Bakersfield City Council
September 24, 2025

Review of Past Accomplishments
Draft Housing Element F-1
Review of Past Accomplishments
To develop appropriate programs to address the housing issues identified in the 6th Housing Cycle Housing Element, the City of Bakersfield reviewed the housing programs adopted in the 5th Housing Cycle Housing Element and evaluated the effectiveness of these programs in delivering housing services and assistance. Table F-1 summarizes the City’s construction, rehabilitation, and preservation goals and accomplishments during the 5th cycle planning period and Table F-2 provides a detailed program-level assessment of housing accomplishments over the last planning period.

1.1 Overview of Accomplishments
In 2011, the State legislature approved dissolution of the state’s redevelopment agencies.

This measure eliminated the City’s tax increment financing capabilities that for over 60 years were a primary tool for acquiring blighted properties and supporting redevelopment in declining neighborhoods. Like many cities, during recovery from the “great recession” revenue growth was largely stagnant, so while the city grew in population and size, City staff and resources were not able to keep up with demands in service. Increased service demands include calls for emergency service (average 24,000 calls per year, per dispatcher); homelessness support (27 percent increase in the number of unsheltered homeless individuals from 2020 to 2021); 57 percent population increase since 2000; and fewest employees to population ratio out of 107 cities analyzed (2013). Responding to the COVID pandemic has required the City to shift more staff time and resources away from redevelopment projects to focus on business assistance, rental assistance, and homeless services programs such as outreach, emergency housing, and food banks. The City also faces challenges related to environmental health concerns.1 Despite these challenges, the City was able to support housing and services for low-income and special needs populations. During the 5th Cycle Housing Element, the City implemented numerous programs to support market-rate and affordable housing production, infill development incentives, preservation of existing housing stock, and rental housing assistance. A full list of programs is included in Table F-2. Most notably, the City accomplished the following housing-related activities:
 Housing for Persons with Disabilities – The City’s Program 1-3e provides housing for persons with disabilities using state and federal funds to provide new units of supportive housing. Additionally using HOME and CDBG funding the City’s Home Access Program provides grants for housing modifications designed to provide or improve access to disabled homeowners from CDBG funds to persons with disabilities and developmental disabilities.
 Affordable Housing Trust Fund Program – In June 2021, the City adopted a resolution establishing the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The program received an initial one-time funding allocation of $5 million plus annual funding from Measure N, the Public Safety and Vital Services Measure, a locally controlled one-cent sales tax.

Funding is also provided from other Federal, State, and local public sources. The City is pursuing additional funding from California Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) and California Local Housing Trust Fund (LHTF). The total amount of funding the City expects to accrue when utilizing all of the current and recommended sources is 1 City of Bakersfield. 2022. FY2022 EPA Brownfields Assessment Grant Application. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-05/R09-22-A-011.pdf City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
F-2
projected to amount to $63.7 million through fiscal year 2025 or 2026.This fund aligns with goals of Program 1-1c to assist in the development of affordable housing.  Homeless Prevention Services – The City served approximately 1,673 persons with funding from the Emergency Solutions Grant and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS program to assist housing and service providers to prevent or reduce incidence of homelessness through Program 1-3a.
 Homeless Shelter Development Program – The City’s Program 1-3c has produced 410 additional beds to support homeless individuals and a large portion of the beds are available as part of the new Navigation Center, which was developed as part of a 2020 land purchase by the City of the former Calcot Property on 1900 E. Brundage Lane. This 17-acre site consisted of a 35,000 square-foot former office building that was converted into the Brundage Lane Navigation Center (BLNC). The BLNC provides low barrier transitional housing in partnership with Kern County. On-site services include medical, mental health, and social services to at-risk populations. The first year of BLNC operation, the Center successfully transitioned 85 people from homelessness to housing.
 Rental Housing Assistance Program – The City, in collaboration with the Housing Authority of Kern County (HACK), completed two fourplexes of affordable housing and began construction of an additional 101 units of affordable housing as part of Program 1- 4a. The City’s Rapid Re-Housing Program (Program 3-1d) was amended to provide approximately 50 families who were previously homeless with temporary rental assistance, an increase of 30 families that were assisted prior to the amendment.  Development Incentives Program – The City, through Program 1-5b, provided incentives utilizing budget reconciliation funding from Fiscal Year 20-21 to developers for three affordable housing complexes. The City allocated local sales tax funding to support the development of these affordable housing projects through the budget reconciliation, which included $3.3 million.
 Rehabilitation Funding Program – The City provided over $150,000 annually to community organizations for housing projects as part of Program 3-2d.  Fair Housing Program – The City contracts with Greater Bakersfield Legal Assistance (GBLA) for Fair Housing Services in the amount of $100,000 of CDBG funds annually through Program 4-1a. Fair housing actions included counseling, mediation, and referral services to 2,047 City landlord and tenants; tracking of 205 housing discrimination complaints, including 33 fair housing complaints; conducting 10 rental audits and 39 fair housing investigations; providing unlawful detainer information to 59 landlords and tenants; providing three fair housing trainings and four public service announcements; and serving 64 Limited English Proficiency clients.
 Infill Incentive Program – The City’s infill incentives have produced nearly 101 units on qualified infill lots through Program 5-1a, which utilized HOME funds to support the development of affordable housing on infill lots. In addition, the City utilized the Infill Infrastructure Grant Program through HCD to support the development of 136 units of infill housing including two fourplexes.
 At-Risk Rental Assistance Program – The City helped 45 individuals at-risk with rental assistance through Program 3-3d.

Review of Past Accomplishments
Draft Housing Element F-3

1.2 Development of Affordable Units
The City of Bakersfield is well positioned to make a head start on the 6th housing cycle’s goals through the guiding principles of the Bakersfield Affordable Housing Strategy, which includes a series of tools and programs to support the implementation of this strategy.

The City supported the construction of 12 projects with 743 deed-restricted units in the 5th housing cycle and brought the number of total deed restricted units to 4,882. A portion of this housing was built specifically for very low-income residents totaling 517 affordable units.

Affordable housing developments that were completed in the 5th cycle include the following projects:
 Residences at East Hills: Completed in December of 2021, this project includes 81 units of affordable housing, 44 of the units designated for veterans and their families.

These units will be rent restricted to households earning between 30-60 percent AMI.  22nd Street Lofts Apartments: Completed in September 2022, this project includes 20 one-bedroom units with units available for senior residents, age 62 and older, earning at or below 30 percent of Area Median Income (AMI) and of these units have a Housing Assistance Payments contract with HACK.
 Parkview Cottages and Creekview Villas: Completed in 2016, these projects added a total of 25 units for low-income homeowners.

For greater details of each development, refer to Appendix G for the full flier of each project.

1.3 Effectiveness of Addressing Special Needs
Special needs communities are demographic or occupational groups that call for specific program responses to address unique housing needs. State law specifically requires analysis of the special housing needs of people who are elderly or disabled (including developmental disabilities), female-headed households, large families, farmworkers, and people experiencing homelessness. These special needs groups often spend a disproportionate amount of their income to secure safe and decent housing and are sometimes subject to discrimination based on their specific needs or circumstances.

The City was successful in facilitating the development of housing for special needs groups during the 5th Cycle Housing Element. Under Program 1-1a Federal and State Funding Program, the City of Bakersfield receives an entitlement of approximately $4.5 million annually in federal assistance, which includes a mix of CDBG, HOME, and ESG funds.

HOME and ESG funds are required to be used on affordable housing and supportive services projects. During the 2020-21 Fiscal Year, the City of Bakersfield spent approximately $6.5 million for affordable housing, infrastructure improvements, nonprofit assistance, home services, and services to people with HIV/AIDS. The City’s ConPlan 2025 has included special needs populations within the City’s top priorities for federal entitlement funds. The City has been effective at providing funding to support special needs groups and has incorporated further progress and funding into future planning.

The City of Bakersfield’s 5th Cycle Housing Element addressed special needs populations through a set of actions under Policy 1-3. This policy specifically works to assist special needs persons including the elderly, disabled, female-headed households, large families, farmworkers, and homeless persons and families. During the 5th Cycle Housing Element, the City took the following actions to address housing for special needs:

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
F-4
 In October of 2020, the Brundage Lane Navigation Center opened its doors and has since provided 410 beds for homeless persons and in the first year helped transition 85 people from homeless to stable housing.
 During the 2019-2020 year, the City helped to serve 1,637 persons through the Emergency Solutions Grant program, which included emergency shelter operations, rapid re-housing of 50 households, and outreach services that served 543 people.  On Feb. 18, 2021, the City of Bakersfield amended Section 17.04.285 relating to food and/or shelter service agency and added Sections 17.04.602, 17.04.608, and 17.04.626 relating to supportive housing, target population, and transitional housing, to be consistent with State of California Department of Housing and Community Development guidelines and requirements.
 The City committed HOME and Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds to a proposed development to construct 20 units of new affordable housing. Construction is expected to begin in 2021 and be completed in 2022.
 The City provides $40,000 in Home Access grants annually for accessibility and mobility improvements to existing housing.
 In February 2021, the City amended its municipal code to ensure that all reasonable accommodation requests can be made through the City's ADA/504 Coordinator.  The City of Bakersfield completed two fourplexes for affordable housing and began construction on an additional 101 units of affordable housing. Further, 35 more units are funded and began construction in 2021.

Cumulatively, 5th cycle housing programs are generally effective at addressing housing needs for special needs groups, especially people experiencing homelessness, people with disabilities, and low- and moderate-income households, although additional programs and actions would be beneficial to serve the community’s needs. For instance, additional program actions are needed to support extremely low-income households and college students at risk of homelessness.

As discussed in Appendix B, Housing Needs Assessment, Bakersfield senior householders have a higher share at lower income levels, with one-third of senior households earning below $30,000 per year. In the 5th housing cycle, the City supported the development of 145 new senior units (Program 1-3d – Senior Housing), and administered home access grants to 112 households for persons with mobility impairments (Program 1-3e – Disabled Persons).

Recently, the City of Bakersfield allocated $719,953 to support a 16-unit senior housing complex directly adjacent to the Bakersfield Senior Center a redevelopment of the existing Bakersfield Senior Center into a 4-story mixed-use complex with 36-units of senior housing.

The City also mandates that all new construction supported with City funds must have five percent of units (minimum) set aside for households with disabilities. The City has also worked with the Housing Authority to help low-income senior households access housing vouchers to support the cost of rent (Program 1-4a – Rental Assistance). Low-income senior households who rent are particularly vulnerable to housing displacement since they are typically on a fixed income. Although the City’s programs have been successful, the magnitude of need remains high. The City will employ several programs in the 6th housing cycle to increase affordable housing development, prioritizing special needs housing groups such as seniors.

To assist persons with disabilities, the City, under Program 1-3e, provided housing for persons with disabilities using state and federal funds to provide new units of supportive housing. Additionally, the City’s Home Access Program provides grants for housing modifications designed to provide or improve access to disabled homeowners from CDBG Review of Past Accomplishments
Draft Housing Element F-5
funds to persons with disabilities and developmental disabilities. The City assisted 112 households with home access grants in the 5th housing cycle. The City will continue the Home Access Grant Program and will also aim to develop 25 housing units for households with persons with disabilities in the 6th housing cycle (Action 5.1 in Chapter 2, Housing Plan).

Bakersfield has a higher percentage of large households compared to the state. Although Bakersfield has sufficient housing units to accommodate large households in the city, overcrowding is an issue for lower-income households, especially those that rent. The City fell short of its new construction goals in the 5th housing cycle. In the 5th housing cycle, the City’s Program 2-2d –Large Family Units directed the City to encourage rental units for large households, but it is unclear if this program was adequate to meet the housing needs of large households. In the 6th housing cycle, the City will employ Action 8.7 to provide technical assistance and incentives to housing developers to build larger rental units (3 to 4- bedroom units) in residential and mixed-use development, with the objective to support the development of at least 10 rental units for large households.

As discussed in Appendix B, Housing Needs Assessment, and Appendix D, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, farmworkers have barriers to housing due to low-income salaries and other factors. The 2020 ACS identified 14,175 residents in Bakersfield with occupations in farming, fishing, and forestry. In 5th housing cycle, the City employed Program 1-3g – Farmworker Housing and successfully supported two recent multifamily housing projects for farmworkers. Farmworkers are also able to access deed-restricted affordable housing. Due to the continued need for farmworker housing, the City will employ Action 5.3 in the 6th housing cycle with more defined responsibilities and objectives to coordinate with non-profit organizations and the Housing Authority, and provide incentives and technical assistance for housing development. The City aims to support 300 units of farmworker housing in the 6th housing cycle. Additionally, the City will complete the establishment of the Community Land Trust (Program 20 in Chapter 2, Housing Plan) to provide additional housing opportunities for low-income households, including farmworkers.

Bakersfield has strived to meet the needs of persons experiencing homelessness. In the 5th housing cycle, the City supported the opening of the Brundage Lane Navigation Center in 2020 and has since provided 410 beds for homeless persons and in the first year helped transition 85 people from homeless to stable housing. The City also helped to serve 1,637 persons through the Emergency Solutions Grant program, which included emergency shelter operations, rapid re-housing of 50 households, and outreach services that served 543 people. The City of Bakersfield currently has 151 units supported through Project Homekey, including the conversion of two former hotels and an additional 166 units under construction. The City is currently working with local service providers utilizing $3.2 million in funds for the following project categories: Rapid Rehousing, Case Management, Youth Rental Assistance, and Shelter Operations (Programs 1.3a through 1.3c). As discussed in Appendix B, Housing Needs Assessment, there is a resource gap of 822 individuals in need of temporary or transitional housing. The City will strengthen and diversify its program actions and objectives in the 6th housing cycle under Program 11 in Chapter 2, Housing Plan, pertaining to supporting additional shelter beds, housing for persons at risk for homelessness, outreach, permanent supportive housing, and supporting youth transitioning out of the foster system.

The City did not employ any programs in the 5th housing cycle directly related to housing for college students. As noted in Appendix B, Housing Needs Assessment, a 2020 survey conducted by Bakersfield College found that 39 percent of Bakersfield College students were housing insecure, and that 19 percent were experiencing homelessness. Although City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
F-6
California State University Bakersfield (CSUB) has on-campus housing for a portion of its student body, most students live off campus either at home or in rental housing. To address housing needs for college students, the City will partner with the educational institutions, identify existing programs and resources that can be leveraged to meet needs with the goal of creating 200 student housing units in the 6th housing cycle (Action 5.5 in Chapter 2, Housing Plan).

In the 5th housing cycle, the City employed several programs to address the needs of lowincome and extremely low-income households, which benefitted all special housing needs groups. Most of these programs are carried over into the 6th housing cycle (see Chapter 2, Housing Plan), with more defined actions, timelines, and objectives. The City will also enact additional programs for fair housing services and outreach, and tenant protections.

1.4 Quantified Objectives
Table F-1 summarizes the City’s progress toward meeting the previous 5th Cycle Housing Element RHNA, as well as objectives to rehabilitate and conserve/preserve existing housing stock. The City of Bakersfield did not reach its 5th cycle RHNA goals in the Very Low-, Low-, Moderate-, and Above Moderate-Income categories, but did achieve objectives for housing rehabilitation. The City did not have any affordable units at risk of market conversion during the 5th housing cycle.

Table F-1 Quantified Housing Objective and Achieved Accomplishments New Construction Rehabilitation Preservation (At-Risk Units) RHNA
(2015-2022) Actual Objectives Actual Objectives Actual
Very Low-Income 9,706 517 0 37 0 0
Low-Income 5,800 141 15 144 0 0
Moderate-Income 6,453 4,413 0 0 0 0
Above Moderate-Income 14,331 9,549 0 0 0 0
Total 36,290 14,620 15 181 0 0

1.5 Review of Past Accomplishments
Table F-2 provides a detailed program-level assessment of housing accomplishments during the 5th cycle planning period.

Review of Past Accomplishments
Bakersfield General Plan F-7
Table F-2 Review of Past Accomplishments
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 1-1a –
Federal and
State Funding
The objective of this program is to acquire funds from the state and federal grant opportunities to support the
development of affordable housing, housing for special
needs, and support service projects.

The City of Bakersfield receives an entitlement of
approximately $4.5 million dollars a year in federal
assistance. That represents $3.2 million in CDBG funds, $1,000,000 in HOME funds, and $300,000 in ESG money.

HOME and ESG funds are required to be used for
affordable housing and supportive service projects.

The City receives approximately $6 million annually in HUD funding for community and housing projects. In 2020 the City received additional Cares Act funding. Additional funding from HCD is also used to support the development of affordable housing. In 2021 the City issued a NOFA to allocate from a variety of entitlement and grant funds in the amount of $8,639,356 to support housing development.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 1.1a will be carried over into the next 6th Cycle Housing Element as part of new Programs 4 and 5. The City will continue to apply for HUD and State HCD funding to support the development of affordable housing and housing for special needs.

Program 1-1b –
Redevelopment
Successor
Housing Agency
Funding
The objective of this program is to reallocate previous Redevelopment funding to low to moderate income housing programs.

Allocate Successor Housing Agency Low to Moderate funds to direct housing-related programs. Use set aside funds from previous Redevelopment Low Moderate housing funds
of $6,000,000 for low to moderate income housing programs including down payment assistance, infrastructure
improvements and construction.

Used RDA housing funds to assist 1 low income and 3 moderate income units. Creekview Villas was completed in 2016 with RDA funds, adding 16 low-income units.

Continued Appropriateness: This program will be removed since the RDA no longer exists. The funding will be reallocated into new and existing low to moderate income housing programs such as down payment assistance (new Program 14), infrastructure improvements (new Program 17) and construction of subsidized low and moderate-income housing (new Program 4).

Program 1-1c –
Local
Assistance and
Outreach
Continue to provide education and technical assistance to developers, nonprofit organizations, or other qualified private sector interests in the application and development of projects for federal and state financing and by providing assistance with entitlements, site identification, fee
reductions when appropriate, and density bonuses.

The City holds scheduled meetings with developers of housing projects as requested to help educate and guide through the entitlement process.

Continued Appropriateness: This program will be combined with Program 1-5a due to the similar functions into the new Program 8.

Program 1-2a –
Homeownership
Assistance
Continue to identify and pursue Federal, State and regional programs to move very low-income families from renters to homeowners, such as HUDs Homeownership Voucher
Program, down payment and closing cost assistance,
mortgage financing and mortgage credit certificates for homebuyers. The City’s objective is to assist 15 persons or families with homeownership assistance.

Continued working with a Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) to develop the Chardonnay neighborhood where Self-Help Enterprises constructed ten single-family low-income homes and provided silent second mortgages up to $60,000. The City administers a city-wide down payment assistance and education program with $250,000 in HOME funds annually. As a result of this program, Parkview Cottages (9 units) and Creekview Villas (16 units) added a total of 25 units for low-income homeowners.

Continued Appropriateness: This program be combined with Program 1- 1a, which has the same goal of seeking state and federal funding, into the new Program 14 to assist residents with homeownership opportunities.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
F-8
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 1-3a –
Homeless
Prevention
Services
Continue to apply for and allocate Emergency Solutions
Grants and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS
(HOPWA) program funds to assist housing and service
providers including homeless services and shelters, street outreach, Kern Mental Health at Risk Homeless Services, HIV/AIDS homeless support services and Alliance Against Family Violence services and emergency shelter. Continue to allocate a staff member to the Continuum of Care Board (Kern County Homeless Collaborative) and assist to provide housing to single individuals, working poor, homeless,
senior citizens, students, and others in need of basic, safe housing to prevent or reduce the incidence of homelessness in areas near service providers, public transportation, and service jobs.

The City continued funding and implementing projects with ESG and HOPWA funds. Approximately 1,637 persons were served through the Emergency Solutions Grant program. This was broken down in the following ways: $161,602 was spent on Emergency Shelter Operations and Services (1,044 people served), $100,332 was spent on Rapid Re-Housing (50 Households served), and $23,625 was spent on Outreach Services (543 people served). Additionally, approximately $560,733 was provided to Kern County Public Health to provide HOPWA services in the City under the following categories: Tenant Based Rental Assistance, Facility Based Housing, Short-Term Rental and Mortgage Assistance and Housing Services. 1,150 persons have been assisted with HOPWA funds in the past year.

The City has also used CARES funds to address homeless prevention and services and will report on the following grants in the next couple of years:
$3.2 million in CARES Rental & Mortgage Assistance, $11.3 million in CARES Rent and Mortgage Assistance, $1.1 million in Homeless Prevention, and $1.5 million in Rapid Rehousing. Additional COVID related Projects include: infrastructure upgrades to homeless shelters to expand quarantine areas, COVID related operations costs, COVID related outreach, landlord incentives, increased case management, and data collection. In recent years, the State introduced the Housing Homeless Assistance Grant.

The City is currently working with local service providers utilizing $3.2 million in HHAP funds for the following project categories: Rapid Rehousing, Case Management, Youth Rental Assistance, and Shelter Operations.

Continued Appropriateness: This program will be combined with Program 1-1a, which has the same goal of seeking state and federal funding, into the new Program 11 to support housing for residents experiencing homelessness.

Program 1-3b --
Supportive and
Transitional
Housing
To be consistent with SB2, amend the Zoning Ordinance to specifically identify supportive and transitional housing, and permit this type of housing as a residential use, subject to these restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone.

On Feb. 18, 2021, the City of Bakersfield amended Section 17.04.285 relating to food and/or shelter service agency and added Sections

17.04.602, 17.04.608, and 17.04.626 relating to supportive housing, target population, and transitional housing, to be consistent with State of California Department of Housing and Community Development guidelines and requirements.

Continued Appropriateness: This program will be carried over as Program

11. The City will revise the Zoning Code to comply with AB 2162 to ensure that supportive housing with up to 50 units be a use by-right in zones where multifamily and mixed use is permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses, and ensure that there is no minimum parking requirements for units occupied by supportive housing residents if the development is located within 0.5-mile of a public transit stop.

Review of Past Accomplishments
Bakersfield General Plan F-9
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 1-3c –
Homeless
Shelter
Development
Facilitate the development and rehabilitation of SRO units and other emergency shelters in the City by offering
financial assistance to nonprofit developers who wish to rehabilitate or develop SROs in order to house extremely low income individuals or develop emergency shelters. The City’s objective is to assist in rehabilitation of 5 units, 5 units of SROs and 10 beds for emergency shelter.

The City will encourage developers of affordable housing to apply to the MHP – Supportive Housing Program to develop housing affordable to extremely low-income households that are homeless or at-risk of becoming homeless. The City will further assist with expedited permit processing, incentives and modification of development standards as necessary.

Partnerships between the City, County, and local service providers have led to the increase of shelter beds in the City of Bakersfield by 410 beds. 150 of these beds are at the City of Bakersfield’s new Navigation Center which was constructed using local funds.

The MHP Supportive Housing program has contributed to the development of three units of affordable to extremely low income or at-risk, and the development of 22nd Street (20 units) that are 30 percent AMI units.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 1-3c will be carried over as the new Program 11 to continue to provide financial and technical support to nonprofit organizations through MHP – Supportive Housing Program to rehabilitate or develop affordable housing for extremely low-income households and persons at risk for experiencing homelessness. The City will expedite permit processing for the development of such units.

Program 1-3d –
Senior Housing
Continue to provide for elderly and frail elderly persons by encouraging the use of set-aside funds to develop housing that is affordable to very low and low-income seniors. Assist in the development of affordable senior projects using
HOME funds and set-aside funds. The City’s objective is to assist 2 affordable senior housing projects.

The City committed HOME and NSP funds to a proposed development to construct 19 units of new affordable housing, which opened in September 2022. Between 2013 and 2022, a total of 145 new senior units opened.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 1-3d will be carried over as part of new Program 4 to provide funds for affordable housing development, including housing for low-income seniors.

Program 1-3e –
Disabled
Persons
Continue to provide for housing for persons with disabilities including developmental disabilities with the use of federal and state funds to provide new units of supportive housing for persons with disabilities and permit persons with
disabilities of any age to locate in senior citizen independent living facilities. In addition, administer the City’s Home Access Program that provides accessibility and mobility enhancing device grants of up to $3,500 each from CDBG
funds to persons with disabilities and developmental
disabilities. The City’s objective is to assist 2 supportive housing projects and assist 50 persons with home access grants.

The City provides $40,000 in Home Access grants annually for accessibility and mobility improvements to existing housing. In total, the City was able to assist 112 households with home access grants.

All new construction must have 5% of units (minimum) set aside for households with disabilities.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 1-3e will be carried over as new Program 5 to provide technical and financial support housing for residents with disabilities, including the Home Access Grant Program.

Program 1-3f –
Reasonable
Accommodation
Ensure that the City complies with the provisions of SB 520 (Chapter 671 of the government code). The City will
complete an audit and, if necessary, revise the City’s
ordinances, codes, policies, and procedures to ensure that they comply with the “reasonable accommodation”
provisions.

Added to Bakersfield Municipal Code on February 3, 2021. All reasonable accommodation requests can be made through the City’s ADA/504 Coordinator.

Continued Appropriateness: The City will continue this program to amend the Reasonable Accommodations Ordinance to remove subjective findings and provide link on the Housing page of the City website (new Program 5).

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
F-10
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 1-3g –
Farmworker
Housing
Assess the need for farmworker housing in the City by
coordinating with the United Farm Worker Union and various nonprofits, including the Kern County Housing Authority, Self-Help Enterprises, and the Delano Office California Rural Legal Assistance to determine the need for
farmworker housing in the City. Continue to assist builders and stakeholders to pursue funding resources, density
bonuses, infrastructure availability and, if necessary, and provide priority processing. The City’s objective is to assist one farmworker housing project.

The City continues to support the development of farmworker housing. Two multifamily farmworker housing projects are scheduled to finish construction in 2023, Brentwood Crossings and Sagewood.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 1-3g will be carried over as new Program 5 to Provide technical and/or financial assistance to facilitate the development of affordable farmworker housing.

Program 1-4a –
Rental
Assistance
Continue to collaborate with HACK and monitor the Section 8 Housing program. Respond to the federal government
Super NOFA on an annual basis and use whatever
influence exists to obtain additional certificates/vouchers.

The City of Bakersfield continued to monitor the Section 8 Housing program and collaborated with HACK to distribute housing vouchers.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 1-4a is carried over as new Program 6 to continue to support HACK to provide housing assistance to extremely low, very low-, low-, and moderate-income households, including the Section 8 housing assistance program.

Program 1-4b –
Public Housing
Assist in the expansion of public housing in the City. The City does not operate a housing authority for public housing but will support HACK in their efforts by providing assistance to public housing builders and stakeholders to pursue
funding resources, density bonuses, infrastructure
availability and, if necessary, and provide priority
processing. The City’s objective is to assist with to 2 public housing projects.

See 1-4a.

The City has assisted HACK in the Adelante Vista modernization project by preparing environmental review documents.

Continued Appropriateness: Nationwide, the trend is to convert public housing into project-based rental assistance. Therefore, Program 1-4b will not be continued. The City will implement new Program 4 to provide technical and financial support for subsidized affordable housing.

Program 1-5a –
Development
Process
Assistance
The City shall continue to implement the Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance, but shall modify the ordinance, if
necessary, based on the findings of the Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance Review and Affordable Unit In-lieu
Fee/Nexus Study. To preserve affordability, allow and
encourage developers to "piggyback" or file concurrent
applications (i.e., rezones, tentative tract maps, conditional use permits, variance requests, etc.) if multiple approvals are required, and if consistent with applicable processing requirements. Continue to have the first staff person that assists a low-income housing developer to be the primary City contact for that developer on that project. This person then assists the developer through permits, approvals, plan checks, inspections, etc. This reduces the time a lowincome housing developer must spend in City offices and makes the approval process smoother and faster.

The City continues developer assistance but does not have an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.

Continued Appropriateness: This program be combined with Program 1- 1c to the new Program 10 to take the necessary steps towards the development of an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.

Review of Past Accomplishments
Bakersfield General Plan F-11
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 1-5b –
Development
Incentives
To preserve affordability, provide incentives (i.e., density bonus units, fee reductions, fee deferral, fast-tracking, etc.) and encourage developers to employ innovative or
alternative construction methods to reduce housing costs of residential projects who agree to provide the specified percentage of units at a cost affordable to very-low and/or low income households or senior citizens. The City’s
objective is to assist 10 affordable housing projects.

The City of Bakersfield allocated local sales tax funding to support the development of affordable housing. Fiscal Year 20-21 included $4.3 million and a budget reconciliation added an additional $3.3 million for affordable housing. The City assisted 12 housing projects for a total of 734 units.

The City continues to provide developer assistance. The City provided support for the development of three affordable housing complexes and sold property to facilitate the development of an affordable single-family home.

The City of Bakersfield adopted a revised accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance and reduced impact fee payments associated with the development of these units. The City is implementing a Pilot Program to incentivize ADU development.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 1-5b is carried over as the new Program 4 to provide technical support and incentives for the development of affordable housing.

Program 1-5c –
Density Bonus
The City will continue to implement its Density Bonus
Ordinance, consistent with Government Code Section
65915, and consider requests for density bonuses on
residential projects.

The City continues to provide density bonuses for the development of affordable housing.

One density bonus application was processed to build a fourplex on a single-family lot, which began construction in 2019 and was completed in 2022.

Continued Appropriateness: The City will continue to provide information to developers on density bonus opportunities consistent with State law as part of Program 4.

Program 2-1a –
Available
Vacant Land
Monitor and update the inventory of vacant lands using the City’s GIS mapping capabilities and continually update the base map to overlay urban vacant lands with zoning and
density information and make this information available online and in various City offices. The City’s objective is to annually update the vacant land inventory.

The City continues to have an adequate amount of vacant land zoned for residential use, with a focus on fill development in Central Bakersfield and other strategic areas to align with the High Speed Rail Station Plan and other applicable area plans.

The City provides a map of vacant lands using the City’s GIS mapping capabilities.

Continued Appropriateness: The City will monitor and promote sites for housing in new Program 7.

Program 2-1b –
Development
Monitoring
Continue program to monitor the extent of residential,
commercial, and industrial development on an annual basis.

Sufficient detail should be provided to monitor employment growth and housing production. Monitor housing
development costs on an annual basis to ensure
affordability to a broad spectrum of City residents. Include information from the Bakersfield Board of Realtors, Multiple Listing Service and the HBA to track housing development, sales, and listing costs.

The City continues to monitor development and growth.

Continued Appropriateness: The City will have a new overarching “Sites Inventory Monitoring” program as Program 7.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
F-12
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 2-2a –
Zoning for All
Incomes
Monitor the amount of land zoned for all types of housing and initiate zone changes if necessary. Utilizing GIS
updates, monitor the amount of land zoned for both single family and multifamily development and initiate zone
changes to accommodate affordable housing. The City’s
objective is to annually review its residential zones to make sure there is enough land to accommodate housing for all incomes.

The City continues to monitor all housing types.

Continued Appropriateness: The City will have a new overarching “Sites Inventory Monitoring” program as Program 7.

Program 2-2b –
Housing
Opportunity
Sites
Ensure that there is a sufficient amount of multifamily zoned land to meet the housing need identified in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). Continue the program
of lot consolidation to combine small residential lots into a large lot and large lot subdivisions to accommodate
affordable housing production. Offer incentives such as offering graduated density bonuses on a case-by-case
basis. The City’s objective is to do 5 lot consolidations and 30 subdivisions.

The City of Bakersfield initiated an RFP process for a qualified consultant to utilize $625,000 of SB2 funding to develop an affordable housing strategic plan.

The City continues to have adequate amount of zoning land for multifamily housing.

Continued Appropriateness: This program will be the new Program 9 for development of large lots and new Program 8 to support lot consolidation.

Program 2-2c –
Adequate
Infrastructure
Ensure adequate infrastructure exists to meet the housing need identified in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The City will continue to implement adopted
policies that require City water and sewer providers grant priority to proposed affordable housing projects. The City will deliver its adopted Housing Element to all local water and sewer providers.

The City continues to have adequate infrastructure to meet housing needs.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 2-2c will be carried over as new Program 4 to adopt written policies and procedures for the Public Works - Utilities Division pursuant to Government Code Section 65589.7.

Program 2-2d –
Large Family
Units
Encourage the development of larger rental units (three and four bedroom) to accommodate the changing household
demographics. Work with the development community to
identify the incentives and programs that will encourage the construction of three- and four-bedroom rental units. The City’s objective is to hold an annual workshop with
developers and educate them about affordable housing
programs and incentives and assist with the development of 10 large family units.

The City continues to encourage large rental units. The number of units with 3+ bedrooms were not recorded for projects during the 5th cycle.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 2-2d will be carried over as part of new Program 8 to support development of both smaller rental and owner units (studio and one-bedroom) and larger rental units (3 to 4- bedroom units) in residential and mixed-use development.

Program 2-2e –
Small Units
Encourage the development of smaller rental and owner
units for singles and couples to accommodate the changing household demographics. Work with the development
community to identify the incentives and programs that will encourage the construction of studios and one bedroom
rental units or small 1-2 bedroom single family units. The City’s objective is to hold an annual workshop with
developers and educate them about affordable housing
The City continues to encourage small units. The number of small units were not recorded for projects during the 5th cycle.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 2-2e will be carried over as part of new Program 8 to support development of both smaller rental and owner units (studio and one-bedroom) and larger rental units (3 to 4- bedroom units) in residential and mixed-use development.

Review of Past Accomplishments
Bakersfield General Plan F-13
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness programs and incentives and assist with the development of 10 small single units.

Program 3-1a –
Prevent
Disruptive Land
Uses
Protect existing stabilized residential neighborhoods from the encroachment of incompatible or potentially disruptive land uses and/or activities. Review of development
proposals within or adjacent to existing residential
neighborhoods for potential conflicts (intrusive, disruptive or incompatible land uses and/or activities). Review will be initiated at the point in the processing of the proposal (general plan amendment, rezone, conditional use permit, variance, etc.) when sufficient detail to determine project compatibility is available.

Through project review, the City continues to prevent disruptive land uses to existing residential neighborhoods.

Continued Appropriateness: The City will delete this program as the goals are already codified by the General Plan Land Use Element.

Program 3-1b –
Code
Enforcement
Establish code enforcement as a high priority and provide adequate funding and staffing to support code enforcement programs. Enforce existing regulations regarding derelict or abandoned vehicles, outdoor storage, and substandard or illegal buildings and establish regulations to abate weedfilled yards when any of the above is deemed to constitute a health, safety or fire hazard. The City’s objective is to complete 100 code enforcement inspections to facilitate housing improvements or rehabilitation.

With mid-year budget amendments, the City will maintain a staff of 16 authorized full time code enforcement officers.

Continued Appropriateness: The City will delete this program as it is restating the functions of an existing division.

Program 3-1c –
Public Facility
Improvements
Install and upgrade public service facilities (streets, alleys, and utilities) to encourage increased private market
investment in declining or deteriorating neighborhoods.

In low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, the City has allocated around $2.2 million annually in CDBG funds towards curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements; park lighting upgrades; and park facility upgrades and rehabilitation.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 3-1c will be carried over as part of Program 17 to focus investment in Central and Southeast Bakersfield as part of the AFFH.

Program 3-1d –
Foreclosure
Assistance
Continue to refer homeowners in foreclosure to consumer credit counselors and Self-Help Enterprises, who has a
program that is assisting homeowners in foreclosure.

Additionally, the City’s Rapid Re-Housing program provides assistance to approximately 20 households annually who
have been displaced due to foreclosure or eviction.

The City no longer implements this program due to lack of funding. No homeowners were assisted with foreclosures.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 3-1d will not be carried over due to lack of funding, but the City will support foreclosure education as part of Program 6.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
F-14
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 3-2a –
Housing
Rehabilitation
Provide technical and financial assistance to all eligible homeowners and residential property owners to rehabilitate existing dwelling units through grants or low interest loans.

The City will continue to partner with community
organizations and assist in single family rehabilitation in the City using federal and Redevelopment Successor Housing
Agency funds for deferred or below market interest loans, down payment assistance or grants to rehabilitate singlefamily and eligible multifamily complex owners. The City’s objective is to assist in the rehabilitation of 10 units.

The City provides HOME entitlement funds to support housing rehabilitation.

Since 2015, 181 households received assistance; however, progress on the program was delayed due to COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the City implemented the Home Repair and Weatherization program utilizing ARPA funding which provides to preserve the health and safety of their homes.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 3-2a will be carried over as new Program 1 to support housing rehabilitation.

Program 3-2c –
Reduce Lead
Based Paint
Act to reduce Lead Based Paint Hazards and incorporate
the appropriate actions (pursuant to the Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992) into all housing programs under the jurisdiction of the City. On a case-by-case basis, provide funds for the testing and mitigation of housing units for lead-based paint. The City’s objective is to assist in the reduction of lead-based paint hazards in 5 units.

As part of the HOME Access and the ARPA Home Repair and Weatherization programs, funds are set aside to mitigate Lead Based hazards where needed.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 3-2c will be carried over as Program 1 to reduce lead-based paint hazards.

Program 3-2d –
Rehabilitation
Funding
Make funds available to community-based organizations to acquire and rehabilitate units which may have been
abandoned or otherwise lost from the City’s housing stock and sell them to very low and low-income first-time
homebuyers. Continue to set-aside 15 percent of HOME
entitlements funds for CHDO acquisition and rehabilitation.

The City’s objective is to provide rehabilitation funding to one community organization every two years.

The City has provided over $150,000 annually to community organizations for housing projects.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 3-2d will be carried over as Program 1 to support housing rehabilitation.

Program 3-3a –
Monitor At-Risk
Housing
Continue regular contact with the California Housing
Partnership Corporation, the agency that monitors the at-risk units and owner notifications of intent to opt-out. Continue to assist the housing nonprofit, Golden Empire Affordable
Housing, Inc., formed by HACK, in the purchase and
rehabilitation of any at risk units in the City.

The City regularly monitors at-risk units and incentivizes property owners to utilize grant funds to rehabilitate and extend deed restricted housing. During this timeframe, no units were converted to market rate.

Continued Appropriateness: This program will be carried over as Program 3 to address at-risk units.

Program 3-3b –
Monitor and
Preserve
Affordable
Housing
Closely monitor the status of affordable rental housing units.

Continue regular contact with the owners/ operators of rental complexes that may be at risk of selling out of the affordable housing program. Provide technical assistance to potential purchasers, including nonprofits, developers, and tenants of potentially converting affordable properties. The City’s objective is to annually contact the California Housing Partnership Corporation for a list of potential at risk housing and provide assistance to developers and/or properties to help preserve 195 affordable units.

The City annually monitors affordable housing.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 3-3b will be carried over as new Program 3 to address at-risk units.

Review of Past Accomplishments
Bakersfield General Plan F-15
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 3-3c –
At-Risk
Preservation
Upon notification that a project is at-risk, the City will meet with the development community and provide assistance in preserving these units. Assistance may be in the form of financial assistance from the City which may come from
programs such as CalHFA’s preservation program. Other
assistance may be technical assistance with applications for other programs, such as the Low Income Housing Tax
Credit Program.

The City continues to look to provide rehabilitation funding to preserve affordable units.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 3-3c will be carried over as new Program 3 to address at-risk units.

Program 3-3d –
At-Risk Tenant
Assistance
When a project becomes at-risk, the City will work with the development community to provide education to tenants
about what it means when a project is at-risk, the level of the risk of conversion to market rate rents, and assistance with finding other housing opportunities should the project not be preserved.

The City did not lose affordable housing to market rate rents during this timeframe, but was prepared to utilize Rapid Rehousing, and Tenant Based Rental Assistance.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 3-3d will be carried over as new Program 3 to address at-risk units.

Program 4-1a –
Fair Housing
Program
The Community Development Department, through its Fair
Housing Program, will support the intent and spirit of equal housing opportunities as expressed in the Civil Rights Act of 1986, Title VII of the 1968 Civil Rights Act, California Rumford Fair Housing Act of 1968 and the Fair Housing
Amendments Act of 1988, The California Fair Employment
and Housing Act, The Unruh Act (California Government
Code Section 51), The Ralph Civil Rights Act (California Civil Code Section 51.7), The Bane Civil Rights Act
(California Civil Code Section 52.1), California Government Code Sections 111135, 65008 and 65589.5. As part of the City’s Fair Housing Program the following activities will be completed; 1) an annual Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing concurrent with the Consolidated Plan Annual
Action Plan; 2) Provide annual fair housing tester training in order to promote tester pool retention; 3) investigate all formal housing discrimination complaints received and make appropriate referrals to enforcement agencies; 4) employ one full time counselor for one-on-one counseling programs through telephone or walk-in contact.

The City contracts with Greater Bakersfield Legal Assistance to provide fair housing services. Through the allocation of $100,000 in CDBG funds, GBLA provided the following services in FY 21-22:
 Served approximately 64 Limited English Proficiency (LEP) clients.  Conducted 3 Fair Housing Trainings-Distributed 2,252 pieces of Fair Housing literature at various venues in the city.
 Conducted 4 PSAs for Fair Housing Outreach-Received 8,844 visits to the Fair Housing Website.
 Held 6 Fair Housing Education Events-Received and tracked 205 housing discrimination complaints, including 33 fair housing complaints.  Conducted 10 rental audits.
 Conducted 39 fair housing investigations.
 Provided representation to 10 city clients choosing to file formal, informal housing discrimination complaints.
 Provided counseling, mediation, and referral services to 2047 City landlord and tenants.
 Provided unlawful detainer information to 59 landlords and tenants.

Instead of hiring a fair housing counselor, the City partnered with GBLA for the administration of the Fair Housing Program.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 4-1a will be carried over as new Program 16 to support fair housing services.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
F-16
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 4-1b –
Public
Information and
Outreach
Implement an effective and comprehensive outreach and
public education program designed to raise awareness of the fair housing laws that protect individuals, often in traditionally underserved communities, against housing
discrimination. Outreach will include the development and distribution of educational literature and resources that describe ways to prevent housing injustices and the
applicable laws that protect against discrimination. The materials will be made available free to the public in various languages. Outreach will also include workshops on fair housing law for landlords, tenants, nonprofit organizations and government employees. The workshops will include an overview of the state and federal fair housing laws, as well as basic landlord-tenant rights and responsibilities.

Workshops will be given in various languages as needed.

The City will hold 2 workshops annually at accessible
community locations. Expand public information and
outreach programs for first time home buyers in high
minority areas to help them qualify for special lending programs offered by local lending institutions. Educate mortgage lenders that they need to increase their outreach in lower income areas. Collaborate with service agencies to distribute educational materials. The City will update fair housing brochures aimed at reaching the growing Spanishspeaking communities by January 2016. The City’s Limited English Proficiency plan only identified Spanish translation based on current demographics.

The City holds regular community meetings and regularly attends community events per year to educate public on City housing assistance programs. The City maintains a webpage dedicated to the Affordable Housing Strategy. During the creation of the strategy community meetings were held with information provided in English, Spanish, and Punjabi. Due to COVID, outreach events were limited. The City contracts with the Greater Bakersfield Legal Assistance to provide fair housing resources that include legal assistance for housing discrimination inquiries.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 4-1b Program 4-1a will be carried over as new Program 16 and new Program 17 to support outreach and education for fair housing services.

Program 4-1c –
Community
Equity and
Access
Encourage public and private low-income housing in
neighborhoods that are not traditional residential areas with access to transit, employment centers, and community
amenities. The City’s objective is to hold two workshops with developers and educate them about affordable housing and optimal locations in the City.

The City evaluates all proposed housing projects and encourages equitable locations. The City maintains a map of equitable areas to help guide new construction projects.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 4-1c will be carried over as Program 4 to actively promote sites available for affordable housing development to potential developers, private and nonprofit organizations, and other interested persons and organizations; provide technical assistance in the application for projects with affordable housing; and ensure a streamlined permitting process.

Review of Past Accomplishments
Bakersfield General Plan F-17
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 4-1d –
Housing
Discrimination
and Complaint
Investigation
The City (or Fair Housing service provider) will maintain a 24-hour discrimination hotline and will investigate allegations of housing discrimination under the fair housing laws. The City will conduct fact finding investigations and propose potential solutions for victims of housing discrimination.

Case resolution may include mediation, conciliation, a
referral to state and federal administrative agencies, or referral to the contractor’s litigation department.

Provided as needed by the Greater Bakersfield Legal Assistance. Through the allocation of $100,000 in CDBG funds, GBLA provided the following services in FY 21-22 related to housing discrimination and complaint investigation:
 Served approximately 64 Limited English Proficiency (LEP) clients.  Conducted 10 rental audits.
 Conducted 39 fair housing investigations.
 Provided representation to 10 city clients choosing to file formal, informal housing discrimination complaints.
 Provided counseling, mediation, and referral services to 2,047 City landlord and tenants.
 Provided unlawful detainer information to 59 landlords and tenants.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 4-1d will be carried over as new Program 16 to support fair housing services.

Program 4-2a –
Housing
Displacement
In development of public projects, require an analysis of potential displacement of existing residences with an
emphasis on minimizing both temporary displacement and
relocation. Continue to use CDBG or HOME funds when
necessary to mitigate the unsettling impacts of temporary and permanent relocation during the construction or
rehabilitation of publicly funded housing.

Provided as needed.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 4-2a will be carried over as new Program 6 to support tenants at risk of displacement.

Program 5-1a –
Infill Incentive
Using HOME funds to provide incentives such as reduced
lot size in the Downtown Area to affordable housing
developers, acquire/construct infill homes for new
homebuyers.

The City continues to provide HOME funds to infill housing projects. 392 units were put to construction which qualify as infill.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 5-1a will be carried over as new Program 8 to support new housing development.

Program 5-1b –
Fund Infill
Development
Continue to apply for the Infill Infrastructure Grant Program through HCD to provide residential and mixed-use housing opportunities.

No IIG funds were applied for during the cycle.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 5-1a will be carried over as new Program 8 to support new housing development.

Program 5-1c –
Locations for
Infill
Development
Collaborate with and use GIS tools developed by the
California Coalition for Rural Housing and the UC Davis Regional Opportunity Index to determine optimal infill
locations for affordable housing with accessibility to transit, employment opportunities, community facilities, services and amenities. The City will evaluate optimal infill locations for affordable housing using GIS tools at least three times during the planning period or as necessary.

The City is currently working on its Transformative Climate Communities *TCC) planning grant to complete an Affordable Housing Site Analysis in Southeast Bakersfield, as well as a Downtown Capacity Analysis for its central core. The Affordable Housing Strategic Plan included a Housing Inventory tool, a GIS tool, that can help developers locate potential sites for affordable housing development.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 5-1a will be carried over as new Program 4 to support the development of an Affordable Housing Site Analysis tool to create a Priority Affordable Housing Sites List.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
F-18
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 5-2a –
Mixed Uses
To ensure the development of housing that has, to the
extent possible, a support structure of shopping, services, and jobs within easy access. Encourage development of
well-planned and designed projects that provides for the development of compatible residential, commercial,
industrial, institutional, or public uses within a single project or neighborhood.

The City continues to encourage mixed-use housing projects, such as the Renaissance at Baker and Bakersfield Senior Center projects in predevelopment phases.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 5-2a will be carried over as new Program 15 to support infrastructure for public transit and active transportation such as walking and biking in areas designated for housing opportunities, and new Program 17 to support infrastructure improvement plans in Central and Southeast Bakersfield.

Program 5-2b –
Jobs/housing
Balance
Cooperate with large employers, the Chamber of
Commerce, and major commercial and industrial developers to identify and implement programs to balance employment growth with the ability to provide housing opportunities affordable to the incomes of the newly created job
opportunities. Consider the effects of new employment,
particularly in relation to housing demands, when new
commercial or industrial development is proposed.

The City encourages mixed use development and employment centers in close proximity to housing.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 5-2b will be carried over as new Program 15 to increase public transit and active transportation connectivity between housing and places of employment and education.

Program 5-3a –
Energy
Efficiency
Improvements
Promote and support State and local programs for energy and water conservation in existing homes. The Golden State Finance Authority provides financing for homeowners
making energy efficiency improvements.

The City provided information to affordable housing developments in support of GRID alternatives and energy service provider PG&E to provide energy improvements for low-income housing units.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 5-3a will be carried over as new Program 15 to promote education about these programs.

Program 5-3b –
Efficient
Development
Promote and support State and local programs for energy and water conservation in existing homes. The Golden State Finance Authority provides financing for homeowners
making energy efficiency improvements.

The City implements the State's green building code and implements residential water conservation programs. The Home Repair and Weatherization Program eligible activities include energy conservation features, as well as plumbing, heating, and weatherization improvements.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 5-3b will be carried over as new Program 15 to promote education about these programs.

Program 5-4a –
Local
Coordination
Continue to support the Housing Authority of the County of Kern (HACK) to provide housing assistance to extremely
low, very low-, low- and moderate-income households.

Maintain membership in HACK to qualify City residents for Section 8 existing housing assistance administered by the Housing Authority. Continue to participate in the monthly meetings of the Homeless Collaborative composed of
service providers, the County, mental health professionals, Continuum Care advocates, and interested individuals.

Investigate alternative intergovernmental arrangements and program options to deal with area-wide housing issues and problems. Work with the Kern County Administration to
identify and solve regional problems.

City works collaboratively with County and other agencies to address homelessness and housing needs, both passively and by taking an active role on boards and committees. Additionally, the City Council initiated the AD Hoc Housing and Homeless Committee to host monthly meetings with stakeholders and to provide staff with action items to assist with local coordination and collaboration.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 5-4a will be carried over as new Program 6 to support the use of Section 8 housing assistance.

Review of Past Accomplishments
Bakersfield General Plan F-19
Program Program Objectives Progress and Continued Appropriateness Program 5-5a –
HSR
Coordination
Continue to coordinate with the High Speed Rail Authority and evaluate the impacts to existing housing and housing needs from the High Speed Rail project. The City will
conduct public outreach, as needed, with the High Speed Rail Authority to provide project updates and to collect public feedback during various stages of project development. The City will develop a station area plan that will evaluate the impacts to existing housing and for the potential of future housing growth in the downtown area. Plan to be completed by the end of 2017.

The City Council adopted the Making Downtown Bakersfield High-Speed Rail Station Area Plan in May 2018 which included housing development in the City's urban core. The City continues to coordinate with the HSR Authority to address impacts to existing housing.

Continued Appropriateness: Program 5-5a will be carried over as new Program 8 to support coordination with the High Speed Rail Authority.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
F-20
This page intentionally left blank.

Rincon Consultants, Inc.
4589 N Marty Ave., Suite 102
Fresno, California 93722
559-228-9925
www.rinconconsultants.com
August 27, 2025
Project No: 21-11036
Roque Nino, Principal Planner
City of Bakersfield
Planning Division
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93301
Via email: [email protected]
Subject: CEQA Exemption Memorandum for Bakersfield 2023-2031 Housing Element Update City of Bakersfield, Kern County, California
Dear Mr. Nino:

This memorandum provides an analysis to support the determination by the City of Bakersfield (the lead agency) that the proposed Bakersfield 2023-2031 Housing Element Update are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15061(b)(3) (“general rule” or “common sense”) and of Title 14, Article 18, 15620 of the California Code of Regulations (statutory). The proposed project falls within the sphere of the general rule or common sense rule, that CEQA applies only to development which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the project is not subject to CEQA.

Project Background
As part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element update, cities are required to identify housing sites that provide the development capacity to accommodate build out of the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) at all income levels. To accommodate the City’s RHNA need for all income levels, future housing development would occur through a variety of methods, including development on vacant parcels, infill development in existing residential and commercial areas, and development of accessory dwelling units (ADU). Housing elements are also required to consider ways to promote access to housing that is attainable for residents at all income levels, beyond focusing solely on opportunities for production of new units.

The proposed project, herein referred to as the “proposed project,” would amend the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan replacing the current Housing Element with the proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element. The proposed Housing Element establishes programs, policies, and actions to further the goal of meeting the existing and projected housing needs of all income levels of households in the Bakersfield community and provides evidence of the City’s ability to accommodate the RHNA through the year 2031, as established by the Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG).

Exemption Analysis
In order to determine if the proposed project is exempt, we reviewed potential CEQA exemptions that may apply to the proposed project. The following analysis reviews if the proposed project can be considered categorically exempt.

City of Bakersfield
CEQA Exemption Memorandum for the 2023-2031 Housing Element 2 Categorical Exemption
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15354, “Categorical Exemption” means an exemption from CEQA for a class of projects based on a finding by the Secretary for Resources that the class of projects does not have a significant effect on the environment.

CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300.2(a) through (f) list specific exceptions for which a CE may not be used. These exceptions are as follows:
a. Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.

The proposed project involves adoption of a policy document and does not in and of itself include any proposed development. As such, the proposed project would not impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern. Therefore, the proposed project does not trigger these exemption exceptions.
b. Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.

The proposed project involves adoption of a policy document and does not in and of itself include any proposed development. Because the proposed project does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts that are cumulatively considerable. In addition, through the City’s development review process, future development projects would be evaluated for potential cumulative impacts and for consistency with all applicable policies of the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and City Code. Through this development review process, potential cumulative impacts to various natural and human-made resources would be evaluated. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not contribute to significant cumulative impacts, the proposed project does not trigger these exemption exceptions. c. Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.

Due to the absence of unusual circumstances related to the project or on the project site, the project would not have a reasonable possibility for a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances and this exception does not apply.
d. Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.

According to the California Department of Transportation (2023), there are no State designated scenic highway sections within or near the city of Bakersfield. The nearest designated Scenic Highway is Route 190 near Lone Pine, approximately 160 miles northeast of the project site. The nearest eligible scenic highway is Route 58 located near Mojave, approximately 59 miles east of the project site. The proposed project does not trigger these exemption exceptions.

City of Bakersfield
CEQA Exemption Memorandum for the 2023-2031 Housing Element 3 e. Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

The proposed project involves adoption of a policy document and does not in and of itself include any proposed development. The proposed project does not propose specific development projects, but facilitates density needed to accommodate the 6th cycle RHNA. Because specific projects are not known at this time, the City cannot assess the specific impacts of development in qualitative terms.

All housing development proposals will be subject to the State and local regulations regarding the treatment of hazardous materials, and project-specific environmental review. Furthermore, proposals are subject to development standards and conditions of approval as part of the permitting process, including environmental review. The proposed project does not trigger this exemption. f. Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.

The proposed project involves adoption of a policy document and does not in and of itself include any proposed development. The proposed project does not propose specific development projects, but facilitates density needed to accommodate the 6th cycle RHNA. Because specific projects are not known at this time, the City cannot assess the specific impacts of development in qualitative terms.

All housing development proposals will be subject to the policies listed in the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, and project-specific environmental review. Furthermore, proposals are subject to development standards and conditions of approval as part of the permitting process, including environmental review. The proposed project does not trigger this exemption.

Common Sense Applicability
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), also known as the “general rule” or “common sense” exemption, CEQA exempts activities that can be seen with certainty to have no possibility for causing a significant effect on the environment. The CEQA Guidelines state in that section that “A project is exempt from CEQA if… [T]he activity is covered by common sense that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.” Whether a particular activity qualifies for the common sense exemption is a question of fact that is supported by substantial evidence submitted in connection with the project. (CREED-21 v. City of San Diego (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 488, 510). The analysis must identify reasonably foreseeable physical changes and consider any environmental impacts that may result from those changes. (Wal–Mart Stores, Inc. v. City of Turlock (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 273, 291; Muzzy Ranch Co. v. Solano County Airport Land Use Com. (2007) 41 Cal.4th 372, 386).

The proposed project involves adoption of a policy document and does not in and of itself include any proposed development. The proposed project does not propose or approve any physical development.

The proposed project is analyzed in the attached Initial Study and is not anticipated to result in any new changes to the physical environment.

The proposed project will not result in changes to the physical environment, nor will it result in potential environmental impacts. Furthermore, to ensure adequate factual support for the common sense exemption, an Initial Study has been completed analyzing each area of potential impact. The Initial Study determined that there would be no environmental impacts that would result from approval of the proposed project. As such, as shown in Attachment 1, Initial Study, the proposed project meets the criteria for the common sense exemption as identified above.

City of Bakersfield
CEQA Exemption Memorandum for the 2023-2031 Housing Element 4 Determination
Based on this analysis documented in this memorandum, the proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element Update meet the criteria for a common sense exemption pursuant to Sections 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, exceptions to the applicability of a CE, as specified in section 15300.2(a) through (f) of the CEQA Guidelines, do not apply to the project. Therefore, it is concluded that the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to the common sense exemption CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)
Sincerely,
Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Kimiko Lizardi, Principal Matt Maddox, Principal
Project Manager CEQA Technical Lead
760-918-9444 916-706-1374
[email protected] [email protected] Attachments
Attachment 1 Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption
2023-2031 Housing Element
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption
prepared by
City of Bakersfield
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93301
Contact: Roque Nino, Principal Planner
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
4589 North Marty Avenue, Suite 102
Fresno, CA 93722
August 2025

2023-2031 Housing Element
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption
prepared by
City of Bakersfield
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93301
Contact: Roque Nino, Principal Planner
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
4589 North Marty Avenue, Suite 102
Fresno, CA 93722
August 2025
This report prepared on 50% recycled paper with 50% post-consumer content.

Table of Contents
Initial Study i
Table of Contents
Acronyms and Abbreviations.................................................................................................................iii Initial Study.............................................................................................................................................1

1. Project Title.........................................................................................................................1

2. Lead Agency/Project Sponsor Name and Address..............................................................1

3. Contact Person and Phone Number ...................................................................................1

4. Project Location and Existing Setting..................................................................................1

5. 2023-2031 Housing Element Description ...........................................................................4

6. Required Approvals.............................................................................................................8

7. Have California Native American Tribes Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated with the Project Area Requested Consultation Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1? ..........................................................................................................................8 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected...........................................................................................9 Determination ........................................................................................................................................9 Environmental Checklist.......................................................................................................................11 1 Aesthetics..........................................................................................................................11 2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources..................................................................................15 3 Air Quality .........................................................................................................................19 4 Biological Resources..........................................................................................................23 5 Cultural Resources............................................................................................................27 6 Energy ...............................................................................................................................29 7 Geology and Soils..............................................................................................................31 8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions...............................................................................................37 9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................................39 10 Hydrology and Water Quality ...........................................................................................43 11 Land Use and Planning......................................................................................................49 12 Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................51 13 Noise .................................................................................................................................53 14 Population and Housing....................................................................................................57 15 Public Services...................................................................................................................59 16 Recreation.........................................................................................................................61 17 Transportation ..................................................................................................................63 18 Tribal Cultural Resources..................................................................................................67 19 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................69 20 Wildfire..............................................................................................................................73 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance..................................................................................75 References............................................................................................................................................77 City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
ii
Bibliography..................................................................................................................................77 List of Preparers............................................................................................................................79 Tables
Table 1 RHNA Allocation and Percentage of Income Distribution for Bakersfield..........................5 Table 2 Bakersfield Housing Element Goals and Policies................................................................6 Table 3 Current Population and Housing Stock for Bakersfield ....................................................57 Table 4 Kern COG’s Regional Growth Forecasts for Kern County .................................................57 Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location................................................................................................................2 Figure 2 City of Bakersfield Location.................................................................................................3 Figure 3 Agricultural Land in Bakersfield ........................................................................................16 Appendices
Appendix A Native American Tribal Consultation Correspondence Acronyms and Abbreviations
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption iii
Acronyms and Abbreviations
AB Assembly Bill
ADU Accessory Dwelling Unit
AMI Area Median Income
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
BFD Bakersfield Fire Department
BFE Base Flood Elevations
BMC Bakersfield Municipal Code
BMPs Best Management Practices
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalRecycle California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
CCAP Climate Change Action Plan
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFGC California Fish and Game Code
CH4 Methane
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CO2 CarbonDioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CVRWQCB Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board CWA Clean Water Act
CWS California Water Service
DOC California Department of Conservation
DOF Department of Finance
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
DWR Department of Water Resources
EPA US Environmental Protection Agency
EOP Emergency Operations Plan
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
iv
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FTA Federal Transit Authority
GET Golden Empire Transit
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GWh Gigawatt Hours
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
GWP Global Warming Potential
HCD California Department of Housing and Community Development HFCs Hydrofluorocarbons
HMP Hazard Mitigation Plan
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Kern COG Kern Council of Governments
KRGSA Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agency
LID Low Impact Development
LRA Local Responsibility Area
MRP Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
N2O Nitrous Oxides
PRC Public Resources Code
PFCs Perfluorocarbons
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric
PPV Peak Particle Velocity
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation
RMS Root Mean Square
ROG Reactive Organic Gases
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
SB Senate Bill
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SF6 Sulfur Hexafluoride
SFHA Special Flood Hazard Areas
SJVAB San Joaquin Valley Air Basin
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption v
SJVAPCD San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
SRA State Responsibility Area
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
vi
This page intentionally left blank.

Initial Study
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 1
Initial Study

1. Project Title
City of Bakersfield 2023-2031 Housing Element

2. Lead Agency/Project Sponsor Name and Address
City of Bakersfield
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93301
661-326-3733

3. Contact Person and Phone Number
Roque Nino, Principal Planner, 661-326-3671

4. Project Location and Existing Setting
The study area includes the entire City of Bakersfield (hereinafter referred to as “City” or “Bakersfield”). Bakersfield is located in the southern region of the Central Valley and encompasses approximately 151 square miles.

The regional location of Bakersfield is shown in Figure 1 and the city limits are show in Figure 2.

Existing Setting
Bakersfield includes primarily single-family residential uses (approximately 72 percent of Bakersfield) with the remainder occupied by schools, civic buildings, religious institutions, parks and open space, industrial, and commercial uses. Bakersfield contains 61 public parks and other landscaped areas with wooded paths, tennis courts, pickleball courts, sports facilities, children’s playgrounds, and picnic facilities. Bakersfield is largely developed and is within a landlocked setting which has influenced its historic development patterns and affects its potential for new housing and employment.

The housing stock of Bakersfield in 2023 was made up of 99,444 (72.4 percent) single-family detached homes, 3,541 (2.6 percent) single-family attached homes, 14,709 (10.7 percent) multifamily homes with 2 to 4 units, 16,895 (12.3 percent) multifamily homes with 5 or more units, and 2,738 mobile homes (1.9 percent) (DOF 2023).

The Center of the City is mostly urbanized while the peripheral areas surrounding the center include agricultural and open space areas.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
2 Figure 1 Regional Location
Initial Study
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 3
Figure 2 City of Bakersfield Location
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
4 5. 2023-2031 Housing Element Description
The proposed project, herein referred to as the “proposed project,” would amend the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan replacing the current Housing Element with the proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element. The proposed Housing Element establishes programs, policies, and actions to further the goal of meeting the existing and projected housing needs of all income levels of households in the Bakersfield community and provides evidence of the City’s ability to accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) through the year 2031, as established by the Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG).

Background and History
The Housing Element is one of the State-mandated elements of the General Plan. The current Housing Element was adopted in December 2014 and in effect through 2023. The Housing Element identifies Bakersfield’s housing conditions and needs, and establishes the goals, objectives, and policies that comprise the City’s housing strategy to accommodate projected housing needs, including the provision of adequate housing for low-income households and for special-needs populations (e.g., unhoused people, seniors, single-parent households, large families, and persons with disabilities).

The proposed Housing Element Update would bring the element into compliance with State legislation passed since adoption of the 2015-2023 Housing Element and with the current RHNA. In July 2022, the Kern COG Executive Board adopted the 6th Cycle Final RHNA, which includes a fair share allocation for meeting regional housing needs for each community in the Kern COG region.

Housing Element Update Components
The proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element Update includes the following components, as required by State law:
 Review of the previous Housing Element: This section reviews the results of the goals, policies, and programs adopted in the previous Housing Element and compares projected outcomes with actual achieved results.
 Housing Needs Assessment: This section reviews the existing and projected housing needs of the community. It provides a profile of socio-demographic information, such as population characteristics, household information, housing stock, tenure, and housing affordability. The assessment also considers local special housing needs, such as seniors, farmworkers, homeless, large households, and female-headed households.
 Resources and Inventory of Adequate Sites. This section provides resources and an inventory of adequate sites that are suitably zoned, or appropriate for rezoning or annexation, and available within the planning period to meet the jurisdiction’s fair share of regional housing needs across all income levels.
 Governmental and Nongovernmental Constraints. This section identifies and analyzes impediments to housing production across all income levels.  Fair Housing Assessment. This section provides a summary of contributing factors that serve as barriers to fair housing choice and access to opportunities in Bakersfield.  Housing Plan. This section provides a statement of the community’s goals, quantified objectives, and policies to maintain, preserve, improve, and develop housing. It also provides a Initial Study
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 5
schedule of meaningful actions to be taken during the planning period to achieve the aforementioned goals, objectives, and policies. It includes quantified objectives for new construction, rehabilitation, and conserved units by income category (i.e., very low, lowmoderate, and above-moderate) to make sure that both the existing and the projected housing needs are met, consistent with the City’s share of the RHNA.

Regional Housing Needs Allocation
The RHNA is a California State Housing Law requirement that is part of the periodic process of updating local general plan housing elements. It is a process that determines existing and projected housing need (i.e., RHNA allocation) for all jurisdictions in the state (including cities and unincorporated county areas) with the intent to provide opportunities for a mix of unit types, tenure, affordability, and help achieve greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions from cars and light trucks. The RHNA allocates housing need based on future estimates of housing unit growth need over the RHNA planning period (2023-2031), meaning the growth anticipated for the region would occur even without the implementation of the Housing Element Update. Therefore, the proposed Housing Element Update would not increase growth but rather is intended to accommodate the anticipated growth in the region projected by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and Kern COG through the RHNA process.

The proposed Housing Element Update would bring the element into compliance with State legislation passed since adoption of the 2014-2023 Housing Element and with the current Kern COG 6th Cycle Final RHNA. Bakersfield’s RHNA allocation for the 2023-2031 planning period (6th RHNA cycle) is 37,461 units, as shown in Table 1, which is distributed among four income categories (City of Bakersfield 2025).

Table 1 RHNA Allocation and Percentage of Income Distribution for Bakersfield Income Level Percent of Area Median Income (AMI) Units Percent Extremely Low and Very Low <30-50% 11,129 29.7%
Low 51-80% 7,082 18.9%
Moderate 81-120% 5,317 14.2%
Above Moderate >120% 13,933 37.2%
Total – 37,461 100.0%
Source: City of Bakersfield. Bakersfield Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element.

Meeting the RHNA
To meet the City’s RHNA, the City has identified planned and approved projects (projects already in the development process) and anticipated accessory dwelling unit (ADU) production which can be credited towards the City’s RHNA requirement. With anticipated pipeline projects and projected ADUs, a total of 3,004 units can be credited toward the City’s RHNA.

The remaining 34,137 units would be accommodated through adequate sites planning on vacant and non-vacant lots. The City has identified housing opportunity locations, collectively called the Sites Inventory, which are sites that have potential for new residential development within the Housing Element planning period. Most of the sites are vacant and approximately 14 percent of the sites are nonvacant and underutilized. Nonvacant sites typically have large parking lots or underperforming commercial or office buildings that no longer serve the uses that occupy them. In some areas, sites will need to be rezoned to allow higher densities (more housing on a single site) to City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
6 accommodate housing affordable to low-and moderate-income households. The Sites Inventory includes capacity for 39,431 units. Overall, including pipeline projects and projected ADUs the City has capacity for 42,755 units across all income categories, resulting in a 14.1 percent, or 5,294 unit, excess over RHNA.

Housing Element Update Goals and Policies
The Housing Element includes goals, policies, and programs to ensure sufficient land to accommodate the RHNA and to promote housing production, including affordable housing. Table 2 includes a full list of Housing Element Update goals and associated policies.

Table 2 Bakersfield Housing Element Goals and Policies
Topic Goals and Supportive Policies
Goal H-1: Conserve and Preserve the Existing Housing Opportunities, Viable Housing Stock, and Neighborhoods in Bakersfield.

Policy H-1.1: Support Safe and
Livable Housing
The City shall enforce adopted code requirements that set forth acceptable health and safety standards for the occupancy of housing units.

Policy H-1.2: Preserve Existing
Single-Family Housing
The City shall preserve the existing single-family housing stock occupied by lower-income households by providing financial assistance, as available, to rehabilitate owner-occupied residences, and mobile homes.

Policy H-1.3: Residential
Rehabilitation
The City shall administer residential rehabilitation programs that assist lowerincome households to ensure the safety and habitability of housing units and the quality of residential neighborhoods.

Policy H-1.4: Preserve At-Risk Units
and Naturally Occurring Affordable
Housing
The City shall avoid the loss of publicly assisted and unassisted (“naturally occurring”) affordable housing units and the resulting displacement of lowincome residents by providing funds, as available, to nonprofit developers to be used for the acquisition of subsidized housing developments at risk of converting to market rate units.

Goal 2: Assist the Development of Housing Affordable to Extremely Low-, Very Low-, Low-, and Moderate-Income Levels and populations with Special Needs
Policy H-2.1: Promote Housing
Development Affordable to
Residents at All Economic Levels.

The City shall support the production of rental and for-sale housing for people of all income levels.

Policy H-2.2: Support and Increase
Funding for Deed-Restricted
Affordable Housing.

The City shall promote affordable housing development through financial and strategic support, including administrative and technical assistance to affordable housing developers.

Policy H-2.3: Create Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance.

The City shall conduct an economic feasibility study to guide the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.

Policy H-2.4: Promote A Variety of
Housing Types
The City shall review and update its zoning standards to encourage the development of higher density housing types affordable to low- and moderateincome residents.

Policy H-2.5: Support Housing
Production for All Needs
The City shall encourage the production of housing that is physically and financially suitable for individuals and families experiencing homelessness, residents with special needs, including but not limited to large households, seniors, extremely low-income residents, and persons with physical and developmental disabilities.

Policy H-2.6: Prioritize Affordable
Housing Near Public Transit and
Services
The City shall prioritize funding and processing of affordable housing development in locations near public transit and existing and planned community services.

Goal H-3: Increase Housing Production by Providing Adequate Sites for a Variety of Housing Types and Removing Constraints to Residential Development
Initial Study
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 7
Topic Goals and Supportive Policies
Policy H-3.1: Reduce Barriers to
Housing Development
Facilitate innovative housing models and promote regulatory reforms that reduce the costs of housing production while also promoting broader citywide housing priorities.

Policy H-3.2: Provide and Maintain
Adequate Sites to Accommodate
the RHNA
The City shall maintain appropriate land use designations and densities to accommodate an increased supply of housing units by type, cost, and size to meet its share of the regional housing need in alignment with citywide housing priorities.

Policy H-3.3: Streamline Housing
Entitlement and Permitting Process
The City shall streamline the housing approval and permitting process, particularly for affordable housing, throughout City departments.

Policy H-3.4: Facilitate Infill
Development
The City shall utilize infill development strategies to support and connect existing neighborhoods.

Policy H-3.5: Facilitate Strategic
Development on Large Lots
The City shall support and facilitate strategic development on large lots to promote cohesive and connected development that provides housing for a variety of household incomes and types.

Goal H-4: Advance Fair Housing, Equity, and Inclusion
Policy H-4.1: Fair Housing Services
and Education
The City shall support effective programs that work toward eliminating housing discrimination of protected classes under State and federal law.

Policy H-4.2: Affirmatively Further
Fair Housing
The City shall monitor and ensure compliance with the City’s obligation to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing.

Policy H-4.3: Commit Resources to
Ensure Equitable Neighborhoods
The City shall invest in historically underserved communities and racially/ethnically concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs) while promoting housing stability and preservation for current residents, and address the needs of communities vulnerable to environmental health issues.

Policy H-4.4: Promote MixedIncome NeighborhoodsThe City shall promote mixed-income neighborhoods with an equitable distribution of housing types and housing mobility opportunities for people of all incomes throughout the city.

Policy H-4.5: Support WealthBuilding Activities for Low-Income Residents
The City shall support efforts to connect low-income residents with financial empowerment resources, homeownership programs, first-time homebuyer opportunities, small business assistance, and workforce training resources and services and ADU developments on their existing property to generate rental income opportunities and increase property values.

Policy H-4.6: Leverage Resources
for Housing Assistance and
Education
The City shall pursue and administer, where feasible, all available federal, state, and local resources to provide financial assistance, housing rights and financial education, and other services related to homeownership, housing stability, and housing mobility.

Policy H-4.7: Focus Housing
Opportunity Programs for
Vulnerable and Underrepresented
Residents
The City shall focus outreach for homeownership and affordable housing opportunity programs to residents in areas vulnerable to displacement and to populations that are underrepresented in the housing market.

Policy H-4.8: Engage
Underrepresented Residents
The City shall prioritize engagement of underrepresented residents and people of all racial, ethnic, and economic backgrounds in City plans and programs to achieve equitable outcomes.

Policy H-4.9: Reduce Barriers Evaluate and reduce barriers to housing that disproportionately affect populations in protected classes, lower- income households, and special needs populations by rescinding or mitigating development standards that are exclusionary, discriminatory, or otherwise impede the development of housing that is affordable to lower income households, including prohibitions on multifamily housing, limitations on density, and other standards that increase the cost of constructing housing.

Goal H-5: Housing for Individuals and Families Experiencing Homelessness City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
8 Topic Goals and Supportive Policies
Policy H-5.1: Support Residents at
Risk of Homelessness
The City shall utilize data supported strategies to create impactful, long-term solutions to reduce the risk of homelessness for vulnerable households and individuals, with a focus on affordable housing production, financial and supportive services and resources, and workforce training.

Policy H-5.2: Support Existing and
New Transitional and Emergency
Shelters
The City shall continue to prioritize the use of available funds to support emergency shelters and transitional and supportive housing programs for people experiencing homelessness and those who are at risk of becoming homeless.

Policy H-5.3: Fund Construction of
New Permanent Supportive
Housing
The City shall facilitate and provide permanent supportive housing options that offer appropriate services for people experiencing chronic homelessness.

Policy H-5.4: Actively Engage in the
Regional Response to End
Homelessness
The City shall participate with the County of Kern, the Bakersfield-Kern Regional Homeless Collaborative, the Bakersfield/Kern County Continuum of Care, and partner agencies to develop and implement strategies that address homelessness through a shared vision, coordinated programs, and joint funding opportunities.

Source: City of Bakersfield. Bakersfield Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element.

6. Required Approvals
With recommendations from the Planning Commission, the City Council would need to take the following future discretionary actions in conjunction with the Housing Element Update:
 Adoption of the 2023-2031 Housing Element of the General Plan The Draft Housing Element has been submitted to the HCD for review and comment. The City will seek certification of the Final Housing Element from the HCD subsequent to the City’s adoption.

7. Have California Native American Tribes Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated with the Project Area
Requested Consultation Pursuant to Public Resources
Code Section 21080.3.1?
On June 22, 2023, the City of Bakersfield contacted California Native American Tribal governments by sending an Assembly Bill (AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18 notification letter via email to tribes with an affiliation with the project area based on a list provided by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). Under AB 52, Native American tribes have 30 days to respond and request further project information and request formal consultation. Under SB 18, Native American tribes have 90 days to respond to request consultation. The City did not receive a request for formal consultation under AB 52 or SB 18. Therefore, no California Native American Tribes traditionally or culturally affiliated with the project area have requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1.

Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 9
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
This project would potentially affect the environmental factors checked below, involving at least one impact that is “Potentially Significant” or “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
□ Aesthetics □ Agriculture and
Forestry Resources
□ Air Quality
□ Biological Resources □ Cultural Resources □ Energy
□ Geology/Soils □ Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
□ Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
□ Hydrology/Water Quality □ Land Use/Planning □ Mineral Resources □ Noise □ Population/Housing □ Public Services
□ Recreation □ Transportation □ Tribal Cultural Resources □ Utilities/Service Systems □ Wildfire □ Mandatory Findings of Significance
Determination
Based on this initial evaluation, I find that the proposed project will not result in a physical change to the environment that would have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore subject to the common sense exemption pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)).

Signature Date
Printed Name Title
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
10 This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Aesthetics
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 11
Environmental Checklist
1 Aesthetics
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista? □ □ □ ■
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway? □ □ □ ■
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from a publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is
in an urbanized area, would the project
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality? □ □ □ ■
d. Create a new source of substantial light or
glare that would adversely affect daytime
or nighttime views in the area? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Scenic views generally refer to visual access to, or the visibility of, a particular natural or man-made visual resource from a given vantage point or corridor. Focal views focus on a particular object, scene, setting, or feature of visual interest. Panoramic views, or vistas, provide visual access to a large geographic area, for which the field of view can be wide and extend into the distance.

Panoramic views are usually associated with vantage points looking out over urban or natural areas that provide a geographic orientation and view not commonly available. Examples of panoramic views might include an urban skyline, a valley, a mountain range, the ocean, or other water bodies.

According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, Bakersfield has various viewsheds and visual resources concentrated along the northern border of the city (City of Bakersfield 2002).

Specifically, Northeast Bakersfield provides scenic hillside views of Bakersfield, the Kern River, and oilfields (City of Bakersfield 2022). Additionally, according to the Kern River plan, the Kern River, City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
12 which flows through the middle of Bakersfield, is a valuable visual resource in the area (Kern County 1985). There are no designated or eligible State scenic highways in the City (Caltrans 2023).

The topography of Bakersfield is generally flat and mostly developed with urban structures and infrastructure. Vegetation is mostly composed of urban landscaping, including nonnative, cultivated trees, shrubs, and grasses. Because of the relatively flat topography and low-lying structures, views of the Sierra Nevada foothills north of the city, Wheeler Ridge in the south, and the Tehachapi foothills in the east can be viewed from many parts of the city, particularly from streets and corridors oriented east-west and north-south. However, atmospheric conditions such as smog or haze, agricultural dust, and dense morning winter fog, sometimes limit long-range visibility to the hills and ridges.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? An adverse effect would occur if a proposed plan would block or otherwise damage a scenic vista upon implementation. Generally, the varying topography and development throughout Bakersfield blocks surrounding views.

Because the proposed project is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development (e.g., construction of housing or infrastructure), it would not result in impacts to scenic vistas. Furthermore, future development requiring discretionary approval accommodated under the proposed project would undergo project-specific development review, including design review pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 17.08 which governs site plan review and includes standards such as building height which would minimize impacts to scenic vistas.

Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? There are no designated scenic highways or scenic corridors in the city. In addition, because the proposed project is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, it would not result in impacts to scenic highways or corridors. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
c. Would the project, in non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Bakersfield can be categorized as an urban area as it is largely built out with a mix of residential neighborhoods, commercial areas and corridors, and industrial areas, and has a population of more than 100,000 residents (CEQA Statute Section 21071). The proposed project does not include specific projects but puts forth goals and policies that encourage housing and various aspects of new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not, in and of itself, conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Furthermore, future development Environmental Checklist
Aesthetics
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 13
requiring discretionary approval accommodated under the proposed project would undergo project-specific developmental review to assess consistency with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Development proposals would be subject to the City’s Zoning Code and adopted development guidelines in addition to the City’s Hillside Development Ordinance (Chapter 17.66 of the BMC). This ordinance protects visual resources concentrated along the city’s northern border. There would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area?
Bakersfield is an urbanized city with commensurate level of light and glare. Future development in Bakersfield would, in large part, occur as infill on already developed parcels or on vacant or underutilized sites within existing neighborhoods. New lighting could occur on buildings for safety and in pedestrian walkways, and light could be emitted from interior sources through windows on upper stories of tall buildings. The main source of glare would likely be from the sun shining on reflective or light-colored building materials and glazing.

The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts to light and glare. In addition, future development would be reviewed for consistency with regulations related to light and glare contained in the Chapter 17.71 of the BMC which regulates outdoor lighting and indoor lighting if it is determined by the planning director that the indoor lighting causes a nuisance to neighboring properties. Therefore, there would be no impacts related to light and glare.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
14 This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 15
2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? □ □ □ ■
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use or a Williamson Act contract? □ □ □ ■
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 12220(g));
timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code Section 4526); or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code Section 51104(g))? □ □ □ ■
d. Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use? □ □ □ ■
e. Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Bakersfield contains approximately 81,694 acres of land with a general plan land use designation for agricultural uses (City of Bakersfield 2022). There are 32,334 acres zoned for agricultural uses within Bakersfield. The city also contains an estimated 16,953 acres of land with a general plan designation for open space (City of Bakersfield 2022). As shown in Figure 3, a majority of land in Bakersfield is urban and built-up land. This land is concentrated in the center of the city with areas of prime farmland, unique farmland, and grazing land concentrated along the edges of the city limits (DOC 2022). There is no land under a Williamson Contract within Bakersfield.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
16 Figure 3 Agricultural Land in Bakersfield
Environmental Checklist
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 17
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract?
The proposed project is a policy document and does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to accommodate the projected population growth in Bakersfield. There is active farmland on the edges of the city limits, however future development would be required to comply with policies included in the Conservation/Soils and Agriculture Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan including Policy 2,3, and 14 which requires the protection of agricultural land and extensive review of projects proposing to urbanize agricultural land to determine how commercial agriculture will continue on site and the appropriateness of the proposal considering features such as soil type and surrounding uses (City of Bakersfield 2002). Additionally, future development that would require discretionary approval would be required to undergo a project specific CEQA process to determine the specific impacts of that project. Therefore, the proposed project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), or conflict with existing zoning and existing Williamson Act contracts, and no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
c. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)); timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526); or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
d. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? “Forest land” is defined in the California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 12220(g) pursuant to the California Forest Legacy Program Act of 2007 as land that can support 10 percent or more native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits.

The proposed project is a policy document and does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. The City’s zoning map indicates that there are no areas within Bakersfield zoned for forestry, timberland, or timberland production (City of Bakersfield 2022). Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, or timberland zoned Timberland Production, and no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
18 e. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Furthermore, there is no land in Bakersfield designated as forest land, or timberland zoned as Timberland Production (City of Bakersfield 2022).

Additionally, as discussed above, because it is a policy document the proposed project would not result in conversion of farmland. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use, and no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 19
3 Air Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan? □ □ □ ■
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? □ □ □ ■
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? □ □ □ ■
d. Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Bakersfield is located in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). The SJVAB extends to eight counties in the San Joaquin Valley Area. The SJVAB is under the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) The SJVACPD is responsible for development of the regional Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which is a comprehensive program for compliance with federal and State air quality planning requirements including California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The most recently adopted AQMP is the 2024 PM2.5 Plan for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 Standard and the 2022 Ozone Plan for the San Joaquin Valley.

The SJVAB is in non-attainment for the federal standards for ozone and PM2.5 and the State standards for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 (SJVAB 2012). The SJVAB is in non-attainment for the state standards for ozone, PM 10, and PM 2.5. The SJVAB is designated unclassifiable or in attainment for all other federal and State standards. This analysis conforms to the methodologies recommended in the SJVAPCD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (2002).

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The proposed project, in and of itself, does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts to air quality. In addition, Policy 1 in the Conservation/ Air Quality Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan requires compliance with SJVACPD control measures for City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
20 reactive organic gases (ROGs). Policy 2 encourages land use and land use practices that do not contribute significantly to air quality degradation. Policy 3 requires dust abatement measures during grading and construction operations. And Policy 4 requires the City to consider air quality impacts when reviewing discretionary permits for land use proposals. These policies would be applicable to future development . These policies would reduce fugitive dust emissions and ROGs. Future development would also be required to comply with air quality plans such as 2024 PM2.5 Plan for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 Standard and the 2022 Ozone Plan for the San Joaquin Valley which include regulations set by the SJVACPD and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to reach attainment for Pm 2.5 and Ozone in the San Joaquin Valley. Future development requiring discretionary approval accommodated under the proposed project would undergo project-specific developmental review to address potential project level impacts related to air quality. There are no impacts associated with the proposed project.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
c. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. In addition, short-term air quality impacts resulting from construction of the sites, such as dust generated by clearing and grading activities, exhaust emissions from gas- and diesel-powered construction equipment, and vehicular emissions associated with the commuting of construction workers will be subject to SJVACPD rules and protocols. Similarly, operational impacts would be addressed by provisions in the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and other regulations and standards that govern air quality in Bakersfield.

Impacts identified for an individual project would be addressed through the project approval process specific to concerns for that project.

Therefore, the adoption of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. There are no impacts associated with the proposed project.

NO IMPACT
d. Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
The occurrence and severity of potential odor impacts depends on a number of factors, including the nature, frequency, and intensity of the source; the wind speeds and direction; and the sensitivity of the receiving location, each contribute to the intensity of the impact. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they can be annoying and cause distress among the public and generate citizen complaints.

The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to odors or other potential emissions. In addition, SJVACPD’s 2002 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines land uses associated with odor complaints as wastewater treatment plants, landfills, confined animal Environmental Checklist
Air Quality
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 21
facilities, composting stations, food manufacturing plants, refineries, and chemical plants. Future development under the proposed project would include only residential development, which would not be considered a major generating source of odor and would not create objectionable odors to surrounding sensitive land uses. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
22 This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Biological Resources
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 23
4 Biological Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any 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
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? □ □ □ ■
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? □ □ □ ■
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means? □ □ □ ■
d. Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites? □ □ □ ■
e. Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance? □ □ □ ■
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan? □ □ □ ■
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
24 Environmental Setting
Although Bakersfield is highly urbanized, the city still contains many natural open spaces and distinct ecological communities. Bakersfield includes several designated habitats such as non-native grassland, valley sink scrub, Sierra-Tehachapi saltbrush scrub, valley saltbush scrub, great valley mesquite scrub, and southern cottonwood-willow riparian forest (City of Bakersfield 2022). “Special status” species are either federally or state-listed as endangered, threatened, or sensitive. “Endangered” species are those considered in imminent danger of extinction due their limited numbers. “Threatened” species refers to those likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future, primarily on a local scale. “Sensitive” species are those that are naturally rare or have been locally depleted or put at risk by human activities. Bakersfield has occurrences of the following special status species: San Joaquin kit fox, blunt-nosed leopard lizard, tipton kangaroo rat, San Joaquin (Nelson’s) antelope squirrel, Bakersfield cactus, Tulare psudobahia, California jewelflower, striped adobe lily, and Bakersfield saltbrush (City of Bakersfield 2022).

According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), there is no critical habitat for special status species within Bakersfield (USFWS 2023).

The Kern River flows through Bakersfield and there are several creeks throughout the city. The Kern River provides habitat for various wildlife. The Kern River Parkway Plan and the Kern River Plan Element includes policies to protect sensitive habitats in and around the Kern River.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any 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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d. Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? The special status species that may occur within Bakersfield are discussed in the environmental setting section above. There are several wetlands and areas of riparian habitat along the Kern River in Bakersfield. There are no wildlife movement corridors within Bakersfield.

The proposed project does not include specific projects but puts forth goals and policies that encourage various aspects of new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts to biological resources. In addition, future development requiring discretionary approval accommodated under the proposed project would undergo project-specific developmental review to address potential impacts. Short-term impacts resulting from construction of the sites would be subject to State and City regulations. Similarly, operational impacts would be addressed by Environmental Checklist
Biological Resources
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 25
provisions in the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and other regulations and standards that govern biological resources in Bakersfield and the region. Specifically, Policy 1 of the Conservation/Biological Resources Element aims to direct development away from “sensitive biological resource” areas unless effective mitigation measures can be implemented. Future projects would also be subject to permitting pursuant to the Clean Water Act (CWA) and California Fish and Game Code (CFGC). Requirements commonly required under the CFGC and CWA include measures to protect streams and bodies of water along with riparian habitats.

Impacts identified for an individual project would be addressed through the project approval process specific to concerns for that project. The proposed project would have no impact to candidate, sensitive or special status species, riparian habitat, State or federally protected wetland or wildlife movement or corridors.

NO IMPACT
e. Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
The proposed project, in and of itself, does not include the development of a specific site, rather it includes policies and programs to encourage housing within the city of Bakersfield. The Bakersfield Zoning Code Section 17.61.050 includes regulations pertaining to tree preservation and protection and requires the replacement planting of trees that have been removed. In addition, codes

12.40.060 and 12.40.070 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code (BMC) forbid the removal or trimming of City owned landscaping material. On-going implementation of BMC and general plan goals and policies through site-specific design review and use permits would reduce potential impact to protected trees. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact.

NO IMPACT
f. Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
The Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan expired June 1, 2023 (City of Bakersfield 2022). Currently, Bakersfield does not have an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

The proposed project, in and of itself, does not propose specific projects but sets forth goals and policies that promulgate new housing development in Bakersfield. Future development would be required to comply with federal, State, and local regulations. There would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
26 This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Cultural Resources
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 27
5 Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource
pursuant to §15064.5? □ □ □ ■
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5? □ □ □ ■
c. Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
CEQA requires that a lead agency determine whether a project could have a significant effect on historical resources (PRC, Section 21084.1) or unique archaeological resources (PRC Section 21083.2 [g]). A historical resource is a resource listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) (Section 21084.1), a resource included in a local register of historical resources (Section 15064.5[a][2]), or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (Section 15064.5[a][3]). A unique archaeological resource is an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: (1) contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information, (2) has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type, or (3) is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.

Impacts to significant cultural resources that affect the characteristics of any resource that qualify it for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or adversely alter the significance of a resource listed in or eligible for listing in the CRHR are considered a significant effect on the environment.

These impacts could result from physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 [b][1]). Material impairment is defined as demolition or alteration in an adverse manner [of] those characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion or eligibility for inclusion in the CRHR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[b][2][A]).

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
28 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
The City of Bakersfield maintains an inventory of historic buildings and sites within the city.

According to that inventory, there are 63 historic sites within Bakersfield (City of Bakersfield 2022c).

Most of these sites are clustered in the center of the city along Truxton Avenue.

The City of Bakersfield does not maintain an inventory of archaeological sites, but it is assumed that archaeological sites are present in Bakersfield and the surrounding areas. Therefore, there is potential to encounter unidentified resources on future sites. However, the proposed project does not include specific projects but puts forth goals and policies that encourage various aspects of new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not create adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 or cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource. In addition, future development would be required to comply with federal, State, and local regulations and policies to preserve historical and archeological resources. Therefore, the adoption of the proposed project would have no impact on historical or archaeological resources.

NO IMPACT
c. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Future development would be subject to State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 which states that, if human remains are unearthed, no further disturbance can occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to the PRC Section 5097.98.

Therefore, the adoption of the proposed project would not disturb human remains and there would be no impacts.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Energy
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 29
6 Energy
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in a potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption
of energy resources, during project
construction or operation? □ □ □ ■
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Most of the electricity generated in California is from natural gas-fired power plants, which provided approximately 50 percent of total electricity generated in 2021. In 2021, California used 277,764 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity and produced 70 percent of the electricity it used and imported the rest from outside the state (California Energy Commission [CEC] 2021).

In 2018, Senate Bill 100 accelerated the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standards Program, codified in the Public Utilities Act, by requiring electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy and zero-carbon resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045. Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) is the electricity provider that serves Bakersfield. Southern California Gas Company is the natural gas provider for the city. As of 2021, PG&E provided approximately 50 percent of clean energy mostly sourced from wind, geothermal, biomass, solar and small hydroelectric facilities (PG&E 2021).

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
The proposed project is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development and therefore would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. Future development requiring discretionary approval would be required to undergo project-specific evaluation to quantify specific impacts to energy consumption, which would occur during the permitting process for that project. Individual projects would be required to comply with the BMC Chapter 15.05, which adopts the 2022 California Building Code (CBC), which includes Title 24, Part 6 known as the “California Energy Code.”, as well as Title 24, Part 11 which outlines the “Green Building Standards Code” or “CALGreen.” Future development would also be required to adhere to requirements regarding solar systems pursuant to the most updated Title 24 standards.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
30 Adherence to these requirements would minimize the potential for future development to result in the wasteful or unnecessary consumption of vehicle fuels. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Future development would be subject to the energy conservation requirements of the California Energy Code, the California Green Building Standards Code, and local policies such as the BMC. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Geology and Soils
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 31
7 Geology and Soils
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

1. Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault? □ □ □ ■

2. Strong seismic ground shaking? □ □ □ ■

3. Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction? □ □ □ ■

4. Landslides? □ □ □ ■
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil? □ □ □ ■
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that
is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction, or collapse? □ □ □ ■
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994), creating substantial direct
or indirect risks to life or property? □ □ □ ■
e. Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater? □ □ □ ■
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature? □ □ □ ■
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
32 Environmental Setting
Bakersfield is located within the San Joaquin Valley at the base of the Sierra Nevada mountain range. The valley is a north-west trending trough between the Sierra Nevada on the east and the Coast Range mountains on the west (City of Bakersfield 2002).

There are several faults near Bakersfield including the San Andreas Fault (35 miles south), the Garlock Fault (35 miles southeast), the Wheeler Ridge Fault (26 miles southwest), the Pleito Fault (27 miles south), the White Wolf Fault (18 miles southeast), the Premier Fault (11 miles north), the Kern Front Fault (5 miles north), and several areas east of the city marked as unnamed ground breaks of the 1952 Earthquake (DOC 2021).

Bakersfield is subject to potential seismic hazards such as strong ground shaking, fault rupture, liquefaction, earthquake induced landslides, subsidence, landslides, flooding, and potential inundation from the failure of Lake Isabella dam. Specifically, the area in southwestern Bakersfield near Panama Lane is at the highest risk of earthquake induced liquefaction due to the high water table (City of Bakersfield 2022). This area also has the highest risk of subsidence. Risks of liquefaction and subsidence elsewhere in the city are low. Landslides within the city are most likely to occur in the foothills to the east and northeast of the city and along the Kern River Canyon and floodplain (City of Bakersfield 2002).

Impact Analysis
a.1. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? As discussed above under Environmental Setting, the Premier Fault, Kern Front Fault, and unnamed ground breaks of the 1952 earthquake run closest to Bakersfield.

The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. However, because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to surface rupture. Furthermore, future development would be required to comply with policies included in the Safety/Public Safety Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, including Policy 10 which prevents development designed for human occupancy within 50 feet of a known active fault and prevents buildings from being placed astride an active fault. Future development would also be required to comply with the CBC which sets guidelines seismic safety in construction. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Geology and Soils
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 33
a.2. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? Although Bakersfield is not directly in or above a known fault zone, there are several faults that run near the city including the San Andreas Fault, resulting in a potential for strong seismic ground shaking along its alignment.

The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to geologic hazards. Future development accommodated under the proposed project would be subject to adopted development guidelines and required to adhere to 2022 CBC (Title 24, Part 2) requirements, policies in the Safety/Public Safety Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, such as Policy 10 prevents development designed for human occupancy within 50 feet of a known active fault and prevents buildings from being placed astride an active fault. In addition, Policy 11 requires site-specific studies to locate and characterize fault traces within an Alquist Priolo Fault Zone for construction designed for human occupancy. Additionally, future development would be subject to BMC Section 16.44.010 which requires a preliminary soil report and grading plan for new subdivisions to reduce impacts related to seismic hazards. Therefore, there would be no impacts related to earthquake faults and seismic ground shaking.

NO IMPACT
a.3. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? a.4. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides?
As discussed in the setting section above, liquefaction risk is highest in southern Bakersfield and landslides are most likely to occur in the foothills east and northeast of the city and along the Kern River Canyon and floodplain.

The proposed project does not propose specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to liquefaction or landslides. Development accommodated under the proposed project would be subject to adopted development guidelines and required to adhere to CBC requirements, policies in the Safety/Public Safety Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, and applicable State and local regulations. BMC Section 16.44.010 which requires a preliminary soil report and grading plan, would be applicable to future development. Additionally, policy 13 of the Safety/Public Safety Element requires the determination of liquefaction potential at sites with high groundwater prior to development and the implementation of mitigation to prevent or reduce damage from liquefaction would be applicable. Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impacts.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
34 b. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. In addition, future development would be required to comply with CBC, Appendix Section J110, Erosion Control Standards, which ensures appropriate erosion and stormwater pollution control during grading and construction activities. Additionally, future construction activities that occur on more than one acre are required to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit. NPDES requires the development of a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), which includes best management practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion and topsoil loss from stormwater runoff. BMPs generally include an effective combination of erosion and sediment controls, which include barriers such as silt fences, hay bales, drain inlet protection, or gravel bags. Impacts identified for an individual project would be addressed through the project approval process specific to concerns for that project. The proposed project would have no impact to substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.

NO IMPACT
c. Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Impacts related to landslides and liquefaction are addressed under Impacts a.3. and a.4.; therefore, this discussion focuses on impacts related to unstable soils as a result of lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse. Lateral spreading occurs as a result of liquefaction; accordingly, liquefaction-prone areas would also be susceptible to lateral spreading. Subsidence occurs at great depths below the surface when subsurface pressure is reduced by the withdrawal of fluids (e.g., groundwater, natural gas, or oil) resulting in sinking of the ground. Collapse refers to the potential for the project to cause the ground or soil to become unstable, leading to a sudden sinking or falling in of the land surface
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse. Furthermore, future development would be required to comply with the CBC’s minimum standards for structural design and site development. Therefore, CBC-required incorporation of soil treatment programs (replacement, grouting, compaction, drainage control, etc.) in excavation and construction plans can achieve an acceptable degree of soil stability to address site-specific soil conditions. In addition, future development would be required to adhere to BMC Section 16.44.010 which requires a preliminary soil report and grading plan for new subdivisions to minimize impacts related to unstable soils. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to unstable soils as a result of lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse.

NO IMPACT
d. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Environmental Checklist
Geology and Soils
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 35
Expansive soils swell with increases in moisture content and shrink with decreases in moisture content. These soils usually contain high clay content. The potential for soil to shrink and swell depends on the amount and types of clay in the soil. Highly expansive soils can cause structural damage to foundations and roads without proper structural engineering and are less suitable or desirable for development than non-expansive soils because of the necessity for detailed geologic investigations and costlier grading applications.

The proposed project does not propose specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to expansive soils.

In addition, future projects would be required to adhere to State and local requirements, such as the CBC, BMC Section 16.44.010 which requires a preliminary soil report and grading plan, and policy 13 of the Safety/Public Safety Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan would require mitigation to be incorporated into foundation design for development in areas of known liquefaction within the city. Additionally, the CBC includes requirements to address soil-related hazards. Typical measures to treat hazardous soil conditions involve removal of soil or fill materials, proper fill selection, and compaction. In cases where soil remediation is not feasible, the CBC requires structural reinforcement of foundations to resist the forces of expansive soils. Therefore, the proposed project would have no impacts related to expansive soils.

NO IMPACT
e. Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to septic tanks and wastewater disposal. In addition, future development is anticipated to be connected to the municipal waste disposal system. Therefore, the proposed project would not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater and no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
f. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Paleontological resources, or fossils, are the evidence of once-living organisms preserved in the rock record. They include both the fossilized remains of ancient plants and animals and the traces thereof (e.g., trackways, imprints, burrows, etc.). Paleontological resources are not found in “soil” but are contained within the geologic deposits or bedrock that underlies the soil layer. There may be paleontological resources within Bakersfield, however, because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts to paleontological resources or unique geologic features. In addition, future development requiring discretionary approval would be subject to development plan review to determine potential concerns related to paleontological resources or unique geologic features based on site-specific locations and development design. Therefore, the adoption of the proposed project would not City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
36 directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site, or unique geologic feature and no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 37
8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment? □ □ □ ■
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Gases that absorb and re-emit infrared radiation in the atmosphere are called greenhouse gases (GHGs). The gases widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced climate change include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxides (N2O), fluorinated gases such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs because it is short-lived in the atmosphere, and natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation, largely determine its atmospheric concentrations. GHGs are emitted by natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and CH4 are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are usually by-products of fossil fuel combustion, and CH4 results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Human-made GHGs, many of which have greater heat-absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases and SF6 (U.S. EPA 2023). Different types of GHGs have varying global warming potentials (GWP). The GWP of a GHG is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years). Because GHGs absorb different amounts of heat, a common reference gas (CO2) is used to relate the amount of heat absorbed to the amount of the gas emitted, referred to as “carbon dioxide equivalent” (CO2e), which is the amount of GHG emitted multiplied by its GWP. Carbon dioxide has a 100-year GWP of one. By contrast, methane has a GWP of 30, meaning its global warming effect is 30 times greater than CO2 on a molecule per molecule basis (IPCC 2021).

Bakersfield currently does not have a city-wide GHG inventory or adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP). In 2008 SJVACPD adopted their Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) which directed the development of guidance to assist lead agencies, project proponents, permit applicants, and interested parties in assessing and reducing the impacts of project specific GHG emissions on global climate change. In 2009 SJVACPD adopted guidance which requires individual projects to either implement best management practices (BMPs) or demonstrate a 29 percent reduction in GHG emissions, from business-as-usual for impacts to be considered less than significant (SJVACPD 2012).

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
38 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b. Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to GHG emissions. Furthermore, development proposals for individual projects would be subject to adopted development guidelines, including standards that govern the emissions of GHGs. The City would require individual projects to comply with the latest Title 24 Green Building Code and Building Efficiency Energy Standards, which would reduce GHG emissions associated with energy use from lighting, water-efficient faucets and toilets, and water efficient landscaping and irrigation.

Development within Bakersfield would obtain electrical power from PG&E which sources 50 percent of their power from renewable sources. The proposed project would not generate GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment and would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, there would be no impact related to GHGs.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 39
9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials? □ □ □ ■
b. Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment? □ □ □ ■
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within

0.25 mile of an existing or proposed
school? □ □ □ ■
d. Be located on a site that is included on a
list of hazardous material sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment? □ □ □ ■
e. For a project located in an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would
the project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or
working in the project area? □ □ □ ■
f. Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan? □ □ □ ■
g. Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires? □ □ □ ■
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
40 Environmental Setting
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) regulates hazardous waste in California, primarily under the authority of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the California Health and Safety Code. The DTSC also administers the California Hazardous Waste Control Law to regulate hazardous wastes. The Hazardous Waste Control Law lists 791 chemicals and approximately 300 common materials that may be hazardous; establishes criteria for identifying, packaging, and labeling hazardous wastes; prescribes management controls; establishes permit requirements for treatment, storage, disposal, and transportation; and identifies some wastes that cannot be disposed of in landfills.

The DTSC EnviroStor database contains information on properties in California where hazardous substances have been released or where the potential for a release exists. The California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database contains information on properties in California for sites that require cleanup, such as leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites, which may impact, or have potential impacts, to water quality, with emphasis on groundwater.

According to databases of hazardous material sites maintained by the DTSC (EnviroStor) and the SWRCB (GeoTracker), Bakersfield has the following types of hazardous sites that are still active or need further investigation: evaluation, voluntary cleanup, state response, corrective action, and school investigation, and cleanup program sites (DTSC 2023; SWRCB 2023). These sites are dispersed throughout the city.

Emergency Preparedness
As required by State law, Kern County has adopted a Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) for managing response to multi-agency and multi-jurisdictional emergencies, and to facilitate communications and coordination among all levels of government and affected agencies.

In addition, Kern County has adopted its Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) as of March 2022. The Kern County EOP provides for the coordination of emergency operations for the cities within its jurisdiction, including Bakersfield (Kern County 2022). Kern County also adopted an updated multijurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) in 2020 to reduce the loss of life, personal injury, and property damage that can result from a disaster (Kern County 2020).

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to hazardous material transport, use, or disposal. In addition, the use of potentially hazardous materials during construction of future development would be required to comply with federal, State, and local regulations regarding the handling of potentially hazardous materials. Likewise, the transport, use, and storage of hazardous materials during future construction would be required to comply with applicable federal and State laws, such as the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, Environmental Checklist
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 41
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the California Hazardous Material Management Act, and California Code of Regulations Title 22. Future development would also be guided by the Kern County EOP and HMP.

Use of common household hazardous materials, such as cleaning and degreasing solvents, fertilizers, pesticides, and other materials used in regular property and landscaping maintenance, would also be subject to compliance with applicable federal and State laws, listed previously, as well as Policy 7 of the Safety/Public Safety Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan which requires compliance with State and federal laws governing hazardous materials and enforces BMC ordinances regulating the manufacturing, sale, disposal or transport of hazardous materials. With adherence to these policies and regulations, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
c. Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? The proposed project in and of itself does not include development and therefore would have no impact on existing or proposed schools. As discussed above, the proposed project would not involve the use or transport of large quantities of hazardous materials. Therefore, no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
d. Would the project be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
As discussed in the Environmental Setting above, Bakersfield contains hazardous sites that are still active or require further investigation. The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts on hazardous waste sites or create a hazard to the public or environment. In addition, for future development that could occur on hazardous materials sites, in accordance with existing regulations, the City would coordinate with other agencies to address contamination of soil and groundwater from hazardous materials on various sites and require that contamination be cleaned up to the satisfaction of the City and other responsible agencies prior to issuance of permits for new development. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? There are two airports within the Bakersfield Metro Area, Meadows Field Airport and Bakersfield Municipal Airport (City of Bakersfield 2022). Meadows Field serves as a commercial airport for Kern County while Bakersfield Municipal Airport is a general aviation airport. The proposed project is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development. Future development in Bakersfield would be required to adhere to the master plans and Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans for both airports within Bakersfield. This would ensure that future development would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise. There would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
42 f. Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to emergency response plans and emergency evacuation plans. Furthermore, implementation of the SEMS, EOP and HMP would provide guidance during unique situations requiring an unusual or extraordinary emergency response. Additionally, as part of standard development procedures, plans would be submitted for review and approval to ensure that future development would have adequate emergency access and evacuation routes in compliance with existing City regulations.

Additionally, the Safety/Public Safety Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan includes policies to ensure the enforcement of emergency response plans and require discretionary approval projects to assess impacts on police and fire service facilities. The proposed project would not introduce features or policies that would preclude implementation of or alter these policies or procedures. There would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
g. Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
As discussed in Section 20, Wildfire, Bakersfield does not lie within a State Responsibility Area (SRA) but does include very high fire hazard severity zones (VHFHSZs) as designated by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) in a small portion of northeastern part of the city (CAL FIRE 2025). The proposed project, in and of itself, does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to loss, injury, or death caused by wildland fires. Furthermore, future development would be required to comply with Policy 9 of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan which restricts the use of fire prone building materials and Policy 2 which requires discretionary projects to assess the impacts to fire services. Additionally, future development would be required to comply with the California Fire Code to ensure development is constructed to safeguard life and property from wildfire hazards. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Hydrology and Water Quality
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 43
10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface
or ground water quality? □ □ □ ■
b. Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin? □ □ □ ■
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
(i) Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site; □ □ □ ■
(ii) Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site; □ □ □ ■
(iii) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or □ □ □ ■
(iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? □ □ □ ■
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation? □ □ □ ■
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management
plan? □ □ □ ■
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
44 Environmental Setting
Water Supply
Bakersfield is serviced by the Bakersfield District of California Water Service (CWS). The City of Bakersfield receives water sourced from 51 groundwater wells, the Kern River, and treated water purchased from the Kern County Water Agency (CWS 2023). The water sourced from the Kern River is treated with advanced membrane filtration at surface water treatment plants owned by CWS and Kern County Water Agency (City of Bakersfield 2020).

Surface Water
The Kern River flows through Bakersfield. The Kern River watershed covers approximately 3,612 square miles. The State Water Project California Aqueduct flows through the center of the city.

Additionally, the Eastside Canal and Caliente Creek are located in east Bakersfield.

Groundwater
Bakersfield is located within the San Joaquin Valley-Kern County Groundwater Basin which is identified as high priority basin (Department of Water Resources [DWR] 2023). Water is supplied to Bakersfield from this subbasin through 51 groundwater wells. The City of Bakersfield is part of the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agency (KRGSA). KRGSA adopted their groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) in 2019 and the plan was amended in July 2022.

Water Quality
Water quality in Bakersfield is governed by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB). According to the 2020 Water Quality Report, drinking water in Bakersfield is in compliance with primary and secondary drinking water standards (California Water Service 2020).

Flooding
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) establishes base flood elevations (BFE) for 100-year and 500-year flood zones and establishes Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA). SFHAs are those areas within 100-year flood zones or areas that will be inundated by a flood event having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The 500-year flood zone is defined as the area that could be inundated by the flood which has a 0.2 percent probability of occurring in any given year, or once in 500 years, and is not considered an SFHA. Most areas of Bakersfield are within Flood Zone X, which indicates a 0.2-1 percent chance of annual flood hazard.

Dam Inundation
Flooding could potentially result from the failure of Isabella Dam which is located approximately 40 miles northeast of Bakersfield. The dam has the capacity to hold 570,000 acre feet of water and is built near a major earthquake fault (City of Bakersfield 2002). If an earthquake were to cause the dam to fail it has the potential to flood 60 square miles of metropolitan Bakersfield and the surrounding areas of Oildale and Greenacres. The probability of dam failure is extremely low (City of Bakersfield 2002).

Environmental Checklist
Hydrology and Water Quality
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 45
Impact Analysis
a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts that violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. In addition, future development would be subject to compliance with existing regulations, standards, and guidelines established by federal, State, and local agencies in addition to the goals and policies in the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and BMC related to water quality. This includes compliance with the requirements of the SWRCB Construction General Permit, which requires preparation and implementation of a SWPPP for projects that disturb one acre or more of land. The SWPPP must include erosion and sediment control BMPs that would meet or exceed measures required by the Construction General Permit, as well as those that control hydrocarbons, trash, debris, and other potential construction-related pollutants. Postconstruction stormwater performance standards are also required to specifically address water quality and channel protection events. Implementation of these BMPs would prevent or minimize environmental impacts and ensure that discharges during the construction phase of new development would not cause or contribute to the degradation of water quality in receiving waters.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not, in and of itself, result in impacts that would substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge that would impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin, or conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. In addition, future development would be required to comply with Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater (MRP) NPDES Permit (No. CA 00883399) which promotes infiltration. Implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) measures would increase absorption of stormwater runoff and the potential for groundwater recharge. Future development would not conflict with implementation projects or goals outlined in the GSA to preserve water quality and groundwater supplies in the area. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
46 c(i) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
c(ii) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? c(iii) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
c(iv) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows? The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts that would substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of a site or area, resulting in substantial erosion, flooding, surface runoff, or redirection of flood flows. In addition, future development would be required to comply with BMC Section 14.12.220 which describes prohibited discharges.

Additionally, pursuant to BMC Section 8.34.060 future projects would be required to comply with a NPDES permit issued for discharge, as well as BMPs for construction. Operators of a construction site would also be responsible for preparing and implementing a SWPPP that outlines project specific BMPs to control erosion, sediment release, and otherwise reduce the potential for discharge of pollutants in stormwater. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate a substantial increase in runoff that would result in substantial erosion, siltation, flooding on- or offsite; or increase polluted runoff. There would be no impact.

Furthermore, future development would be required to comply with existing programs and permits such as the MRP. Development design would include BMPs to avoid adverse effects associated with stormwater runoff quality. Specifically, future development would be required to implement LID Measures and on-site infiltration, as required under the C.3 provisions of the MRP. Additionally, future development would be required to comply with policies outlined in the Public Services and Facilities Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and regulations outlined in Chapter

8.35, Stormwater System, of the BMC. Therefore, the proposed project would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, and there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Hydrology and Water Quality
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 47
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not, in and of itself, result in impacts regarding flood hazards. In addition, future development would be reviewed for consistency with federal, State, and local requirements to limit flood hazards, including release of pollutants. As discussed in the Environmental Setting above, most of Bakersfield is within Flood Zone X (FEMA 2023). Future development would be required to comply with BMC Section

15.74.120, which contains standards for construction in flood zones, including using building materials and techniques and ensures that flood-resistant design occurs per the most restrictive provisions available. The Kern County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, which covers Bakersfield and sets guidelines to reduce risk and preventing loss from natural hazard events, including floods and mitigation strategies. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to the release of pollutants due to project inundation.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
48 This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Land Use and Planning
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 49
11 Land Use and Planning
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established
community? □ □ □ ■
b. Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Bakersfield has a mix of residential, industrial, commercial, and agricultural/open space land uses within the city. Agriculture and open space are primarily concentrated around the edges of the city, while industrial, commercial, and residential uses are dispersed throughout the center of the city (City of Bakersfield 2022).

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project physically divide an established community? The Housing Element is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development.

Therefore, it would have no impact on dividing an established community. Furthermore, the proposed project would prioritize the development of new housing on infill and appropriately zoned vacant sites within areas of Bakersfield. As part of the proposed project, the Housing Element Update includes Policy H-1.2 and H-1.4 which promotes the preservation of existing housing units.

Future development would be located near public transportation, schools, retail, and other services and would not involve the construction of new roads, railroads, or other features that may physically divide established communities in Bakersfield. Goals, policies, and objectives under the proposed project would put a greater emphasis on preventing displacement and promoting housing stability to maintain and preserve the quality of Bakersfield’s existing neighborhoods. Consequently, the proposed project would not impact the physical division of an established community. No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
50 b. Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
As part of the proposed project, the Housing Element Update examines the City’s housing needs, as they exist today, and projects future housing needs. This Housing Element Update focuses on addressing Bakersfield’s housing needs by providing objectives and policies associated with fair housing, the prevention of displacement, and promoting housing stability.

Upon its adoption by the City, the proposed project would serve as a comprehensive statement of the City’s housing policies and as a specific guide for program actions to be taken in support of those policies. The proposed project is a policy document that would encourage housing development in infill areas and on appropriately zoned vacant and non-vacant sites. Future development would be reviewed by the City for consistency with adopted local and State laws, regulations, standards, and policies. There would be no impacts related to conflicts with land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Mineral Resources
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 51
12 Mineral Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of
the state? □ □ □ ■
b. Result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land
use plan? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Bakersfield is in a major oil producing region and there are oil, natural gas, sand, and gravel resources within the city. Bakersfield has 590 oil and gas wells which are spread throughout the city (City of Bakersfield 2022). The city also has sand and gravel extraction areas which are concentrated along the floodplain and alluvial fan of the Kern River. Additionally, there is potential for gemstones and fossils in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains which are outside of the city (City of Bakersfield 2002).

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not, in and of itself, result in impacts to mineral resources. In addition, future development would be required to comply with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) and with policies included in the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, including Policies 4, 5, 9, 10, and 11. These general pan policies require land use decisions to recognize the need for conservation of mineral resources, fossils, and gemstones; protection of signification mineral and petroleum areas; the implementation of CEQA to reduce environmental impacts; and the prohibition of incompatible development in areas of mineral and petroleum extraction and processing. Adherence to these polices would ensure that there would be no impacts.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
52 This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Noise
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 53
13 Noise
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project result in:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies? □ □ □ ■
b. Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? □ □ □ ■
c. For a project located within the vicinity of
a private airstrip or an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive
noise levels? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Noise
Environmental noise levels typically fluctuate over time, and different types of noise descriptors are used to account for this variability. The unit of measurement used to describe a noise level is the decibel (dB). Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale that quantifies sound intensity. A doubling of the energy of a noise source, such as a doubling of traffic volume, would increase the noise level by 3 dB; similarly, dividing the energy in half would result in a decrease of 3 dB. Noise sensitive land uses generally include residences, hospitals, schools, churches, libraries, and parks.

Ground-borne Vibration
Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground-borne vibration are construction equipment, steelwheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads. The primary concern from vibration is that it can be intrusive and annoying to building occupants and vibration-sensitive land uses. Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV) or root mean square (RMS) vibration velocity.

The PPV and RMS velocity are normally described in inches per second (in./sec.). PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal. A PPV of 0.035 is considered barely noticeable while a PPV of 2.00 is considered severe (Caltrans 2020). Vibration sensitive receivers, which are similar to noise-sensitive receivers, include residences and institutional uses, such as hospitals, schools, and churches. However, vibration-sensitive receivers City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
54 also include buildings where vibrations may interfere with vibration-sensitive equipment that is affected by vibration levels that may be well below those associated with human annoyance (e.g., recording studios or medical facilities with sensitive equipment).

Descriptors
The impact of noise is not a function of loudness alone. The time of day when noise occurs, and the duration of the noise are also important. In addition, most noise that lasts for more than a few seconds is variable in its intensity. Consequently, a variety of noise descriptors has been developed.

The noise descriptors used for this analysis is the community noise equivalent level (CNEL).  The equivalent continuous sound level (Leq)is defined as the single steady A-weighted level equivalent to the same amount of energy as the actual fluctuating levels over a period of time.

Typically, Leq is equivalent to a one-hour period, even when measured for shorter durations as the noise level of a 10- to 30-minute period would be the same as the hour if the noise source is relatively steady (Crocker 2007).
 The CNEL is a 24-hour equivalent sound level with an additional 5 dBA penalty to noise occurring in the evening hours, between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. and an additional 10 dBA penalty to noise occurring during the night, between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., to account for the added sensitivity of humans to noise during these hours (Caltrans 2013). Quiet suburban areas typically have a CNEL in the range of 40 to 50 dBA, while areas near arterial streets are in the 50 to 70+ CNEL range (FTA 2018).

Noise Sensitivity
The Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan identifies residential areas, schools, convalescent and acute care homes, and parks and recreational areas as noise sensitive areas. These uses are dispersed throughout the city. The largest sources of noise within the city are vehicles on State highways and major local streets, aircraft overflight from nearby airports, and local industrial and commercial activity (City of Bakersfield 2022).

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not, in and of itself, result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise or vibration levels in Bakersfield. In addition, residential uses typically do not generate substantial levels of noise or vibration. Development proposals for individual projects would be subject to adopted development guidelines. Construction and operation of future development would be required to comply with Bakersfield’s Noise Ordinance and policies included in the Noise Element of the Municipal Bakersfield General Plan. The Bakersfield Noise Ordinance specifically prohibits construction activities before 6 a.m. and after 9 p.m. Monday through Friday, and before 8 a.m. and after 9 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Therefore, future construction activities would not generate noise or Environmental Checklist
Noise
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 55
vibration during regular sleep hours. Future development requiring discretionary approval accommodated under the proposed project would undergo project-specific developmental review.

No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts involving excessive noise levels associated with airport activity. Furthermore, future development would be required to comply with regulations and policies included in the airport land use plans for Meadows Field Airport and Bakersfield Municipal Airport which are both within Bakersfield. With adherence to these policies no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
56 This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Population and Housing
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 57
14 Population and Housing
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)? □ □ □ ■
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Table 3 provides the 2023 of population and housing estimates for Bakersfield. As of 2023, Bakersfield has an estimated population of 408,373 and 137,327 housing units, with an average household size of 3.06 people (California Department of Finance [DOF] 2023).

Table 3 Current Population and Housing Stock for Bakersfield City of Bakersfield Kern County
Population (#of people) 408,373 907,476
Average Household Size (persons/household) 3.06 3.07
Total Housing Units (# of units) 137,327 308,365
Vacant Housing Units 5,134 (3.7%) 20,660 (6.7%)
Source: DOF 2023
Kern COG’s Regional Growth Forecasts for 2020 through 2050 is the most recent regional long-range plan and regional growth forecast for Kern County (Kern COG 2019). The growth projections for Kern County are shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Kern COG’s Regional Growth Forecasts for Kern County 2010 2050 (Projected) Projected Growth (Percent Increase) Housing (# of units) 252,200 362,100 109,900 (44%)
Employment (# of jobs) 275,000 402,200 127,200 (46%)
Source: Kern COG 2019
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
58 Impacts related to population are generally social or economic in nature. Under CEQA, a social or economic change generally is not considered a significant effect on the environment unless the changes are directly linked to a physical change.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Therefore, the project would not induce substantial unplanned growth but rather is intended to accommodate the growth that is anticipated to occur in Bakersfield. Furthermore, the State requires that all local governments adequately plan to meet the housing needs of their communities.

HCD and Kern COG are responsible for identifying the projected RHNA and Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) for each jurisdiction in Kern County, including Bakersfield. These documents include population, employment, and housing projections for the region. As discussed in the Project Description, the proposed project identifies sites that have the capacity to meet the City’s RHNA, therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with State requirements for the RHNA. In addition, the proposed project, as a policy document, would not involve the extension of roads or other infrastructure that could indirectly lead to population growth. Rather, the proposed project is intended to establish goals and policies that encourage housing development to accommodate the growth that is anticipated to occur in Bakersfield. Thus, the proposed project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly, and there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield to accommodate the growth that is anticipated to occur in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing. In addition, the Housing Element Update, as part of the proposed project, includes Policy H-1.2 and H-1.4 which promotes the preservation of existing housing units which would limit displacement within the city as a result of the proposed project. Furthermore, California Government Code Section 7261(a) requires projects that would potentially result in displacement to proactively provide relocation assistance advisory services to all persons displaced. Therefore, the adoption of the proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing and no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Public Services
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 59
15 Public Services
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, or the need for
new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the
public services:
1 Fire protection? □ □ □ ■
2 Police protection? □ □ □ ■
3 Schools? □ □ □ ■
4 Parks? □ □ □ ■
5 Other public facilities? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
The Bakersfield Fire Department (BFD) provides fire protection and emergency medical services for Bakersfield. There are 14 fire stations throughout the city and 240 sworn, support, and reserve fire personnel (City of Bakersfield 2023).

The Bakersfield Police Department provides police services including patrol, traffic services, investigations, and animal control to Bakersfield. There are three police stations within the city.

The Bakersfield City School District operates 34 elementary schools and 10 middle schools. (Bakersfield City School District 2023) The Kern High School district operates 19 high schools, six alternative education schools, and one adult school (Kern High School District 2023).

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
60 Impact Analysis
a.1. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
a.2. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
a.3. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools, or the need for new or physically altered schools, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives? a.4. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks, or the need for new or physically altered parks, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives? a.5. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of other new or physically altered public facilities, or the need for other new or physically altered public facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development but rather establishes goals and policies to promote new housing development intended to accommodate the growth that is anticipated to occur in Bakersfield, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to public facilities and services.

In addition, future development requiring discretionary approval accommodated under the proposed project would undergo project-specific developmental review and would be subject to adopted development guidelines, including standards that govern public facilities, services, and adequate fire and public safety protections. Additionally, policies in the Safety/ Public Safety Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, such as Policy 2 which requires discretionary projects to assess impacts on police and fire services, would apply to future development.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered public facilities and there would be no impact.

Impacts related to parks are discussed in Section 16, Recreation, and impacts related to other public facilities such as water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste infrastructure are discussed in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Section 19, Utilities and Service Systems.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Recreation
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 61
16 Recreation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated? □ □ □ ■
b. Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
The City of Bakersfield's Recreation and Parks Department maintains 61 parks, four public pools, 13 spray parks, two sports complexes and two skate parks within the city (City of Bakersfield 2002).

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to recreational facilities. In addition, development proposals for individual projects would be subject to adopted development guidelines, including standards that govern recreational facilities.

Therefore, the proposed project would not increase the use of existing recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Thus, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
62 This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Transportation
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 63
17 Transportation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance
or policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit, roadway,
bicycle and pedestrian facilities? □ □ □ ■
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)? □ □ □ ■
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)? □ □ □ ■
d. Result in inadequate emergency access? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
The City’s General Plan Circulation Element identifies the existing transportation conditions of the city, existing and future roadways, bicycle trails, and pedestrian trails. Route 99 is a north-south facing freeway that runs through Bakersfield, which connects with Route 58, an east-west facing freeway. State Route 204 and 178 are also partially within the metropolitan area and carry Bakersfield traffic throughout the area. Transit service in Bakersfield is provided by local buses, intercity buses, AMTRAK and paratransit services. The local bus operator is Golden Empire Transit (GET). Intercity bus operators include Greyhound, Orange Belt Stages, Airport Bus of Bakersfield and Kern County. Two major railroads provide freight service to Bakersfield: Burlington Northern-Santa Fe and Southern Pacific. The California Highspeed Rail is currently undergoing construction as of 2021, with a planned stop in Downtown Bakersfield (City of Bakersfield 2022). There are roughly 176 miles of bike lanes that exist on various streets within the city (City of Bakersfield 2022).

Bakersfield’s Bike Transportation Plan guides the future development of bicycle facilities and programs in the city (City of Bakersfield 2013).

In 2018, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 was finalized to help determine the significance of transportation impacts. Beginning on July 1, 2020, level of service (roadway congestion) is no longer considered an acceptable metric for analyzing transportation impacts under CEQA. Instead, jurisdictions must adopt vehicle miles traveled (VMT) thresholds to analyze impacts related to the number of automobile trips and miles traveled.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
64 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system.

Bakersfield’s Bicycle Transportation Plan includes plans, policies, and implementation projects to promote bicycling within the city. Future development would not conflict with this plan and would be required to adhere to the policies within it. Additionally, Bakersfield’s Pedestrian Access Plan includes recommendations for improvements to the Bakersfield pedestrian environment with an emphasis on connecting pedestrians to transit services (City of Bakersfield 2020). The proposed project would not conflict with this plan.

Furthermore, future development would be required to comply with policies included in the Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan including Policy 34 which requires development review to determine a project’s impact on the transportation system, Policy 35 which requires new development in incorporated areas to provide transportation facilities such as streets, curbs, and traffic control devices on site, Policy 37 which requires new development to pay for necessary transportation improvements in the project vicinity, and Policy 39 which requires new development to pay or participate in its pro rata share of the expansion of transportation facilities it necessitates. Future development would also be required to comply with Policy 9 included in the Bikeways section of the Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan which requires new subdivisions to provide bikes lanes on collector and arterial streets and Policy 10 which encourages the construction of subdivisions to include internal bike paths.

Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. There would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to VMT. In addition, future development would be required to adhere to federal, State, and local policies and regulations. The Housing Element Update, as part of the proposed project, includes policies such as H-2.6 to encourage housing development near existing transit services. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). There would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Transportation
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 65
c. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)? The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts related to hazards related to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. In addition, future development would be required to adhere to federal, State, and local policies and regulations including those policies included in the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and would be reviewed and required to be consistent with appropriate regulations and design standards in effect at the time, such as adequate sight distance at new driveways between vehicles entering and exiting the driveways and pedestrians on the adjacent sidewalk, as well as motor vehicles and bicycles on the adjacent street, as outlined by Section 17.08.175 of the BMC. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use, and there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access. In addition, the City maintains the roadway network which would provide access to new development sites in accordance with industry design standards, which ensures that the physical network would be free of obstructions for emergency responders. Emergency access to new development sites would be subject to review by the City of Bakersfield and responsible emergency service agencies, thus ensuring that future projects would be designed to meet all emergency access and design standards.

Additional vehicles associated with new development sites could increase delays for emergency response vehicles during peak commute hours. However, emergency responders maintain response plans which include use of alternate routes, sirens, and other methods to bypass congestion and minimize response times. In addition, California law requires drivers to yield the right-of-way to emergency vehicles and remain stopped until the emergency vehicle passes to ensure the safe and timely passage of emergency vehicles.

Future development requiring discretionary approval accommodated under the proposed project would undergo project-specific developmental review to ensure consistency with the City’s existing and planned circulation network; and ensure that the construction of new features would not impede emergency access. These review processes would evaluate the design of future projects’ emergency access schematics, which would minimize and mitigate the potential for the creation of inadequate emergency access. Therefore, no impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
66 This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Tribal Cultural Resources
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 67
18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in a Public Resources Code
Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
or cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native American
tribe, and that is:
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? □ □ □ ■
b. A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of
the resource to a California Native
American tribe. □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
AB 52 established that “A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment” (PRC Section 21084.2). It further states that the lead agency shall establish measures to avoid impacts that would alter the significant characteristics of a tribal cultural resource, when feasible (PRC Section 21084.3).

PRC Section 21074 (a)(1)(A) and (B) defines tribal cultural resources as “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe” and is:

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
68 1. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k), or

2. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1.

In applying these criteria, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

AB 52 also establishes a formal consultation process for California tribes regarding those resources.

The consultation process must be completed before a CEQA document can be certified. Under AB 52, lead agencies are required to “begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project.” Native American tribes to be included in the process are those that have requested notice of projects proposed within the jurisdiction of the lead agency.

California Government Code Section 65352.3 (adopted in 2004 pursuant to the requirements of SB 18 [SB 18]) requires local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with tribal organizations prior to making a decision to adopt or amend a general or specific plan. The tribal organizations eligible to consult have traditional lands in a local government’s jurisdiction, and are identified, upon request, by the NAHC. As noted in the California Office of Planning and Research’s Tribal Consultation Guidelines (2005), “The intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places.” Impact Analysis
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code 21074 that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? The City sent notification letters on June 22, 2023 to 11 tribal representatives from nine Native American organizations (Big Pine Paiute Tribe of Owens Valley, Chumash Council of Bakersfield, Kitanemuk & Yowlumne Tejon Indians, Tejon Indian Tribe, Tule River Indian Tribe, Santa Rosa Rancheria, Kawaiisu Tribe, Tubatulabals of Kern Valley, and Kern Valley Indian Council) based on a list of contacts provided by the NAHC. To date, the City has not received any responses requesting additional consultation under AB 52 or SB 18. The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield.

Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not have an impact related to tribal cultural resources. Furthermore, development proposals for individual projects would be subject to adopted development guidelines, including standards that govern archaeological resources as described in Section 5, Cultural Resources, and disposition of human remains as governed by Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and PRC Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Utilities and Service Systems
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 69
19 Utilities and Service Systems
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects? □ □ □ ■
b. Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years? □ □ □ ■
c. Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing commitments? □ □ □ ■
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals? □ □ □ ■
e. Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
Bakersfield is serviced by the Bakersfield District of California Water Service (CWS). The City of Bakersfield receives water sourced from 51 groundwater wells, the Kern River, and treated water purchased from the Kern County Water Agency (CWS 2023). The water sourced from the Kern River is treated with advanced membrane filtration at surface water treatment plants owned by CWS and Kern County Water Agency (City of Bakersfield 2020). The Kern Sanitation Authority provides wastewater services to the city of Bakersfield. The City’s Public Works Department Solid Waste Division manages all solid waste retrieval and disposal throughout the city. Telecommunication services in Bakersfield are provided by private companies, including AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
70 Comcast Cable which provides internet, phone, and television. PG&E provides electricity and the Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas services to Bakersfield.

Impact Analysis
a. Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
b. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
The proposed project is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development.

Individual projects would be individually reviewed to ensure that adequate utility services would be provided to each site. Future development would be concentrated in urban areas that are served by existing utilities infrastructure, including potable water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, electrical power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities. All development would also be required to comply with all utility service standards set in the BMC and Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, such as Policy 5 in the Public Services and Facilities Element which requires new development to pay a pro rata share of necessary municipal utility expansions. Impacts identified for an individual project would be addressed through the project approval process.

Water Supply
The precise location and connection to water services would be determined at the time development is proposed. Should new connections or upgrades be required, such upgrades would be subject to subsequent City review and would be subject to fees according to Policy 5 in the Public Services and Facilities Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. Chapter 8 of California Water Service’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) includes a water shortage contingency plan which would be implemented in the case of a water shortage in Bakersfield (CWS 2020). In the case that a water shortage occurs, future development would be required to comply with necessary demand reduction measures outlined in the water shortage contingency plan. The proposed project would not result in inadequate water supply.

Stormwater
Future development would be evaluated to determine adequacy of utility infrastructure as part of the standard City development review process. See also Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality.

Wastewater Generation
Wastewater treatment for future development would be provided by existing infrastructure within Bakersfield. Project development would be required to comply with the regulations to maintain wastewater capacity in Bakersfield. Future development would be evaluated to determine adequacy of utility infrastructure as part of the standard City development review process including approval by the Public Works Department. The proposed project would not result in impacts to wastewater.

Environmental Checklist
Utilities and Service Systems
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 71
Electricity, Natural Gas, and Telecommunications
Future residential development in conformance with the proposed project would be evaluated to determine adequacy of utility infrastructure as part of the standard City development review process. The proposed project would not result in impacts to electricity, natural gas, or telecommunications. No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
d. Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
The proposed project is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development.

Therefore, the proposed project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Furthermore, individual development projects would be required to comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statues and regulations. This includes California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) regulations found in Title 14 and Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
72 This page intentionally left blank.

Environmental Checklist
Wildfire
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 73
20 Wildfire
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas
or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the project:
a. Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan? □ □ □ ■
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and
thereby expose project occupants to
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? □ □ □ ■
c. Require the installation or maintenance
of associated infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities)
that may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing impacts
to the environment? □ □ □ ■
d. Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslopes or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope instability,
or drainage changes? □ □ □ ■
Environmental Setting
The Bakersfield Fire Department (BFD) is responsible for protecting life, property, and the environment within the city. The Kern County EOP provides for the coordination of emergency operations for the cities within its jurisdiction, including Bakersfield.

No part of Bakersfield is within an SRA. There are small areas in north and northeastern Bakersfield that are within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) with moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones (CAL FIRE 2025). A small area in southwestern Bakersfield is also within a high fire hazard severity zone.

In addition, the location of the city and existing environmental factors do not promote a high risk for exposure to pollutant concentrations. Prevailing winds in Bakersfield generally move from west to east across the city (WeatherSpark n.d.).

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
74 Impact Analysis
a. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
The city of Bakersfield is not within an SRA and only a small area in northeastern Bakersfield is within a VHFHSZ. Furthermore, the proposed project is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development. Because it is a policy document, the proposed project would not, in and of itself, have an impact on adopted emergency response or evacuation plan or pollutant concentrations from wildfire. Future development would be required to comply with the California Fire Code as adopted in Chapter 15.65 of the BMC, the Kern County EOP, and the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. Compliance with these regulations and policies would ensure that there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
c. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? Bakersfield is not within or near an SRA and only a small area in northeastern Bakersfield is within a VHFHSZ. The proposed project does not propose specific projects but puts forth goals and policies that encourage various aspects of new housing development in Bakersfield. Therefore, the proposed project would not have an impact on wildfire safety. In addition, most roads and utility infrastructure required for future development would be existing or would occur in currently developed areas. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
d. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslopes or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Bakersfield is not within or near an SRA and only a small area in northeastern Bakersfield is within a VHFHSZ. Furthermore, the city is generally flat. Therefore, there would be low risk of downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes within the city. The proposed project puts forth goals and policies that promote housing development in Bakersfield to meet the City’s RHNA requirements. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not have an impact related to wildfire. Therefore, there would be no impact.

NO IMPACT
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 75
21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Does the project:
a. Have the potential to substantially
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, substantially reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory? □ □ □ ■
b. Have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that
the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)? □ □ □ ■
c. Have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or
indirectly? □ □ □ ■
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The proposed project, in and of itself, does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment. Adoption of the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. In addition, the proposed City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
76 project would not have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or sensitive natural community.

Through the City’s development review process, future development projects would be evaluated for potential direct and indirect impacts on biological and cultural resources. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory and no impacts would occur.

NO IMPACT
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not result in impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. In addition, through the City’s development review process, future development projects would be evaluated for potential cumulative impacts and for consistency with all applicable policies of the City’s General Plan, Zoning Code, and BMC.

Through this development review process, potential cumulative impacts to various natural and human-made resources would be evaluated. Adoption of the proposed project would not have impacts that are individually limited or cumulatively considerable. No impact would occur.

NO IMPACT
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
The proposed project does not include specific projects but sets forth goals and policies to encourage new housing development in Bakersfield. Because it is a policy document that does not involve or approve physical development, the proposed project would not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.

Through the City’s development review process, future residential development projects would be evaluated for potential direct and indirect impacts on human beings. Therefore, the proposed project would not have environmental effects which would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly and no impacts would occur.

NO IMPACT
References
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 77
References
Bibliography
Bakersfield, City of. 2002. Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/37a2e20d-e610-431f-a222-9f4f2ecd2ddd. (Accessed May 2023).
_____. 2008. Hillside Development Ordinance.
https://docs.bakersfieldcity.us/weblink/0/edoc/991247/Hillside_Development_Ordinance_ map.pdf (Accessed June 2023).
_____. 2010. Bakersfield Pedestrian Access Plan. https://www.kerncog.org/wpcontent/uploads/2021/02/Bakersfield_Pedestrian_Access_Plan.pdf. (Accessed June 2023). _____. 2013. Bicycle Transportation Plan.
https://docs.bakersfieldcity.us/weblink/Browse.aspx?startid=602140&dbid=0. (Accessed June 2023).
_____. 2020. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan.
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/c5b0009e-ea0e-4721-a4eefd716aab2659?cache=1800. (Accessed June 2023) _____. 2022a. Zoning Map. https://docs.bakersfieldcity.us/weblink/0/edoc/1574130/ZONING.pdf. (Accessed June 2023).
_____. 2022b. Memo re: Pending Expiration of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan. https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/fe98aade-8ee9-4cdf-9950-d7655429c2a9. (Accessed July 2023).
_____. 2023. About the Fire Department. https://www.bakersfieldcity.us/252/About-the-FireDepartment. (Accessed June 2023).

Bakersfield City School District. 2023. Elementary Schools. https://www.bcsd.com/Page/140. (Accessed June 2023).

California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2021. Alquist Priolo Earthquake Map. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. (Accessed June 2023).

California Department of Finance (DOF). 2023. Population and Housing Estimates. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housingestimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2023/. (Accessed June 2023).

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). Local Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfirepreparedness-and-mitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones. (Accessed August 2025).

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf.

Accessed November 2022.

City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
78 _____. 2023. California State Scenic Highway System Map. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e 8057116f1aacaa. (Accessed June 2023).

California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) 2023.Envirostor Database. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=bakersfield+ca (Accessed June 2023).

California Department of Water Resources (DWR). SGMA Basin Prioritization Dashboard. https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bp-dashboard/final/. (Accessed August 2025).

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2021. 2021 Total System Electric Generation. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2021- total-system-electric-generation. (Accessed June 2023).

California Water Service (CWS) 2020a.Bakersfield 2020 Water Quality Report. https://www.calwater.com/ccrs/bk-bk-2020/. (Accessed June 2023). _____. 2020b. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan- Bakersfield District. https://www.calwater.com/docs/uwmp2020/BK_2020_UWMP_FINAL.pdf. (Accessed June 2023).
_____. 2023. District Information. https://www.calwater.com/district-information/?dist=bk. (Accessed June 2023).

Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG). 2019. 2020-2050 Regional Growth Forecast. https://www.kerncog.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Kern_2020- 2050_Regional_Growth_Forecast.pdf. (Accessed June 2023).

Kern County. 1985. Kern River Plan.
https://psbweb.co.kern.ca.us/planning/pdfs/kcgp/kern_river_plan_ocr.pdf. (Accessed June 2023).
_____. 2020. Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan. http://mitigatehazards.com/county-ofkern/. (Accessed June 2023). _____. 2022. Emergency Operations Plan.
https://www.kerncounty.com/home/showpublisheddocument/8407/637859766134270000 . (Accessed June 2023).

Kern High School District. 2023. School Directory.
https://www.kernhigh.org/apps/pages/schooldirectory. (Accessed June 2023).

Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E). 2021. Clean Energy Solutions. https://www.pge.com/en_US/aboutpge/environment/what-we-are-doing/clean-energy-solutions/clean-energysolutions.page?WT.mc_id=Vanity_cleanenergy. (Accessed June 2023).

San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). 2012a. Ambient Air Quality Standards & Valley Attainment Status. http://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm. (Accessed June 2023). _____. 2012b. Climate Change Action Plan.
https://www.valleyair.org/Programs/CCAP/CCAP_menu.htm. (Accessed July 2023).

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVACPD). 2002. CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/CEQA%20Rules/GAMAQI%20Jan%202002%20Rev .pdf. (Accessed May 2023).

References
Initial Study – Common Sense Exemption 79
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2023. Geotracker Database. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=bakersfield+ca#. (Accessed June 2023).

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. Overview of Greenhouse Gases. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases. (Accessed June 2023).

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2023. Critical Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species Map.
https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265ad4fe0989 3cf75b8dbfb77. (Accessed May 2023).

Weatherspark. N.d. Weather in Bakersfield California. https://weatherspark.com/y/1451/AverageWeather-in-Bakersfield-California-United-States-YearRound#:~:text=The%20predominant%20average%20hourly%20wind,of%2074%25%20on%2 0July%2018. (Accessed June 2023).

List of Preparers
Rincon Consultants, Inc. prepared this Initial Study under contract to the City of Bakersfield. Persons involved in data gathering analysis, project management, and quality control are listed below.

Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Matt Maddox, MESM, Principal in Charge
Karly Kaufman, MESM, Project Manager
Hannah Bireschi, Environmental Planner
Leeza Segal, Planner
Gina Gerlich, GIS Analyst
Debra Jane Seltzer, Publishing Specialist
City of Bakersfield
2023-2031 Housing Element
80 This page intentionally left blank.

NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
TO: Office of Planning and Research FROM: City of Bakersfield PO Box 3044, 1400 Tenth Street, Room 222 Planning Department Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
X County Clerk
County of Kern
1115 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Project Title: 6th Cycle Housing Element 2023-2031
Project Location-Specific: Various
Project Location-City: Bakersfield Project Location-County: Kern Description of Project: The project is a request for an amendment to the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, updating the 6th cycle Housing Element 2023-2031. The Housing Element is a policy document that identifies existing and projected housing needs and establishes programs and policies to address housing needs. The project involves adoption of a policy document and does not in and of itself include any proposed development. The project does not propose or approve any physical development. The project will not result in changes to the physical environment, nor will it result in potential environmental impacts.

Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Bakersfield – City Council Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: City of Bakersfield – Development Services Department Exempt Status:

Ministerial (Sec.21080(b)(1); 15268));
Declared Emergency (Sec.21080(b)(3); 15269(a));
Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
_ Categorical Exemption. State type and section number. ____________________ Statutory Exemptions. State section number. ________________________________ X Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2) and 15061(b)(3) – General Rule or Common Sense
Reasons why project is exempt: There is no possibility that this type of project would have a significant effect on the environment; therefore the project is not subject to CEQA. Similar projects have occurred in the City of Bakersfield where policy documents are updated that do not propose a physical project.

Lead Agency: Contact Person: Jose Fernandez Telephone/Ext.: (661) 326-3778 If filed by applicant:

1. Attach certified document of exemption finding.

2. Has a notice of exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes X No _
Signature: Date: 8/29/25 Title: Associate Planner
x Signed by Lead Agency Date received for filing at OPR: ______________ Signed by Applicant
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
651 Bannon Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
August 8, 2025
Paul Johnson, Director
Planning Division
City of Bakersfield,
1715 Chester Avenue,
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Dear Paul Johnson:

RE: City of Bakersfield’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Revised Draft Element Thank you for submitting the City of Bakersfield’s (City) revised draft housing element received for review on July 10, 2025. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. In addition, HCD considered comments from Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability and Public Interest Law Project, pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c).

The revised draft meets the statutory requirements that were described in HCD’s December 23, 2024 review. However, the housing element cannot be found in substantial compliance until the City has completed and submitted necessary rezones (see below) to make prior identified sites available or address the shortfall of sites to accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The housing element will substantially comply with State Housing Element Law (Gov. Code, § 65580 et seq) when all necessary rezoning and element are adopted, submitted to, and approved by HCD, in accordance with Government Code section 65585.

A jurisdiction that did not adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days from the statutory deadline (December 31, 2023) must rezone sites within one year of the statutory deadline and meet requirements pursuant to Government Code sections 65583, subdivision (c)(1)(A) and 65583.2, subdivisions (c), (h) and (i), as applicable. As this year has passed and Actions 7.3 (Adequate Sites: Reuse Sites) and 7.5 (Adequate Sites: Rezone to Allow Higher Densities) have not been completed to meet all statutory requirements and submitted to HCD for review, the housing element is out of compliance and will remain out of compliance until the rezoning has been completed and submitted to HCD to meet all statutory requirements. Once the City completes the rezoning, a copy of the resolution or ordinance should be transmitted to HCD. HCD will review the documentation and issue correspondence updating the status of the City’s housing element compliance.

Paul Johnson, Director

As a reminder, the City’s 6th cycle housing element was due December 31, 2023. As of today, the City has not completed the housing element process for the 6th cycle. The City’s 5th cycle housing element no longer satisfies statutory requirements. HCD encourages the City to revise the element as described above, adopt, and submit to HCD to regain housing element compliance.

Public participation is essential to the effective planning, adoption, and implementation of the housing element. The City should continue to engage the community throughout the process, including during and after adoption. This includes outreach to organizations representing lower-income and special needs populations, as well as individuals and groups who submitted comments on the housing element. The City should ensure that information is shared consistently through a variety of outreach methods and that public input is meaningfully considered and incorporated where appropriate. Commenters on this review, particularly Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability, provided meaningful program suggestions. HCD encourages the City to continue working with the public, including commenters on this housing element review, and adjust policies and programs, as appropriate. Please be advised that any revisions to the housing element must be posted on the local government’s website. In addition, a link to the revised document must be emailed to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notice regarding the housing element, at least seven days prior to submission to HCD.

For your information, pursuant to Government Code section 65583.3, subdivision (b), the City must utilize standards, forms, and definitions adopted by HCD when preparing the sites inventory and submit an electronic version of the sites inventory. While the City has submitted an electronic version of the sites inventory, any future adopted versions of the element must also submit the electronic version of the sites inventory.

Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant, Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs, and the Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the City will meet housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.

For your information, some general plan element updates are triggered by housing element adoption. HCD reminds the City to consider timing provisions and welcomes the opportunity to provide assistance. For information, please see the Technical Advisories issued by the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation at:
https://www.lci.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html.

HCD appreciates the hard work and dedication of the City in preparation and review of the housing element. HCD looks forward to receiving the City’s adopted housing Paul Johnson, Director

element and welcomes the opportunity to provide technical assistance through the rezone and adoption process. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Irvin Saldana, of our staff, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Paul McDougall
Senior Program Manager
JF: S:\03_Advance Planning\04_Housing Element\16_Public Hearing\PC

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD

PLANNING COMMISSION

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: September 4, 2025 AGENDA CATEGORY: 6.a
TO: Chair Strickland and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jennie Eng, Assistant Planning Director J. Eng
DATE: August 29, 2025
FILE: Approval of General Plan Amendment to update the 6th cycle Housing Element 2023- 2031 for the City of Bakersfield and its proposed Notice of Exemption. [Document Description]
Ward: All Wards
STAFF PLANNER: Jose Fernandez, Associate Planner
REQUEST: Approval of General Plan Amendment to update the 6th cycle Housing Element 2023-2031 for the City of Bakersfield and its proposed Notice of Exemption.

APPLICANT: City of Bakersfield OWNER: N/A
LOCATION: Citywide APN: N/A
PROJECT SIZE: N/A CEQA: Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15061(b)(3) (General Rule)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution approving the General Plan Amendment to update the City of Bakersfield’s 6th Cycle Housing Element for the 2023-2031 planning period and its proposed Notice of Exemption and recommend the same to City Council.

PROJECT OVERVIEW:

The Housing Element identifies existing and projected housing needs within the community and establishes policies, programs, and actions to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Certification of the Housing Element by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is required to ensure the City remains in compliance with State housing law and retains access to important funding opportunities.

The City submitted its initial draft Housing Element to HCD on June 22, 2023, and has since worked through multiple rounds of review and revisions in response to HCD comments. Subsequent drafts were File No. 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
submitted on May 20, 2024, October 24, 2024, and most recently on July 10, 2025. The current draft reflects extensive revisions to address HCD’s feedback. HCD has provided a letter dated August 8, 2025, stating the revised draft meets the statutory requirements as described in their most recent review dated December 23, 2024. However, the Housing Element will not be considered in substantial compliance with State law until the City Council formally adopts the most recent draft and it is certified by HCD. Upon certification, the 6th cycle Housing Element will provide a comprehensive policy framework to guide housing production, preservation, and affordability throughout the 2023–2031 planning period.

BACKGROUND AND TIMELINE:

Housing Element Law. Since 1969, California has required that all local governments (cities and counties) adequately plan to meet the housing needs of everyone in the community. Cities and Counties meet this requirement by adopting Housing Elements as part of their “General Plan”, also required by the state.

California’s Housing Element Law acknowledges that, in order for the private market to adequately address the housing needs and demand of Californians, Cities and Counties must adopt plans and regulatory systems that provide opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain, housing development. As a result, housing policy in California rests largely on the effective implementation of local General Plans and, in particular, local Housing Elements.

General Plan Housing Element. Updating the Housing Element is one of the most critical responsibilities of local governments in California, as it ensures that jurisdictions plan for the housing needs of individuals and families who live, work, and play in their communities. At the same time, the process can be complex and resource-intensive. Compliance with Housing Element law is also tied to eligibility for numerous State and federal funding programs related to housing, transportation, and infrastructure. In some cases, jurisdictions must have a certified Housing Element to access funds. In others, while certification is not a strict requirement, jurisdictions with a compliant Housing Element receive additional points in the competitive scoring process, significantly improving their chances of securing funding.

Bakersfield’s 5th Cycle Housing Element. Housing cycles operate within eight-year intervals. Bakersfield's Housing Element for the period spanning 2015 to 2023 was formulated in strict accordance with the provisions outlined in the State's General Plan law pertaining to Housing Elements. This comprehensive document underwent a thorough review process and was officially adopted by the City Council on January 20, 2016. Subsequently, it received formal certification from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on February 16, 2016.

Bakersfield’s 6th Cycle Housing Element. The City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element, covering the 2023–2031 planning period, was due to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on December 31, 2023. The first draft was submitted on June 22, 2023, initiating HCD’s 90-day review period. The HCD review process is comprehensive, and City staff, in coordination with the City’s consultant Rincon Consultants, have worked diligently to address comments and prepare revisions. Since the initial submittal, the City has provided additional drafts on May 20, 2024; October 24, 2024; and most recently on July 10, 2025, each reflecting updates made in response to HCD’s feedback.

Since the Housing Element was not certified by the statutory deadline of December 31, 2023, the City has remained out of compliance with State housing law. Until certification is secured, Bakersfield is subject to State enforcement measures and may face reduced eligibility for certain housing and infrastructure File No. 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
funding programs. Staff continues to work closely with HCD and has provided the requested resolutions for the rezones and is waiting for a response from HCD which will resolve the outstanding issues with the goal of achieving certification and restoring compliance.

Regional Housing Needs Allocation. State law requires that every Housing Element include an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, based on land use designations, zoning, and other factors. This inventory of land must meet the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing mandate called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The RHNA is based on population projections, income distribution, and access to jobs, developed through a methodology by KernCOG. For the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023-2031), the City of Bakersfield is tasked with creating a land inventory that can accommodate 37,461 housing units in the next eight years. Table 1 compares the 5th Cycle and 6th Cycle RHNA allocations for each jurisdiction in the region.

Table 1 – KernCOG RHNA Allocations
Jurisdiction
5th Cycle
Allocation
(2015-2023)
6th Cycle
Allocation
(2023-2031)
# Increase
# Decrease
% Increase
% Decrease
Overall % of 6th
Cycle Allocation
Unincorporated
County Areas 21,583 9,243 -12,340 -57.2% 16.0%
Arvin 1,168 1,174 6 0.5% 2.0%
Bakersfield 36,290 37,461 1,171 3.2% 65.0%
California City 1,268 427 -841 -66.3% 0.7%
Delano 1,462 1,866 404 27.6% 3.2%
Maricopa 35 13 -22 -62.9% 0.0%
McFarland 311 244 -67 -21.5% 0.4%
Ridgecrest 1,346 1,436 90 6.7% 2.5%
Shafter 2,036 3,294 1,258 61.8% 5.7%
Taft 254 504 250 98.4% 0.9%
Tehachapi 496 902 406 81.9% 1.6%
Wasco 1,426 1,086 -340 -23.8% 1.9%
Total Kern County 67,675 57,650 -10,025 -14.8%
Source: KernCOG 5th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan June 2015-December 2023 KernCOG 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan June 2023-December 2031 PROJECT ANALYSIS:

The City of Bakersfield is required to plan for 37,461 new housing units during the 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023–2031), as allocated by the Kern Council of Governments through the RHNA. To meet this File No. 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
obligation, the Housing Element identifies a “Sites Inventory” comprised of vacant and underutilized parcels that can reasonably accommodate residential development during the planning period. The inventory prioritizes infill development, corridor revitalization, and sites located near transit, schools, employment centers, and other community resources.

Housing Element Update Components.

The proposed 2023-2031 Housing Element Update includes the following components, as required by State law:
• Review of the previous Housing Element: This section reviews the results of the goals, policies, and programs adopted in the previous Housing Element and compares projected outcomes with actual achieved results.
• Housing Needs Assessment: This section reviews the existing and projected housing needs of the community. It provides a profile of socio-demographic information, such as population characteristics, household information, housing stock, tenure, and housing affordability. The assessment also considers local special housing needs, such as seniors, farmworkers, homeless, large households, and female-headed households.
• Resources and Inventory of Adequate Sites. This section provides resources and an inventory of adequate sites that are suitably zoned, or appropriate for rezoning or annexation, and available within the planning period to meet the jurisdiction’s fair share of regional housing needs across all income levels.
• Governmental and Nongovernmental Constraints. This section identifies and analyzes impediments to housing production across all income levels. • Fair Housing Assessment. This section provides a summary of contributing factors that serve as barriers to fair housing choice and access to opportunities in Bakersfield. • Housing Plan. This section provides a statement of the community’s goals, quantified objectives, and policies to maintain, preserve, improve, and develop housing. It also provides a schedule of meaningful actions to be taken during the planning period to achieve the goals, objectives, and policies. It includes quantified objectives for new construction, rehabilitation, and conserved units by income category (i.e., very low, low-moderate, and above-moderate) to make sure that both the existing and the projected housing needs are met, consistent with the City’s share of the RHNA.

REZONING:

To ensure sufficient capacity for housing development across all income levels, the City’s strategy includes rezoning 333 sites to increase allowable residential densities to also allow higher density housing where appropriate. Rezoning efforts are focused on areas with existing or planned infrastructure and community services, including the Downtown Bakersfield High-Speed Rail Station Area, Old Town Kern, Chester Avenue, Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, and other major corridors. This approach promotes infill development, reduces urban sprawl, and increases opportunities for mixed-income and transit-oriented housing throughout the city.

HCD’s August 8, 2025 letter requested documentation of the City’s rezoning efforts. In response, staff provided the approved ordinances of the two rezoning actions taken by City Council on April 24, 2024, and July 24, 2024.

PUBLIC OUTREACH:

Public engagement has been central to the Housing Element update process. The City conducted an extensive outreach effort that included a project-specific website (Bakersfield2045.com), a housing needs File No. 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
survey, housing sites survey, community workshops, stakeholder interviews, and public meetings. In total the City hosted 64 outreach events and surveyed 4,500+ residents to gather community input.

To reach the largest and broadest spectrum of community members and stakeholders, Bakersfield utilized the following notification methods throughout the Housing Element update process:
• The project was covered in the Kern County Farm Bureau E-Newsletter and in various local media outlets including KGET-17, 23ABC, Bakersfield.com, and KERO 23 ABC News. • Regular posts to the City’s social media accounts, including Facebook and Instagram, announcing project website launch, survey, and a housing sites survey tool, public meetings, and release of the Draft Housing Element for public review.
• Broadcasts on the local public access television station. • Email lists of community and advocacy groups, non-profits, faith-based organizations, schoolbased organizations, mobile home park associations, homeowners associations, disability advocates and neighborhood groups to provide outreach and regular updates on the project. In addition, the City is maintaining an “interested parties” list for those who have requested regular updates about the General Plan update.
• The City developed flyers in English and Spanish advertising the project. Specifically, the City developed and circulated a bilingual, introductory flyer informing residents about the Housing Element, the need for adequate housing in Bakersfield, how to plan for new housing, types of housing, a project schedule, and contact information. More than 1,300 flyers were distributed to government facilities and pop-up events.

Key themes raised by the community included the need for more affordable housing, a greater variety of housing types, expanded education on tenant rights and resources, and equitable distribution of housing opportunities across all neighborhoods. Community members also emphasized the importance of limiting sprawl, focusing on infill, and locating housing near transit and services. This feedback directly shaped the Sites Inventory, rezoning priorities, and the policy framework included in the Housing Element.

The Housing Element was revised per HCD and public comment and released for public review for seven days from June 6 to June 13, 2025. The City posted the revised Housing Element on the project website and emailed the list of interested parties. Two comment letters were received during public comment period, one letter in support by the Builders Association and the other letter was from the Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability (LCJA), requesting additional changes to programs. The City revised Action 4.1 and 2.4 according to revisions suggested by LCJA.

The formulation of the 2023-2031 Housing Element continues to be a process characterized by robust public engagement. This approach ensures that the document accurately reflects the insights and perspectives of the community.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND DETERMINATION:

CEQA. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), also known as the “general rule” or “common sense” exemption, CEQA exempts activities that can be seen with certainty to have no possibility for causing a significant effect on the environment. The CEQA Guidelines state in that section that “A project is exempt from CEQA if… [T]he activity is covered by common sense that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.”
File No. 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
The proposed project involves adoption of a policy document and does not in and of itself include any proposed development. The proposed project does not propose or approve any physical development.

The proposed project will not result in changes to the physical environment, nor will it result in potential environmental impacts. To ensure adequate factual support for the common sense exemption, an Initial Study (included in the attachments) was completed analyzing each area of potential impact. The Initial Study determined no environmental impacts would result from approval of the proposed project.

Therefore, the proposed project meets the criteria for the common sense exemption.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Public notice for the proposed project and environmental determination was advertised in The Bakersfield Californian on August 22, 2025. All property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site typically receive mailing notices of the public hearing. However, if the number of owners exceeds one thousand, as is the case with this proposal, in lieu of mailed notice, notice may be provided by placing a display advertisement of at least one-eighth page in the newspaper ten days prior to the hearing. This notification process adheres to both city ordinance and state law. Additionally, on August 29, 2025, hearing notices were direct emailed to community organizations that represent various housing interests and economic segments of the community. As of this writing, no written comments have been received.

In adherence to the provisions outlined in Senate Bill 18 (SB 18), formal correspondence was mailed on June 22, 2023 notifying the American Indian Tribes of the details pertaining to the Housing Element Update project. The issuance of this notice signifies the initiation of the 90-day consultation period mandated by SB 18. As of this writing, no formal request for tribal consultation has been received.

COMPATIBILITY ANALYSIS:

This Housing Element update is an amendment to the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and per Government Code §65300.5, the City reviewed the policies of the general plan, particularly land-use provisions, to ensure internal consistency is maintained within all general plan elements.

CONCLUSIONS:

Staff finds that the applicable provisions of CEQA have been complied with and that the updated 2023- 2031 6th Cycle Housing Element meets the statutory requirements of State housing element law.

Therefore, staff is recommending that your Commission recommend that the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment updating the Housing Element. Should the Housing Element be ultimately approved by the City Council, it will then be sent to HCD for their official certification.

ATTACHMENTS:
• Bakersfield Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element
• CEQA Exemption Memorandum
• Planning Commission Draft Resolution
• HCD Letter, dated August 8, 2025, Meeting Statutory Requirements PJ:rd | S:\03_Advance Planning\04_Housing Element\16_Public Hearing\PC\1. Sep 4th PC\PC Memo_Item 6_A Vfinal.Docx

MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 4, 2025
TO: Chair Strickland and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jennie Eng, Assistant Planning Director J.Eng
SUBJECT: Agenda Item 6.a – General Plan Amendment to Update the 6th Cycle Housing Element 2023-2031 for the City of Bakersfield
Transmit Additional Correspondence
Subsequent to distribution of the staff report for the above-referenced agenda item, staff received correspondence from two commenters: (1) the Law Offices of Babak Naficy on behalf of the Kern-Kaweah Chapter of the Sierra Club; and (2) Mr. Gordon L. Nipp, Ph.D., representing the Kern-Kaweah Chapter of the Sierra Club. The following is a summary of the comments received followed by Staff’s response.

Babak Nacify Comment
The commenter stated the City has failed to undertake any environmental review of the proposed amendments as required by CEQA. The commenter states, the City’s strategy includes rezoning 333 sites to increase allowable residential densities and to amend the Zoning Code to require by-right approval for housing developments.

The commenter rejects Staffs determination that the approval of the Housing Element Update is exempt from CEQA pursuant to the “common sense” exemption, as more fully described in the attached letter.

Staff Response
Staff maintains that the General Plan Amendment to Update the 6th Cycle Housing Element 2023-2031 is a policy document and does not include any proposed development which is exempt from CEQA as a common sense exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15061(b)(3) (common sense).

There are no proposed projects to be developed as this time. The rezoning of parcels as mentioned by the commenter are rezones that have been approved by the City Council on April 24, 2024, and July 24, 2024.

In addition, the amendments to the City Zoning Code (B.M.C. Title 17) were approved by City Council on March 27, 2024 and are not part of this action.

GPA Update 6th Cycle Housing Element, Memo Page | 2
Gordon Nipp Comment
The commenter disagrees with Staff’s determination that the approval of the Housing Element Update is exempt from CEQA pursuant to the “common sense” exemption and further states that the Initial Study prepared is flawed.

Other concerns are that the Housing Element does not include adequate monitoring and enforcement details, is deficient in many goals, policies, and implementation measures and should require an annual monitoring report, all as more fully described in the attached letter.

Staff Response
As previously stated above, Staff maintains that the General Plan Amendment to Update the 6th Cycle Housing Element 2023-2031 is a policy document and does not include any proposed development which is exempt from CEQA as a common sense exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15061(b)(3) (common sense). The proposed project falls within the sphere of common sense rule, that CEQA applies only to development which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. Thus, the project is not subject to CEQA.

In response to comments that the Housing Element does not adequately provide monitoring and enforcement details and does not include an annual monitoring report, Staff has included the letter dated August 8, 2025 from the California Department of Housing and Community Development which determines that the Revised Draft Housing Element meets the statutory requirements as described by HCD.

Furthermore, Staff will continue to provide HCD with a Housing Element Annual Progress Report.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

At this time, Staff continues to recommend your Commission: (1) Adopt Resolution approving the General Plan Amendment to update the City of Bakersfield’s 6th Cycle Housing Element for the 2023-2031 planning period and (2) its proposed Notice of Exemption and recommend the same to City Council.

Attachments:
• Public Comments