the California Burrowing Owl
Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995). If active burrowing owl burrows are
detected during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), no
construction activity shall take place within 250 feet of any active nest until it
is determined by a qualified biologist that all juvenile burrowing owls
associated with any active nest are foraging independently and capable of
independent survival. Construction activity in the vicinity of any active nest
shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring biologist.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside of breeding season (September
1 through January 31), passive relocation efforts may be undertaken in accordance
with recommended protocol by the California Burrowing Owl Consortium and
CDFG (CDFG 1995).
5.3.A.6 The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered
under the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, shall
be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected
species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately
to the USFWS and CDFG.
5.3.A.7 An environmental liaison shall be retained by the project proponent and identified in
writing to USFWS, CDFG and the City of Bakersfield. The environmental liaison's
qualifications shall consist of the following (minimum requirements), completion of
at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and
has demonstrated field experience in the San Joaquin Valley. The environmental
liaison will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the environmental mitigation
and take avoidance measures. Subject to the approval of the appropriate City
Agency, the environmental liaison shall draft and prepare an Environmental
Education and Compliance Plan that is consistent with the mitigation measures
presented herein. The Environmental Education and Compliance Plan will be used to
L NK,
Michael Brandman Associates
2-162 rn
SA03-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc o
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
train employees and contractors to ensure that the required environmental compliance
measures are implemented. A pre-construction training session shall be held to
ensure all responsible parties are aware of what the environmental protection and
mitigations are and how to ensure that they are implemented. The project proponent
- shall submit to the City of Bakersfield proof of attendance by site employees of the
pre-construction training session within 10 days of the training session.
On a monthly basis, the environmental liaison shall prepare a report that details the
implementation of the environmental protection and mitigation measures. Any
failure of measures to be effective shall be reported as they occur. The liaison shall
suggest improvements and changes as possible, and will coordinate any revision of
environmental protection and mitigation measures with the Applicant, the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, as appropriate.
5.3.A.8 The following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented
during all construction phases of the proposed project to further reduce potential
direct and indirect impacts to special status species and their habitat to less than
significant:
• Prior to any grading activities, the project proponent shall install the
appropriate fencing adjacent to all designated open space areas delineating the
limits of grading. This includes the installation of construction snow fencing,
silt fencing, and/or temporary chain-linked or other such fencing around the
perimeter of any active construction zone adjacent to designated open space
areas. Fencing shall be installed by the project proponent, inspected for
efficacy (by a qualified biologist), and repaired by the project proponent on an
on-going basis during all phases of development.
• Construction vehicles shall carry fire extinguishers or other fire retardants or
equipment to enhance the prevention and control of any unplanned man-
caused fires.
5.3.A.9 Due to the projects adjacency to areas designated as open space and habitat where
known sensitive species occur, the following mitigation measures shall be adhered to.
Prior to recordation of a final map, the Project Applicant shall record the following
conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CC&Rs) in the Office of the County
Recorder. These CC&Rs shall apply to all property and property owners (including
multi-family and commercial properties). The CC&Rs shall be prepared and
enforced by the project's Home Owner's Association (HOA) during the operation
phase of the project:
13AKF9
o- s1,
Michael Brandman Associates 2- _ 3 m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc U t j
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
• The Project Applicant shall submit a landscape plan to the City of Bakersfield
for review and approval. The landscape plan shall include a planting screen
adjacent to designated open space areas. Native trees, shrubs, forbs, and
grasses shall be planted to help provide protective cover and minimize
potential adverse indirect impacts resulting from night lighting for the
development. Lighting shall be further shaded and directed away from
designated open space areas.
• A management plan shall be prepared and implemented to ensure the proper
management of open space areas containing Bakersfield cactus specimens and
other sensitive resources. The management plan shall include avoidance
measures to prevent long-term impacts to resources within open space areas.
These would include, at minimum, education measures to ensure the proper
identification of Bakersfield cactus specimens within open space areas, and
measures to prevent inadvertent damage to cactus specimens during any
maintenance or recreational activities within or adjacent to open space areas.
• All domestic pets shall be leashed and prohibited from entering protected
habitat areas on the project site.
• Prohibit the use of herbicides or pesticides on trails or open space areas where
they may adversely affect plants or protected wildlife. Use of these chemicals
under a plan approved by CDFG and the USFWS would be excepted.
- Prohibit the dumping of any material over the bluffs or outside the
individual lot.
- Prohibit off-trail hiking or bike riding on the bluffs and within open space
areas, as appropriate to prevent erosion and impacts to protected species.
- Prohibit the pumping of pool water or drainage over the bluffs and within
open space areas.
- Require the immediate repair of erosion on the bluffs and open space areas
that may be caused by broken water mains, etc. or failure to comply with the
CC&Rs.
- Ensure that the management of the parks, open space and common areas
will be accomplished in a manner that ensures take avoidance measures for
the San Joaquin kit fox will be implemented described in Mitigation
Measure 5.3A.3.
• Require that the HOA ensure that necessary repairs to project fencing along
the border between the proposed project and the Hart Park Cactus Preserve be
completed in a timely manner.
Compliance with Mitigation Measure 5.3.A.1 through 5.3.A.9 will mitigate the cumulative impact
that the project will have on biological resources to less than significant.
o40AK~9J-~
2-164 Michael Brandman Associates R,
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc o
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
References: Pages 6-21 through 6-22 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6
of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.2.4 - Cultural Resources
Impact 6.3.4.C: The proposed project may contribute to significant cumulative impacts to
paleontological resources.
2.2.4.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact on paleontological resources.
There are other planned and proposed projects that are located in the vicinity of The Canyons project.
The proposed project is located in an area of known paleontological resources. Other projects in
addition to the proposed project could potentially result significant impacts to paleontological
resources. The project's contribution to potential cumulative impacts to paleontological resources is
considered cumulatively considerable, and therefore, significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(] changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.4.C.1 Prior to the start of any ground disturbance related to project development and as
needed during on-going ground disturbance, construction personnel involved with
earth moving activities shall be informed that fossils may be encountered, and shall
be educated on the appearance of fossils, the laws protecting fossils, the
consequences of not abiding those laws, and the proper notification procedures in the
event that a fossil is discovered. This construction personnel training shall be
conducted by a qualified paleontologist, retained by the project applicant and
approved by the City of Bakersfield, and upon completion, proof of training shall be
submitted to the City of Bakersfield.
5.4.C.2 Upon the commencement of any ground disturbance related to project development,
a professionally trained and experienced paleontologist, retained by the project
applicant and approved by the City of Bakersfield shall implement a paleontological
resource impact mitigation and monitoring program during project-related earth
~ ~ AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-1 T
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc _m
cJ O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
moving activities. This paleontological resource impact mitigation and monitoring
program shall follow Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standard guidelines
(see Appendix D-3 of this Recirculated Recirculated Draft EIR) and include: pre-
construction coordination; construction monitoring; emergency discovery
procedures; sampling and data recovery; preparation; identification; and analysis of
any fossil specimens salvaged; museum storage of any specimens and data recovered;
and preparation of a final report to be delivered to the City of Bakersfield and other
interested parties.
5.4.C.3 During construction, earth moving activities shall be monitored by a qualified
paleontologist where the earth moving activities will disturb previously undisturbed
sediment potentially containing significant fossils. Monitoring shall be performed by
a qualified paleontological monitor retained by the project applicant and approved by
the City of Bakersfield, under the supervision of the project paleontologist.
Following SVP standard guidelines, once one-half of excavations are completed, if
no fossils have been discovered, monitoring can be reduced to half-time, quarter-
time, spot-checking, or suspended. Monitoring is not required in areas that sediments
have been previously disturbed. In areas where potential fossilferous sediments will
be buried, but not otherwise disturbed, a paleontological monitor shall examine
surface exposures prior to their being buried and the monitor shall salvage any
exposed fossils.
Compliance with Mitigation Measure 5A.C.1 through 5.4.C.3 will mitigate the cumulative impact
that the project will have on paleontological resources to less than significant.
References: Pages 6-23 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6 of Chapter I of
the Final EIR.
2.2.5 - Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact 6.3.7.A The proposed project will increase drainage and has the potential to degrade
surface water quality.
2.2.5.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact on surface water quality during
the construction phase.
Construction activities have the potential to increase runoff, erosion, and sedimentation that would
not otherwise occur. The construction phase has the greatest potential for pollution of ground water
and surface waters due to the fuel to operate construction vehicles. Similar to other development
2-166 Michael Brandman Associates AKF9
SA03-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
~ T
m
v O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance
projects, the proposed project will be required to obtain a National Pollution Discharge (NPDES)
permit, which will be supported through the implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Protection
Plan (SWPPP). Since the SWPPP has not been prepared for the proposed project, implementation of
the construction activities for the project may result in significant water quality impacts. These short-
term water quality impacts could contribute to significant cumulative water quality impacts. -
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort
has been made by the Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a
reasonable manner within 90 days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may
proceed with review and approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a
specific list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent
construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of
erosion from moving off site into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project
applicant shall provide evidence that the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the
State Water Resources Control Board. The NOI is a mechanism to establish
responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of the proposed operations. The BMPs
that will be included, but will be finalized with the preparation of the SWPPP,
include the following.
. Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
aAxF9
o ~
Michael Brandman Associates 2-16V _m
5903-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc U L
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via storm water. Solid waste
will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Compliance with Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1, where the project applicant shall prepare a Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the City of Bakersfield to approve will mitigate the
cumulative surface water quality impact of the proposed project to less than significant.
References: Pages 6-25 through 6-26 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6
of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
4 aAkF9
2-168 Michael Brandman Associates O'
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
F-- m
C~ Q
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
2.2.6 - Public Services
Impact 6.3.9.A The proposed project will increase the cumulative need for fire facilities, and the
project's contribution to cumulative impacts would be considered cumulatively
considerable.
2.2.6.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact related to the need of a new fire
station.
According to Bakersfield Fire Department staff, Fire Stations No. 1, 8, and 10 will not be able to
provide adequate fire services to serve the development of the proposed project and cumulative
development within the northeast Bakersfield area. Therefore, the proposed project will contribute to
a significant cumulative impact on fire protection services.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
6.3.9.A.1 Prior to recordation of a final map, project applicant shall enter into an agreement
with the City to set the parameters of the fair share funding to the City of Bakersfield
Fire Department for the construction and operation of a new fire station on Paladino
Drive, east of Morning Drive. The City of Bakersfield Fire Department has planned
for the new fire station to be staffed with 3 to 7 personnel and an engine and ladder
truck.
The implementation of Mitigation Measure 6.3.9.A.1 would result in the construction of a new fire
station servicing the area of the proposed project. Therefore, after mitigation the project impact
related to the need for fire facilities would be considered cumulatively less than significant.
References: Pages 6-30 in Section 6 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of
the Final EIR.
Impact 6.3.9.C The proposed project will result in a substantial increase in students on the project
site. Future developments in the project vicinity are also expected to substantially
increase students. The project's contribution to cumulative school impacts would
be considered cumulatively considerable.
`aAKF
'9J,
Michael Brandman Associates -c,
v O
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
2.2.6.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact related to the lack of school
capacityfor the incoming students from the proposed project and surrounding projects.
Implementation of the proposed project and future growth in the project vicinity is expected to result
in a substantial increase in residences as well as school-age children. The proposed project's
generation of 573 elementary students, 138 junior high students and 339 high school students will
increase Bakersfield School District and Kern High School District school services demand. The
project's increase in student population as well as the increase from cumulative projects would result
in significant cumulative school impacts, and the project's contribution would be considered
cumulatively considerable.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.C.1 In accordance with SB 50 and Proposition IA, prior to the issuance of building
permits, the project applicant shall pay Bakersfield City School District and Kern
High School District adopted development impact fees in accordance with the
statutory fees that are in effect at the time of issuing each permit.
The implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.9.C.1 would result in lowering the project's cumulative
school impact to less than significant.
References: Pages 6-31 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6 of Chapter I of
the Final EIR.
2.2.7 - Traffic and Transportation
Impact 6.3.11.A The proposed project will contribute to the cumulative increase in traffic and
exceed the City's level of service standard for intersections and roadways
2.2.7.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies apotentially cumulative significant impact on ten unsignalized intersections
under the 2016 plus project conditions.
~ .a A KF
~I-
2-170 Michael Brandman Associates
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc p
'?RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
To evaluate the cumulative impact of the project and future traffic growth on the transportation
network, traffic projections for the year 2016 with the proposed project was prepared and compared
to existing conditions. There are ten unsignalized intersections that will be significantly impacted
after project generated traffic and cumulative 2016 traffic is added to the existing and future
intersections. The intersections that will be significantly impacted are:
• Morning Drive and Spring Canyon Parkway (Evening peak hour degrades to a LOS F)
• Fairfax and Paladino Drive (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades from LOS A to LOS F
and Westbound: Evening peak hour degrades from to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and Paladino Drive (Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Vineland Road and Paladino Drive (Northbound: Evening peak hour degrades to LOS E)
• Morning Drive and Panorama Drive (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades from LOS A to
LOS F and Westbound: Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and Auburn Street (Evening peak hour degrades from LOS A to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and SR 178 (Westbound: Evening peak hour degrades to LOS E)
• Morning Drive and SR 178 (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Masterson Street and SR 178 (Northbound: Morning peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS
C and Evening peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS F and Southbound: Morning peak hour
degrades from LOS B to LOS C and Evening peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and College Avenue (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades to LOS D)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental 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.
6.3.11.A.I Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) program, paying the standard per-lot rate
for the residential portion of the project and the approved fixed fee for the
commercial portion of the development. Following are the RTIF program
improvements that are required to be implemented. The timing of implementing these
~3AKF~
o' s
Michael Brandman Associates 247f~m
M
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc 5 r
O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
CEQA Findings Canyons Fact
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
improvements are estimated *i.e., by 2030), however, the improvements shall be
completed as the significance thresholds are reached.
Year 2016
Intersections
No additional improvements beyond those identified in Mitigation Measures
5.11.A.1 and 5.11.A.2 are required.
6.3.11.A.2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall pay the
proportionate share for local mitigation improvements (those not covered by the
RTIF). The City shall collect such fees and incorporate them into the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP). Following are the local mitigation program
improvements that are required to be implemented. The timing of implementing these
improvements are estimated (i.e., 2030), however, the improvements shall be
completed as the significance thresholds are reached.
Year 2016
Intersections
No additional improvements beyond those identified in Mitigation Measures
5.11.A.I and 5.11.A.2 are required.
Implementation of extending Clearwater Canyon Place east to Morning Drive as
shown on the Alternative Site Plan requires the following additional mitigation
measure for the intersection of Fairfax Road and College Avenue:
2030
Fairfax Road and College Avenue: Add one northbound left turn lane and two
southbound right turn lanes.
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed above. The project specific mitigation
for Existing plus project and 2016 plus project will suffice in reducing traffic impacts to a less than
significant level. Refer to mitigation measures 6.3.11.A. I and 6.3.11.A.2 in Section 6 of the Final
EIR.
References: Pages 6-32 through 6-44 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6
of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.2.7.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact for six roadway segments under
the 2016 plus project conditions.
a~Ak~r
2-172 Michael Brandman Associates
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CounciASept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
C--' O
±)RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Six roadway segments will be significantly impacted after project generated traffic and cumulative
2016 traffic is added to the existing and future roadway segments. The roadway segments that will be
significantly impacted are:
• Morning Drive - Spring Canyon Parkway to Paladino Drive (Degraded to LOS F)
• Morning Drive - Paladino to SR 178 (Degraded from LOS A to LOS F)
• Morning Drive - Pioneer Drive to Niles Street (Degraded from LOS D to LOS F)
• SR 178 - Fairfax Road to Morning Drive (LOS B degrading to LOS F)
• SR 178 - Morning Drive to Vineland Road (LOS B degrading to LOS F)
• SR 178 - Vineland Road to Masterson Street (Degraded to LOS F)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(]), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental 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.
6.3.11.A.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) program, paying the standard per-lot rate
for the residential portion of the project and the approved fixed fee for the
commercial portion of the development. Following are the RTIF program
improvements that are required to be implemented. The timing of implementing these
improvements are estimated *i.e., by 2030), however, the improvements shall be
completed as the significance thresholds are reached.
Year 2016
Roadway Segments
• Morning Drive - Paladino Drive to SR 178 - Add two lanes.
• SR 178 - Vineland Road to Masterson Street - Add two lanes.
6.3.11.A.2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall pay the
proportionate share for local mitigation improvements (those not covered by the
RTIF). The City shall collect such fees and incorporate them into the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP). Following are the local mitigation program
improvements that are required to be implemented. The timing of implementing these
improvements are estimated (i.e., 2030), however, the improvements shall be
completed as the significance thresholds are reached.
~ ~AKF
Michael Brandman Associates 2"173 `J, 9J~
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
r_
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Year 2016
Roadway Segments
• Morning Drive - Pioneer Drive to Niles Street - Add two lanes.
• SR 178 - Morning Drive to Vineland Road - Add two lanes.
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed above. The project specific mitigation
for Existing plus project and 2016 plus project will suffice in reducing traffic impacts to a less than
significant level for roadway segments 1) Morning Drive: Spring Canyon Parkway to Paladino Drive
and 2) SR 178: Fairfax Road to Morning Drive. Refer to mitigation measures 6.3.11.A. I and
6.3.11.A.2 in Section 6 of the Final EIR regarding the other above identified mitigation
implementation.
References: Pages 6-32 through 6-44 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6
of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.2.7.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact to 15 unsignalized intersections
and 5 signalized intersections under the 2030 plus project conditions.
There are 15 unsignalized intersections and 6 signalized intersections that will be significantly
impacted after project generated traffic and cumulative 2030 traffic is added to the existing and future
intersections. The intersections that will be significantly impacted are:
• Morning Drive and Alfred Harrell Highway (Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Fairfax Road and Alfred Harrell Highway WB Ramp (Evening peak hour degrades from LOS
B to LOS F)
• Fairfax Road and Alfred Harrell Highway EB Ramp (Evening peak hour degrades from LOS A
to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and Spring Canyon Parkway (Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Fairfax Road and Paladino Drive (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades from LOS A to
LOS F and Westbound: Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and Paladino Drive (Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Vineland Road and Paladino Drive (Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Masterson Street and Paladino Drive (Evening peak hour degrades from LOS A to LOS F)
~ 2, A Kr9J
2-174 Michael Brandman Associates
S:103-0337 Canyons%City CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc R'
0
-)RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• Morning Drive and Panaroma Drive (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades from LOS A to
LOS F and Westbound: Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and Auburn Street (Evening peak hour degrades from LOS A to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and SR 178 WB (Morning peak hour degrades to LOS F and Evening peak
hour degrades to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and SR 178 EB (Morning peak hour degrades to LOS F and Evening peak hour
degrades to LOS F)
• Masterson Street and SR 178 (Northbound: Morning peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS
F and Evening peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS F; Southbound: Morning peak hour
degrades from LOS B to LOS F and Evening peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS F; and
Eastbound: Morning peak hour degrades to LOS F and Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and College Avenue (Eastbound: Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F and
Westbound: Evening peak hour degrades to LOS F)
• Fairfax Road and Panorama Drive (Evening peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS D)
• Fairfax Road and Auburn Street (Evening peak hour degrades from LOS B to LOS F)
• Fairfax Road and SR 178 (Evening peak hour degrades to LOS D)
• Alfred Harrell Highway and SR 178 (Morning peak hour degrades from LOS C to LOS E and
Evening peak hour degrades from LOS C to LOS F)
• Fairfax Road and Niles Street (Evening peak hour degrades from LOS C to LOS F)
• Morning Drive and Kern Canyon Road (Morning peak hour degrades from LOS C to LOS E
and Evening peak hour degrades from LOS C to LOS F)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental 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.
6.3.11.A.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) program, paying the standard per-lot rate
for the residential portion of the project and the approved fixed fee for the
s~
Michael Brandman Associates 2-175 ,
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
v O
ORIGINA[-
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
commercial portion of the development. Following are the RTIF program
improvements that are required to be implemented. The timing of implementing these
improvements are estimated *i.e., by 2030), however, the improvements shall be
completed as the significance thresholds are reached.
Year 2030
Intersections
The following intersection improvements are required in addition to those
improvements identified in Mitigation Measures 5.11.A.1 and 5.11.A.2.
• Morning Drive and Alfred Harrell Highway - Construct one westbound left
turn lane and one northbound right turn lane.
• Fairfax Road and Alfred Harrell Highway Westbound Ramp - Construct two
westbound left turn lanes, one westbound right turn lane and two northbound
left turn lanes.
• Fairfax Road and Paladino Drive - Construct one westbound left turn lane, one
westbound right turn lane, and one southbound left turn lane.
• Morning Drive and Paladino Drive - Construct one eastbound left turn lane,
one westbound left turn lane, one westbound right turn lane, and one
soutbound right turn lane.
• Vineland Road and Paladino Drive - Construct one eastbound through lane.
• Masterson Street and Paladino Drive - Install signal, construct one eastbound
turn lane, one westbound left turn lane, one northbound left turn lane, one
southbound left turn lane.
• Morning Drive and Panorama Drive - Construct one northbound through lane
and one southbound through lane.
• Morning Drive and SR 178 Eastbound - Construct one northbound through
lane and one eastbound left turn.
• Morning Drive and SR 178 - Add one westbound left turn lane.
• Masterson and SR 178 - Construct one eastbound left turn lane, one westbound
right turn lane one northbound left turn lane, one northbound through lane, one
northbound right turn lane, one southbound left turn lane and one southbound
through lane.
• Alfred Harrell Highway and SR 178 - Construct one eastbound through lane
and one westbound through lane.
• Morning Drive and College Avenue - Install signal and construct one
southbound left turn lane.
• Morning Drive and Kern Canyon Road - Construct one westbound left turn
lane, one westbound right turn lane, one northbound left turn lane, and one
northbound through lane.
< ~ AKF9
2-176 Michael Brandman Associates 8
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc m
J `J
URIGINAI
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• Fairfax Road and College Avenue: Add one northbound left turn lane and two
southbound right turn lanes. (Implementation of extending Clearwater Canyon
Place east to Morning Drive as shown on the Alternative Site Plan requires the
following additional mitigation measure for the intersection of Fairfax Road
and College Avenue)
6.3.11.A.2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall pay the
proportionate share for local mitigation improvements (those not covered by the
RTIF). The City shall collect such fees and incorporate them into the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP). Following are the local mitigation program
improvements that are required to be implemented. The timing of implementing these
improvements are estimated (i.e., 2030), however, the improvements shall be
completed as the significance thresholds are reached.
Year 2030
Intersections
The following intersection improvements are required in addition to those
improvements identified in Mitigation Measures 5.11.A.1 and 5.11.A.2.
• Fairfax Road and Alfred Harrell Highway Westbound Ramp - Install signal
• Fairfax Road and Alfred Harrell Highway Eastbound Ramp - Construct one
southbound left turn lane.
• Morning Drive and Alfred Harrell Highway - Install signal.
• Vineland Road and Paladino Drive - Construct one northbound left turn lane.
• Fairfax Road and Panorama Drive - Construct one southbound through lane.
• Morning Drive and Panorama Drive - Construct one eastbound through lane
and one westbound through lane.
• Fairfax Road and Auburn Street - Construct one eastbound left turn lane, one
westbound left turn lane, one westbound right turn lane, one northbound left
turn lane and one southbound through lane.
• Fairfax and SR 178 Eastbound Ramp - Construct one eastbound right turn
lane, one northbound through lane and one southbound left turn lane.
• Morning Drive and College Avenue - Construct one eastbound left turn lane,
one westbound left turn lane, and one northbound left turn lane.
• Morning Drive and Kern Canyon Road - Construct one eastbound left turn
lane, one eastbound right turn lane, one southbound left turn lane and one
southbound through lane.
• Fairfax Road and College Avenue: Add one northbound left turn lane and two
southbound right turn lanes. (Implementation of extending Clearwater Canyon
Place east to Morning Drive as shown on the Alternative Site Plan requires the
AKe~~~
Michael Brandman Associates 2-177 r-
om
S A03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
following additional mitigation measure for the intersection of Fairfax Road
and College Avenue)
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed above. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures 6.3.1 LA.] and 6.3.11.A.2 located in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR are required.
References: Pages 6-32 through 6-44 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6
of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, and Response to Comment E-4 in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR.
Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact on I1 roadway segments under
the 2030 plus project conditions.
There are eleven roadway segments that will be significantly impacted after project generated traffic
and cumulative 2030 traffic is added to the existing and future roadway segments. The roadway
segments that will be significantly impacted are:
• Fairfax Road - Alfred Harrell Highway to Paladino Drive (Degraded from LOS A to LOS F)
• Fairfax Road - Panorama Drive to Auburn Street (Degraded from LOS A to LOS E )
• Morning Drive - Spring Canyon Parkway - Paladino Drive (Degraded to LOS F)
• Morning Drive - Paladino Drive to SR 178 (Degraded from LOS A to LOS F)
• Morning Drive - Niles Street to Pioneer Drive (Degraded from LOS D to LOS F)
• Alfred Harrell Highway - China Grade to Fairfax Road (Degraded from LOS A to LOS E)
• SR 178 - Oswell Street to Fairfax Road (Degraded from LOS A to LOS F)
• SR 178 - Fairfax Road to Morning Drive (Degraded from LOS B to LOS F)
• SR 178 - Morning Drive to Vineland Road (Degraded from LOS B to LOS F)
• SR 178 - Vineland Road to Masterson Street (Degraded to LOS F)
• SR 178 - Masterson Street to Comanche Drive (Degraded to LOS F)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental 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.
AKe
2-178 Michael Brandman Associates
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc n,
v
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
6.3.11.A.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) program, paying the standard per-lot rate
for the residential portion of the project and the approved fixed fee for the
commercial portion of the development. Following are the RTIF program
improvements that are required to be implemented. The timing of implementing these
improvements are estimated *i.e., by 2030), however, the improvements shall be
completed as the significance thresholds are reached.
Year 2030
Roadway Segments
The following intersection improvements are required in addition to those
improvements identified in Mitigation Measures 5.1 LA.1 and 5.11.A.2 and those
improvements identified under the existing with project, 2016 cumulative and 2030
cumulative scenario above.
• Fairfax Road: Alfred Harrell Highway to Paladino Drive: Add two lanes.
• Morning Drive - Paladino Drive to SR 178: Add two lanes.
• SR 178 - Fairfax Road to Morning Drive: Add two lanes.
• SR 178 - Vineland Road to Masterson Street: Add two lanes.
• SR 178 - Masterson Street to Comanche Drive: Add two lanes.
6.3.11.A.2 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall pay the
proportionate share for local mitigation improvements (those not covered by the
RTIF). The City shall collect such fees and incorporate them into the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP). Following are the local mitigation program
improvements that are required to be implemented. The timing of implementing these
improvements are estimated (i.e., 2030), however, the improvements shall be
completed as the significance thresholds are reached.
Year 2030
Roadway Segments
The following intersection improvements are required in addition to those
improvements identified in Mitigation Measures 5.11.A.1 and 5.11.A.2 and those
improvements identified under the existing with project, 2016 cumulative and 2030
cumulative scenario above.
• Fairfax Road: Alfred Harrell Highway to Paladino Drive: Add two lanes.
• Alfred Harrell Highway: China Grade to Fairfax Road: Add two lanes.
• SR 178 - Oswell Street to Fairfax Road: Add two lanes.
• SR 178 - Vineland Road to Masterson Street: Add two lanes.
• SR 178 - Masterson Street to Comanche Drive: Add two lanes.
Michael Brandman Associates 2-179,_ rn
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc ,J
O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed above. Refer to mitigation measures
6.3.11.A.I and 6.3.11.A.2 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR regarding the identified -
mitigation implementation.
References: Pages 6-32 through 6-44 in Section 6 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6
of Chapter I of the Final EIR.
2.2.8 - Utilities and Service Systems
Impact 6.3.123 The implementation of the proposed project as well as other future development in
the project vicinity will result in the construction of new water facilities which could
cause environmental effects.
2.2.8.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact related to the environmental
impacts caused by the construction of new water facilities.
The proposed project and cumulative development will result in the need for additional water
facilities. These water facilities will include onsite and offsite facilities. The proposed water
facilities on and off the project site (i.e., water lines and pump stations) are proposed within planned
roadway rights-of-way. The environmental effects associated with the proposed roadways as well as
the water facilities have been addressed as part of the project in Section 5, Project Impacts, and
Section 6, Cumulative Impacts, of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR. The potential environmental effects
associated with the proposed water facilities include air quality, biological resources, cultural
resources, and water quality. These potential air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and
water quality impacts are considered significant. Since the project's potential environmental effects
are significant, the project could contribute to potential significant cumulative air quality, biological
resources, cultural resources, and water quality impacts associated with the construction of new water
facilities.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
2-180 Michael Brandman Associates YJ,
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc CI
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.8.1, 5.2.C.1, and 5.2.C.2 are required to reduce potential
air quality impacts.
5.2.8.1 Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City
of Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that all
construction activities and operations will comply with local zoning codes, and
District Regulation VIII (Rules 8011-8081), and Rule 9510. These regulations
include, but not limited to, the following:
5.2.C.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation Il, specifically, the
project will be subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part
of the SJVAPCD permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's
offsetting thresholds would have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary
source by stationary source basis.
In addition to adherence to SJVAPCD rules and regulations, the following mitigation measure/design
feature has been designed to reduce emissions to below a level of significance:
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply in all respects
with developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement
approved by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance
with the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of
ROG, NO,,, and PM1o net emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully mitigate
the project's air quality impacts to the extent that the development of the project will
result in no net increase in criteria pollutant emissions over the criteria pollutant
emissions which would otherwise exist without the development of the project, all to
be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the Voluntary Emissions Reduction
Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net emissions by 23.81
tons per year (from 23.81 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NO,. net emissions
by 24.60 tons per year (from 24.60 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce PM1o net
emissions by 25.12 tons per year (from 25.12 tons per year to 0 tons per year); and
reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 5.71 tons per year (from 5.71 tons per year to 0 tons
per year). The following additional design features for the project shall be
implemented::
s
Michael Brandman Associates 2-18it
r
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel.
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
• Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
• Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
1. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission
reduction projects
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.1, 5.3.A.3, and 5.3.A.5 through 5.3.A.8 are required to
reduce potential biological resources impacts.
5.3.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a Habitat
Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code and the Implementation/Management Agreement for the MBHCP or
equivalent program or measure as approved by the wildlife agencies.
5.3.A.3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with all
appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP regarding San Joaquin kit fox. In
order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below, the
Michael Brandman Associates O cP~
2-182
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
U p
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City agency (as identified by
the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented. Impacts to
San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat are permitted by the MBHCP, however, the
MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin kit fox,
including known dens for this species. The MBHCP and USFWS guidelines
regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox
in dens. The following specific measures during pre-construction and the
construction phase of the project shall be implemented:
Pre-Construction Survey Mitigation Measures
• Preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days
and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or
construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin
kit fox. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
prior to site grading to identify active dens of protected species and to ensure
appropriate and necessary take avoidance measures are implemented for the
San Joaquin kit fox. A qualified biologist means any person who has
completed at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a
related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification
and life history of the San Joaquin kit fox. If active San Joaquin kit fox dens
are identified during the pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist shall
submit to the City of Bakersfield a protection and avoidance plan that
incorporates the USFWS standardized recommendations for protection and
avoidance to ensure that no San Joaquin kit fox are entrapped in the occupied
den.
• Written results of preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be submitted to the
City within five days after survey completion and prior to the start of ground
disturbance and/or construction activities. No clearing, grubbing or grading
shall commence until the preconstruction surveys are finalized and submitted
to the City for approval. Specific measures for protection and avoidance for
San Joaquin kit fox are provided below.
Pre-Construction Avoidance Mitigation Measures
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), circular exclusion zones shall be established by a
qualified biologist around all potential San Joaquin kit fox dens identified and
shall include a radius of no less than 50 feet. This radius shall be expanded to
100 feet for all known dens. If the pre-construction survey identifies any natal
or pupping dens, the qualified biologist shall contact the USFWS. Natal or
pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and ` AK4
Q), 01
U r-
Michael Brandman Associates 2-181-- m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the USFWS. For
known dens, exclusion zone fencing shall be maintained until all construction
related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all
fencing shall be removed to avoid attracting subsequent attention to the den.
For potential and atypical dens, placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 feet from
the den entrance shall demarcate the location of the den. The exclusion zone
for potential and atypical dens do not require fencing, however the exclusion
area shall be observed by the biologist. No construction, vehicle operation,
material storage, or any other type of surface disturbing activity shall be
allowed within the exclusion zones.
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), disturbance to all San Joaquin kit fox dens should be
avoided to the maximum extent possible. Limited destruction of kit fox dens
may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative. If no reasonable
alternative is feasible other than the destruction of the den, the known kit fox
dens located on the project site that will be destroyed shall be excavated and
destroyed under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist. Prior to the
destruction of dens, the dens shall be monitored for at least three (3)
consecutive days to determine whether the den is active or dormant. Activity
at the den can be monitored by placing tracking medium at den entrances and
by spot lighting. If no den activity is observed during this period, the den
should be destroyed immediately pursuant to the den destruction procedures
set forth below.
Destruction of dens shall be accomplished by careful excavation with hand
tools until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den shall be fully
excavated and back filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes
cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period.
If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal
shall be allowed to escape unhindered, or, to the extent feasible, representatives
from CDFG and/or USFWS shall be contacted to attempt to relocate kit fox
pursuant to the MBHCP. As part of the Implementation Trust to the MBHCP,
the City, CDFG, and/or USFWS are required to gather data on the success of
relocation activities from those engaged in relocation. The City, CDFG, and/or
USFWS may encourage relocation activities to include radio collaring or other
monitoring research by the Endangered Species Recovery Program (ESRP) in
the gathering of data on the success of relocation.
Construction Mitigation Measures
4 3AKF
2-184 Michael Brandman Associates O'
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• The project proponent shall provide for a sensitive species identification and
avoidance education program for all construction employees that consists of a
consultation in which persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative
protection shall explain endangered species protocols, habitat needs, and the
measures and conditions of approval being taken to reduce impacts to the
species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet
conveying this information shall be prepared for distribution to all contractors,
their employees, and any and all other personnel who are working on the
construction site. A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent
who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might
inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped
individual. The representative will be identified during the employee
education program. The representative's name and telephone number shall be
provided to the USFWS.
• To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes during the construction phase
of the project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet
deep shall be covered by construction site personnel, and under the direction of
the construction supervisor, at the close of each working day by plywood or
similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of
earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall
be fully inspected for trapped kit foxes by construction site personnel. If at
any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, representatives from CDFG
or USFWS, or permitted and qualified biologists from local research groups
such as the ESRP, shall be contacted immediately to attempt to relocate the kit
fox pursuant to the MBHCP, and if encouraged by the CDFG or USFWS,
attempt to collar the kit fox pursuant to applicable protocol. In the case of
trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to
allow trapped animals to escape.
• The construction site manager shall ensure that all pipes, culverts, or similar
structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater shall be kept capped or
otherwise covered to prevent injury of kit foxes. If such pipes, culverts or
similar structures are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected
daily prior to burial or closure to prevent entrapment of kit fox or other
sensitive species.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that all food, garbage in plastic shall
be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the site to
minimize attracting kit foxes and other sensitive species to the site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that no dogs, cats, or other animals
are permitted on the project site.
`aAKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-185
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc _ m
'ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that a zinc phosphide based
rodenticide shall be used, if rodent control is deemed necessary during
construction.
Night time construction shall be prohibited. In addition, all construction vehicles shall observe a 20
mph speed limit on the project site and developer shall create established staging, parking and storage
areas to ensure the prevention of accidental direct impacts and takes of kit foxes.
5.3.A.5 Implementation of the following mitigation measures will ensure compliance with
the MBTA and CFG Code for protected nesting bird species. Prior to the issuance of
a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with the following measures
regarding nesting migratory bird species, including the burrowing owl, protected
under the MBTA and CFG Code:
• If site grading is proposed during the general breeding season for nesting birds
that are protected under the MBTA and CFG Code(February 1 through August
31), a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
within 30 days prior to grading activities within any project impact area in
order to identify all active nests in areas impacted throughout project
construction and implementation. If an active nest is identified during the pre-
construction survey, no construction activity shall take place within a
minimum of 200 feet of any active nest until the young have fledged (as
determined by a qualified biologist) and the nest is no longer determined to be
active, or until another distance is recommended by a qualified biologist, and
approved by the Planning Director. This distance shall be expanded to 500
feet for any nesting raptor species excluding the burrowing owl, for which
specific mitigation is provided below. Construction activity in the vicinity of
any active nest shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring
biologist who may reduce the size of or eliminate a buffer otherwise required
by this measure for individual nests. Nesting habitat that must be removed as a
result of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding
season which is defined herein as approximately September 1 through January
31. Habitat may be removed at any time during the breeding or non-breeding
season if a qualified biologist determines after a pre-construction survey that
there are no active nests and no nesting birds in the area that could potentially
be affected by construction activities in violation of the MBTA and CFG Code.
• Pre-construction surveys shall include a survey for burrowing owl and
according to recommended protocol by the California Burrowing Owl
Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995). If active burrowing owl burrows are
detected during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), no
G3AKF
2-186 Michael Brandman Associates O' 9J,
a T
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
construction activity shall take place within 250 feet of any active nest until it
is determined by a qualified biologist that all juvenile burrowing owls
associated with any active nest are foraging independently and capable of
independent survival. Construction activity in the vicinity of any active nest
shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring biologist.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside of breeding season (September 1 through
January 31), passive relocation efforts may be undertaken in accordance with recommended protocol
by the California Burrowing Owl Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995).
5.3.A.6 The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered
under the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, shall
be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected
species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately
to the USFWS and CDFG.
5.3.A.7 An environmental liaison shall be retained by the project proponent and identified in
writing to USFWS, CDFG and the City of Bakersfield. The environmental liaison's
qualifications shall consist of the following (minimum requirements), completion of
at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and
has demonstrated field experience in the San Joaquin Valley. The environmental
liaison will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the environmental mitigation
and take avoidance measures. Subject to the approval of the appropriate City
Agency, the environmental liaison shall draft and prepare an Environmental
Education and Compliance Plan that is consistent with the mitigation measures
presented herein. The Environmental Education and Compliance Plan will be used to
train employees and contractors to ensure that the required environmental compliance
measures are implemented. A pre-construction training session shall be held to
ensure all responsible parties are aware of what the environmental protection and
mitigations are and how to ensure that they are implemented. The project proponent
shall submit to the City of Bakersfield proof of attendance by site employees of the
pre-construction training session.
On a monthly basis, the environmental liaison shall prepare a report that details the
implementation of the environmental protection and mitigation measures. Any
failure of measures to be effective shall be reported as they occur. The liaison shall
suggest improvements and changes as possible, and will coordinate any revision of
environmental protection and mitigation measures with the Applicant, the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, as appropriate.
~ 3AKF9s
T
Michael Brandman Associates 2-1,*7
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r
U O
ORIGINAL
i
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
5.3.A.8 The following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented
during all construction phases of the proposed project to further reduce potential
direct and indirect impacts to special status species and their habitat to less than
significant:
• Prior to any grading activities, the project proponent shall install the
appropriate fencing adjacent to all designated open space areas delineating the
limits of grading. This includes the installation of construction snow fencing,
silt fencing, and/or temporary chain-linked or other such fencing around the
perimeter of any active construction zone adjacent to designated open space
areas. Fencing shall be installed by the project proponent, inspected for
efficacy (by a qualified biologist), and repaired by the project proponent on an
on-going basis during all phases of development.
Construction vehicles shall carry fire extinguishers or other fire retardants or equipment to enhance
the prevention and control of any unplanned man-caused fires.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5A.C.I through 5.4.C.3 and 5.3.D.1 are required to reduce
potential cultural resources impacts.
5.4.C.1 Prior to the start of any ground disturbance related to project development and as
needed during on-going ground disturbance, construction personnel involved with
earth moving activities shall be informed that fossils may be encountered, and shall
be educated on the appearance of fossils, the laws protecting fossils, the
consequences of not abiding those laws, and the proper notification procedures in the
event that a fossil is discovered. This construction personnel training shall be
conducted by a qualified paleontologist, retained by the project applicant and
approved by the City of Bakersfield, and upon completion, proof of training shall be
submitted to the City of Bakersfield.
5.4.0.2 Upon the commencement of any ground disturbance related to project development,
a professionally trained and experienced paleontologist, retained by the project
applicant and approved by the City of Bakersfield shall implement a paleontological
resource impact mitigation and monitoring program during project-related earth
moving activities. This paleontological resource impact mitigation and monitoring
program shall follow Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standard guidelines
(see Appendix D-3 of this Recirculated Recirculated Draft EIR) and include: pre-
construction coordination; construction monitoring; emergency discovery
procedures; sampling and data recovery; preparation; identification; and analysis of
any fossil specimens salvaged; museum storage of any specimens and data recovered;
2-188 Michael Brandman Associates O' ` c
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
o
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
and preparation of a final report to be delivered to the City of Bakersfield and other
interested parties.
5.4.C.3 During construction, earth moving activities shall be monitored by a qualified
paleontologist where the earth moving activities will disturb previously undisturbed
sediment potentially containing significant fossils. Monitoring shall be performed by
a qualified paleontological monitor retained by the project applicant and approved by
the City of Bakersfield, under the supervision of the project paleontologist.
Following SVP standard guidelines, once one-half of excavations are completed, if
no fossils have been discovered, monitoring can be reduced to half-time, quarter-
time, spot-checking, or suspended. Monitoring is not required in areas that sediments
have been previously disturbed. In areas where potential fossilferous sediments will
be buried, but not otherwise disturbed, a paleontological monitor shall examine
surface exposures prior to their being buried and the monitor shall salvage any
exposed fossils.
5.4.13.1 The project applicant shall immediately suspend any further excavation or
disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent
human remains and shall contact the Kern County Coroner should the discovery or
recognition of human remains occur. The following actions shall be undertaken.
• There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby
area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
- The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered must be
contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is
required, and
- If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
0 The coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours.
0 The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be
the most likely descended from the deceased Native American.
0 The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for
means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the
human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or
• Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized
representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated
grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject
to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98(e).
- The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent.
~ ~~KF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-18
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
- The most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC, fails to make a
recommendation within 24 hours of being granted access to the site; or
The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and a
mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 is required to reduce potential water quality impacts.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. The SWPPP will also be submitted to the
California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment to the City prior to
City approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort has been made by the
Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a reasonable manner within 90
days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may proceed with review and
approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a specific list of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent construction pollutants
from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of erosion from moving off site
into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project applicant shall provide evidence that
the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the State Water Resources Control Board.
The NOI is a mechanism to establish responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of
the proposed operations. The BMPs that will be included, but will be finalized with
the preparation of the SWPPP, include the following.
• Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
AKr9
2-190 Michael Brandman Associates
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
m
-)RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.B.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via storm water. Solid waste
will be collected, contained and hauled away.
Impacts listed under the aforementioned 6.3.12.B impact statement can be reduced to less than
significant by addressing the necessary mitigation measures listed above. These mitigation measures
will reduce potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and water quality
to less than significant.
References: Pages 6-45 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of
the Final EIR, and Reponses to Comments G- 1, C-8, and C-9 in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR.
Impact 6.3.12.C The implementation of the proposed project as well as other future development in
the project vicinity will not result in the construction of new wastewater facilities
which could cause significant environmental effects.
gAK' 9q
Michael Brandman Associates 2-191 iw
i m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc v Or
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
2.2.8.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact related to the environmental
impacts caused by the construction of new sewer facilities.
The proposed project and cumulative development will result in the need for additional sewer
facilities to connect to the existing sewer system. These additional sewer facilities will include onsite
and offsite facilities. The proposed sewer facilities on and off the project site (i.e., sewer lines and
pump stations) are proposed within planned roadway rights-of-way. The environmental effects
associated with the proposed roadways as well as the sewer facilities have been addressed as part of
the project in Section 5, Project Impacts, and Section 6, Cumulative Impacts, of Chapter 1 of the Final
EIR. The potential environmental effects associated with the proposed sewer facilities include air
quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and water quality. These potential air quality,
biological resources, cultural resources, and water quality impacts are considered significant. Since
the project's potential environmental effects are significant, the project could contribute to potential
significant cumulative air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and water quality impacts
associated with the construction of new sewer facilities.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.2.8.1 Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City
of Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that all
construction activities and operations will comply with local zoning codes, and
District Regulation VIII (Rules 8011-8081), and Rule 9510. These regulations
include, but not limited to, the following:
5.2.C.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation II, specifically, the
project will be subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part
of the SJVAPCD permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's
offsetting thresholds would have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary
source by stationary source basis.
In addition to adherence to SJVAPCD rules and regulations, the following mitigation measure/design
feature has been designed to reduce emissions to below a level of significance:
2.192 Michael Brandman Associates < 6 A KF9
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
'QIGiNA~
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply in all respects
with developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement
approved by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance
with the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of
ROG, NO,, and PMIO net emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully mitigate
the project's air quality impacts to the extent that the development of the project will
result in no net increase in criteria pollutant emissions over the criteria pollutant
emissions which would otherwise exist without the development of the project, all to
be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the Voluntary Emissions Reduction
Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net emissions by 23.81
tons per year (from 23.81 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NO,, net emissions
by 24.60 tons per year (from 24.60 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce PMIo net
emissions by 25.12 tons per year (from 25.12 tons per year to 0 tons per year); and
reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 5.71 tons per year (from 5.71 tons per year to 0 tons
per year). The following additional design features for the project shall be
implemented:
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel.
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
• Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
• Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
I . SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission
reduction projects o~ A KF9~
Michael Brandman Associates 2-193 L m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc v ~
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.1, 5.3.A.3, and 5.3.A.5 through 5.3.A.8 are required to
reduce potential biological resources impacts.
5.3.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a Habitat
Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code and the Implementation/Management Agreement for the MBHCP or
equivalent program or measure as approved by the wildlife agencies.
5.3.A.3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with all
appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP regarding San Joaquin kit fox. In
order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below, the
project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City agency (as identified by
the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented. Impacts to
San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat are permitted by the MBHCP, however, the
MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin kit fox,
including known dens for this species. The MBHCP and USFWS guidelines
regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox
in dens. The following specific measures during pre-construction and the
construction phase of the project shall be implemented:
Pre-Construction Survey Mitigation Measures
• Preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days
and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or
construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin
kit fox. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
prior to site grading to identify active dens of protected species and to ensure
appropriate and necessary take avoidance measures are implemented for the
San Joaquin kit fox. A qualified biologist means any person who has
completed at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a
related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification
and life history of the San Joaquin kit fox. If active San Joaquin kit fox dens
are identified during the pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist shall
submit to the City of Bakersfield a protection and avoidance plan that
incorporates the USFWS standardized recommendations for protection and
aa+~r
2-194 Michael Brandman Associates 0 9~
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
rn
r
V U
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
avoidance to ensure that no San Joaquin kit fox are entrapped in the occupied
den.
• Written results of preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be submitted to the
City within five days after survey completion and prior to the start of ground
disturbance and/or construction activities. No clearing, grubbing or grading
shall commence until the preconstruction surveys are finalized and submitted
to the City for approval. Specific measures for protection and avoidance for
San Joaquin kit fox are provided below.
Pre-Construction Avoidance Mitigation Measures
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), circular exclusion zones shall be established by a
qualified biologist around all potential San Joaquin kit fox dens identified and
shall include a radius of no less than 50 feet. This radius shall be expanded to
100 feet for all known dens. If the pre-construction survey identifies any natal
or pupping dens, the qualified biologist shall contact the USFWS. Natal or
pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and
adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the USFWS. For
known dens, exclusion zone fencing shall be maintained until all construction
related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all
fencing shall be removed to avoid attracting subsequent attention to the den.
For potential and atypical dens, placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 feet from
the den entrance shall demarcate the location of the den. The exclusion zone
for potential and atypical dens do not require fencing, however the exclusion
area shall be observed by the biologist. No construction, vehicle operation,
material storage, or any other type of surface disturbing activity shall be
allowed within the exclusion zones.
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), disturbance to all San Joaquin kit fox dens should be
avoided to the maximum extent possible. Limited destruction of kit fox dens
may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative. If no reasonable
alternative is feasible other than the destruction of the den, the known kit fox
dens located on the project site that will be destroyed shall be excavated and
destroyed under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist. Prior to the
destruction of dens, the dens shall be monitored for at least three (3)
consecutive days to determine whether the den is active or dormant. Activity
at the den can be monitored by placing tracking medium at den entrances and
~3AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-1
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciASept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc f M
U r
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
by spot lighting. If no den activity is observed during this period, the den
should be destroyed immediately pursuant to the den destruction procedures
set forth below.
Destruction of dens shall be accomplished by careful excavation with hand
tools until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den shall be fully
excavated and back filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes
cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period.
If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal
shall be allowed to escape unhindered, or, to the extent feasible, representatives
from CDFG and/or USFWS shall be contacted to attempt to relocate kit fox
pursuant to the MBHCP. As part of the Implementation Trust to the MBHCP,
the City, CDFG, and/or USFWS are required to gather data on the success of
relocation activities from those engaged in relocation. The City, CDFG, and/or
USFWS may encourage relocation activities to include radio collaring or other
monitoring research by the Endangered Species Recovery Program (ESRP) in
the gathering of data on the success of relocation.
Construction Mitigation Measures
• The project proponent shall provide for a sensitive species identification and
avoidance education program for all construction employees that consists of a
consultation in which persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative
protection shall explain endangered species protocols, habitat needs, and the
measures and conditions of approval being taken to reduce impacts to the
species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet
conveying this information shall be prepared for distribution to all contractors,
their employees, and any and all other personnel who are working on the
construction site. A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent
who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might
inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped
individual. The representative will be identified during the employee
education program. The representative's name and telephone number shall be
provided to the USFWS.
• To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes during the construction phase
of the project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet
deep shall be covered by construction site personnel, and under the direction of
the construction supervisor, at the close of each working day by plywood or
similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of
earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall
be fully inspected for trapped kit foxes by construction site personnel. If at
any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, representatives from CDFG
2-196 Michael Brandman Associates a A KF9
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc « J,~
m
r
p
_)RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
or USFWS, or permitted and qualified biologists from local research groups
such as the ESRP, shall be contacted immediately to attempt to relocate the kit
fox pursuant to the MBHCP, and if encouraged by the CDFG or USFWS,
attempt to collar the kit fox pursuant to applicable protocol. In the case of
trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to
allow trapped animals to escape.
• The construction site manager shall ensure that all pipes, culverts, or similar
structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater shall be kept capped or
otherwise covered to prevent injury of kit foxes. If such pipes, culverts or
similar structures are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected
daily prior to burial or closure to prevent entrapment of kit fox or other
sensitive species.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that all food, garbage in plastic shall
be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the site to
minimize attracting kit foxes and other sensitive species to the site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that no dogs, cats, or other animals
are permitted on the project site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that a zinc phosphide based
rodenticide shall be used, if rodent control is deemed necessary during
construction.
Night time construction shall be prohibited. In addition, all construction vehicles shall observe a 20
mph speed limit on the project site and developer shall create established staging, parking and storage
areas to ensure the prevention of accidental direct impacts and takes of kit foxes.
5.3.A.5 Implementation of the following mitigation measures will ensure compliancc with
the MBTA and CFG Code for protected nesting bird species. Prior to the issuance of
a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with the following measures
regarding nesting migratory bird species, including the burrowing owl, protected
under the MBTA and CFG Code:
• If site grading is proposed during the general breeding season for nesting birds
that are protected under the MBTA and CFG Code(February I through August
31), a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
within 30 days prior to grading activities within any project impact area in
order to identify all active nests in areas impacted throughout project
construction and implementation. If an active nest is identified during the pre-
construction survey, no construction activity shall take place within a
minimum of 200 feet of any active nest until the young have fledged (as
determined by a qualified biologist) and the nest is no longer determined to be
active, or until another distance is recommended by a qualified biologist, and ^<~'aKF9
s~
Michael Brandman Associates 2-193
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r
c~ O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
approved by the Planning Director. This distance shall be expanded to 500
feet for any nesting raptor species excluding the burrowing owl, for which
specific mitigation is provided below. Construction activity in the vicinity of
any active nest shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring
biologist who may reduce the size of or eliminate a buffer otherwise required
by this measure for individual nests. Nesting habitat that must be removed as a
result of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding
season which is defined herein as approximately September I through January
31. Habitat may be removed at any time during the breeding or non-breeding
season if a qualified biologist determines after a pre-construction survey that
there are no active nests and no nesting birds in the area that could potentially
be affected by construction activities in violation of the MBTA and CFG Code.
• Pre-construction surveys shall include a survey for burrowing owl and
according to recommended protocol by the California Burrowing Owl
Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995). If active burrowing owl burrows are
detected during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), no
construction activity shall take place within 250 feet of any active nest until it
is determined by a qualified biologist that all juvenile burrowing owls
associated with any active nest are foraging independently and capable of
independent survival. Construction activity in the vicinity of any active nest
shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring biologist.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside of breeding season (September l through
January 31), passive relocation efforts may be undertaken in accordance with recommended protocol
by the California Burrowing Owl Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995).
5.3.A.6 The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered
under the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, shall
be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected
species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately
to the USFWS and CDFG.
5.3.A.7 An environmental liaison shall be retained by the project proponent and identified in
writing to USFWS, CDFG and the City of Bakersfield. The environmental liaison's
qualifications shall consist of the following (minimum requirements), completion of
at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and
has demonstrated field experience in the San Joaquin Valley. The environmental
liaison will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the environmental mitigation
and take avoidance measures. Subject to the approval of the appropriate City
4a~xF9
2-198 Michael Brandman Associates 0
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Agency, the environmental liaison shall draft and prepare an Environmental
Education and Compliance Plan that is consistent with the mitigation measures
presented herein. The Environmental Education and Compliance Plan will be used to
train employees and contractors to ensure that the required environmental compliance
measures are implemented. A pre-construction training session shall be held to
ensure all responsible parties are aware of what the environmental protection and
mitigations are and how to ensure that they are implemented. The project proponent
shall submit to the City of Bakersfield proof of attendance by site employees of the
pre-construction training session.
On a monthly basis, the environmental liaison shall prepare a report that details the
implementation of the environmental protection and mitigation measures. Any
failure of measures to be effective shall be reported as they occur. The liaison shall
suggest improvements and changes as possible, and will coordinate any revision of
environmental protection and mitigation measures with the Applicant, the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, as appropriate.
5.3.A.8 The following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented
during all construction phases of the proposed project to further reduce potential
direct and indirect impacts to special status species and their habitat to less than
significant:
• Prior to any grading activities, the project proponent shall install the
appropriate fencing adjacent to all designated open space areas delineating the
limits of grading. This includes the installation of construction snow fencing,
silt fencing, and/or temporary chain-linked or other such fencing around the
perimeter of any active construction zone adjacent to designated open space
areas. Fencing shall be installed by the project proponent, inspected for
efficacy (by a qualified biologist), and repaired by the project proponent on an
on-going basis during all phases of development.
Construction vehicles shall carry fire extinguishers or other fire retardants or equipment to enhance
the prevention and control of any unplanned man-caused fires.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5A.C.I through 5.4.C.3 and 5.3.D.1 are required to reduce
potential cultural resources impacts.
5.4.C.1 Prior to the start of any ground disturbance related to project development and as
needed during on-going ground disturbance, construction personnel involved with
earth moving activities shall be informed that fossils may be encountered, and shall
be educated on the appearance of fossils, the laws protecting fossils, the
consequences of not abiding those laws, and the proper notification procedures in the
~gAK~c9
Michael Brandman Associates
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rn
r
`ORIGINAL
AKF9~
m
~ r
V O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
event that a fossil is discovered. This construction personnel training shall be
conducted by a qualified paleontologist, retained by the project applicant and
approved by the City of Bakersfield, and upon completion, proof of training shall be
submitted to the City of Bakersfield.
5.4.C.2 Upon the commencement of any ground disturbance related to project development,
a professionally trained and experienced paleontologist, retained by the project
applicant and approved by the City of Bakersfield shall implement a paleontological
resource impact mitigation and monitoring program during project-related earth
moving activities. This paleontological resource impact mitigation and monitoring
program shall follow Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standard guidelines
(see Appendix D-3 of this Recirculated Draft EIR) and include: pre-construction
coordination; construction monitoring; emergency discovery procedures; sampling
and data recovery; preparation; identification; and analysis of any fossil specimens
salvaged; museum storage of any specimens and data recovered; and preparation of a
final report to be delivered to the City of Bakersfield and other interested parties.
5.4.C.3 During construction, earth moving activities shall be monitored by a qualified
paleontologist where the earth moving activities will disturb previously undisturbed
sediment potentially containing significant fossils. Monitoring shall be performed by
a qualified paleontological monitor retained by the project applicant and approved by
the City of Bakersfield, under the supervision of the project paleontologist.
Following SVP standard guidelines, once one-half of excavations are completed, if
no fossils have been discovered, monitoring can be reduced to half-time, quarter-
time, spot-checking, or suspended. Monitoring is not required in areas that sediments
have been previously disturbed. In areas where potential fossilferous sediments will
be buried, but not otherwise disturbed, a paleontological monitor shall examine
surface exposures prior to their being buried and the monitor shall salvage any
exposed fossils.
5.4.D.1 The project applicant shall immediately suspend any further excavation or disturbance of the
site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains and shall
contact the Kern County Coroner should the discovery or recognition of human remains
occur. The following actions shall be undertaken.
• There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby
area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
- The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered must be
contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is
required, and
- If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
0 The coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours.
2-200 Michael Brandman Associates j T
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc R,
v ~
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
0 The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be
the most likely descended from the deceased Native American.
0 The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for
means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the
human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or
• Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized
representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated
grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject
to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98(e).
- The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent.
- The most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC, fails to make a
recommendation within 24 hours of being granted access to the site; or
The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and a
mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 is required to reduce potential water quality impacts.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. The SWPPP will also be submitted to the
California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment to the City prior to
City approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort has been made by the
Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a reasonable manner within 90
days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may proceed with review and
approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a specific list of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent construction pollutants
from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of erosion from moving off site
into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project applicant shall provide evidence that
the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the State Water Resources Control Board.
The NO] is a mechanism to establish responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of
the proposed operations. The BMPs that will be included, but will be finalized with
the preparation of the SWPPP, include the following.
• Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
~AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-201>
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City CounciMept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc M
' O
PIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil. Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via storm water. Solid waste
will be collected, contained and hauled away.
G3AK~9
2-202 Michael Brandman Associates O' cow
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
r
U p
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.12.C.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a final sewer
study to the City Engineer to determine capacity and design of the Northeast Sewer
truck line and ability to serve the project. If the City Engineer determines there is not
adequate capacity, Mitigation Measure 5.12.C.I as follows shall be required.
If the City Engineer determines there is not adequate capacity, the following shall be
required: If prior to the issuance of building permits, the 18-inch sewer trunk line
shown in the City's Master Plan to parallel the existing Northeast Sewer trunk along
Paladino Drive, Vineland Road, and Kern Canyon Road has not been constructed by
adjacent developments, the developer of the proposed project shall be responsible for
the construction of this sewer trunk line. This trunk line must be complete prior to
the issuance of the first building permit within the development. The developer shall
participate in the formation of a Planned Sewer Area (PSA) for this line and may
receive credit against his required PSA fees for the improvement he has constructed.
Impacts listed under the aforementioned 6.3.12.C impact statement can be reduced to less than
significant by addressing the necessary mitigation measures listed above. These mitigation measures
will reduce potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and water quality
to less than significant.
References: Pages 6-45 through 6-45 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6
of Chapter I of the Final EIR, and Reponses to Comments G-1, C-8, and C-9 in Chapter 2 of the
Final EIR.
Impact 6.3.12.13 The implementation of the proposed project as well as other future development in
the project vicinity will result in the construction of new drainage facilities which
could cause significant environmental effects.
2.2.8.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact related to the environmental
impacts caused by the construction of new drainage facilities.
The development of the proposed project and cumulative development within the Northeast
Bakersfield area will increase stormwater runoff. The project includes a storm drain system
throughout the project site that will convey storm water to two proposed onsite retention basins.
Since the proposed drainage facilities that include two onsite retention basins will reduce peak
concentration flows to pre-project levels, the proposed project would not contribute to potential
cumulative drainage impacts. Offsite drainage facilities will also be constructed as part of the
proposed project, specifically culverts and water quality inlets. Offsite drainage facilities may also be
necessary for cumulative development. Drainage facilities such as culverts and water quality inlets
are proposed within planned roadway rights-of-way. The environmental effects associated with the
,13 H KF9
sIMichael Brandman Associates 2-2
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
v o
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
proposed roadways as well as the offsite drainage facilities have been addressed as part of the project
in Section 5, Project Impacts, and Section 6, Cumulative Impacts, of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR. The
potential environmental effects associated with the proposed offsite drainage facilities include air
quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and water quality. These potential air quality,
biological resources, cultural resources, and water quality impacts are considered significant. Since
the project's potential environmental effects are significant, the project could contribute to potential
significant cumulative air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and water quality impacts
associated with the construction of new culvert and water quality inlet facilities.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.2.6.1 Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City
of Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District that all
construction activities and operations will comply with local zoning codes, and
District Regulation VIII (Rules 8011-8081), and Rule 9510. These regulations
include, but not limited to, the following:
5.2.C.1 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply with San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) Regulation II, specifically, the
project will be subject the SJVAPCD's New Source Review (NSR) Rule. As a part
of the SJVAPCD permitting process, any emissions exceeding the SJVAPCD's
offsetting thresholds would have to be offset back to the thresholds on a stationary
source by stationary source basis.
In addition to adherence to SJVAPCD rules and regulations, the following mitigation measure/design
feature has been designed to reduce emissions to below a level of significance:
5.2.C.2 Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall comply in all respects
with developer's obligations under the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement
approved by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer. Developer's compliance
with the Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement will result in a reduction of
ROG, NOX, and PM10 net emissions to zero or in quantities sufficient to fully mitigate
A KF9~
2-204 Michael Brandman Associates
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc o
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
the project's air quality impacts to the extent that the development of the project will
result in no net increase in criteria pollutant emissions over the criteria pollutant
emissions which would otherwise exist without the development of the project, all to
be verified by the SJVAPCD. Accordingly, the Voluntary Emissions Reduction
Agreement will include provisions to further reduce ROG net emissions by 25.14
tons per year (from 25.14 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce NO,, net emissions
by 18.68 tons per year (from 18.68 tons per year to 0 tons per year); reduce PMIO net
emissions by 14.03 tons per year (from 14.03 tons per year to 0 tons per year); and
reduce PM2.5 net emissions by 9.82 tons per year (from 9.82 tons per year to 0 tons
per year). The following additional design features for the project shall be
implemented:
• Utilization of land use designs which create walkable communities and
encourage pedestrian travel.
• Utilization of interconnecting sidewalks, walking paths, and/or bike paths in
order to encourage travel by means other than by motor vehicle.
• Utilization of appropriate landscaping to create reasonable shade canopies for
streets, parkways, and parking areas.
• Utilization of roadway designs which enhance pedestrian safety by appropriate
signaling, signage, and separation from traffic.
• Design requirements which incorporate natural gas hookups and electrical
outlets on patios.
• Design requirements which prohibit the installation and use of wood burning
stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
The Voluntary Emissions Reduction Agreement approved by the SJVAPCD, and
entered into by and between the SJVAPCD and developer is a voluntary emission
reduction program in line with SJVAPCD goals, and similar in nature to other
agreements entered into by the SJVAPCD.
The program shall provide for the following:
1. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment protocol
2. SJVAPCD review and approval of the air quality assessment
3. SJVAPCD receipt of the monies required to provide full mitigation of the
development's emission impact and implementation of the emission
reduction projects
4. The Canyons, LLC reimbursement of the SJVAPCD for the services
5. The Canyons, LLC assistance in locating the emission reduction projects
6. The Canyons, LLC implementation of all feasible air mitigation measures
through "smart growth" design of the development
7. Emission reductions
~AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc - m
O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.1, 5.3.A.3, and 5.3.A.5 through 5.3.A.8 are required to
reduce potential biological resources impacts.
5.3.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a Habitat
Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code and the Implementation/Management Agreement for the MBHCP or
equivalent program or measure as approved by the wildlife agencies.
5.3.A.3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with all
appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP regarding San Joaquin kit fox. In
order to ensure compliance with the specific mitigation measures detailed below, the
project proponent shall coordinate with the appropriate City agency (as identified by
the City) to ensure mitigation measures are being properly implemented. Impacts to
San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat are permitted by the MBHCP, however, the
MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin kit fox,
including known dens for this species. The MBHCP and USFWS guidelines
regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox
in dens. The following specific measures during pre-construction and the
construction phase of the project shall be implemented:
Pre-Construction Survey Mitigation Measures
• Preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days
and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or
construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin
kit fox. Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
prior to site grading to identify active dens of protected species and to ensure
appropriate and necessary take avoidance measures are implemented for the
San Joaquin kit fox. A qualified biologist means any person who has
completed at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a
related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification
and life history of the San Joaquin kit fox. If active San Joaquin kit fox dens
are identified during the pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist shall
submit to the City of Bakersfield a protection and avoidance plan that
incorporates the USFWS standardized recommendations for protection and
avoidance to ensure that no San Joaquin kit fox are entrapped in the occupied
den.
• Written results of preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be submitted to the
City within five days after survey completion and prior to the start of ground
disturbance and/or construction activities. No clearing, grubbing or grading
shall commence until the preconstruction surveys are finalized and submitted
3AKF9
2-206 Michael Brandman Associatesy
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc 0 v
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
to the City for approval. Specific measures for protection and avoidance for
San Joaquin kit fox are provided below.
Pre-Construction Avoidance Mitigation Measures
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), circular exclusion zones shall be established by a
qualified biologist around all potential San Joaquin kit fox dens identified and
shall include a radius of no less than 50 feet. This radius shall be expanded to
100 feet for all known dens. If the pre-construction survey identifies any natal
or pupping dens, the qualified biologist shall contact the USFWS. Natal or
pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and
adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the USFWS. For
known dens, exclusion zone fencing shall be maintained until all construction
related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all
fencing shall be removed to avoid attracting subsequent attention to the den.
For potential and atypical dens, placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 feet from
the den entrance shall demarcate the location of the den. The exclusion zone
for potential and atypical dens do not require fencing, however the exclusion
area shall be observed by the biologist. No construction, vehicle operation,
material storage, or any other type of surface disturbing activity shall be
allowed within the exclusion zones.
• Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San
Joaquin Kit Fox (1999), disturbance to all San Joaquin kit fox dens should be
avoided to the maximum extent possible. Limited destruction of kit fox dens
may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative. If no reasonable
alternative is feasible other than the destruction of the den, the known kit fox
dens located on the project site that will be destroyed shall be excavated and
destroyed under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist. Prior to the
destruction of dens, the dens shall be monitored for at least three (3)
consecutive days to determine whether the den is active or dormant. Activity
at the den can be monitored by placing tracking medium at den entrances and
by spot lighting. If no den activity is observed during this period, the den
should be destroyed immediately pursuant to the den destruction procedures
set forth below.
Destruction of dens shall be accomplished by careful excavation with hand
tools until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den shall be fully
excavated and back filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes
cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period.
o '9s
Michael Brandman Associates 2- _ m
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
Cj
'_)RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal
shall be allowed to escape unhindered, or, to the extent feasible,
representatives from CDFG and/or USFWS shall be contacted to attempt to
relocate kit fox pursuant to the MBHCP. As part of the Implementation Trust
to the MBHCP, the City, CDFG, and/or USFWS are required to gather data on
the success of relocation activities from those engaged in relocation. The City,
CDFG, and/or USFWS may encourage relocation activities to include radio
collaring or other monitoring research by the Endangered Species Recovery
Program (ESRP) in the gathering of data on the success of relocation.
Construction Mitigation Measures
• The project proponent shall provide for a sensitive species identification and
avoidance education program for all construction employees that consists of a
consultation in which persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative
protection shall explain endangered species protocols, habitat needs, and the
measures and conditions of approval being taken to reduce impacts to the
species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet
conveying this information shall be prepared for distribution to all contractors,
their employees, and any and all other personnel who are working on the
construction site. A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent
who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might
inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped
individual. The representative will be identified during the employee
education program. The representative's name and telephone number shall be
provided to the USFWS.
• To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes during the construction phase
of the project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet
deep shall be covered by construction site personnel, and under the direction of
the construction supervisor, at the close of each working day by plywood or
similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of
earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall
be fully inspected for trapped kit foxes by construction site personnel. If at
any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, representatives from CDFG
or USFWS, or permitted and qualified biologists from local research groups
such as the ESRP, shall be contacted immediately to attempt to relocate the kit
fox pursuant to the MBHCP, and if encouraged by the CDFG or USFWS,
attempt to collar the kit fox pursuant to applicable protocol. In the case of
trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to
allow trapped animals to escape.
2-208 Michael Brandman Associates
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9.09.doc O
F- m
r-
C.7 (j
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
• The construction site manager shall ensure that all pipes, culverts, or similar
structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater shall be kept capped or
otherwise covered to prevent injury of kit foxes. If such pipes, culverts or
similar structures are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected
daily prior to burial or closure to prevent entrapment of kit fox or other
sensitive species.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that all food, garbage in plastic shall
be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the site to
minimize attracting kit foxes and other sensitive species to the site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that no dogs, cats, or other animals
are permitted on the project site.
• The construction supervisor shall ensure that a zinc phosphide based
rodenticide shall be used, if rodent control is deemed necessary during
construction.
Night time construction shall be prohibited. In addition, all construction vehicles shall observe a 20
mph speed limit on the project site and developer shall create established staging, parking and storage
areas to ensure the prevention of accidental direct impacts and takes of kit foxes.
5.3.A.5 Implementation of the following mitigation measures will ensure compliance with
the MBTA and CFG Code for protected nesting bird species. Prior to the issuance of
a grading permit, the project proponent shall comply with the following measures
regarding nesting migratory bird species, including the burrowing owl, protected
under the MBTA and CFG Code:
• If site grading is proposed during the general breeding season for nesting birds
that are protected under the MBTA and CFG Code(February 1 through August
31), a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist
within 30 days prior to grading activities within any project impact area in
order to identify all active nests in areas impacted throughout project
construction and implementation. If an active nest is identified during the pre-
construction survey, no construction activity shall take place within a
minimum of 200 feet of any active nest until the young have fledged (as
determined by a qualified biologist) and the nest is no longer determined to be
active, or until another distance is recommended by a qualified biologist, and
approved by the Planning Director. This distance shall be expanded to 500
feet for any nesting raptor species excluding the burrowing owl, for which
specific mitigation is provided below. Construction activity in the vicinity of
any active nest shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring
biologist who may reduce the size of or eliminate a buffer otherwise required
by this measure for individual nests. Nesting habitat that must be removed as a , 3a~r9
J~
9
FTI
Michael Brandman Associates 2.20
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r-
O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
result of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding
season which is defined herein as approximately September 1 through January
31. Habitat may be removed at any time during the breeding or non-breeding
season if a qualified biologist determines after a pre-construction survey that
there are no active nests and no nesting birds in the area that could potentially
be affected by construction activities in violation of the MBTA and CFG Code.
• Pre-construction surveys shall include a survey for burrowing owl and
according to recommended protocol by the California Burrowing Owl
Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995). If active burrowing owl burrows are
detected during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31), no
construction activity shall take place within 250 feet of any active nest until it
is determined by a qualified biologist that all juvenile burrowing owls
associated with any active nest are foraging independently and capable of
independent survival. Construction activity in the vicinity of any active nest
shall be conducted at the discretion of a qualified monitoring biologist.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside of breeding season (September 1 through
January 31), passive relocation efforts may be undertaken in accordance with recommended protocol
by the California Burrowing Owl Consortium and CDFG (CDFG 1995).
5.3.A.6 The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered
under the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and CFG Code, shall
be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected
species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately
to the USFWS and CDFG.
5.3.A.7 An environmental liaison shall be retained by the project proponent and identified in
writing to USFWS, CDFG and the City of Bakersfield. The environmental liaison's
qualifications shall consist of the following (minimum requirements), completion of
at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and
has demonstrated field experience in the San Joaquin Valley. The environmental
liaison will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the environmental mitigation
and take avoidance measures. Subject to the approval of the appropriate City
Agency, the environmental liaison shall draft and prepare an Environmental
Education and Compliance Plan that is consistent with the mitigation measures
presented herein. The Environmental Education and Compliance Plan will be used to
train employees and contractors to ensure that the required environmental compliance
measures are implemented. A pre-construction training session shall be held to
ensure all responsible parties are aware of what the environmental protection and
AKF9
2-210 Michael Brandman Associates O,
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc _ m
")RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance
mitigations are and how to ensure that they are implemented. The project proponent
shall submit to the City of Bakersfield proof of attendance by site employees of the
pre-construction training session.
On a monthly basis, the environmental liaison shall prepare a report that details the
implementation of the environmental protection and mitigation measures. Any
failure of measures to be effective shall be reported as they occur. The liaison shall
suggest improvements and changes as possible, and will coordinate any revision of
environmental protection and mitigation measures with the Applicant, the City,
CDFG, and USFWS, as appropriate.
5.3.A.8 The following additional construction mitigation measures shall be implemented
during all construction phases of the proposed project to further reduce potential
direct and indirect impacts to special status species and their habitat to less than
significant:
• Prior to any grading activities, the project proponent shall install the
appropriate fencing adjacent to all designated open space areas delineating the
limits of grading. This includes the installation of construction snow fencing,
silt fencing, and/or temporary chain-linked or other such fencing around the
perimeter of any active construction zone adjacent to designated open space
areas. Fencing shall be installed by the project proponent, inspected for
efficacy (by a qualified biologist), and repaired by the project proponent on an
on-going basis during all phases of development.
Construction vehicles shall carry fire extinguishers or other fire retardants or equipment to enhance
the prevention and control of any unplanned man-caused fires.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5 A.C.I through 5.4.C.3 and 53.D. I are required to reduce
potential cultural resources impacts.
5A.C.1 Prior to the start of any ground disturbance related to project development and as
needed during on-going ground disturbance, construction personnel involved with
earth moving activities shall be informed that fossils may be encountered, and shall
be educated on the appearance of fossils, the laws protecting fossils, the
consequences of not abiding those laws, and the proper notification procedures in the
event that a fossil is discovered. This construction personnel training shall be
conducted by a qualified paleontologist, retained by the project applicant and
approved by the City of Bakersfield, and upon completion, proof of training shall be
submitted to the City of Bakersfield.
a4'"AKF9
Michael Brandman Associates 2-211 S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rm-
v o
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
5.4.C.2 Upon the commencement of any ground disturbance related to project development,
a professionally trained and experienced paleontologist, retained by the project
applicant and approved by the City of Bakersfield shall implement a paleontological
resource impact mitigation and monitoring program during project-related earth
moving activities. This paleontological resource impact mitigation and monitoring
program shall follow Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) standard guidelines
(see Appendix D-3 of this Recirculated Draft EIR) and include: pre-construction
coordination; construction monitoring; emergency discovery procedures; sampling
and data recovery; preparation; identification; and analysis of any fossil specimens
salvaged; museum storage of any specimens and data recovered; and preparation of a
final report to be delivered to the City of Bakersfield and other interested parties.
5.4.C.3 During construction, earth moving activities shall be monitored by a qualified
paleontologist where the earth moving activities will disturb previously undisturbed
sediment potentially containing significant fossils. Monitoring shall be performed by
a qualified paleontological monitor retained by the project applicant and approved by
the City of Bakersfield, under the supervision of the project paleontologist.
Following SVP standard guidelines, once one-half of excavations are completed, if
no fossils have been discovered, monitoring can be reduced to half-time, quarter-
time, spot-checking, or suspended. Monitoring is not required in areas that sediments
have been previously disturbed. In areas where potential fossilferous sediments will
be buried, but not otherwise disturbed, a paleontological monitor shall examine
surface exposures prior to their being buried and the monitor shall salvage any
exposed fossils.
5.4.D.1 The project applicant shall immediately suspend any further excavation or
disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent
human remains and shall contact the Kern County Coroner should the discovery or
recognition of human remains occur. The following actions shall be undertaken.
• There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby
area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
- The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered must be
contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is
required, and
- If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
0 The coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours.
0 The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be
the most likely descended from the deceased Native American.
2-212 Michael Brandman Associates
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc rn
v o
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
0 The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for
means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the
human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, or
. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized
representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated
grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject
to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98(e).
- The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent.
- The most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC, fails to make a
recommendation within 24 hours of being granted access to the site; or
The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant, and a
mediation by the NAHC fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.1 is required to reduce potential water quality impacts.
5.7.A.1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be submitted to the City of
Bakersfield for review and approval. The SWPPP will also be submitted to the
California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment to the City prior to
City approval. Based on documentation that a good faith effort has been made by the
Project Applicant and if CDFG has not responded in a reasonable manner within 90
days, as determined by the City Engineer, the City may proceed with review and
approval of the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall include a specific list of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to prevent construction pollutants
from contacting stormwater and prevent all products of erosion from moving off site
into receiving waters. Furthermore, the project applicant shall provide evidence that
the Notice of Intent (NOI) was filed with the State Water Resources Control Board.
The NOI is a mechanism to establish responsible parties, dischargers, and scope of
the proposed operations. The BMPs that will be included, but will be finalized with
the preparation of the SWPPP, include the following.
• Soil Stabilization
- Upon completion of grading, permanent seeding will be performed on all
slopes and areas outside of the proposed lots and streets. In addition,
seeding will be performed on any areas where completion of final
subdivision improvements are to be postponed.
- -6a F9
- sue,
Michael Brandman Associates 2-2tl
~ rn
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
U O
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
- The seed mix will consist of native plants that include fast-germinating and
fast growing plants as well as plant cover that requires more time to become
established.
- Mulching of seeded areas will be performed to prevent loss of weeds and
soil--Natural germination, as opposed to watering is recommended.
Watering or irrigation of seeded areas usually results in early germination
and die-off without plant-establishment.
- Perimeter controls such as silt fences and berms will be installed to
commencement of grading, and will be maintained through completion of
construction.
- Detention Basin A and Detention Basin B will be constructed at the
commencement of grading. The project will be graded such that all lots will
drain to the storm drain system proposed within the streets (i.e., lots will not
drain down slopes). As grading operations progress, temporary sediment
traps and sediment basins shall be constructed at strategic locations within
the streets until such time as final street improvements are completed.
• Slope Stabilization
- Grading of the project site will result in cut and fill slopes. Slopes will be
stabilized using techniques that, along with re-vegetation, include products
to minimize storm water velocity as wattles, compost tubes, and compost
blankets.
• Dust Control/Dust Suppressants
- Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.2.13.1 is required.
• Containment of Fuels, Lubricants, and Other Possible Sources of Pollution
- Special care will be taken during fueling of construction vehicles.
Accidental spills will be contained and disposed of, including removal of
contaminated soil. Chemicals, paints, solvents, fertilizers, toxic materials or
potential pollutants will be stored in watertight containers.
• Construction Water
- Water used in construction will not contain pollutants.
• Sanitary Facilities
- Temporary sanitary facilities will be provided throughout the construction
area.
• Solid Waste Disposal
Solid waste will not be allowed to discharge from the construction area via storm water. Solid waste
will be collected, contained and hauled away.
43AKF9
2-214 Michael Brandman Associates S~
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Impacts listed under the aforementioned 6.3.12.1) impact statement can be reduced to less than
significant by addressing the necessary mitigation measures listed above. These mitigation measures
will reduce potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and water quality
to less than significant.
References: Pages 6-47 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of
the Final EIR, and Reponses to Comments G-1, C-8, and C-9 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.2.9 - Aesthetics
Impact 6.3.13.A The proposed project and cumulative development would alter the visual character
of the project vicinity. This impact is considered significant.
2.2.9.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact related to the visual character of
the project site.
The proposed project may contribute to significant cumulative visual impacts as the Northeast
Bakersfield area develops. Views of three residences in the western portion of the site and six
residences in the eastern portion of the site are provided from Visual Observation Points along Alfred
Harrell Highway. Views of a Slope Protection Area are provided from a Visual Observation Point
along Morning Drive. The project potential visual effect is considered cumulatively considerable, and
thus significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.5.13.1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the grading plans shall comply with the
applicable provisions of the Hillside Development Ordinance and specify structure
setbacks from the toe or top of the slopes as appropriate, in accordance with the
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation and Addendum II. Building setbacks from
the toe of slopes shall be half the height of the slope to a maximum setback of 20
feet. Setbacks from the top of slopes less than 10 feet in height shall have minimum
3 r~ Kr
m
Michael Brandman Associates 2-f-15
SA03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc > r-
O
oRIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
setback of half the slope height. All slope setbacks shall be delineated on the final
subdivision maps.
5.13.A.1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall confirm conformance
with the Hillside Development Ordinance as it relates to the Visual. Resource Areas.
Based on current plans, houses on Lots 41-43 in Phase 36 and Lots 18-23 in Phase 15
shall be limited to 24 feet high unless the applicant documents that a taller house will
be consistent with the Hillside Development Ordinance, based on site-specific cross-
section analyses from Viewshed Observation Points. The applicant may consider
design changes such as deeper setbacks from ridgelines, stepped upper stories, or
installation of visual screens such as landscaping or berms as may be allowed under
the Hillside Development Ordinance.
5.13.A.2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project landscape architect shall submit
a revegetation plan for approval, which will reduce erosion on the face of slopes,
constructed or otherwise altered by the project, including erosion due to drainage
features.
5.13.A.3 Prior to approval of a final tract map, Lots 46 through 50 in Phase 6 that front onto
Pebble Creek Court shall be eliminated.
5.13.A.4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the grading plans shall demonstrate the
softening of the appearance of Pebble Creek Court as viewed from Morning Drive by
implementing the following, (a) limit grading to the upper portion of the SPA beyond
the ridgeline located approximately 220 feet up the SPA, (b) grade the upper hillside
in the manner shown in exhibit 5.13-13, (c) contour and revegetate the fill area to
provide a natural appearance similar to the lower portion of the SPA, and (d) install a
berm approximately six feet tall along the edge of Pebble Creek Court so that cars on
the road are not visible from cars on Morning Drive, as measured from four feet
above the Morning Drive centerline.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.5.D.1 and 5.13.A.I through 5.13.A.4 will bring the
cumulative impacts associated with the visual character of the project vicinity to less than significant.
References: Pages 6-48 through 6-49 in Section 6 of Chapter I of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6
of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2-216 Michael Brandman Associates c g A 1(,59
SA03-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc > ~n
r m
O
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of insignificance
2.2.10 - Mineral Resources
Impact 6.3.15.A The implementation of the propose project as well as other future development in
the project vicinity will induce substantial population growth in the project area.
2.2.10.1 -Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact related to the loss of known
mineral resources.
Implementation of the proposed project, in conjunction with future development associated with the
General Plan buildout, may result in development in areas where the Bureau of Land Management
holds subsurface mineral rights. The impacts to cumulative development from the filing and exercise
of mining claims are unknown, and therefore the project could contribute to a significant cumulative
impact.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental 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.
5.15.A.1 Prior to the recordation of a final parcel map or final tract map on the project site,
whichever occurs first, the project applicant shall complete one of the following and
provide the City of Bakersfield Planning Department a letter from the Bureau of
Land Management that one of the following has been completed.
1. Acquired the 240-acre mineral estate from the Untied States
2. Removed the 240-acre mineral estate through an exchange approved by the
BLM; or
3. Other BLM approved method that removes surface entry rights and restricts
minerals rights to a depth below 500 feet from the ground surface.
Completion of one of the three aforementioned items within Mitigation Measure 5.15.A.1, with proof
of letter from the BLM to the City of Bakersfield will lessen the cumulative impact associated with
loss of known mineral resources to less than significant.
References: Pages 6-49 in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents referenced in
or incorporated by reference in Section 6.3, Cumulative Impact Analysis, in Section 6 of Chapter 1 of
the Final EIR.
3~Kt
T
m
Michael Brandman Associates 2-2p
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City CouncihSept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc U r
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative The Canyons
Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance CEQA Findings of Fact
SECTION 3: PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
In preparing and adopting findings, a lead agency need not necessarily address the feasibility of both
mitigation measures and environmentally superior alternatives when contemplating the approval of a
project with significant environmental impacts. Where the significant impacts can be mitigated to a
level of insignificance solely by the adoption of mitigation measures, the lead agency is not required
to adopt findings regarding the feasibility of environmentally superior alternatives, or justify why the
agency did not elect to approve each of the alternatives, even if their impacts would be less severe
than those of the project as mitigated.
The Final EIR analyzed a range of reasonable alternatives which could avoid or reduce the proposed
project's potential significant adverse impacts. These alternatives included the No Project/No
Development Alternative, the No Project/Development in Accordance with the Existing Zoning
Designations, the Alternative Site, the Reduced Density Alternative, and the Alternative Site Plan.
The City finds that the range of alternatives analyzed by the EIR was sufficient to inform the public
and decision makers of the environmental consequences of the proposed project and the availability
of feasible alternatives. No other alternatives have been proposed for study that would have provided
the decision makers and the public with new or better analysis of potential impacts or identification of
superior alternatives to the project.
The Final EIR determined that all potential significant adverse environmental impacts of the proposed
project could be mitigated to a level below significance by the adoption of the mitigation measures
incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan. Accordingly, the City finds that all
significant impacts of the proposed project will be mitigated by the project design and the mitigation
measures incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan and that no additional
and that no additional findings concerning alternatives for the proposed project are required. City
staff recommended the following modifications to the project design (referred to as the "hybrid"
plan), including features suggested as part of the Alternative Site Plan alternative, and the City
Council considered these and other changes in deciding whether to approve the project and in what
form.
• Enlarge the northeast park by converting the adjacent road and housing lots.
• Delete the 2-acre park in the southwest corner, and allow that land to be subdivided for
single-family residential use.
• Extend Clearwater Canyon Place, including a multi-purpose trail and Class 1 bike path,
to connect with Morning Drive.
• Connect Pebble Creek Court to Clearwater Canyon Place as a new primary access for the
lots in the southeast corner of the project, convert Stone Creek Canyon Way to a
secondary emergency vehicle access (EVA) serving that area, and revise Mitigation
Measure 5.9.A.1 to require the EVA instead of fire sprinklers.
2-218 Michael Brandman Associates Kr9
S:103-0337 CanyonslCity CouncillSept 9-091CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc 0'n
- m
O
?RIGINAL
The Canyons Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative
CEQA Findings of Fact Impacts Which can be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Eliminate the Goodmanville Road access (extension of Solitude Canyon Way) in the
northwest corner of the project. Allow one additional single-family lot on Crest Canyon
Place at the former roadway connection point.
Allow lots that are eliminated as described above or as a result of application of Hillside
Ordinance criteria to be redistributed elsewhere in the project, subject to conforming to
applicable City standards.
The City finds that each of the project changes described above has been adequately evaluated in the
Final EIR, will not give rise to any new or more severe impact than identified in the Final EIR for the
project or the Alternative Site Plan, will not render any mitigation measure in the Final EIR less
effective in avoiding or reducing a significant impact, and for some of the changes will provide
benefits compared to the project as proposed. The City finds that the modifications to the project
design ultimately adopted as part of the project approval, resulting in an alternative to the project as
originally proposed, do not give rise to any new significant impact or any increase in the severity of
an impact not already addressed in the EIR, so that recirculation of the EIR is not required as a
consequence of any of the modifications ultimately incorporated into the project approval. The City
also finds that all potential significant adverse environmental impacts of the project as modified can
be mitigated to a level below significance by adoption of the mitigation measures incorporated into
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
and Reporting Plan.
F aakF~
Michael Brandman Associates 2-219`
R,
SA03-0337 Canyons\City CounciASept 9-09\CEQA Findings 9-9-09.doc r-
O
)91GINAL
EXHIBIT D
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
for
The Canyons
Prepared for:
City of Bakersfield
Development Services Department
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Contact: Ms. Jennie Eng, Principal Planner
Prepared by:
Michael Brandman Associates
220 Commerce, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92602
714.508.4100
Contact: Michael E. Houlihan, AICP, Project Director
Michael Brandman Associates
As edited by City staff for September 9 2009 City Council adoption.
3Ak~~
v ~
ORIGINAL
The Canyons Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15097,
public agencies that make findings under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 15091 of the
CEQA Guidelines relative to an EIR in conjunction with approving a project are required to prepare a
mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). The City of Bakersfield has made findings
under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines for The Canyons.
Therefore, a MMRP is required for The Canyons. The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure compliance
with those mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval in order to mitigate or avoid
significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR. Following is a MMRP that
incorporates the mitigation measures set forth in the Final EIR. The City of Bakersfield City Council
will deliberate on the adoption of this MMRP at the time of certification of the Final EIR for The
Canyons.
The following MMRP identifies the City department that is responsible for verifying that the
mitigation measures for The Canyons are performed (see Table 1). The City departments will also be
responsible for providing a date that each mitigation measure is verified as completed. In addition,
the MMRP provides a comment column for the City departments to provide notes and remarks. The
timing of implementing the mitigation measures in the MMRP is identified in each measure.
The performance of the mitigation measures is the responsibility of the project applicant. The project
applicant is responsible to provide evidence to the City departments that the mitigation measures are
performed and completed. The City will be responsible for ensuring that implementation of all
mitigation measures occurs in accordance with this program.
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\MMRP 9-9-09.doc
Michael Brandman Associates Fn-
S:\03-0337 Canyons\City Council\Sept 9-09\MMRP 9-9-09.doc V r
ORIGINAL
N a
a i
V V m
m mg
• U
C w
O U
W ~
V I
L c
a ~
> 3~
i
a a I 30
.o a
C Q, Q o
c
o ~
0 CL
' ao oo on a~ O
COL
ao z
cm 10
p p, R CL II
~ ~ p.¢~'' olwda o !ado' o aQa' o '
2 04 cd 'w
40- 'A
C-4 04 cd rA 4)
> ° S0aYb, 03p~0 APo0'raoa~' V1
04U -00 -0
Fd 4) 83
°b.~' .0 04 o o"O o b i
-Cd
p ° co o a G Q. c y 0° y O a N w cO Cd 4; -0
b p vp, y c a ° w o > a~ ca ...a II
a~ • q a ° ;3 v, e~ m a~ b o ' o
F~~~y+"+ v d a p.. a o. a` B o a 'b o Cd
b ~j a a
p w+ a v0 a o U '
00 't 0 "
b r~ a°i 3 ° o = c o ° 'f r. w o
° ° o a~ a w ai on
Cd
Cd -C4 ~ y w o m' O ed oS o ° as ° a o cp" z~•~ °
IOA 0"
.r 0
w w a) U .a o 4.) A
W 0 o
e a s p" a s a o p is c> 'd 06
M'r °pcn ri.a ci~ka -4ywn~ v,3o°' AKF
Q . U b..0 r; C p o ca y o w to m
b .C IA of `S 1A (Si a ld •-r o TS 0. f_ F- N o
_ ~7 V~ cd Gtl V~ w N 1n N R u S
ORIGINAL
~rn
a
th
E ~ _U
p U
M
I 4
,U
C U
Q
z
Cot n
a Q o
0-0
o
°ro.~~
C3 a> V U e' Q a O $ ~~y w O
U U . iy-i Q r"'i 0 RS U U U lC ow Cn
co a N a Ca !7 a '4 t7 a~ o 0 o d N
R _
'~~3 to
00 y o o o a~i ~ 2~,U o~ v o caa a gib' a
00
o nova " o y.9~ ~U o° 4.) N 3 II
o ~A 000 o rn
a~ OO.r ' l cc o> ie ° ° b w U b
14) "
N
w Oa 3 ao py ' O I~ .U vi `0 O n
b> 0n IS -S v t*"
5 ci
a a~i b ° , p .?o w 'o O O v w „may V~
y~, w ins b a b U Q p H • r ` cc °u ^ " a~i ° II
a v °
to I o bo to
U a 0 w o Q a ti
O-C
cn a
~~p b ~ ~'p„y c°> w1 Aw w ~ 9 p,va, }?c`~AIl~9
iOv~E- ~~1~~ ~O Q.vi c °a • • • • • Z
rn
O
--~IGINAL
y c`
C G
4
U
r
C ~ is
A O. 4
g'
0
v
c
m ~
~p
c
~ o o Z
c3 !a¢~'' o aQa o
a
0 ¢ vow, GA G o.°~
3 ap, `ebb a~iW o >
in. OR
J-5 w
a)
7~ 11
ro-
cod. 'ed
v°. vU O a U 00 O ~
ti ob o v ° o a.o a, a o . a.
y 0 y a as v f~ c aq a cd cd
a) 7EL Uo ~o~>, O.~~ o►,
C > Q •U, U bq ~i oU U p o L1~i N° O C ~U, V1
y o a~ o. aa 3"a a~U wAA
a °p . bj) p, ° U y to o o o v o pUpyy U v ° ~ v ev caa 4) 50
bo.
-n . ash g A 1{~9
° a~i A ° b ' o N o a a3i
• • H Z P4 a. v~ a Z CA v) .D b 'v vi o J'r
Z
)RIGINAL
(
Eo
m~
e -
o, t o
O ~
g ~ T
C ~
~ U
~ r
en
~ i m R
~ a o
40
C
a
0
06
z
0 4) a~a a ::moo by
a a ~ a ~ a ~ a ~ on
44 Z --.4 cd
bAC7 q y.~°a o a~4o- c a' 0 b.
o -.4
0 > ~ N a`"i a~i ~ 6n a~i o ~ w ap.~ t%
v~ o a°i c° p awa .;5 cW 9o
o
-2-a 0 6. v
" V o E N •i "'W 0 0 ,2'*R .o o ;oz .o ° w v o ° ? a er
o an h ob ° W o a s ° a o 3 a c~
as a a~ ° v a.. a a v~
o a o a QC7 a>,,. o N~.ti ° o o o o II
0. P.
.0 -0
N a a N F V o w O a H Q. a N O 05 ~.W~ ~,aaoo.y° b 'b a ° o p. A 0AKF9~
m Q Q+ e~ c°i Q P, aai ^o v~ R+ w N ° p w v~ • • • • •
O
ORIGINAL
1` q
1 ~d
a m,
U
U
C
C U
o
to
a ~
~ off;
a
a
06
s z
II
a
' ba b o c ~o
U 14
c. a a w
as o
A-5 u
51
51
°
r%i Z .1 8-0 pp 'd Q N N s 1r Rf o vy~
0 to -o- 2 .2
o 1-4
0 o -d ° pa°4~awi
w
o 0 0
0. :bo
3
"do) U
-0 -E I
0. 0- cis
U • rA 9- a N Z. a; o .-a y .-1 ed G U
2 a 2.0 o o a o s is
9 vu o 9 pU~ pU pU. a o o; o
a a 3 A' ¢ n¢ ¢ UJ~ U U ao b •W II
~~u to y ~r b ,~b w AKF9
°
e
0 to 04
m
~ O
ORIGINAL
a~
G A
R
m
to
~ U
O ~
R
-
i 3
CL
a
I
C V
+ c~
4 'b O
oa: > a Z
° ° II
a o a ¢Q o
.0 o -0
lo*
U b~a~~P,w as a
off' ~b 0 o v~ a~oi ~ ~b a. ~ a~ w ~,b U ~ y ~ ~
on ao U ° on ¢ f~ a~ o o
Q 04 rn o N o p, 0. O cVV a a U O° Pr 5 y
a b ao o v o ° a a`~i ° a a~ a~
ac t;io c' ,a a~ o x ti ro a~ U o II
y ce . .V h 'O U t~ U N Co ea O C7 0 r.
o a~ o 'er ~ ° °
0 0_ 0 to o
j N v a~ aa+ p' V p r pc°~p gyn. o. E~ o V a~ ~a a~~i
W ^ O I7 ° o ce N cd .0 P. 04 'b a f0
pVC a a U ao 0 o rU a 3 ° y" °
U) 05
W. °y o~ o c o -0 0 0.
ao o
w 5Ab $
ow u
0 -0 CA
c.b'~ yam' a'~ a a~ ° ai c p ° a
° a 2
a o,~ aaci'.b d•=;.v o 0 0 ~ ~ ° ~ „A ai gAK~-
O M o U r; o a~ ° w w v ° o. ~b a o
9J,
o o
m vi o. CA o a U a P. x PC a o o w U
_ m
v G
ORIGINAL
a y o,
4
m
O ~
~ U
r
b
v
IL
c
4 1 42 II 0 4) 040)
.2 4) cd 0 s.
Ei J05 -00 OW .!z
'0 ~v au a `~a o p A a ai '0 h a~ o II
w y 'p 04 ° jai d w O U b w of ° o w o cd o
dap y°b °a. ~~O ~i H
V O
V
v~ A a., ° , O O O Ob
o o ol pw ° v«~ ° °U o i~ on°-ow°° c
2.0 ° a~i 3 ° ° ° ~b o v
o° y 0-0 0. a b w o A$~ 2~ C o co o
'A 15.1 1 0 -0 CA
049 00.2 q b k v cUa qaD a p p t~ 'y 1 v a n II
G O O U d vOi g O O U b ° O b" O O m U b U 00 N' OA n
0 4)
o G a o ai a~ a~ o k w y w O° o 0
aQ v '29 o o aaa o... ~a o AKF9
GQ ~ y • U • ~-c~
"PIGINAL
~P
ya
e
U
p ~ e
T
c C
U
t3) e`n
C 4
o s
G
;v
J! w
V
i
i
C cVd
I C ~ ~
eu ~a o
a z
a I.~.
to, o I f~ a Q o
0 41)
o 11 0. xl-
o cd N
00 00 42 M.
-ce
.2 S 45 .n.2 o.° a o as o o y
(U bA o. 4) q is y O 48 o p o~ o r4.2 s~ o 0 yFi o~
W o'o0Q~ ooC4 d oaoi0 ~ arc o H
c ~b o 4) o ~o t= ° ~'r~ a
v, .b + vOi o b w O O _ h w o ti
04-0 0 bx to o 0 id 0o cad O d 0 Q p
G °
" O
O
~
~ bq b
3~a~ ~.o as ai' w
g" C3
0 .9 oa,r°, o ;to aci00aoot) mo
.5°
aV. "o"of~i 4
r CA
y v .U co o °q b 4) a°i p~ 'y ° a~i o Cs i. rn
Go m
0 0
13 =m
o o o o o cad o. aci aci -0 a °.8 °Q 2b o ~ w -r =A ay 0aaa0 aa4)v ~ aKF9J,
T
t a m
ORIGINAL
a
a4
e m?9
e
p ~ U
L
, a
i
I ~ ~ I U
t+ ~
z
U~ rn a U O O U b v, ~ ~
+ y U Oa v U O 'O b p U O 0 y cC
~ Nom' U Q. ~ cd~ ~ c7 O ~ 7 ~ U O ' ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ 6. y O U -
0ti U a y U y y w 0) a~ rn n Q a~ N OwO
°'°a~'•=; oiu~ax~aa~a'cga ~ •a>,o. ~,o~„ awe,:.,a~ c~ ~
w R o
b' `o' •ti d o a>i c° o o b 0
2 ow
o° M U a y -d .r ca O v w
"o
c0 id ;a a0 . .~a~ o ° io o o v °
00 -04
to o 'o 40.
"o Ln
U U a
1i 0.-
"o b
° a~ ¢ k G cUd b b y a~ o a ° O 0 a o abi
0-0
42 0 2
w ~b °v~! II
~ ~ a b.~w
IA ao~ aUol~~a w h~ l~
e O
a o 0 0 010) x 00 ~ w r O o ~ a~
,aAK~9
o w v'+, r'" g a aUi 00 a a. o o o o En
o U a0 00 v~ ti ° U 0 0 b Q. o a~ 40.
b G ~D
-Cd
0 w ~ b.0 w ~.J" bi' b N" G. w • o r
Z
ORIGINAL
c Q
E
o
G U
R ~ ern
CL 4
gv
a
4
fq C I V
ed
O Al
0 Z
a aQ o
on 0 ~3 U Es0COD i ao~ a~ aou
O x r, v O a~
40. .0
a cd a U U 0~ 4 at rn C O O a~i y= m p O N
O O N N O 'b ti O .d b O N O U Q O w b C C%1
tbz -S '5 i
-8 4~ Q' O O b w O ° .r 0 k x9 a~ ice" Cam. RS Rf SC G" N
ea aai b y t„~ c ~ ~ o ° o ~ z 'd aaiaai ~ 4 ~a v a aai o O o
a vD U O O cC 41 C 46 6. U v; C ed w a. a a 0 0
Qa, 0•0 -oCar o~~~$`"~ 8 N h >I
m .6 O U U N U Oa id 'm p v' w GL . 3 ed : .d d
V 'b 'b n- ~L y V W O» .r . p O
8 O a O Cd O cd v ca O ed -
4) 8 v
m a CD ccdy 'bpC a° a v
j U pp V] p a w ta O "d > U .d Q cd cy' ' m
0
dj U a a a ? p ar 5 a U y :3 .ti ed O U C U
p O O O O b m ai '«7 O V O a O O w
cd ,tj p L7 U O 4.
N a~. ' ^LJ " Ica O O O V or. b0, .0. VO
i" 09 a U 'b w c~ p cd cd - N O y
U h .O Q y Up y w v O ~0+ a^ 4~ O O A O N O a Gi Z C/]
b ran o" oA ty v a~ rn
b y b p v 'd o a i II
9 0
R O y p p w O O p a' O 9-20 a O 0, O O
-0 'AK
t K, JD
o ~s1
m
')RIGINAL
E
O Cis
10 ~ o
I U
C U
' r
-4012
E
0
u
i~
C
c
a'
I
a
' out o
~ II
a ^
z
':aQa o
;5 O O O o N ca 'b a c p of b v~ U b
oq N p w*:a "8
'00 = r. 0
AD JD 0
q O o cn • a i! G N o° y v N o O U P. 4.
0.0 I N ~v, . d Q a~ U o ° x x o (A
o O N
` v] o -co p, .s w° b O- A 7~ x pp U U b cv a>
w N c~ c~ 0.2 'b U b O ° N vOi ~ G y
° o o ~w a~pb w a~i 3~ o o U >.a o3 y a
o b•oc °~bo i °q`~ o~ ba o°~•°o a
o b X5.0 5 b o 0'°'d o
05 *5 9
o p a 3 U b c q. ti° o k a w G cn
o o
R U :G O b O b o ~ .O U eC O _W O a1
.r ~ v, o y U ~ o
w ~ ~ ca ° p ~ a~ Q
°
o b° o o o y 0 a~ p ca p o w o AitF9
E b ~a -c ~ b aA a~w~~.•~ ~ a~~~ka...,~U'
H S~
10
`)RIGINAL
o
a v
v m
m-
C U
T
G U
ir-
c
r G7
V
O
~a
fla goo z
p„ ~ as II
a w d o
' a. d o
c~ ~ O a~ w v~y~ q w a~ U 0~ ~ ~ a ~ e~ y w U aai -d a~'i y U a a~ a~i ~v,
V1 ^p N O Q , O O .a: ~ ~ w CD a . ~ . w y ° .4 N N i! ~ ~ ~ c~"d a ~ ~
a~3~°AOU OR '+nopA
rUi, W a~ a R C4~~ cad
U U p b t j p U> b O U 4. cc v
W L;, 45 o ao >,o op o~ 3 a
.8 4.1 oll °;a p+ g C* 0
o cc ° a°'i o'° b ° pp0~ e o ~o II
y a 0 y" ° o Y lab cy o c a 0
0 y v~ 1.5
A' a~a° 0 `44 toc$~3w^~a a~ v,aoo
ooau-o G o~: yd°'a° t
JZ 0.2 .0 a) r. "a - 41 0
co 000 do P+ v .2 3 •2 'v p- O y b d p
c~'o; ova a." a .°c `°'oCI'°OO
ow'= aaai o'°'0 ¢ a y 3 ° ~ o.° >,o~ v
0 0 ~o o .^'d o'.~ 2.1 o G aai 4) ~ 0~v~ aai ~ ~D a o'd II 04
` o0 o ~ ~ a ~ o.~ ~ o~ ~ p.).? ~ ~w a
•u 0
0
h c o b 'b a a o -d ° rn o p cc O o
. a cc w
_ V. U a.4. O U a~ F U 3 o'd N
~ ~wa~oa~~, c ~l?n'wv~aaii?w
ORIGINAL
m c
CIL
m
m'
03
C N
C
t U
rm-
i
i
da
~ ! U
e~
~ ~ a a a~ a a II
a) o
w a o o a. o '0 o 0 ° p o w
o b vpi b ° ° 0 ci v y > p ° • °
a a o a y o a y y' a ° O a o EA C a a
O O
o ~-aix o cov a~i'~ a~•~~ w w ° p
0
80.
40. 2
cd ad
04 9:1- m 10 u
v~ n o r0 0 a w, ai a 2 a ' o b v
w
x -0
co .4 a 000 O .b 0 •y 9 y 5 r. N 2
I f rA - 0
II
Ac 0
a~ a~° H~ Hp~ AK9
V ai b ~i°, aai cai o a ' Ems- o`~u c°~ ° c°
0
ORIGINAL
~g
G C ' Q~
e
m -c~
e~
m=
U
C
~ ~ , to
U
en
g o 0
W s
W m
E
~a
a
C L ~
"0 0
I. r
j ~ ~ a a II
a Qa o a Qa' o
.r
4) 4. 4w
tzi
° O O N ca o w
r. O U O N N O cd °r
b
a O «i Q 4. s. U b
p v o
e0 p s g ~ 3 > a~ 'C7 w°O .o o O w ° 2
Q a N "b w O° ai b N Q a y .a W O O a~ .r >
11 - 0 '5 IL) .
N cC c~ p b VO d O V C," cC cd `n av3 n w", b ° 14
O O
cd ran N VN N N rn 'b •y tj.,+ w •Ca ~O 1a~1 'O
>O> b. a'' y c a pU, N w O Q .b Op • p N
O 4+ Q p I~ b b O c~ N to Q¢ a Lz+ i0 y v' N N 0 "0 q)
2- u
one U ~-8 ° rn
o o ti
a~ o ° O
EA 0) ro-
~y° a~ STS w~~a~ mbo acao
r. -0 cd .14
oZ~a. m 3 a i~ o > aUi b
co 0 .1 >"g
a o'o °ao ~v ~gQ ob o w d'on o..4A'
0 o w o 0 o~~o ° ° o~ a~ ° ° ° w W--
av o
V y a ~ O a U W) ° C-4 t- ~ 4) 's o 4) b N v • ° ~ O N
~ ~ ~ O Q A q ~ 'd a~ ~ o O a? v, ~ ,b o ce w a~i+ o y O II
O .7 p
y a^+ Q tr a GJ O N yi a+ Q U o U 1+ w 0
^ b a~ °
o c $ ygp• w b O O U .s a~ o
aai ° cra ° w Or. O a>
Z alb ti'" w a .p AKF9
0
°a o c°~ a a . goy cP~
vM'~ U aaA.8 0
'ORIGINAL
Q °
E
m p e~
• U
i C U
~ en
g
i
r
C
1°a
'a
o z
wd o ad o
"g go
won 80 ° >
o U
a~ v ' w ti oq H ° o ao °q0 d , o rn~~++
'G
.b w ° .ti
t ~
p A N U o CL,~ ',C N b cFr' V it1
1-5 4) 0r. b N N .7 , N Oq ° t~ o b OVA O y
10 0 .0 "0 00 0 "or
~•o~ o ~b y.2-, o o h o a° i w a4~ 0 f o 91. ~ .-.a 4 E4
'0 -53 :3 A
. , V] cv A ew cd 0 o Ca bo • o " U d w 0.0
7,
E 00 O. •[AE~ °o~b
o U "0 "a o a o . cov aUi ° a won U .
'o w „ a~ a
.2 Ig 4-.
o° o 0 o o'° °w a -8 V)
n? II
a F
°a Z 0 ~ ~ O 9 o >;b o a4 ~ r OAK 9~,
y kn u o G • ~o n
v O
ORIGINAL
~ ~ do
~N
m=
U
G C ~ U
w i ~ r
Q o
E
0
U'
a
I I U
C
Rf
W
~CL
O
O z
a, da o
o a~ > w > 0u
o° G a
b a~ ao a o v a~ - o t ° - 3
0,8 0-0 0-0
° o o i 0' .y yam'" 0 14 p
N ^o o ,o °
2,8,8 a' V .0 r4
w br,... bww co b4b b v h O p ti
ago°p v 0U oona.='
a o go
~'b'E
°a °boU ~ono °ooc°a~~°'o'S'I
a~i c aXi o a~:d a°i a~ o ea•E obb cd to
b 2 04 > 0 0.0 "a 0 0,
d Q oo N, 2:' c° o z W b GA w b
0 co v to 3 -0 to o° o ao o o r. on p i o o
-0 0 0 'o o o'
y C~, at a~ U p v, O O d w O w e . ~ Q o W p, b o~
u -0 ti Q Nat
G CL ~ ca r" ~ C ~ ~ . ~ q ~ "S r. w ~ a ~ o ~ a°i ~0 • ~ o gi' ~ V1
a ~A cwU -r, 5x o a a'S p,~,cA vQ 3U3aAk~9<n
m
O
ORIGINAL
a o
CLC to a
p.,
e[ o°Z
8 lea~
U
o '
i3 r
v
>'3
a m
a'v
RS
0 0
aQ~ o ~,aQQ' o
O 'b ed
bUUyy'
w = C7 t a
o v o aai 'v c c w
ocu a a~ a~° aor. ao-0 ~Ga >+a a
00 b Q y U a 00 aai a~ o ° a Q
to) 4L)
a o a oU o aA °f~ o a~ v oua o a
cdU
°w' 3 'b ~ > .i b ~ ~ ~ i ~ .b ° ~ ° a~i v°, a a°i a aai ° ° Q' ~ > '
°w~ o
g
o a a~ ao'd a~ ° W ° 3
ao a U> b a~ o p a o v cd o4 b e y=
o"o
00.
a 0'b cow' a~ a ~b ono'b.~
e ~ `O ~ b ~ an w 0 ~ ' ~ ~ C7 a I~ ~ ~ o ~ a ~ C j ~ a,.~ ~ AK
~ ..~.na~~ o~.., el o^A. ab~EA a~0 a~ba0 o co
9-Z •°p• m
-O
ORIGINAL
•o
~ do
C
8 £ ~4
m
t
U
T
U
~ r
I 4
C o
c
a `m
u
;G
CE
i
:
W
O~ b0~ 4~ yp
0 'i O Q O 7-.
O
a p.Qa o ',aQ o
0 >1
a~
OA rn v a~
0 or. CA
EA 4> U r. 4) o- =0
d wG ny , w v] 1~ i0 O .`3 O 0 O 0 bj v
'm Cd o.
tot 'A 0 'D 00
I ~0 4 Oa°i ~ono~°o~ca°u
":g 0 0-0 to -
0 1) f) -0 0
r. C's r ai b a~i bb 10 .0 c °3 y o q Q o ° p, o v w ►-a
0 pi U 4) -,q 0 au boo C"*
"0 w to
o a~ GQ o o E" y oo c y •o b o a~ >y aNi .~i 3AKF
out ° o"ci.,•" cts 0° p~,°.Q o.~ww N ao U o 0. ~P
ORIGINAL
Q~
•o m
Y
g ~ ' T
~ U
4
CL o
a
m 3
a'
m
Q I o
a. o a,Q o a
o ° " w
N O O m N a U O V
N a
0 W4
~Q °~,oa~ a .b~~~a3 o,,,s„••.~°b¢,'~>aa a~
0 co "t3
0 '00A 84
00 0. > 0
g >
ou !s s -40) b cob ° a~ b b
.ti
0 0 ' a . a~ To o
4. o au o is a~
o ° o .b O ^ a3i ca .c b b a¢i G y 0, ~ y ~ ~ ~ II 7EL °'ow~ap 'gam W. rn
y 04 p 45-
0 O d b a O b V w
a o a~ o y cn ° a o `W ° o~' S
a~.a~ ~p~-' mho u,a~tia.~~•~,aa ,.,w° W abo~~•.a
4~ 0--o 83 co W
C' cd o > ci•~w aoo~ o
0, u CA
oa a 4 orb gab Q o o o Q AKF9
)RIGINAL
m ~ 'a
c ~a
m
e,
a ro
U
~ U
h
M
I
U
3
a
C U
Rf
I ~ I
a ~ ~ on ~ ou "0 z
a
a ¢a o,aQa o aQa o~a¢' o,aQ~ o aQ~' o
-
~ o' gg
ON N N L," ° U h RT O W
O Y ct O
o 0'a
4-4
!ta o +a o -o w 'ti a~i
ct w 3A U
p oo v
b
WO "0 > 0
G , ~ a I?i,' ~ ~ Q ~ ~ w v
° o r? n~i
a. v o o ^o o $ 84
a0i 4. o o aL A+ O W v 4L) w ~n AG y~j ? A KF
O
'PIGINAL
~A
f1 i
G C U
M
m
~rt
a
a
I
co
'b oo ~a
j ~ O ono ° ~ z
at,a, a u
w da o a da o a, do' o
P. mow o o c°~
00 0 0 0) r_- 00 "Or.
OK ~ o b o ~;6 a:b a o o cC o; _ 00-0 lo. 'o
N i3 0 . y N p 3 :d m O> w pO+ p o cd q } O. O
Q R. O b ~O C7 G. on • q era 0 N . ° y ° W" Y ''s °
c o w w 'S a A u w p .op c~ c°> ro C .~J U CA
o -o c v o o a ' ►.a
~ ~ ~ w C7 A 4;, .r y ~ A ~ -d ~ ~ o -Z 0
3 b w U b a
on 4. a o O bp a v V b-= b w0 N
14 ~ c~ V] b N y a O id y
O N N s7 N Vi b°° N N U o- W
IVA
to axi 'd v, a~ ° a`di b 11. 3 on U y
o aoi d 0 c a awi W$°° v, ro w on o
o Q d on it N on Q ~ ~ p N it
f" •C O4, o cC «S p bn N U J o bn ,ti c~ CL . y
.r. o 0 a 0 ca S w 'C .ti ° p o b o ,c co o A 0,-o
At~. II
o o a s w a~ b° 0
. off'
v a b o ti ` b A KF
e oo~ Uiu-~y~o~-~>,~ Uoro.~a~.0 oooa~G,)°~r; 9s
v aa• M o~d„ a: sin °"O a o C8
_ cn a°a o o °a o ff.. v .'r' o So(u'ow° aa~ aW'_~b_b a H
ORIGINAL
Q~
L °
o co
m -
G C ' U
~ r
Q
,W
a
r !a
co
° o z
~aQ o
"0 boo
11,10
-6,6 0 II
V. ut 15. C3 0
a o v o i U v, v U a~ ° b b o
L. a U vUi a s op b v k O y . t.•1' J. p r. U U U y O O O y
1 1
0'5.-'>,.naiS~:o00~~ba, u
$ao>,o'a° U
° G ' > V. ao 'D wed a `S a°~i w -02 o
tb a O U w a C> a 1 g ~ pq a.., a o H
m o. o o A w° o .d .5 `.9 o a o> ai 0 o~$ b r
o y U t,_ 52 A U y b o. ° v, v
° ~~a,b~01DO0-~'aO
°O a w a~~N~:~oa~h
o a~b a ° b•?.~ ~ a• U o 0.0 p o U
a N a~ a a 0 v U
a G . ca a o $ y id j c°~ p ° aai y w0 0 ° 0
0 > o
G eo ° 'd S c~ ^O w U a N > h w ca N 4U. t, C%]
N b N .d C O b O O U w U C
$ N U c> II
N a .~i U a w 'U N w p b~iD b b U 'b w
.4 0 h o Cc c o Q" ° o. ° A° p
~U v?bAKF
e a o o E p a~b 0 rA a' o a v,b wb aai
a _ U a~ a~ ^ w U a~ b is a i~ e A T
_ 'an U V] W U ed O 4: O VI v~ F. G1. rn v, U U v, m L1. O N-'~ a r
H O
a -)RIGINAL
t Q
e
lea
m~
m ~
C _ V U
C U
C C m
M
'o
v
f c
y
CL
c
a z°
i ~ II
a
4. b
1O p ri y 00 p y~j y `aU a O
0 10
y a ca cd O O t3 O > p i U 9~ ~ O O w cd
v > c~ t z bZ a~ ovate b
o W)
s
0 U aa~ o ,Sro w
0 ~ v a, ,
00 o a U ^o 0 E-
o$ o m o
~3 0 0 a a a° o a~ ao 49
cy {O~ R7 h 4-+ O r.Ci~ O yam" y `'3,. 4~ y b" .d ed U 0, '0 1
e"
j ti cC O p° N u O Fi a y OO +U+~. y N 4"
Oa w y O a0 a b, OA E 00 b p V a C
° a~ oU z ~a°i a o o¢ o o t;n En
a a v p v a~ y U I y y a c g a° Z oq II
C o b.E~ 0 0 0 a~ ~bw~~' `.K
c3 9 4 F9
15. g=. in r
= O
')RIGINAL
C I C
$ E
~ v ! mN
e
~ t o
VU
- ~U
C C m
C ~ U
M
W Q
a y
m
a
a
aQ o
4
c~ z
a u
o ' a a, I~ ~ a ;
~ c ,o ~ o ° w v ~ ~ E~ a, .b o .c o
a, o ° ° -O v ou a a w
yn.Oc 00 O o 0 2 ~ W a 0
a b a. c ~ To o ~ o Q w q o E! ~
it - W -0
OW .0 -0
0. 5
tb -S
A It;
10 A ;s U~ a°i - a a, a o o 6 O y o 0 a) ;a
-S o
z:N~i o~n a~i °b' ° ~°a, ° o
5 4) < 'o to
!0 0
° a, ci a 'on cc y ° > 's
=
q Z a0>i C7 q y W o -d e~ y
O Q O~rr Q` "G vOi N y tom. p N p O O T! q id p V~
•M 4, 'Q, U ;>y > o b 'y ..fir bn Q, w~+ 'Y II
m >
U O ho°~ AlCF9
~~+po~ari104
X0 R O
r~i~ S r~i~ N N O~ ~.n
V W''. U 'b N O, O C^ N N. a F+ Qr N ice.. w
o. o" ;a too Zo Z Cko
ORIGINAL
4 ~a
JEC
c m"
U
o `2
I ~ T
C ~ ie
O ~ ~ U
en
a, 4
g ~ s
m
z ,
a
U
. z
a
00
4. W. 4) (L) Cd 421 0
v > o a~ v' o o a~ ° . 0 O 0 o y
IN " Re 4) 0 ca -
0 0 W. a* 1.
.c o on .a o
.0 2 cd N o A. a ° v au
w > a a~
c, to 0. 0
:a a~ a o .n a~ o O o 00
uo 3 ~ o ~ ~ ~ y p O > e R. 4)
v b Oo O
0.0 0 -0 o ° 4+ 54 a o
O a N o O 4+ N w .d • V" RUC q 'b 0 G ~ O~ 3 C ~ ~
w+
p :3
a~ o ° d> e o e 2 to ~ r~ y .r ° O o 3 o
v ~on I;no° v ago 'gib •°'b~ ¢~~ti °
o •0 a`ai O
CA C-) Cd 60 o o p aai b o crd II
a c o
a a .°c 9 0 ° .1 , lz y 0 -ab v
-0 0
o. 4 ° ~ aai w y wo co > a~.0 wcw ~ a•mw ~0-0 AKF9J
b v, U O. o a~ eo
N G.
ORIGINAL
ao r
C -0 U
i ~
U
.403
ty)
4
a-
a b
~ ,tea a ,.~a a '
V is.Q o wQ o
c'
I ' O
o '3
a
ao. QQ' o
-
I
c~
c
4 ~
4i O
CG Z
w
on o o f i a b
o ai o w iv c p v v
on o_
440) 0
4) 4) cd 4)
00 r
A. p J p p 'ti p p p y O w
.0 o
4) cc) M .14 o
° v. p 4~ p W p cd O -4) W b y i0 v~
o op. H p" p p .a. ^p A O pt", O
,pp Q q p 0.7 O
b ee " o. cd a ap v, x i Q au + co
GL w oD ~l
y a a 'b ° a ow ~v~ ebb b'
o U U o o ao d7 b! c o °W° o b I^
M 00 -,U 4, "0 0
1-51
o a~ ~ 4u) 3
k b o ° o.~U a cv
0 41
ai c° v v o. p GaG au ~c x a p r. y p e w v
0 42 .2
b ! o > a a ~a+ a ° O -S ~ -`f°0 ° o =v a Q' ~
a3i O A F 5 W v1 r~°n F G 4.0 ~N p Q v] p V]
-o "0 10 o -0
e~ v~ a p wp v~ v o ri 0 -
y g ' oq ' oD p .~4 ! aq U .d b W ..d..o ' S p O U p pp w iy 4 9J,
e o p a a cpa b A x ~ Q 02 p b A° v a A°
° W W a c~ „n p n ° b ro N .a p `c a a b c~ °3 m
nl I AL
u
i
k
U
C
a N
c
m 3~
o a o
0, u o
j
p
a ~ to
0 o z
Q a Qa o GA Qa o
w 0
o a tw.~ bb ob y c~ co -0 o-S ~s
0 04
oo y .a Cd N U P. -S .2 K , °
x .o i, ani a~ v api a"i LYl q C cd a o C/]
s. O b a> as 0. y p N w •O 0 O .L"
y a° cjj~
-S 0 o w 9 *r-
14 ca a o0
o v I~ api Q u" U.
1.0 .2 . E
0° o a co 'b o y i~ e~ p a a~ o ~v o 0
$ g' o
'r4 0
~s b E . o
on 3 a ~E o .c a p ~
O > a o . ° 0 v
tC N O pw~ O R N Q O ty ^ Lt+ ~O
O A y V CG pv !7 Ly p y r, Ow O 0 O y ~ ° O UO.V
tiw O
G N O° 15 « ^I~ .G 'b O b ° p 0 p0.b 4 0 O a, O U ~O .O y N 2 rA
yb a~'~'~ -.4 rA o 4°.a o. w o~> 3 0 II
-0 0
j .,~~~o„o mss;
0 45 0.
up. 40, 0
1 0-9 .
t w°c°h I;b aoi °4-a¢• ui v0, p
U O
ORIGINAL
C ~
N d
C Q~
v m
m=
ro
uv
m ea ~ o
CL
E
0
3
v
teCL' 3
d v O I
i
a Qa o
$a!
z
o b o ~ II
a o a a a
a a ° o °
a1 Q o CA Q o C~ Q o'
w
0
to A
yo° p3°o~Q V~
C7r~ ~ vrn a~n
b oo cd ; v, a U cd .i~ o rn w ~ a~ ~
v p A a w s E 3> t q a - 0
4 ° o a°~i y
b o''o Uow 0ooUU$ v`'-
V 00 4) 0
114 4) 'o Cd
o'dp"'Sw;'O>o'bti~bz'b
.0 (ODI 0 lo
o~ oho Q 10".0~0 0 'ona~ag0.
~T~ II
0 o ato d.~ aa, 0 ? y ,tea
o p o a? o b b H . Q y co o ~Oyj Lo 2
3 y w c0 Q O q CU O p^ w ed w U t]..~ C rj a
0 .41
° Q ,•.r C~^O q ° o ¢ y4. o-S .5a n.o M 0w °
i =1
o a~ v o.,!O ow a
0.0 ~A
b a a >.d a5 o•yV ° 0.0 a ° ona 3 a o ° v~
w b H o a4 O a~ c o o a "a ro o o o a~ ~oj
m v~~ a~ ° wa: v ~xl K9
s~
- - m
ca ~
ORIGINAL
ft c
Na
ro
~ U
r
u
~a.
a
to C U
yr Cd
C
4-4 a
~~az
~a II
too
„ a ou 3~ a~ on>, .nH•~ cd o a b w
41 Al
40 4) -8
R-2 0
A R.
ctl ai 0 1:6 a "40
; y ' 'S - o 'd y .2 12-0
Q to -0 0
my ouca,~ c °
7 o o a~~'' v
a~ a
04'0 1A rA
CIS
0 -0 C, 0
-0 .2 IOU 0 2
0 4) .2
o o a o o a' w o ° v v b PO 'o 4, o
0Q .C 4.1 y yew r VA•°
b a~ II
°
A. ^ y o fii ° o rn oD +r co ° a~ v w 4)
i ~•3 a~'~ ° ~ ° o o a~ aabi ob v~ a ~
•°p
oQr ,rJ o p 0 y P KF9
e A .a 04 v 40.4 Q N o• on a A v p,
C)o
Oj~IGINAL
IL Q~
m ~ £ e~
O_
C V ~ a
V m
G
ra
G ~U
E ~ U
G
G ~ U
Z r
~ 8!Q o
E
0
,v
3
on
n''
~a
a
$ a
'm b z
? r a II
a !~Qa o
4 oo C~J
00
04 -0-0 0.0
yy U
. cad °U y O U j
p P to
ao ° o oa' 3b~ r i
U " Ong a13 FE 6 a o 0 a
00 ta
on a~ ¢ 4) U gip' p .d ai ° a a
a .pa v; o V 42 .D caO 0i, a O ~ Q b
.6 CIS
0. 0 14 10 u 0 > a) 'A
U co
°
w
;I > 004 C.) 0
° 0 w v a~i .a y p m w p c b
u" 'ob 3 °'.a b4'w'
H t 3 0 o o o a. a 3 b o a o o II
a. $ o b o
R. ° U o o ~n ° . ~w~ 0 3 H o v~ ° ma'y' y AkF
U v~ U v~ cn ao ce~ a~ 9cP
m • Z
• • •
• v) v ~z M m
~G
ORIGINAL
Y! °
ro5
E
m-
to
r V
O1 ~ 4
CL o
E
CL' b b b
b
on ~
to 0
i a a p a in.
a s a! a c Qa c II
L~ Q o GU S o in. d o ~ a~
o
a a~ci o opp n
o.
0 -S -4
-5 C03 60
or- 0-
0 0 t!
cc, 0 o 8-0.
'o 63 *6 -0 r, oa oo a
II
mw w a° o a o o v, a; 0 °p b o .5-00
G .a ~ v, ~ c0 p o a y p ~ N N cd p w .k
o v, ~i b i . ~ .°'n ~ a b o a, ~ ~ ¢ ;,d o ' ~ k~ ~ ~ a ~ o v~
u 121
U y . a. y O a V 48 a w o w w p U
cd 0, :3 ai y 0 a~ .a O O 2 id o ° o o v
0 4) 4) 0
O U " p b w N 14 cd cd y N o
`S p v~ N C U
y U b+" G Q OO a N tir •to7 O N O !•a ..U. y O U
H ~ b t~ 41 a° x o 0 3 ~.cd
a
a o _ :3 C,3
p_ on o a v y
on MQ~ .n ` c° p 1 1 .o 0 aai b b b o AxF9
V ao a s a ao oo °r a°'i U ao o ao w o v, o0 0 o o" a~ T
= V1 v Vi h 'y w ~A v 3 2"o GL w Vi GL b U n v rn b >_0 er m
m '
-tz M r-
0 If
ORIGINAL
ti o
a
Vi
C C G~
~ Eq
~O
m
U
G
G C U
O ~
V'
a
q ~
o Z
a
PaQa o !pqQ o
Vi i+ N O V
v o a Q ca o a F" -Cd
00
0 00 O O v~ y O Q. - N° a cd
`"Cjx~ a$ o oy o c one o a 3
Qj CA
a a o o w a o
a. 'b•- o a.~ b:3~
a 00:°w w -S bc ~b a 0 -ti a II
+ .O ti b O cd 4.. j v1 CL w C~ I.. :b ' 0 ed A l!
U . o y o ~.'b c o H v a
01 0
a~>°°' a;~15 O r Nay °"a I'S a" ai O p ~yd cad c°i o "cd ° p Z 'gypp c~
;01 10, cod. 00
C o w ~n o w LL r; 0,0 a otji Kt
N m cOd a~i o p!, 4 ~~y p ,b > P ' o. p aj cl
c~ aoo~v av~ o~i~a°' o.., a
v, ab w 4 v~ ° a~ v> a~~..y vi aH ~-o. W'S • Fl. Z M r
U
ORIGINAL
E L~
a N rn
E
C G Ca
e v m~
e rS
u u
U
g La
0
C C m
O U
t0 0
"s
u
a
h
' U
~ ~r cd
W
C
z
'n E b
.14
o
"0, CA
ou w ~ ~
'n r
40
10 >0
ow 00 '00 0- w -0 -0 9L4 "o En
vo rn a 'o Sao b~ a. v b
=0, 000
o ai~ o A o.d o p oEv ~b w 3 h °q~~° o o A o A c%~
1 "2 .d an ti ou Q r ' o b ao on I I
00
00 e4
P- P4
v v v eA y .~-d > v w v F9~
_ • • • 0.i • • ti ti H 3 • • • •
- _ _ - m
r--
G o
ORIGINAL
E
U
C C , m
~ rn
A 4
°A
H¢° o
Cc
~a z
a
w
fines ° o c~a'~ :3 w
a~a°>
12
00
r-
14 EL- -o -S w
or-
a go ° w o °a ~7 ac°v y Q II
04 u
PC > 0. A
o v O 00
z a 0 y 0 E 10 rA
ou 00 09
u 0. 42
PS -0 p .0, w b obi ° °
>oa~i x >c.o
A It
~ ~ N "q ~ ~ citd ~ ~ I~ ~ " U ~ ~ O O ~ ~ i O O O ~ cC ~
V C3 0e o c~ o
p O a~ p 0 v a W> ti • • • O 9Jc~
r
v O
ORIGINAL
t
m a~
C e
G i U
O
?r r
~ W 4
06 °
a
LO L
V
~I
I ' TTT?
V W
~a
a .
N C U
$a z
II
b o
.a .ti ° > a~ i o b U
12.
o ; ° > a 0 0> w ab II
a 00 O Ab Q I;nb 0~ C CA
j a S N .t3 I~
le 0 00 C: -s 79
~i 00'3 0~ v~
o A; go£ y .d R"b Av A.o o°
g COD
d5d C)
75.2 0
>°aA c'O
~c z N l~ QC z N T
O
'ORIGINAL
Q
CL !3 Q
EQ
e m~
~ v
e ~
w
W 4
~ ~ o N
m
' ;n a I
,c~Qa o '
I ~ c °a
z
0 0
a,Q~ o aQa o
o ^ t'om' a o
o
U N N ~ .b O U
:Z'4 o
p° aai C U b' y aUi > 0 A O,
b o a w a~ ~a w, qq ° y4) 0
> r r~ pp o' C
5" . w fl. is 5: r dq G.:' rn r- y w b 41 S y
o ° a
40.
o a~ a~ a~ o a~ o ayi a~i a. > w q
.14 00
ed coi o Y V~`~. cd n a~'i y eve cc a
• U -2 U a p. 'ti O > y N cd vi b Q o w id
0 Ow
P-, Ez 0 :9 04
a g o b a s N A, N° ~p ^o a o o b II
p° a c R" K3 io .-7 w ° a~i xs ° U U a a Kr
a:J,U.~.a a~'"i.'~ o`'"u ~ ~ ~ m•^,iu.~~ O'. 9J'~
v 30 o`ta°'i: a°oa''" a~a~ R,
t ~1 u; ~ • a j a v~ ca W v~ Ww-+ U y Z w a
. ~n ~ a N U 4° o
~
O IUINAL
y ~
m
C ' _ V U
U
G ~
O
~ i C U
O
a da c
A
0
a a. II
ada o ada o a,d o
°'r ab ~Mb wb•~'N°Si'x o oU ~b~ a w
a°Ai U ca U O. OA bq
a~a~ 3 owl b) yv,on
a, 5 °wCA
'R 0
0 co
° Oa gx a.a q c~b'~ a,,e a Pn- S4
N , U a c6 V o Q°, U on U C
0 Vi oo coo w ~ o P. O b a w cad
~.a o a b a a° b b, o 4, a o 0 o°' a`V
co o V) .b u 's C. y o p j ° o q o a o CA
o aai V p. y C 7a .-t4 o a~ bA N P. ~ N e a II
y > w D O y y r. .~"5 a O a
O pq h N ~L w
e 8 0 W p cra ~o v a y a ey w ra ~2 a~ en ',e KE
i U) 0 02 04
CORD
° a~. Q ui A¢tiP,w ~3 0 a A vi Q,4. 5 -3 ~A ~gcvA~ r-Z r-
p
r
ORIGINA
C ~ C Q~
C t o'
a
CL 4
a
W m
w o
a'
l .r
c
'CoL
a on o
' a ~ II
'ad o
-0 0 10 o -0 -,o 1
_ w a A
4) cA
N O U y p w ti Q" OD O N
n Oa to ta '1~ w
k V) p a~ O 3 ~~r i~ . a -d w ai .rte p o a`"i II
N° O "p. A. Wp F O O O 4. O b n
a w p ca b .ti Q a~ N o cbb w q H
N ° o G4 a v O 6. a~ . a
0 m 16 ai Q W w a O p O> p ° d p co 04 3;'0 0 0v~ ° ° W,' o
v r oA w
10. >
O 0". 2 -0
v, co
W c~ p b b 04 v, 1- OC a a~ W w •E.
c o a J a°i o O w 0.9 o on
~U q',~; ~''o ova k a - Q
p a a-11•
i o ci 9
.0 U u~ "i w :r cd ~w N ri V id c~".~pyG~ o Q O
Ch
ORIGINAL
r '
C G ~ a
V U
V
C
C C ' U
;0 r
~0 : c
CL
a
W m
Q
ly
- -
16
(A bo
3
a a w c
E~ Q¢' o
CL
oa ~ z
;I a u
map c
oan'ao~' o U y bN 3~cs
0.2 r. 46
Loll
V w o y o U-0 ° x b
to
u. o 8.~ o a2
LL. -0
0 .9
.14 ou 0 0- to
Z w N' a~i p m Aq a b 15
b 02 cd 4) ao~ °p > y o o ob o v~
°a Qon 1 Qon0ai abU a II
to 0 r-
d 'b ` a° .0 0 00
° ovi b' N ovi 3 v a A K
N, X 0 0. o c ao~- N hb ao 3 o L ` o a cis 03
F9
')RIGINAL
0a
e
c e~
~ to
G U
G
~ r
C 9
c
CD
'o
J2
a
~w
z
II
~d 'b a~ a 0 atko cd v w
a 78 -15
4~ 8 0o 0, -m
a o
° o a O.10 '
0 N o o N ' y OHO N ~I .9 ° 04
L 3 3 A o o u w, b a VA o Q c a3i ai x v
o E 9 2 9 O 5 0 ~ ~ q° au a ° on U o
;a 0-
0 U 40,
o ~d
a a~ cd cd q w o o g C., 00 ;j t 0 -0 5 "00 1.
IF 'v oz 'od -2
a
o o 0
04 o V]
b' ° a a c~ _ a 0 0 v o
w
y ° b .o 'Ty o ono on x on an o II
0 y a
~°o 03~o 0°a~ n AKF
to) -0 Q
Cm)
140
ORIGINAL
e e
8 E Eo
C V U
e
u
~ r
o
p, s
$ C rA
c ~
m m
,v
$
c
m
a'a' w
a
Qa o
~a z
II
O
.o by Q w xy &
Q a v .c 04
00 oU d Ts w O . a ° cC
co (U C4
0 on Vol e U aN n a ° II
0 4- To SR
0 Q)
.o a A
o ° i 444 ° a00
a°, C'n
a~ a a api a~i ai v; .c°. A
=0 .2
c au w w a aci a~r~ a~i+ o o c o II
N = y • ~p 1 Fl F+' 'O 4 : = o
yC' 00 00 00 a
C l~ I~ cd O . N N Cj Ct v~ J, V~
en 2' • • • • ~p p,i~: O4) ~
NtiZ • • Nti z T
rn
i p
-)RIGINAL
E L
a
XUY
T
C W
0 V
r
C
E
tv
c
m;3
a'
as
j
;
z
a
b
3 w~ ~x ' a
'00 0 -0 r-
3 O U.d U U'd bb b
3 U a a o m on v,
60 cd
x b ~ > ~ ~ ~ c c
A a~'i i ° ao c > II
fa 0
~r q o on U
4; 0; 0
eta a Q a a o W U c O .b
a~ aO b b a-100b d ~ ~ b Ut
v :3 "0
C y
p~
0 10 00 0 .00
79 9 0 •O .d > O 'b > 'd d N V] b4 N O N r
N .w
N Rf .d l0 'b cd O 1~ 'U O ~ '0 0 O cd O V]
R+ C4 U bD b O R~, by P4 y .b by °
yC` i y+~~ id c~ D p cd p O cif O 'r7 O "'~7 O ~bD yr c~~
• . • . • . • . . . . o
Z .r m
C7
-)RIGINAL
N perp,,
4 N C
to
C
CT
~ mJ
G i VU
m 4
~a
a 3
3
' as
Ac
a
o$!, Z
Y 4
91
Q
a
w ¢ A a
d w U~+ y
O Q td
m~ ~ N V a n
U
.r
x o ~ ~ ~ II
U
00 00
14
b U M
M ~
v v ,
0
D . . . . Z V
-)RIGINAL
J
Tho UK Group
Consubnts
' lopawa 1009 AUG 12 M 11: 42
. con i tieft 111108rore t
• G= W SuiidNnp,d Engineerjne i i LD C I T Y CLERK
August 12, 2009
HAND DELIVERY
City Council
City of Bakersfield
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
SUBJECT: PARTIAL APPEAL WITHDRAWAL
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS
THE CANYONS: CPAIZC 03-0337
Dear Council Members:
On April 22nd 2009 my firm flied an appeal on behalf of the applicant of four decisions of the
Planning Commission made during the Planning Commission hearing of April 16, 2009 with
regard to Agenda Items 5. la, b, c and d relating to GPA/ZC 03-0337 (the "Appeal').
At the direction of the applicant, we hereby withdraw Appeal Item No. 1 of the Appeal. Appeal
Items No.'s 2, 3 and 4 remain as identified in the Appeal.
Respectfully,
*0044
Robert. M. Kapral
President
Cc: Mr. Jim Santurro
Canyons, LLC
Mr. Ed Shaffer, Esq.
Archer Norris
Mr. Scott Howry, Esq.
Young Wooldridge
Mr. Michael Kaia, Esq..
Young Wooldridge
2181 Setum Court, Suite 100. Sakersbeki,' CA • 93308.8828 • Tel: 881.322.1200 • Fax. 861.322.1234
O~$AKF9 cE4011: flwpre4PNem'►4rouP•con+
m
0 O
OPIGINAL
f
K ~bnts P
1409 APR 22 AM 8: 43
. err suw,g a e
April 22, 2006
HAND DELIVERY
City Council
City d BalcardW
1501 Trwdun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 83301
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF APPEAL
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS
THE CANYONS: GPA/ZC 030337
Dear Council Members:
With regard to aforementioned GPA2C 03-0337, this letter serves as a fornwi appeal by the
applicant of four decisions of the Planning Commission made during the Planning Commission
hearing of April 18, 2009 with regard to Agenda Items 5.1a, b, c and d as follows:
Appeal Item No. 1:
The Planning Commission approved f3PA/ZC 03-0337 Conditions of Approval Exhlbit B-1,
Condition No. 2 ('Condition 20), which states:
'2. Prior to *Won= of s buM ft peank developer sha11 Pay a M*r ftwports0on
1b6ft 10e M tine anrourrt of $0.35 per square 1W for corm WOW amW $2487 for
n&WW tlw ch' 8019 unit. 1rhe amount of No be may be akjsd to the annual h>ce use
per the Cost Inds as approved by the C8y Enpknsr. K pdor to Mamma of
a buk t+p psrnNt send be is nnergsd kft go nepM►arnd 77F program than papmsrrt of the
189onai TIF be wfo be deemed to haw saEblled the Intent of this ommiM n. Tft be is a
component of the C&y Cowm# alppnovud aodan plrr to puraue AMX6 nsecM to ocnVAft
ocnat►udbn of mor h Wwfa6ion AscaNBibs to serve growth and drwa% nnsnt wit do
AfWmpollan BaNsrslNid. For orderly dsvuiblrrnsnr
The Tragic and Transportation section of The Canyons Environmental Impact Report ('EIR')
identities mitigation msaew" to reduce Irnpacb on the locct and MOWW transportation mfty as
in the City of BakaraMid. Two seprallte transportation impact ties pnognams an identllfed in the
EIR: The Makopoliton Trsnepo Cation Impact Fee Program ('RTIF' Program) and the Local
Mitigation Impact Fee Program ('LMIF' Prc omm). The EIR dMwibss the RTIF Program
(rellsrsnoe pp. 5.11-24, 28) and states: 'Prods invnlWV t3ensral P1bn W"Wk menu are
svaNntsd by adcaV haflla to ft pra0cted 20.pw haft ft was, to dsft,nkre F the RTIF
improvwrngrrts could aooo"w odats the Prod ihvdhft the General Plan amsrrdimt.- The EIR
aho describes the LMIF Program (reference pp. 5.11.25, 28) and states 7/ an bnprorwnent is
requ*W for a spsaft PICOK t; and it was beyond what wog oontwr*jdw wf Me RTIF
PfvyrW then the /mProvwmant is isqulnrd as a Lood Afoaoon requvar ent.
21 i ad m Coin Bulb loo • 9dNlnN 0 CA • 93308-MM • W. e61.3Z2.12D0 • FOC W-=12N
EMM: ~RdOrMmipiouRaom
a~'Kr9
o' sT
m
~ r
v O
ORIGINAL
a y coza
ea
T~fr~CWWwConwrieWon wfGPMLC~ 7
P.2 offs
The RTIF was adopted by both the City of Bakersfield and the County of Kem in 1992.
Participation in the program is required of all new development and Includes a Regional
Transportation Facilities List and a Transportation Impact Fee Schedule. The Regional
Transportation Facilities List Includes those Improvements needed on the regional transportation
network Improvements required beyond those kWdMsd within the RTIF Program are
categorized as Local Mitigation and are covered by the LMIF Program. Implementation of the
RTIF and LMIF Programs with each new development ensures the incremental and cumulative
impact to the local and regional transportation system from now development Is reduced to a
level of lose than significant.
The EIR included Mitigation Measures 5.11.A1, 5.11.A2, 5.11.A3, 6.3.11.A1 and 6.3.11.A2
which identified the incremental intersection and roadway improvements needed urKW the
exhsft traffic with project, year 2016 traffic with project and year 2030 traffic with project
scenarios (pr*d related and cumulative analysis) to reduce the potential sigMAcant Impacts to
less than significant. These mitigations are repeated as Conditions 74, 75, 76, 85 and 86.
Condition 2 attempting to impose an additional large 'n*w franapontaI ffNdls>~y W should be
removed because it is (1) not a part of the RTIF or LMIF Programs, (2) not legishOvey, enacted
by the City and (3) inconsistent with the Mitigation Fee Act (Govemnant Cods Sections 68000-
66025). Furthermore, Imposition of the Condition vlolatss the vested rights of the applicant
pursuant to the Subdivision Map Ad (Government Code Sectiorn 6641046499.37) and the
Permit Streamlining Ad (Government Code Seaton 65920 st seq.).
Appeal Itann No. 2:
The Planning Commission approved GPA/ZC 03-0337 Condftions of Approval Exhibit B-1,
Conditions 1. 1. 5.2 and 6 that include a requirement to build a class 1 bike path within Moming
Drive from Alfred Harrell Highway to the existing Class 1 bko path on the old Morning Drive
alignment ('Bike Path Conditions') as foNows:
"1.1 Pmvkle ftdly executed dedlcWon for Atlw*g Dyve to artsrfar standards for dw
1b/ 1twfte of the area *Wlfn dre GPA request, and naosaawy tW-cf-wwy for off ate
irrrprsavwPw is mqu*W at tfrrre of mcordat/on of each of the lhraf had nap phases (gee /afar
oandilaians). Osdlosdorrs s1raN kmt ds su tabd wffts for b>twOn Chu /bills padt; droufd n
wWndad k tars calm and addltimal ansas for hrmhoaptig who s mqulrsd and as dhrcted
by dre City Engk w. SL*W s wrwrrt W* rspavt wath ft dsdlosdan downw to B darn is
a tantadve subdlWabn map ovw On a* OPA/ZC area is subnatfled dsdtaatloa can be
provided wffi Ora map."
'5-2 When AfarNng DrN* is om pfated, ft wfN hays a Class 2 bibs psM In scoardance
wath doe NwMesst Poky and Trails Plan. Slnoa Me apptfcsnt /s not rewmaaibb for me W
ln*anavsrraettit an Afarninp DnW, for public sadbty reasons the appliant shah conahtrd
Aftmkv se s psmrarant public sheet at a ml *mm of 36' wHo (lwo 12 fed atidls paved Nwnas
Plus a 6' whirr ahoukbra), end slraN cww&W an /Wwft dam 1 bM* path them Claa►weter
Canym Ptaos to ANisd H~ Hwy.-
'B With do 4M home oamhuded, mrbd►vidsritdew/oper &%W oon &W Aloming
Ddm as a pwnNw sat puWjv absst at s n*tlmum of 3d' wdda (taw 12 foot wide paved Norse
plus a 6' wide shoulders), fham Clsarwdw Canyon Place to Spr ft Canyon. Statue tiro
eppNCaW is not r sponaft for the W /mpnav*nm* on Monft Drfvs, for pub#O safbty
reasons Me appatM.wrat shall oorrahuot an /sxssrtrrr CNrss 1 b#w pent from C/earwafw Canyon
Place, to a temporary oonneotibn to the erdsi ft CNsss t b#w pa lit on the old AforaiRg Drlvs
aNgn• • -
ZfM exum OmK Suft 100. e.aaran.a, CA - 4W6 . Tot: N1.324.1200 . F=: =.s2z IZM * 00. WI.200.8 g AKF9
Errant:.hwwl%w=mrgoup oorn=n
s~
r
U O
ORIGINAL
alycMa
CRY of &*WdW
PlamMp Owrade ion Appeal
Tro CWWWLO ,1PA2C W4M?
Pape 3 d 6
The Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Chapter III - Circulation Element - Bikeway Master
Plan (Figure 1114) designates a 1210, j bike lane for the portion of Morning Drive between
Paladin Drive and Alfred Harrell Highway. The status of the Class 2 We lane has been
confirmed through the City Public Works Department posting of the Metropolitan Bakersfield
Bikeway Master Plan adopted by the City of Bakersfield on December 11, 2002, and updated and
reaffirmed August 16, 2006. A Class 1 Skce path is an 8-foot wide paved path with 24bot wide
shoulders on moh-side-sepetate,Trom tfw'tdWJWiy. In donli;Wborf a CWb 2 bike lane Is a 4
foot wide path within the roadway with a 4-Inch stripe separating the roadway from the We lane.
The difference in requirements Imposes a substantial a Mkkx ai construction cost.
The City of Bakersllsid constructed a bike path within the Morning Drive alignment from Alfred
Harrell Highway to Paladin Drive sometime In 2002 without easements from the affected
landowners (ref. Kem County Superior Court 'Btatement of Decision' Issued on January 30, 2009
in regards to Case No. S-1500-CV 257620 SPC ('Court Ruling')). The Court Ruling stated the
City of Bakerslsld has no bike path easement that Is Independent of and In the absence of an
easement for a public street within Morning Drive. We contend the Imposition of the Bke Path
Conditions Is me* an attempt by the City of Bakerslisid to defer its obligations to correct a
construction defect associated with the bike path and the Court Ruling.
The Bike Path Conditions should be revised to replace the Class 1 bike path requirement with a
Class 2 bike lane, for the folknlvt reasons.
(1) There is no evidence In the record that the City of Bakeraftid amended the Bikeway
Master Plan to support the conditions to construct a Class 1 bike path (intarim or otherwise) in
Morning Drive from Alined Harrell Highway, to a temporary connection to the existing Class 1 bike
path on the old Morning Drive alignment.
(2) There Is no evidence In the record that the construction of a Class 2 bike path from
Allred Harrell Highway to a temporary connection to the existing Class 1 We path on the old
Moming Drive alignment is unsab for bicyclists and motorists.
(3) There Is no evidence in the record that Class 2 bike lanes within arterial highway
alignments such as Morning Drive are ursatse for bicyclists and motW ts.
(4) The Bikeway Master Plan designates a Class 2 bike lane for Morning Drive from
Alfred Harrell Highway to Paladin Drive.
Appeal Hem No. 3:
The Planning Commission approved ZC 03-0337 with a condition requiring a Planned Unit
Development ('PUD') overlay be atta dyed to all residentlel zoning within the project. New
Condition 86 added by staff based on the Commission action reads as follows:
'88 Approve a PUD (PAmW Unit Devatpment) overby zone on aft reelklar al
zoned property no* me canyons prod "
The projsd's zoning Is presently R-1, single-family residential. The requested zone charges are
R-1-HD, R-2-1,11), R 24"JD-F11), C-2-PCD44D and OS-HD. The two residential zones alhcled by
the Planning Commission action are the R-14-ID and R -2-M Zones. The HD designation is a
HlNeide Development Combining Zone due to the project's location within a Hill side Development
Zone IderMed by the Balarsfleld Municipal Code, Title 17 Section 17.66. The Planning
Commission's action would require the addition of a PUD overlay to the R-1-HD and the R-2-1-10
proposed zones, i.e., R-1-PUD-HD and R-2-PUD4HD.
2161 S*M ONA Sub 100. eeNn 1 " CA . 0330e426 • Tel: 6b1.322.1200 . Fax: 651.3221234 • Cal: ae1.203.63e6
81 W : rh I 100-11.1w .come=
4~,AKF9
Q),
m
I- r
`v o
1 011Y cummo
Plamkp C m inlon App.M
The CwWw% WA2C W-W7
Paps 4 d6
The Commission's stated purpose In adding the condition was to provide an added layer of
control over the architectural elements of the residential structures and Is Woo ping within the
gated, private communities and within the non-gated, developed areas for single-family
residential housing. However, this action by the Planning Commission is inconsistent with
General Plan Chapter II - Land Use Element Implementation No. 6(e) which reads:
7n the City of 8alcsrsfls/d, devei pwt and bulAft knprovsrnsnI rsgddng a buffding
penrdt (except ter a0gh4smlly r sklarms) are subject to review aooo Wit to their
adherence with dty a wxftdVs, nsgulaflona and pdW ter issuarme of a Devebprrrsnt
Penny Projed4 badu ft Planned Unit Devebpmants and Planned Carnnhsradal
Devsbprnenta, are subjed to nwiew by the PWming Com►niaaian h brnn► pubic
hewfts. All other pmjscta are subject to review and approval by the She Plan Review
Corollate or staff. This process proMse a brum by ~ devalopmsrrt pviods can be
assessed ter compliance with the go^ policies, and standards of this plan.'
The Planning Commission recommendation to condition all residential zoning within the project to
include a PUD overlay should be denied for the following reasons.
(1) It Is inconsistent with the General Plan because single-family residences are exempt
from review by the Planning Commission for compliance with the goals, policies and standards of
the General Plan.
(2) The requirement is arbitrary and capricious because:
(a) there are no goads, policies and standards for the Planning Commission to
use to determine compliance, and
(b) the application of the PUD to 'gated' and "non-gated' slogle-family residential
development within the project is inconsistent with the City's treatment of recently-approved
single-family residential development immediately to the south of the project in the general
Northeast Bakersfield area and throughout the City of Bakersfield.
(3) Regulations are already in place that establishes guidelines and staff review for public
elements of the project such as:
(a) the Northeast Bakersfield Specific Peffas & Trails Plan which regulates the
trail Improvements, including 1- ch gaping and fencing,
(b) the Hillside Development Ordinance which regulates the landscaping and
fencing improvements to open space areas and roadway right of4my, and
(c) the BWwsf*id Municipal Code Title 16.36, Options! Design and Improvement
Standards, which provides for Menhats deem and Improvemen standards to faciftts
, pmnt of the project In a manner #W will be consistent with t1he general plan
requires
the recordation of conditions, covenants and restrictions, and fomra of as h and
omsovv We
me n re tlon (which would include the establishment of architectural and landscaping guideNrbs
and en broement and policing authority).
(4) The action will cause unnecessary delays and increased costs to the project because
builders would be required to submit plans for Planning Commission review and approval prior to
Issuance of building permits.
2161 SMum Cout. Suft 100. Be1w0 Mld, CA • 9330848M • TN: 661.322.12DO • Fa: 661.3? IZM • cal: 661.2M.MW
EnW.Aai WWwmap+w xwmoom O~ ) A K,69
T
~ m
r
v o
ORIGINAL
t
C4 Counrll
CoydBr. Nl*d
Pinning CmmtWw App@W
The Cw"MIOPAMC 03-=7
Paps 5 or s
(5) The homeowners association and architectural committee have a vested interest in
the project and will be better equipped to review and determine compliance with the architectural
regulations established by the developer and enforced by the homeowners association.
Appeal Ilsen No. 4:
The Planning Commission approved ZC 03.0337 with a condition requiring a Special Events Plan
for Hart Memorial Park be prepared and submitted to the Planning Director. Now Condition 87
added by staff based on the Commission action reads as follows:
'87. Pifor to recordation of the first final map, the aigpllcarnGtdevelopsr shah PmPars
*L&h t and obtafn sAwoval of a 'Speclaf Em is Traffic Plan' aftenhp Hart Park
everts that could nm* In the olomrre of Anted H&W Hwy. The plan is sLAW to Me
approval of the Planning Dt►eda.'
Hart Memorial Park is a part of the Kem River Regional Park, a county maintained recreational
facility that includes the Kem River Sooner Park, California Lhdnng Museum, Kem River
Campgrounds, Lake Ming and the Kem River Golf Course. Special events occurring in Hart
Memorial Park are generally associated with Easter Sunday and the annual Fishing Derby.
These events occur on weekends, not during weeklays. According to the Metropolitan
Bakersfield Generel Plan, the service area for the Kem River Regional Park Is app - imatey a
stay (80) mile radius. Hart Memorial Park attracts people from every comer of the City of
B@Mm fsid and beyond, Includinng arose as for east as Mojave, west to Taft and Marioope, south
to Frazier Park and north to Tulare.
The County of Kern Department of Parks 8 Recreation submitted a comment letter to the
Planning Commission on December 18, 2008 regarding The Canyons and Rio Bravo Ranch
Projects (roibrence EIR Chapter 3, Response to Comments, 4.2LL, pp. 4.2-148-148). In his
comment leftsr, Director Robert Leruds alleged that The Canyons project, Ric Bravo Ranch
project and other proposed development projec a may result In increased rsaeadorail use of the
rso -0 a final facilities causing Increased maintenance and impart to law enbroement However,
Mr. Lsrude did not identify a problem with special events or request a "special events plan.' He
further stated that his department was in the process of developing a Master Plan for the Kem
County park and recreation system to address reasaft and park fboitity impacts through
development of mitigation measures. We assume such a County plan will address special events
at Hart Park itthe County truly sees a need.
The Planning Commission recommendation requiring that a Special Events Plan fuor Hart
Memorial Park be prepared and submitted to the Planning Director should be denied for the
foitowing reasons.
(1) The requirement is arbitrary and capricious because:
(a) Kem County Paris A Recreation did not request a Special Events Plan for
The Canyons project, the Rio Bravo Ranch project or other projects,
(b) the Planning Commission's first attempt to place this requirement on The
Canyons project occurred during its December 18, 2008 hearing, but the Commission made no
attempt to impose the tarts requirement on the Rio Bravo Ranch project during a subsequent
public how" agenda Item that same night,
2161 Sat=CbLA &Ib 100 . BMs~a0 " CA • 9=084= • TN: 661.3221200 • Fw: W.322.1234• Cal: W1.203.6
tiom noun
End: I-OF
00 P,
~ m
t- r
v O
ORIGINAL
h
City coixwii
any or BNaa 1ftw
The Cwyan"Af= 03-=7
Pap a of e
(c) the Special Events Plan was not defined in scope or authority, leaving too
much discretion to staff in determining what details the Plan must contain and what burdens it can
place on The Canyons,
(d) the EIR did not Identify any projeckelatsd or cumulative Impact to Hart Park
or reeemmend the Special- Events Plan as a-needed mitigation measure,
(e) there is no evidence to support the need for such a plan or to Impose the
requirement on The Canyons, and
(f) evidence and testimony provided to the Planning Commission during Its
December 18, 2008 and April 16, 2009 hearings documented that projeckeiMsd and cumulative
traffic through Hart Park will constitute only minor increases in total volume and not cause
congestion, and rebutted the need for The Canyons to provide any •spedal events' plan.
(2) Had Memorial Park is considered an "attractant' for the general public recreational
use, drawing from the Metropolitan Bakendeld area, neighboring tides and the general outlying
county area. It is the county's responebility to maintain and manage the Kern River Regional
Park, and therefore, the county's responsibility to develop and Implement a special events plan
for Hart Memorial Park If needed.
This letter provides general explanations and support for appealing each Condition. We reserve
the right to expand on any Appeal Item by separate document and In testimony at the Council's
hearing on May 6, 2008.
Respectfully,
004
Robert. M. Kapral
President
Cc: Mr. Jim Santurro
Canyons, LLC
Mr. Ed Shaffer, Esq.
Archer Norris
Mr. Scott Howry, Esq.
Young Wooldrkige
Mr. Michael Knia, Esq.
Young Wooldridge
21618atun Court, &A& 100 • BaI1Ma6 ',,CA . 933004M . Tal: 061.922.1200 . Fax: Qe1.922.1294. QI: t161.20&83M
Ema0 ~lopral~wrtf*ymp,a m- m
o``aAK~9~
i-- m
v p
ORIGINAL