Barstow City Council
November 4, 2024

3.a
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix D: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page D-73 Figure 29. Planned Improvements to Low Resource Areas

3.a
Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element)

3.a
Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-1 Appendix E. Sites Analysis and Inventory
Every local government is responsible to plan for their share of the region’s need for housing for an eight year period (2021 through 2029). As provided under Government Code § 65583(a)(3), the Housing Element must include an inventory of sites that are suitable, available, and capable of development that meets the local housing need at all income levels. The Sites Analysis describes the City’s housing target for the 6th Cycle planning period, analyzes development trends and methodology by which realistic development capacity was determined, and summarizes the approach for identifying vacant sites to accommodate all income levels. The Sites Analysis concludes with a summary of an analysis of development capacity, and various infrastructure and environmental factors considered in this analysis.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment
Each local government in the State has a responsibility to accommodate zoning for the projected housing needs in its region. The process of allocating regional housing needs to local governments is called the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The RHNA for local governments in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region was developed for the 6th Cycle Housing Element and covers the planning period beginning June 30, 2021 and ending October 15, 2029. SCAG assigned the City of Barstow a RHNA of 1,520 total units for the projection period.

Summarized in Table E-1, the total 2021-2029 RHNA housing production goal is divided into five household income / housing affordability categories, including extremely low income units.

Table E-1 Regional Housing Needs Allocation, 2021-2029
Income Category/
Affordability Levels Income Range
Allocation
(Number of Units)
Percentage of
Units
Extremely Low 0 to 30% of AMI 86 5.7%
Very Low 31 to 50% of AMI 86 5.7%
Low 51 to 80% of AMI 228 15.0%
Moderate 81 to 120% of AMI 300 19.7%
Above Moderate 121% and above 820 53.9%
Total 1,520 100%
Source: Southern California Association of Governments, 2021-2029 Regional Housing Needs The City of Barstow will address its 2021-2029 RHNA planning obligation through a combination of planned and entitled units and vacant parcels with appropriate zoning and access to infrastructure to facilitate development during the planning period. To ensure that adequate capacity is maintained to accommodate its RHNA units and meet the housing needs of the City throughout the entirety of the 6th Cycle, the City will monitor the housing capacity identified in the Sites Analysis and Inventory throughout the planning period to maintain sufficient capacity for the remaining RHNA at all income levels.

3.a
Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-2 Planned and Entitled Units
The City first analyzes projects that are already planned and/or entitled for residential development and are expected to be built during the planning period. These projects represent individuals and companies that have already committed significant time and money into securing the right to build housing in the near future. As detailed in the table below and subsequent narrative description, the City has already approved a substantial amount of residential development that addresses much of the RHNA allocation.

Table E-2 summarizes the City’s RHNA and credits for residential development in the pipeline.

Table E-2 Pipeline Development
RHNA 2021-2029
RHNA Housing Affordability Categories
Very Low Low Moderate Above Mod Total
172 228 300 820 1,520
Planned or Entitled Units
Single Family Subdivisions - - 474 474
203 W. Main St. Motel Conversion 18 - - 18
7th Avenue Specific Plan 101 80 - 181
Subtotal 119 80 474 673
Remaining RHNA 2021-2029 281 220 346 847
Source: City of Barstow, 2024.

Single Family Subdivisions
Three single family subdivisions have been approved and are slated for development in the near future.

While some of these homes may sell at prices that are affordable to moderate income households, the City conservatively assumes affordability only for above moderate income households. South of the College and Veterans Parkway, a 75-acre collection of parcels is approved for 276 single family homes. To the west of the College and on the north side of Veterans Parkway, a 52-unit project is approved. Finally, to the east, on the south side of Rimrock Road across from Stringham Memorial Park, a 36-acre collection of parcels is approved for 146 single family homes. In total, these three projects represent 474 units of market-rate housing that addresses over half of the City’s above moderate income RHNA allocation. 203 W. Main Street Motel Conversion Project
The City approved a general plan amendment and zone change for the 203 W. Main Street Motel, to convert 21 motel rooms into 18 housing units. The property owner/developer has worked on similar conversion projects in Barstow, including an 8-studio unit project (119 Otis Ave, issued 2016 and finalized 2018), a 12-studio unit project (117 Otis Ave, issued 2017 and finalized 2019), and a 10-unit project (200 W. Williams St, issued 2018 and finalized 2019). Recent rental listings for 119 Otis and 200 W. Williams (as of May 2024, rent.com) were $735 and $895, respectively (affordable to 1- and 2-person very low income households. Based on direct communication in May 2024, the property owner for the 203 W.

Main motel cited a monthly rental range of $645 to $745 per unit for the conversion project, which is affordable to 1- and 2-bedroom very low income households, and also noted a completion date of 2025.

3.a
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-3 7th Avenue Specific Plan
The 7th Avenue Specific Plan was adopted in 2020, with the intent to attract affordable housing, including affordable housing for seniors, commercial, and transit improvements through the revitalization of the old hospital site. The old hospital was demolished in 2020 and the overall site is cleared and ready for development. The City maintains control/ownership of the land, with the City Council reconfirming its commitment to the Specific Plan and targeted affordability as recently as early 2024.

The City of Barstow has pursued an Affordable
Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC)
grant to support development of the affordable
housing component. Although unsuccessful the
first time applying, the City will be applying for
Round 8/9 of the AHSC funding. The City also
regularly seeks both state and federal funding for
the implementation of this plan. In March 2024,
the City was awarded a $350,000 grant to perform
environmental assessments to further the
readiness of the site for residential development.

The City anticipates development of this project to
take place once AHSC or other funds are secured,
with a target date for completion of 2028.

The Specific Plan will accommodate 181 units. On a 3.3-acre portion of the Specific Plan, 81 lower income units are planned as higher density apartments consistent with the Medium Density Residential designation (up to 20 units per acre plus density bonus). On two other portions of the Specific Plan (2.4 acres of senior housing and 2.27 acres of non-age restricted housing), the City anticipates additional affordable housing based on targeted funding resources. The future housing would also likely be moderate or higher density apartments consistent with the Diverse Use designation (up to 16 units per acre plus density bonus). For the purposes of the Housing Element, the City is applying more conservative assumptions regarding the future housing affordability of units on these two areas of the Specific Plan: 20 lower income and 80 moderate income units.

The following resources are available less than a mile from the Specific Plan area. These resources help to support the residents living within the specific plan area with public services, schools, parks, transit, and other services that further air housing opportunity.
• Community Centers (Desert
Discovery and Dana Park Centers
• Schools (Cameron Elementary, Barstow
High School, Barstow STEM Academy)
• New Transit Hub • Parks (Camerion Park, Lillian Park) • Library and Post Office • San Bernardino Superior Court • City Hall • Fire Station
• Main Street • Women, Infants, Children (WIC)
• Hospital • Department of Motor Vehicles
7th Avenue Specific Plan

3.a
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-4 Vacant Land Inventory
State Housing Element law emphasizes the importance of adequate land for housing and requires that each Housing Element “…identify adequate sites … to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of housing types for all income levels…” (California Government Code § 65583(c)(1)). To allow for an adequate supply of new housing, land must be zoned at a variety of densities to ensure that development is feasible for a wide range of income levels. The identified land must also have access to appropriate services and infrastructure, such as water, wastewater, and roads.

As such, this section includes an inventory of vacant land that identifies sites that area available with appropriate zoning and development standards, public services, and facilities needed to facilitate and encourage the development housing for households of all income levels.

Development Criteria
Although the City contains a large amount of vacant land, specific criteria were applied to select only sites with the best chance of developing during the planning period, while maintaining consistency with the policies elsewhere in the General Plan and approaches to affirmatively furthering fair housing.

Vacancy Status
Any site included must be vacant, precisely defined as land that is not already slated for future development and lacks any building improvements, unless they are clearly abandoned or so dilapidated as to be nonfunctional. Additionally, consistent with changes in state law, land used for agricultural purposes is no longer considered functionally vacant even with an absence of building improvements.

Environmental Hazards or Restrictions
Any site included must be free from environmental hazards and restrictions that could make future housing development unsafe or increase development costs substantially. Vacant sites were excluded if they contained or were exposed to hazards related to earthquakes, 100-year flooding, dam/basin inundation, very high fire hazard severity zones, wind erosion, and proximity to the military base. Vacant sites were also excluded if they were subject to conservation easements or Williamson Act contracts or designated as farmland that is prime, of statewide importance, or unique.

On the sites zoned for Single Family Residential, some topographical constraints will likely limit development capacity (assumption of 50% reduction). Such sites are large enough, however (9 to 24 acres), that the required grading and reduction of land capacity are not considered to be a barrier to development. Additionally, such sites are only considered for above moderate income capacity. All other sites are unconstrained by topography.

Resource Areas and Future Development
The City applied the lens of AFFH when considering vacant sites using the state’s assessment of access to economic, educational, and environmental resources: the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee’s Opportunity Maps. While all of the Census tracts in and around Barstow are designated as low resource, the City focused on sites in areas that had the best economic, educational, and environmental characteristics; preferred areas closer to where future new market-rate development will take place; and avoided the census tract designated (as of 2024) as an area of high poverty and segregation.

3.a
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-5 Parcel Characteristics
Sites were only considered for lower-income capacity if they were at least one-half acre and no larger than 10 acres. Sites larger than 10 acres were only included for above moderate income capacity.

Additionally, parcels were excluded if they presented any constraints based on shape, access, easements, zoning overlays, or other property conditions. Only one parcel is theoretically constrained by having limited access to the current roadway system; however, the property owner of this parcel also owns an adjoining, smaller parcel that would logically be developed together, thus negating the constraint.

Parcels between one and five acres in size are ideal for 100% affordable housing (lower income) based on discussions with affordable housing developers and a review of past projects in San Bernardino County.

While parcels below one acre in size can also be excellent candidates for smaller affordable housing developments, the City limited the inclusion of such parcels to those owned by entities that also owned other adjoining candidate sites.

Ownership
Sites were only included if they were owned by private individuals or entities. No sites were included if they were owned by exempt entities (e.g., federal government, tribal entities, state surplus sites, school districts, railroads, and special districts), which requires more extensive coordination or agency approvals of surplus land designations as a condition for residential development.

Infrastructure
Sites were only included if they could be served by piped water and wastewater systems without extensive and/or expensive extensions/connection. The City has ample water supply and wastewater treatment capacity for many units beyond the RHNA allocation. The City also only included vacant sites that were served by existing paved roadways, electricity, and telecommunications systems.

Transit
Proximity to existing transit was a high priority, with sites selected for lower income capacity if they were either adjacent (most desirable) or within walking distance of a transit stop(s). Proximity to transit was also desirable for moderate and above moderate income sites but was not considered essential. The City’s urban core is well served by transit with a new transit station just constructed in central city.

Residential Zoning, Density, and Affordability
The City considered vacant land zoned for Medium Density Residential (MDR), which allows housing at a density between 5 and 20 units per acre to have the capacity to accommodate housing affordable to lower-income households. This conclusion was based both on state law, which deems zoning that allows at least 20 units per acre can be presumed to accommodate lower-income housing for the purposes of determining RHNA capacity. A default density of 20 units per acre is based on language from the HCD’s 2022 technical memorandum: “Housing elements due prior to January 1, 2022, may continue to use default densities identified in HCD’s June 20, 2012, technical assistance memo” and the City’s status as a suburban jurisdiction given its population levels below 25,000 from the 2010 Census. Any capacity on sites zoned MDR were also presumed to be affordable for moderate income households as well.

3.a
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-6 Development Trends
Planned and built multifamily projects built in Barstow in the past 15 yearsshow that the average capacity achieved or targeted exceeds maximum (greater than 100%) density levels due in large part to the inclusion of affordable housing. Examples include:
• The 7th Avenue Specific Plan, which includes a 3.3-acre site planned for 81 units of affordable housing (24.5 du/ac or 122% of MDR’s maximum density of 20 du/ac). The balance of the housing component of the Specific Plan anticipates 100 mixed-income units across two sites at an average density of 19.6 units per acre or 122% of Diverse Use’s maximum density of 16 units per acre). • The 203 W. Main Street Motel Conversion Project under development in 2024 will result in 18 units on a 0.72-acre parcel zoned for Diverse Use (DU). This represents a density of 25 units per acre or 156% of the 16 unit per acre maximum density allowed by DU zoning. • Lantern Woods is an acquisition and rehab project completed in 2011 that has 28 units (studio, one-, and two-bedroom units), on a 0.90-acre site zoned for DU, which represents a density of 31 units per acre or 194% of the 16 unit per acre maximum density allowed by DU zoning.

Realistic Development Potential
The City started with the maximum density that would be permitted by right for a lower-income housing development and made adjustments to account for factors that reduce a site’s capacity below the maximum level allowed (explained below). To be conservative and follow guidance from HCD, the City did not add any increase in density due to the application of state density bonus provisions. • Land use controls: No adjustment. The City evaluated the cumulative impact of its development standards (e.g., setbacks, building height, parking; see Constraints analysis in Appendix C), and determined that no downward adjustment factor is necessary due to the general permissive development standards in place to support residential development. • Site improvements: 80 to 90% factor. The City reduced maximum site capacity 10% to reflect onsite improvements, including: sidewalks, roads, utility easements, and infrastructure. Maximum capacity for sites larger than five acres was reduced 20% for internal roadways. These factors are on top of earlier refinements made to adjust for public right of way easements. • Infrastructure availability: No adjustment. All sites are served by or are adjacent to parcels that are currently served by infrastructure; and therefore, no downward adjustment to development capacity is needed for infrastructure availability.
• Environmental constraints: No adjustment to 50%. On the sites zoned for Single Family Residential, some topographical constraints will likely limit development capacity (assumption of 50% reduction). All sites are unconstrained by natural hazards or resources that would reduce capacity, and are outside areas designated for 100-year flood, fire hazard severity, Alquist-Priolo fault (or other hazards), and areas restricted for conservation or designated as farmland. • Trends and incentives: 50% to 90%. An evaluation of past development trends of lower-income housing found that multifamily projects achieved densities exceeding current density thresholds.

However, to be conservative, the City applied a 90% adjustment factor. For above moderate income housing, a 50% reduction factor was assumed to reflect the product type and densities.

3.a
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-7 The City’s sites inventory allows for a maximum capacity of nearly 2,200 units and a realistic capacity of just over 1,200 units. Based on default density standards and the adjustment factors, the vacant sites provide capacity for 304 lower income units, which satisfies the City’s remaining lower income RHNA of 281 units, plus 8% surplus capacity. Other RHNA income levels are met as well.

Parcels Identified in the Previous Element
The following vacant parcels identified in the prior two Housing Elements (4th and 5th cycles) are again considered in this element (6th cycle): 042421729, 018352120, 018360105, 018194165, 018317127, 018318144, 018307125, 018307101, 018183126, 018183128, 018202124, and 018203110.

If such sites were to be identified in this Housing Element to accommodate any portion of the City’s lower income RHNA allocation, state law would require such sites to permit, by right, housing developments that propose a density of 20 units per acre or more and in which at least 20% of the units are affordable to lower income households. However, none of these parcels are identified to accommodate any portion of the City’s lower income RHNA allocation. Accordingly, no additional action or zoning is required on these sites.

Summary of Capacity to Accommodate the RHNA
The City’s housing allocation for the 2021-2029 planning period consists of 1,520 total units. Table E-3, Housing Capacity Identified, provides a breakdown of the RHNA and the City’s capacity through planned/entitled units and developable vacant sites with appropriate zoning capacity. Table E-4, Capacity on Vacant Sites, provides the City’s sites inventory by assessor parcel number. As shown in Table E-3, there is a surplus of capacity for lower-income, moderate-income, and above-moderate income units.

Table E-3 Housing Capacity Identified
Category Total Units
Housing Affordability Levels
Lower Moderate Above Moderate
RHNA 1,520 400 300 820
Planned/Entitled 673 119 80 474
Vacant Sites 1,222 304 372 546
Total Capacity 1,895 423 452 1,020
Surplus Capacity -- +23 +152 +200
Source: City of Barstow, 2024.

A map of all the housing sites identified to address the City’s RHNA is shown in Figures 30 to 33.

3.a
Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-8 Table E-4 Capacity on Vacant Sites
# APN1 AC2
Current
GP/Zone
Density Capacity
Min Max Max Adjust3 Realistic LWR M AM
1 042427223 0.51 MDR/MDR 5 20 11 81% 9 9 - -
2 042812206 1.09 MDR/MDR 5 20 22 81% 18 18 - -
3 042427223 2.68 MDR/MDR 5 20 54 81% 44 44 - -
4 042427224 2.81 MDR/MDR 5 20 56 81% 46 46 - -
5 042427224 3.52 MDR/MDR 5 20 71 81% 58 58 - -
6 042427223 3.61 MDR/MDR 5 20 73 81% 60 60 - -
7 018190101 4.18 MDR/MDR 5 20 84 81% 69 69 - -
8 018318142 0.42 MDR/MDR 5 20 9 81% 8 - 8
9 018318143 0.55 MDR/MDR 5 20 11 81% 9 - 9 -
10 018317122 0.87 MDR/MDR 5 20 18 81% 15 - 15 -
11 0183071254 0.89 MDR/MDR 5 20 18 81% 15 - 15 -
12 018360104 0.91 MDR/MDR 5 20 19 81% 16 - 16 -
13 042424114 0.96 MDR/MDR 5 20 20 81% 17 - 17 -
14 0183171274 1.00 MDR/MDR 5 20 20 81% 17 - 17 -
15 0183071014 1.01 MDR/MDR 5 20 21 81% 18 - 18 -
16 0183601054 1.06 MDR/MDR 5 20 22 81% 18 - 18 -
17 0183181444 1.08 MDR/MDR 5 20 22 81% 18 - 18 -
18 0183521204 3.09 MDR/MDR 5 20 62 81% 51 - 51 -
19 0181941654 3.68 MDR/MDR 5 20 74 81% 60 - 60 -
20 0424217294 7.58 MDR/MDR 5 20 152 72% 110 - 110 -
21 042427224 10.77 MDR/MDR 5 20 216 40% 87 - - 87
22 018321105 12.47 MDR/MDR 5 20 250 40% 100 - - 100
23 042413240 22.72 MDR/MDR 5 20 455 40% 182 - - 182
24 0181831264 12.06 SFR/SFR 0 7 85 40% 34 - - 34
25 0181831284 16.72 SFR/SFR 0 7 118 40% 48 - - 48
26 0182021244 24.27 SFR/SFR 0 7 170 40% 68 - - 68
27 0182031104 9.35 SFR/SFR 0 7 66 40% 27 - - 27
TOTAL 149.9 2,199 - 1,222 304 372 546
RHNA Balance - - 847 281 220 346
Surplus Capacity - - - 23 152 200
Notes:

1. Some parcels share the same APN (042427223 and 042427224) but are owned by the same entity. The parcel configurations do not reflect any past or active development and the sites can be developed separately or together. While the 3.61-acre parcel with APN 042427223 would normally require an access easement and smaller adjustment factor would it be assumed to develop on its own, the adjacent 0.51-acre parcel (also APN 042427223) is owned by the same entity and provides direct access that negates the need for any further reduction in the adjustment factor.

2. Actual parcel acreages are larger for many parcels. Acreage figures shown in this table reflect gross net acreage that removes areas necessary for public rights of way. This acreage reduction is in addition to the adjustment factor applied.

3. While there are no regulatory or market restrictions that would prevent each site from achieving its maximum capacity, adjustment factors have been applied to provide a more conservative estimate of realistic development capacity.

4. Vacant sites used in the prior two Housing Elements (4th & 5th cycles). None of these sites are for lower income units.

3.a
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-9 Figure 30. Barstow Sites Inventory Map
Figure 31. Housing Sites Along Rimrock Road

3.a
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-10 Figure 32. Housing Sites North and South of Interstate 15 Figure 33. Housing Sites North of Main Street/Route 66

3.a
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-11 Fair Housing Implications of Housing Sites
Gov’t Code § 65583(c)(9) requires that the housing sites identified to meet the City of Barstow’s 2021- 2029 RHNA affirmatively further fair housing opportunity. For example, sites must be identified and evaluated relative to the full scope of the assessment of fair housing (e.g., segregation and integration, racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, access to opportunity, etc.). The City must ensure that affordable housing is dispersed equitably throughout the City and avoid concentration in areas of High Segregation and Poverty or Low Resource areas that have historically been underserved. The latter goal is necessary to create more inclusive communities that have access to equal opportunity.

Sites in Relation to Segregation and Integration
The 2015-2020 General Plan planned for the majority of new housing to be built far from the City’s core in the under-developed western half, with some limited low density housing south of the community core.

The City’s updated General Plan will shift the focus of all new housing in the eastern half to a wider range of housing types located adjacent to the City’s core. This core is only 3 square miles. The City's intent is to avoid a "new vs old" development pattern and to bring new housing investments in proximity to existing public facilities, services, and residents, which will ensure that new residents support and help fund improvements to existing public facilities and create new public facilities that are accessible by residents.

For example, new park and school facilities may be needed and would be located close to existing neighborhoods. Additionally, improvements to existing parks and pedestrian and bicycle networks would be better supported under the City's new plan with new housing supporting higher quality programmed open spaces, business, and services within the community’s core. The placement and focus of new housing around the community core will likely bring more affluent residents to support Barstow's schools, both financially and through volunteerism, improving resources available to students. Finally, locating residential around the existing community core (in contrast with areas to the west) will bolster support for transit that would only require minimal extensions to service the new residential areas.

The following provides a brief overview and summary of anticipated impacts of the RHNA sites on fair housing opportunities in Barstow consistent with HCD’s fair housing guidebook.

Racial Segregation
While in many places past discriminatory policies such as redlining practices have segregated the racial composition of the region, at a local level, there are no visible patterns of racial segregation in the City.

The City’s predominant population identifies as non-White, the majority identifying as Hispanic or Latino.

As discussed earlier in this Appendix (page D-30), a dissimilarity index analysis of census tracts shows high levels of race and ethnic integration in Barstow. Racial segregation patterns are more apparent at the regional level, which show a lower proportion of Nonwhite residents than in Barstow itself.

Multiple family housing (e.g., apartments) in Barstow is often affordable for lower income households.

Federally subsidized housing in Barstow is occupied predominantly by Black households (50%), followed by Hispanic (25%) and White (25%) households. However, no multiple-family housing sites are located in the City’s current R/ECAP. Moreover, the highest number of projected low income units (217 in CT#120.02 and 69 units in CT#120.01) are slated for tracts with the lowest proportion of lower income households.

Therefore, the City’s planned site/housing inventory will encourage better integration of units.

3.a
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-12 Income Segregation
Housing sites to address the 2021-2029 RHNA were analyzed by comparing the existing income distribution of households, the planned income distribution of new units only, and the City’s projected future household income distribution once the units have been built. The City’s current RHNA requirement is 26% lower income, 20% moderate income, and 54% above moderate income. The overall SCAG goal for the County is 40% low income, 18% moderate income, and 42% above moderate income.

Of the five primary census tracts that accommodate housing, four tracts will meet the 2021-2029 RHNA.

Table E-5 summarizes the impact of the “RHNA sites” on the household income distribution of each tract.

Census tract #93 remains unchanged as no units are anticipated for that tract. For CT#94, the City’s only R/ECAP, the RHNA sites improve the income distribution with planned sites for single-family homes and no sites for multiple-family housing. Tracts #95, #120.01, and #120.02 will see a decline in the proportion of lower income units. Moderate income units for all tracts (except CT# 120.02) remains relatively unchanged. In conclusion, the changing income distribution is consistent with SCAG goals, though the overall change leaves the City as a predominantly lower income community compared to the region.

Table E-5 Income Impacts of RHNA
Existing Income
Distribution
Census Tracts SCAG
CT 93 CT 94 CT 95 CT 120.01 CT 120.02 GOAL
Lower 67% 85% 69% 49% 55% --
Moderate 9% 6% 19% 29% 20% --
Above 24% 9% 12% 22% 25% --
Future
Lower 67% 75% 66% 45% 51% 40%
Moderate 9% 5% 19% 28% 26% 18%
Above 24% 20% 15% 27% 22% 42%
Source: City of Barstow, 2024
Persons with Disabilities
Approximately 17% of City residents have a disability, which is the fourth highest in the county. More rural communities tend to have a higher percentage of individuals with a disability including Needles (26%), Yucca Valley (21%), and Twentynine Palms (16%) due to the low cost of housing, warm climate, and slower pace of life. However, the actual distribution across the City is relatively even, and ranges from 13% to 20% by census tract. The highest percentage with a disability is in the central area of the City, bound by Main Street to the north and Interstate 15 to the south. This area overlaps with the area where 40% of residents receive assistance through CalFresh food stamps. However, there are no sites specifically designated for housing disabled people that would result in a greater concentration in any tract. Of note, the City is also expending $7.5 million in grants on ramp improvements, bicycle lanes, and sidewalks in the community core to improve the accessibility of its neighborhoods for disabled people.

3.a
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-13 Familial Status
Barstow has a mix of familial structures such as a moderate to high percentage of adults living with a spouse and married couple household with children. The one household type which is disproportionately concentrated in Barstow is female headed households without a spouse who have their dependent children living with them. Approximately 16 percent of Barstow’s households are single female parents with children, the highest in San Bernardino County. Of the five primary census tracts that allow for housing, census tracts #95 and #120.01 contain more than 20% single female parents with children.

A closer analysis explains the reason for the existing concentration. These census tracts have 500 HUDsubsidized units and about 60% of the units are occupied by single females with children due to voucher preference policy adhered to by the County Housing Authority. However, limited lower income housing (85 units) and no public housing with vouchers are forecasted by 2029. Although new housing would likely attract some single female parents with children, it is unlikely that the additional increment of households would be expected to exacerbate any existing concentrations in either census tract.

R/ECAP and Isolated Sites
Barstow has one R/ECAP area (Tract 94) in the northernmost portion of the City. For purposes of this land inventory, no sites for lower income housing were designated in this area to address the RHNA. Instead, this area will accommodate up to 307 above moderate income units. As a result, the proportion of lower income units will decline from 85% to 75% while above moderate income units will double to 20%. The City is also making up to $500,000 in ADA repairs coupled with $7 million in bicycle and pedestrian corridor improvements. While these changes will not eliminate the tract’s R/ECAP designation, the land use and infrastructure improvements will uplift the quality of life and housing options in this tract.

As discussed in the opening paragraphs of this section, the City’s older general plan originally planned for housing on its westside, far from existing services and neighborhood infrastructure. The general plan update plans for more compact development within its community core, an area of three square miles.

All sites are within existing residential neighborhoods and generally have access to a complement of services and infrastructure, including parks, open space, water and sewer service, fire and police stations, businesses providing local services, schools, and nonprofit service organizations. The street network is gridded, and significant funds are being expended to improve accessibility to pedestrians and bicyclists.

The City’s smart growth strategy will allow the community to grow in a more sustainable manner.

Disproportionate Need
Barstow has some of the most affordable housing in the region. As explained earlier in this Appendix, the prevalence and severity of housing overpayment and overcrowding are largely the result of lower incomes and underemployment and not higher housing costs. Homeowner overpayment (among those with a mortgage) has declined significantly, from 32% in 2010 to only 23% in 2019, while renter overpayment has increased slightly from 50% in 2010 to 55% in 2019. Four tracts show the greatest prevalence of renter overpayment (about 60% on average) and overcrowding. However, these three tracts are only slated for 85 units of apartments over the remainder of the planning period. Meanwhile additional apartment sites are designated in the southern portion of Barstow’s core, which will ensure an appropriate vacancy/occupancy rate and moderation of rent increases that often leads to disproportionate burden.

The City’s increased code compliance efforts should also reduce the occurrence of substandard housing.

3.a
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-14 Disparity in Access to Opportunity
The 2015-2020 General Plan planned for the majority of new housing to be built far from the City’s core in the under-developed western half, with some limited low density housing south of the community core.

The City’s updated General Plan will shift the focus of all new housing in the eastern half to a wider range of housing types located adjacent to the City’s core. This core is only 3 square miles. The City's intent is to avoid a "new vs old" development pattern and to bring new housing investments in proximity to existing public facilities, services, and residents, which will ensure that new residents support and help fund improvements to existing public facilities and create new public facilities that are accessible by residents.

Within the three-square-mile core, the following amenities are readily available to residents:
• Community Centers (Desert
Discovery and Dana Park) as well as
Barstow Senior Center
• Educational Institutions: 8 elementary,
junior, and high schools, Barstow
Community College, and private schools
• Transportation: Victor Valley Transit
Hub, Caltrans offices, and Trans Dev
transit for disabled residents
• Parks and Recreation: 13 neighborhood
and community parks, including museums
and historic sites
• City Hall Complex, Parks and
Recreation, Public Works, County
Library, Post Office
• Public Safety: Fire Station and Police
station, Emergency Operations Center,
CHP Dispatch Station
• Barstow Community Hospital, County
IHSS offices, Cal-Vet offices, Veterans
home for disabled veterans
• Clinics: Indian Health Clinic, Mission City
Clinic, SAC Health, Barstow Public Health
Clinic, and several others
• Main Street business district with
numerous businesses and
accompanying services for residents
• Multiple grocery stores as well as the
Barstow MCL Commissary Facilities, which
is open to the public
• Workforce Development. Barstow
Community College, Cora Harper
Center Workforce Center
• County offices – Aging and Adult Services,
Family and Children Services, Transitional
assistance (welfare), WIC Services
Access to economic opportunity is a challenge and a critical factor for Barstow’s success. As mentioned earlier, Barstow is facilitating the development of the Barstow International Gateway. This $1.5 billion investment will result in more than 8,000 local jobs and a total of 12,000 regional jobs. The City is working with Barstow Community College and BSNF Railroad to expand the CTE program available for residents as well as establishing local hiring preferences. These programs will go a long way toward improving the local economy and the availability of living wage job opportunities for Barstow residents.

3.a
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix E: Sites Analysis and Inventory Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page E-15 Electronic Sites Inventory Form

EXHIBIT A
The following is a full list of sites; some nonsubstantive or repetitive columns are omitted but will be submitted in electronic format (e.g., Jurisdiction).

Site Location
ZIP
Code APN
Cons
Sites
Current
GP/Zoning
Min Max Parcel
Size (Ac)
Existing
Use
InfrastructurePublicly
Owned
Site
Status
In Last 2
Cycles
Income Category Capacity
Density Lower Mod Abv Mod Total
Arbor Way and Armory Rd. 92311 0424-272-23 A MDR/MDR 5 20 0.51 Vacant Yes No Available No 9 0 0 9 Grace St. and Barstow Rd. 92311 0428-122-06 - MDR/MDR 5 20 1.09 Vacant Yes No Available No 18 0 0 18 Arbor Way and Armory Rd. 92311 0424-272-23 - MDR/MDR 5 20 2.68 Vacant Yes No Available No 44 0 0 44 Arbor Way and Armory Rd. 92311 0424-272-24 - MDR/MDR 5 20 2.81 Vacant Yes No Available No 46 0 0 46 Arbor Way and Armory Rd. 92311 0424-272-24 - MDR/MDR 5 20 3.52 Vacant Yes No Available No 58 0 0 58 Arbor Way and Armory Rd. 92311 0424-272-23 B MDR/MDR 5 20 3.61 Vacant Yes No Available No 60 0 0 60 Rimrock Rd. and Broadway Ave. 92311 0181-901-01 - MDR/MDR 5 20 4.18 Vacant Yes No Available No 69 0 0 69 Juniper St. and Barstow Rd. 92311 0183-181-42 - MDR/MDR 5 20 0.42 Vacant Yes No Available No 0 8 0 8 Juniper St. and Barstow Rd. 92311 0183-181-43 - MDR/MDR 5 20 0.55 Vacant Yes No Available No 0 9 0 9 Juniper St. and Barstow Rd. 92311 0183-171-22 - MDR/MDR 5 20 0.87 Vacant Yes No Available No 0 15 0 15 Grace St. and Barstow Rd. 92311 0183-071-25 - MDR/MDR 5 20 0.89 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 15 0 15 Higgins Rd. and Calico Dr. 92311 0183-601-04 - MDR/MDR 5 20 0.91 Vacant Yes No Available No 0 16 0 16 Montara Rd. and Rimrock Rd. 92311 0424-241-14 - MDR/MDR 5 20 0.96 Vacant Yes No Available No 0 17 0 17 Juniper St. and Barstow Rd. 92311 0183-171-27 - MDR/MDR 5 20 1.00 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 17 0 17 Grace St. and Barstow Rd. 92311 0183-071-01 - MDR/MDR 5 20 1.01 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 18 0 18 Montara Rd. and Rimrock Rd. 92311 0183-601-05 - MDR/MDR 5 20 1.06 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 18 0 18 Juniper St. and Barstow Rd. 92311 0183-181-44 - MDR/MDR 5 20 1.08 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 18 0 18 Rimrock Rd. and Broadway Ave. 92311 0183-521-20 - MDR/MDR 5 20 3.09 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 51 0 51 Forane St. and Montara Rd. 92311 0181-941-65 - MDR/MDR 5 20 3.68 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 60 0 60 Arbor Way and Prospector St. 92311 0424-217-29 - MDR/MDR 5 20 7.58 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 110 0 110 Arbor Way and Prospector St. 92311 0424-272-24 - MDR/MDR 5 20 10.77 Vacant Yes No Available No 0 0 87 87 Lookout Dr and E. Virginia Way 92311 0183-211-05 - MDR/MDR 5 20 12.47 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 0 100 100 Montara Rd. and Rimrock Rd. 92311 0424-132-40 - MDR/MDR 5 20 22.72 Vacant Yes No Available No 0 0 182 182 N. Muriel Dr. and E. Main St. 92311 0181-831-26 - SFR/SFR 0 7 12.06 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 0 34 34 N. Muriel Dr. and E. Main St. 92311 0181-831-28 - SFR/SFR 0 7 16.72 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 0 48 48 Hillside Dr. & Rte 66/W. Main St. 92311 0182-021-24 - SFR/SFR 0 7 24.27 Vacant Yes No Available Yes 0 0 68 68 B Hill Ln and W. Main St. 92311 0182-031-10 - SFR/SFR 0 7 9.35 Vacant Yes No Available No 0 0 27 27

3.a
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-

3.a
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix F: Stakeholder Engagement Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page F-1 Appendix F. Stakeholder Engagement
State law requires "diligent effort" to achieve participation by all segments of the community. The City solicited input from the public throughout the Housing Element process—during development of the draft element, public review of the draft element, and the adoption process. Significant outreach was also conducted as part of the Barstow International Gateway and General Plan update. The following presents outreach findings that assisted in updating the housing element.

Summary of Public Outreach
The City of Barstow conducted extensive public outreach that engaged all corners of the community as well as stakeholders. The COVID-19 pandemic stay-at-home orders of 2020 and 2021 provided the City with opportunities to explore new mediums of communication with residents. These new avenues for public engagement increased access for those that may otherwise have not been involved in the planning process. Through quick adaptation and response, the City found success in online engagement, which inherently provides greater access to residents who may experience mobility limitations. Much of the outreach and formal engagement activities were held virtually. The following outreach activities were conducted to engage stakeholders and inform the development of the City’s Housing Element:
2020 to 2021: Initial Outreach and 2021 Adoption
February 2020: Re-Imagine Barstow Community Workshop
Re-Imagine Barstow was a community workshop held on February 11, 2020, allowing for interested stakeholders to share their opinions or inclusion in the planning process. Respondents were asked about keywords that come to mind when envisioning housing; common responses included “home” (48%), “affordable” (38%), and “family” (24%). Comments indicated the desire for rehabilitating and constructing housing that is appealing in order to allure and retain residents. Respondents overwhelmingly reported that Barstow needs more housing (86%), to support business and growth; special housing for persons experiencing homelessness, seniors, and low-income households; and housing to attract new residents and business. Finally, respondents were asked about what type of housing Barstow needs most. Answers were varied, but the highest concentrations were affordable housing (19%), senior housing (16%), middle-class housing (14%), and housing solutions for persons experiencing homelessness (14%).

Feedback from this public outreach event helped to inform the following programs:
• Program 1, Housing Inspection and Code
Compliance
• Program 2, Downtown Barstow
• Program 5, Balanced Communities
• Program 6, Diverse Use
• Program 9, Alternative Housing Options
• Program 10, Financial Assistance for Housing
• Program 11, Rental Housing Assistance
• Program 12, Housing for Disabled Persons
• Program 13, Housing for Older Adults
• Program 14, Homeless Services
• Program 16, Equal Housing Opportunities
• Program 17, Efficient Permitting Process and
Affordable Housing Streamlining

3.a
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix F: Stakeholder Engagement Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page F-2 August 2020: Virtual Engagement Meeting and Survey
In August 2020, the City held a virtual engagement meeting and survey to gain insight regarding resident opinions on housing needs, projects, and services. Prior to the meeting, a preworkshop survey was posted asking participants about housing and the AHSC grant. Attendees responded to poll questions during the meeting as well. When asked about the future of the Old Barstow Hospital site, residentsidentified the site as being most suited for housing (26% of votes) or commercial uses (20%).

Respondents also found that the types of housing Barstow needs the most are single-family homes (33%), two-bedroom apartments (22%), and studio apartments (19%). Attendees were also polled about the specific types of housing which they prefer to see in the City; they identified senior housing (32%) and affordable medium-income housing (25%) as most appropriate and needed.

Feedback from this public outreach event helped to inform the following programs. Combined survey and polling results are shown in Exhibit A.
• Program 2, Downtown Barstow
• Program 4, Housing Design
• Program 5, Balanced Communities
• Program 6, Mixed-use and Higher
Density Residential Opportunities
• Program 8, Removal of Constraints
• Program 9, Alternative Housing Option
• Program 13, Housing for Older Adults
• Program 11, Rental Housing Assistance
• Program 15, Equal Housing Opportunities
• Program 17, Efficient Permitting Process and
Affordable Housing Streamlining
May 2021: Online Housing Element Survey
In May 2021, the City posted an online survey on the City’s website and emailed it to stakeholders.

The survey was available in English and Spanish. The full survey results are shown in Exhibit B. The majority of respondents live and work in the City (97%), with more than half living in Barstow for more than 10 years (71%). Most respondents (86%) lived in a single-family home. Respondents shared that the cost and affordability (63%), desirable neighborhoods (53%), and low crime rate/safety (48%) carried the most weight in their housing choices. A majority of respondents acknowledged that there are factors they believe are preventing affordable housing from being built in the city (65%), which parallels with the sentiment that the integration of affordable housing into the city is “not important” (47%). Feedback from this public survey informed the development of the following programs:
• Program 1, Housing Inspections and
Code Compliance
• Program 2, Downtown Barstow
• Program 4, Housing Design
• Program 5, Balanced Communities
• Program 6, Mixed-use and Higher
Density Residential Opportunities
• Program 8, Removal of Constraints
• Program 9, Alternative Housing Option
• Program 10, Financial Assistance for Housing
• Program 11, Rental Housing Assistance
• Program 15, Equal Housing Opportunities
• Program 17, Efficient Permitting Process and
Affordable Housing Streamlining
August to October 2021: Initial Draft and Adopted Housing Element Public Review The City’s initial Draft Housing Element was submitted on August 2, 2021 required prior to the passage of AB 215, which requires set periods of public review for the initial Draft (30 days) and subsequent draft Housing Elements (7 days). In an effort to meet the statutory deadline, the City adopted its Housing Element on October 12, 2021 after conducting outreach in August and making the document available for public review in September and October 2021.

3.a
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix F: Stakeholder Engagement Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page F-3 AUGUST 2021 VIRTUAL ENGAGEMENT MEETING
On August 4, 2021, the City held a virtual meeting for interested parties to learn about the planning process, the initial Draft Housing Element, and their role in the development of the plan. The meeting was held in English and Spanish, and the workshop proceedings were posted on the City’s website.

The workshop was held during a weekday evening and streamed live via Zoom and the City’s Facebook page to facilitate participation. Prompting questions including identifying areas for housing–and fair housing-related issues led to meaningful feedback on their priorities and areas where they would like to see future growth. Participants present included residents, property owners, and employees.

Participants highlighted housing availability and senior housing as the most urgent needs. Residents also wanted to learn more about homeownership assistance and entities that provide resources.

Feedback from this public outreach event helped to inform the following programs. Exhibit D provides a copy of the presentation.
• Program 9, Alternative Housing Options
• Program 10, Financial Assistance for Housing
• Program 11, Rental Housing Assistance
• Program 12, Housing for Disabled Persons
• Program 13, Housing for Older Adults
• Program 14, Homeless Services
• Program 15, Equal Housing Opportunity
OCTOBER 2021: PUBLIC REVIEW AND POSTING
Following the receipt of HCD’s comment letter on September 21, 2021, the City revised the Draft Housing Element and posted the revised Element on the City’s website and notified interested parties (allowing for more than the 7-day public review with posting) on October 1, 2021. On October 12, 2021, City staff presented the revised Draft Housing Element to the City Council for consideration and to allow for additional public comment. The following summarizes input received at the meeting.

Members of the Public
• Discussed concerns with the lack of public outreach.
• Cited concerns with the California HCD’s review of the Draft Housing Element. • Asked why the public hearing was not advertised on Channel 6.

Councilmember Comments
• Asked staff to clarify and confirm information presented on Appendix B, Table 17 and 23. • Asked that Desert Manna be removed from the Housing Inventory in Appendix B, page 27 • Asked about Appendix C and when prevailing wage goes into effect. • Asked staff to clarify the information on page 12 of Appendix C for developers. • Stated the calculations in Appendix D, Table 1 are incorrect. Asked staff to correct. • Asked staff to clarify data in Appendix D, percent of residents on government assistance. • Asked how the properties available for housing development were determined. • Asked for clarification about the eight-year cycle and the benefits. • Asked how the regional housing needs assessment was allocated throughout the City. • Asked how sites were identified in Appendix D and why Riverside Drive was not identified. • Requested a presentation on housing matters at an upcoming Council meeting.

Staff responded with clarifications on the data, process, and methods used in the housing element.

No policy and program changes were deemed necessary at that time and the City Council adopted the Housing Element update and directed staff to submit to HCD for review and certification.

3.a
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix F: Stakeholder Engagement Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page F-4 2022 to 2024: Additional Outreach and Revised Draft Housing Element Following HCD’s March 16, 2022 comment letter, the City conducted an additional outreach in tandem with its General Plan update (initiated later in 2022) to encourage and allow for additional public input.

August 2022 to March 2023: Stakeholder Meetings
The City led stakeholder meetings between August 2022 and April 2023 and met with 13 different collections of over 100 individuals representing local community organizations, public agencies, and interest groups: healthcare, real estate, education, homelessness, small business, Lenwood community, Marine Corps Logistics Base, youth sports, Silver Valley (Newberry Springs, Daggett, and Yermo), faith-based, seniors and veterans, students, the military, and Fort Irwin. The stakeholder input suggested a priority for creating living-wage employment options/careers and the development of new housing options, particularly for higher end market rate housing to attract more skilled workers that provide critical services (e.g., medical professionals). Additionally, the stakeholder input emphasized the importance of enhancing the City’s planning and facilities to address homelessness.

April 2023: Community Survey and Town Hall
The City launched an online bilingual Barstow community survey in April 2023 and received over 200 responses. The survey was intended to provide a platform where residents were able to inform city changes and be part of the General Plan Update, including the Housing Element. This survey had a Housing section, which asked respondents to identify their top three housing program priorities for the City. The top three housing programs the majority of respondents selected were: 1) provide regulatory and/or financial incentives for new developments to include affordable units; 2) pursue funding to rehabilitate existing homes; and 3) streamline permit processes for all types of housing.

Survey respondents also identified the top four strategiesto improve environmental justice conditions within Barstow. Strategies recommended for inclusion into the general plan were: 1) obtain funding to upgrade public facilities in underserved areas; 2) improve access to healthy food by fostering options like farmer’s markets; 3) improve pedestrian and bicycle access to parks and open spaces; and 4) increase the frequency of transit service along routes to places of work and essential services.

The City of Barstow also held a Town Hall in April
2023 to present and discuss the General Plan Update
(including Housing Element) and the Barstow
International Gateway project. Over 300 people
attended and expressed desires for additional livingwage jobs and economic development to spur new housing development and reinvestment in existing
housing stock. Additional support was expressed for
concentrating future housing development around
the existing community core and downtown area (to
support local businesses, spur reinvestment, and
place housing in proximity to existing services,
facilities, and transit facilities), and to prevent an “us vs them” pattern of new growth in the west part of
the community near the BIG project.

3.a
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix F: Stakeholder Engagement Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page F-5 March 2024: General Plan Update Open House and Scoping Meeting In March 2024, the City held a combined Open House and EIR Scoping Meeting on the General Plan Update, including the Housing Element. All material was made available in English and Spanish, with bilingual City staff and consultants onsite to facilitate conversations with all residents. The structure of this open house entailed different sections related land use changes, circulation and mobility, environmental justice, and housing. The City received substantial in-person comments from the over 200 attendees as well as written comments on EIR scoping for the General Plan update and Specific Plan for BNSF’s proposed new rail facility, both of which feed into the City’s housing planning, and directly on housing and related issues. The public shared various housing related issues that they would like to see improved, including the City’s aging housing stock, the need for revitalization efforts, lack of affordable housing, inability to purchase a home, and homelessness.

In response to public input received, the City incorporated the following programs:
• Program 2, Downtown Barstow
• Program 5, Balanced Communities
• Program 10, Financial Assistance for Housing
• Program 11, Rental Housing Assistance
• Program 17, Efficient Permitting Process
and Affordable Housing Streamlining
• Program 19, Increased Transparency
June 2024: Revised Draft Housing Element Public Review
Consistent with AB 215 requirements for revised submittals, the revised draft and a guide to revisions was released to the public for seven days from June 25 to July 1, 2024. The revised draft was distributed via the City’s website and emails to all previously interested members of the public and others who signed up for notification of general City activities.

The City also announced availability of the revised draft Housing Element at its June 25th Planning Commission meeting and July 1st City Council meeting to ensure broader awareness of the public review period and desire for the City to obtain input. After the conclusion of the public review period, no comments were submitted, although informal support was expressed for the City’s progress and changes. The draft Housing Element continues to be available on the City’s website for additional review and comment and the City will continue to accept public comments throughout the HCD review process and make edits as appropriate.

3.a
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Housing Element
Appendix F: Stakeholder Engagement Hearing Draft August 2024 | Page F-6 Summary of Changes Based on Public Input 2022 to 2024
In addition to changes based on compliance with state law, the following revisions were made to Housing programs and other parts of the Housing Element based on public input received between 2022 and 2024.
• Sites Inventory and citywide land use plan: prepared land use plan that fundamentally shifts housing away from areas west of Interstate 15 and focuses future residential around the existing community core
• Program 2, Downtown Barstow: amended the program to include additional outreach and revised the draft Land Use Plan in the General Plan Update to expand housing options and avoid the need for general plan amendments
• Program 4, Housing Design and Program 8, Removal of Potential Constraints: reinforced the need to make changes to ensure and clarify that multifamily developments in the MDR, future HDR, and Diverse Use zones qualify for administrative review against the design guidelines, not subject to Planning Commission approval.
• Program 6, Mixed-use and Higher Density Residential Opportunities: amended the program to include and revised the draft Land Use Plan in the General Plan Update to expand housing options through the creation of a High Density Residential category/zone and increase the density range in the Diverse Use category/zone.
• Program 11, Rental Housing Assistance: revised objectives to include seeking funding to preserve up to 300 units of at-risk housing and provide technical assistance where feasible to extend the long-term covenants on these projects.
• Program 16, Infrastructure and Capital Improvements: new program to further implement an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District to support new housing. • Program 19, Environmental and Community Health: new program to coordinate on and lead implementation of various activities and improvements to improve health and well-being of existing and future residents.
• Program 20, Temporary and Permanent Workforce Housing: new program to create new temporary and permanent workforce housing, with a focus on the use and rehabilitation of existing housing and nonresidential buildings.

TBD 2024: Public Hearings for Adoption of Revised Housing Element Placeholder based on HCD review and adoption hearings

3.a
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing Element_HearingDraft_Aug2024 (1) (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow 2021-2029 Housing Element
Quick Guide to Revisions Made in Response to HCD Comments on Previous Submittal

March 16, 2022 HCD Comments City Revisions / Responses
1a
Extremely Low-Income Households:

The element was generally not revised to
address this requirement and must still
analyze the housing needs of projected and
existing extremely low income households.

Please see HCD’s prior review for additional
data and information on this issue.

The City updated the housing needs for extremely lowincome (ELI) households throughout element.

Updates include:
- Appendix B, p. B-23, Analysis of overpayment,
overcrowding, and future need
- Housing Plan, p. 19, Adding quantified extremely
low income objectives for 2021-2029
1b
Housing Conditions:

The element now reports data on the housing
units in need of rehabilitation in addition to
identifying the age of the housing stock.

However, it must still estimate the number of
units in need of rehabilitation and in need of
replacement. For example, the analysis could
include information from a recent windshield
survey, estimates from code enforcement, or
information from other local organizations.

The City expanded discussion of housing conditions and
substandard housing throughout the element.

Updates include:
- Housing Plan, 19, adding quantified objectives for
housing rehabilitation for 2021-2029
- Appendix B, p. B-11 adding estimates of housing
condition and substandard housing
- Appendix D, p. D-54, adding information on
substandard housing
- Appendix D, p. D-68–73, adding contributing factors
and programs to address housing conditions
2a
Sites Inventory:

The element must identify and analyze sites
for fostering inclusive communities and
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. The
element discusses identified sites for lowerincome households but should also discuss the number of units for all income groups,
evaluate the magnitude of the impact,
describe any isolation of the sites that
address the RHNA and address whether sites
improve/ exacerbate each fair housing issue.

The City updated Appendix E, Sites Analysis and Inventory to revise sites, methodology, and fair housing implications.

Updates include:
- Appendix E, p. E-2 to E-3, adding planned and
entitled projects credited toward the RHNA
- Appendix E, p. E-4 to E-7, revising methodology for
site inventory to address the RHNA
- Appendix E, p. E-8 to E-10, revising sites to include only vacant sites and mapping their locations
- Appendix E, p. E-11 to E-14, addressing the fair
housing implication of sites re: segregation,
integration, isolation, and access to opportunity
2b
-
2c
Local Data and Knowledge, and Other
Relevant Factors:

The element should incorporate local data
and knowledge of the city into the AFFH
section. To meet this requirement, the
element should provide local data not
captured in regional, state, or federal data.

The element must include other relevant
factors that contribute to fair housing issues
in the city. The element can analyze historical
land use and investment practices or other
information and demographic trends.

The City updated Appendix D to include local data and
knowledge and how it influences housing in Barstow.

Updates include:
- Appendix D, p. D-65 adding the results of a housing
survey issued after the housing element was
adopted to clarify key issues
- Appendix D, p. D-66-67, adding a discussion of
contemporary issues, including addressing
disparities in opportunity, resulting from the City’s
past decisions on growth and development.

3.b
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: Barstow_HCD Response Guide - June 2024 (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow 2021-2029 Housing Element
Quick Guide to Revisions Made in Response to HCD Comments on Previous Submittal

March 16, 2022 HCD Comments City Revisions / Responses
2d
Goals, Priorities, Metrics, and Milestones:

The element must be revised to add or
modify goals and actions based on the
outcomes of a complete analysis. Goals and
actions must specifically respond to the
analysis and to the identified and prioritized
contributing factors to fair housing issues and
must be significant and meaningful enough to
overcome identified patterns and trends.

Actions must have metrics and milestones as
appropriate and must address housing
mobility enhancement, new housing choices
and affordability in high opportunity areas,
place-based strategies for community
preservation and revitalization and
displacement protection.

The City revised Appendix D and the Housing Plan to
include additional goals and actions to reflect the local priorities related to fair housing issues.

Updates include:
- Appendix D, p. D-68-D-70, Set forth five new
contributing factors based on revised work.
- Appendix D, p. D-71-72, prepared a fair housing
matrix documenting factors, issues, programs,
geographical areas, metrics, and timetable.
- Appendix D, p. D-73, included a map of some of the
key improvements planned for the City
- Housing Plan, p. 7, adding Program #5 to reduce
disparities in economic development
- Housing Plan, p. 14, adding Program #16 to address
focused capital improvement planning
- Housing Plan, p. 15, adding Program #19 to improve
environmental and community health
- Housing Plan, p. 16, adding Program #20 to explore
temporary and permanent workforce housing
3a
Processing and Permit Procedures:

The element mentions a Site Plan Review
where projects are reviewed to determine
the type of approval (e.g., ministerial, staff
review and Planning Commission review
through public hearing). However, the
element does still not fully address this
requirement. While the element should also
describe procedures for a typical single family
and multifamily project. The analysis should
address the approval body, number of public
hearings, approval findings, and any other
relevant information. The element should add
or modify programs, as appropriate, based on
the outcomes of a complete analysis to
address constraints. Please see HCD’s prior
review for information.

The City updated Appendix C to include information on
local permitting practices, steps, and timelines.

Updates include:
- Appendix D, p. C-18 and C-19, clarifying the project
application review process, site plan review, design
review, approval findings, and timeframes
- Appendix D, p. C-19, clarifying the typical process
and timeframe required for a single-family and
multiple-family project including reviewing body
- Housing Plan, p. 6, includes action item to create
objective design standards in Program #4
- Housing Plan, p. 15, contains action to annually
evaluate review process to ensure timeliness as
stated in Program #17
3b
Housing for Persons with Disabilities:

The element now further describes why a
conditional use permit (CUP) is required for
group homes for seven or more persons but
generally was not revised to evaluate the CUP
as a constraint on housing for persons with
disabilities. Further, the element must still
address the exclusion of these uses from
several residential zones. The element should
The City updated Appendix C to include information on
local permitting practices, steps, and timelines.

Updates include:
- Appendix C, p. C-7, clarifying the need to correctly
define residential care facilities per state law.
- Appendix C, p. C-7, clarifying the findings required
for approving large residential care facilities

3.b
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: Barstow_HCD Response Guide - June 2024 (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow 2021-2029 Housing Element
Quick Guide to Revisions Made in Response to HCD Comments on Previous Submittal

March 16, 2022 HCD Comments City Revisions / Responses
evaluate the impacts of these requirements
and include programs to address identified
constraints, such as amending zoning to allow
these uses in all residential zones and replace
or revise CUP procedures to permit group
homes for seven or more persons with
objectivity to facilitate approval certainty.
- Housing Plan, Program #12 (p. 11-12) commits the
City to correctly define residential care facilities,
and allow in all residential zones per state law.
- Housing Plan, Program #12 (p. 11-12) commits to
conditionally allow large facilities in all zones that
allow housing but will evaluate and modify any
findings that serves as a constraint to ensure
objectivity and certainty in the approval process.
4 Beneficial Impact:

To have a beneficial impact in the planning
period and address housing element goals,
programs must be revised with discrete
timelines and specific commitment.

Specifically, Program 2 (Downtown Barstow)
should commit to how often (e.g., at least
annually and ongoing) the City will contact
developers.

The City has updated the programs, specifically Downtown Barstow (Program #2) specific commitments and time
frames to address this comment.

Updates include:
- Housing Plan, Program #2, p. 5, committing to
contact developers on an annual and ongoing basis
- Revised other housing programs as needed
5 Quantified Objectives:

The element now provides a summary of
quantified objectives for new construction;
however, it must also provide quantified
objectives for rehabilitation and conservation
by income group, including ELI households.

The City has updated the Housing Plan to include these
objectives. Updates include:
- Housing Plan, p.19, adding quantified objectives for
rehab and conservation by income group, including
ELI households. Reference included to Table D-5 for
objectives for fair housing
6 Diligent Effort at Outreach:

While the element lists the programs that
were added or modified following workshops,
online surveys, and meetings (Appendix F), it
still should summarize public comments,
including future comments and describe how
comments were considered and incorporated
into the element. Further, moving forward,
the City should employ additional methods
for public outreach efforts in the future,
particularly to include lower-income and
special needs households and neighborhoods
with higher concentrations of lower-income
households.

Appendix F, Stakeholder Engagement, was significantly
expanded to include additional public engagement efforts and show how the results are incorporated into the update.

Examples of updates include:
- Comments raised at the October 2021 adoption
hearing for the element, additional public outreach
done after HCD’s last element review, and revisions
made (beyond state law compliance) as a result of
comments from the additional public outreach

3.b
Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: Barstow_HCD Response Guide - June 2024 (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) City of Barstow Page 1 of 2
Revisions to the July Draft Housing Element | August 2024 The following two programs have been revised based on recommendations from HCD. Changes are tracked and shown as additions in blue/underline and deletions in red/strikethrough.

3.c
Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing - Aug. 2024 Revisions (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Revisions to the July Draft Housing Element | August 2024 City of Barstow Page 2 of 2

3.c
Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: Barstow_6th cycle Housing - Aug. 2024 Revisions (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element)

3.d
Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
1) Introduction 1
2) Executive Summary 3
3) Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases 11
4) Biological Resources 14
5) Hydrology/Water Quality 18
6) Noise 19
7) Population/Housing 21
8) Public Services and Utilities 21
9) Recreation 22
10) Traffic and Transportation 22
11) Alternatives to the Proposed Project 26
12) Growth‐Inducing Impacts 28
13) Cumulative Impacts 29
14) Mitigation Monitoring Program 31
15) Initial Study Checklist 40

3.d
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 1 1) INTRODUCTION

1.1  Purpose of the Environmental Impact Report
The evaluation of projects to determine their effects on the environment is required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). When a project could have a significant effect on the environment, the agency with primary responsibility over the approval of the project (the lead agency) is required to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

As stated in the State CEQA Guidelines §151211:

An EIR is an informational document which will inform public agency decision makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effects of a project, identify possible ways to minimize the significant effects, and describe reasonable alternatives to the project. The public agency shall consider the information in the EIR along with other information which may be presented to the agency (when considering whether to approve a project).

This Draft Master EIR is intended to provide information to the public and to decision‐makers regarding the potential environmental effects of adoption and implementation of the City of Barstow General Plan Revision. CEQA permits Master EIRs to be prepared for general plans as a means of streamlining the environmental review process. The Master EIR can provide estimates of environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures associated with development projects that are considered likely to occur within the time horizon of the General Plan (2015 – 2020). Once the Master EIR has been reviewed and certified by the City Council, environmental review of subsequent projects that are similar in size, scope and location to those incorporated into the General Plan Master EIR can potentially be substantially reduced.

CEQA requires that Master EIRs contain sufficient information about anticipated development projects, including their size, location, intensity and type of development, for the lead agency to derive estimates of their likely environmental impact, accompanied by mitigation measures designed to reduce adverse environmental impacts to an acceptable level of significance. If the lead agency determines that a subsequent project is “within the scope” of the Master EIR and therefore will have no additional significant environmental effect, and that no new mitigation measures or alternatives may be required, it may prepare a written finding to that effect without preparing a new environmental document or findings. In cases in which this finding cannot be made, the agency may prepare either a mitigated negative declaration or a focused EIR for subsequent projects in order to address environmental impacts that were not sufficiently analyzed and mitigated by the Master EIR.

State law permits lead agencies to establish a fee program to offset the costs of preparing a Master EIR. In this manner, the City can recover a proportion of the costs incurred in preparing this report from project applicants who benefit from employing the document in the environmental review of their development proposals.

3.d
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 2 1.2 Background Reports
In order to provide the technical information necessary to conduct a thorough analysis of the likely environmental impacts of the General Plan Revision, the City of Barstow commissioned the preparation of background reports addressing the issues of circulation, noise, air quality, hydrology and biological resources. These reports are included as appendices to this Master EIR and are incorporated herein by reference.

1.3 Public Review and CEQA Process
CEQA provides three opportunities for public participation during the environmental review process. These points are: 1) during the Notice of Preparation (NOP), when public agencies and the public are informed that an EIR is to be prepared, and are requested to comment on the scope and contents of the proposed EIR; 2) upon circulation of the Draft EIR, when the public and agencies can comment on the adequacy of the environmental document; and 3) finally, after circulation of the Final EIR, when the public and agencies can evaluate the lead agency’s responses to comments submitted on the Draft EIR.

The Notice of Preparation for the City of Barstow General Plan Revision Master EIR was published in November 2014. Public agency responses to the Notice of Preparation are included as an appendix to this document. This public review draft provides a second opportunity for comment by the public and by responsible agencies, either in written form or at public hearings to be held by the Planning Commission and City Council.  This Draft EIR will be circulated for public review for a period of at least 45 days. Comments on the draft document may be submitted to:

Gaither Loewenstein, Economic Development and Planning Manager City of Barstow
220 East Mountain View Street
Barstow, California 92311
[email protected]

The Final EIR will include the City’s responses to comments submitted in response to the Draft document, along with any revisions to the report resulting from these comments and a program for monitoring the mitigation measures contained in the Draft EIR.

After considering the Final PEIR in conjunction with making findings, if the project would result in significant environmental impacts after imposition of feasible mitigation measures, the City may approve the project if the benefits of the project outweigh its unavoidable environmental effects. Under these circumstances, a Statement of Overriding Considerations would be prepared explaining why the City is willing to accept each significant effect. It is anticipated that with the possible exception of certain air quality standards the environmental impacts of implementing the revised General Plan can be effectively mitigated without taking such action.

3.d
Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 3 2) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.1 Description of Planning Area and Vicinity
The General Plan Master EIR encompasses the incorporated City of Barstow and its surrounding Sphere of Influence. The Barstow planning area is located in northern San Bernardino County, roughly halfway between Las Vegas and Los Angeles. (see Exhibit 2‐1: Vicinity Map) The City’s Sphere of Influence is comprised of the incorporated area as well as lands outside of the incorporated city considered as possibilities for annexation to the city at some point in the future. (see Exhibit 2‐2: Planning Area) Within the time parameters of the revised General Plan (2015‐2020) significant annexations of lands within the Sphere of Influence are considered unlikely, with the exception of the possibility of the initial stages of a phased annexation of the Barstow Heights neighborhood, which is currently surrounded on three sides by the incorporated city.

2.2 Relationship of Planning Area to Surrounding Region Barstow is located in the High Desert region of southern California. The region experienced significant growth during the late 1990s and early 2000s as a result of regional and national economic expansion. The recession of 2007‐2009 and the extremely slow recovery from this historic downturn effectively brought this growth to a halt; only recently have there been small signs of a nascent economic recovery in the High Desert region.

Urban growth in Barstow typically occurs as a byproduct of economic expansion in High Desert communities located south of the City, including Victorville, Hesperia and Apple Valley. As housing costs in these communities rise and employment opportunities become more plentiful the viability of Barstow for residential, commercial and industrial expansion tends to increase.

While Barstow’s location at the juncture of three major highways in relatively close proximity to the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach makes it a viable setting for manufacturing, logistics and retail land use expansion, a strong macroeconomic environment is a necessary prerequisite for this growth to occur. Only when economic growth is at relatively high levels can Barstow’s cost and locational advantages be fully capitalized upon. For the past several years City officials have been taking steps aimed at positioning the City to benefit from the next wave of national and regional economic expansion, such as improving roadways and infrastructure, identifying sites suitable for commercial and industrial use and removing constraints to their development and reaching out to landowners and prospective investors to increase their awareness of growth opportunities in Barstow. As a result of these efforts, it is anticipated that substantial improvement in the community’s employment base, accompanied by a return of new housing construction, could begin to occur within the time horizon of the revised General Plan. The General Plan identifies a number of specific locations at which growth is considered most likely to occur, accompanied by estimates of the nature and intensity of this anticipated development. (see Exhibit L‐2: Potential Development Sites in the General Plan Land Use Element)

3.d
Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 4 From the standpoint of assessing regional environmental impacts, because Barstow is not immediately adjacent to other urban communities in the region, separated by over 20 miles of open space to the south and much more than that to the north, west and east, the amount of development that is expected to occur in the community by 2020 is highly unlikely to have cumulative adverse impacts beyond the local planning area. Possible exceptions to this generalization include air quality and biological resources, for which this master Environmental Impact Report contains mitigation measures designed to offset the effects of anticipated development.

3.d
Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 5 EXHIBIT 2‐1: VICINITY MAP
EXHIBIT 2‐2: PLANNING AREA (Sphere of Influence)

3.d
Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 6 2.3   General Plan Mitigating Features  and National Cultural and Regulatory Trends  Likely to Reduce the Environmental Impact of Planned Development
Generally speaking, industrial development is expected to occur primarily in the southwest portion of the City, residential growth is projected mainly along the Rimrock Road corridor and at various infill locations throughout the community and commercial development is most likely to be concentrated in the vicinity of the I‐15/Lenwood Road interchange and the Spanish Trail Specific Plan area along L Street between Main Street and I‐15. The City has sufficient infrastructure and roadway capacity to accommodate this projected increase in population, housing and employment. Areas of environmental concern associated with planned growth include biological resources (with particular emphasis on desert tortoise habitat) air quality (with an emphasis on incorporating project features that minimize or offset greenhouse gas emissions) and hydrology (with the need to ensure that adequate water supplies are available to support development and that new development incorporates water‐saving features being paramount in this regard). Features of the revised General Plan designed to address these issues include:
 Designation of more lands for open space and habitat protection and utilization of the interim open space designation to ensure a compact pattern of urban growth;
 Improvements to the circulation network including phased construction of a connector roadway between High Point Parkway and the Barstow Heights neighborhood (initially and ultimately to Barstow Road) and the exoansion of pedestrian pathways and bicycle routes throughout the City;  Establishment of a “mitigation bank” comprised of lands suitable for tortoise habitat to be used to offset the loss of habitat associated with planned development;
 Policies designed to encourage non‐motorized transportation and the use of electric and other low‐emission generating vehicles;
 Policies that encourage design features geared toward low water use;  Establishment of a local air quality mitigation fund to which developers may contribute in lieu of on‐site mitigation of air quality impacts of projects;  Inclusion of project features such as bicycle racks, pedestrian pathways and tree plantings in commercial and multi‐family residential developments;  and  Expansion of lands designated for diverse uses to encourage co‐location of jobs and housing, thereby reducing commute times and lessening the number of motor vehicle trips.

3.d
Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 7 In addition to the above mitigation strategies incorporated into the General Plan, a number of national trends are likely to have the effect of reducing the environmental impact of Barstow’s planned growth. These trends include:
 Improved fuel efficiency of motor vehicles accompanied by increasing use of lower polluting alternative fuels;
 Aging of the population which, accompanied by the lower intensity driving habits of the millennial generation, which are likely to result in an aggregate reduction of vehicle trips per household;
 New laws regulating the emissions of diesel trucks and locomotives that are scheduled to take effect within the time horizon of the revised General Plan; and  Changing consumer spending patterns prompted by the expansion of online shopping, improvements and cost‐reductions in home entertainment systems and innovations in household appliances that are likely to reduce the amount of trips taken outside the home for shopping, dining and entertainment.

Whereas in previous years the average household might have made up to10 or more vehicle trips per day (a figure that is typically included in models forecasting vehicle usage) it would not be surprising if this were reduced to no more than eight daily vehicle trips by 2020 in light of the national trends and local policy initiatives identified above.  Moreover, these trips are more likely to be made in vehicles that, in the aggregate, pollute the air less and consume less fuel. As this occurs and as the trucks and trains that deliver goods to consumers begin to pollute less as well, the adverse environmental impact of urban development will be significantly reduced, both in Barstow and in the nation as a whole. While these effects are difficult to precisely quantify it can be reasonably assumed that changes in cultural trends and regulatory policies that have already begun to occur will lessen the environmental footprint of the City’s future development. To the extent that they can be quantified, these assumptions have been factored into the analyses utilized by the draft Environmental Impact Report.

2.4 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
An initial study (incorporated as an appendix to this report) was conducted by the Planning Department to identify the potential adverse environmental impacts of implementation of the revised General Plan. This study determined that potentially significant impacts were unlikely to occur with respect to the following environmental factors:

Aesthetics
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Cultural Resources
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Mineral Resources
Geology/Soils

3.d
Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 8 As required by CEQA the Initial Study included substantiation of the City’s conclusion that General Plan implementation would not significantly affect the above environmental features.

Table 2‐1 contains a summary of the likely environmental impacts of the General Plan revision and the mitigation measures designed to address them.

3.d
Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 9 TABLE 2‐1: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS/
IMPACT

MITIGATION
Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gasses /
The project would 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 (including
releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors).

Significant and unavoidable impact

3.3.1 Incorporate 1 bike parking

3.3.2 Encourage use of electrical landscape maintenance equipment.

3.3.3 Provide incentives to equip garages with level electric vehicle charging stations.

3.3.4 Encourage alternative work schedules.

3.3.5 Utilize biological sequestration to offset the greenhouse gas impacts of for industrial and commercial development.

3.3.6 Establish a municipal energy fund.

3.3.7 Increase allowable residential densities.

3.3.8 Increase acreage of lands designated for diverse use development to encourage co‐location of jobs and housing.

3.3.9 Housing options for people working in Barstow.

3.3.10 Continue to explore and implement options for converting the City’s municipal vehicle fleet to low emissions vehicles.

3.3.11 Incorporate pedestrian paths and bicycle lanes and routes into the City’s circulation network.

3.3.12 Promote a compact pattern of urban development.

3.3.13 Prepare a local Climate Action Plan.

3.3.14 Incorporate bus turnouts into the design of commercial and multi‐family residential projects.

3.3.15 Prohibit the installation of wood‐burning fireplaces and stoves in new residential construction.

3.3.16 Support infill development.

3.3.17 Require Best Management Practices to reduce fugitive dust emissions.

3.3.18 Locate new air pollution point sources an adequate distance from sensitive receptors.

3.3.19 Environmental review process.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES /
Have a substantial adverse effect on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, orspecial
statusspeciesin local orregional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service
Less than significant impact with mitigations.

4.3.1 Proposed development on sites having evidence of the presence protected species shall require that protocol surveys be conducted to verify or refute the presence of these species. On sites at which the presence of one or more of these species is verified the impact of proposed development on these species shall be minimized or mitigated in accordance with the guidelines detailed in the Biological Technical Report.

4.3.2 Federal and state incidental take permits shall be required for development projects that are determined to have adverse impacts on desert tortoise habitat; state permits may also be required for projects adversely impacting the Mojave ground squirrel.

4.3.3 Minimization measures such as hiring a biological monitor to remove all tortoises from fenced construction areas and distributing tortoise awareness information to construction personnel who are prohibited from driving cross‐country, littering or bringing pets into the area shall be employed to minimize direct impact to tortoises and occupied habitat:

4.3.4 Adverse impacts of development projects on burrowing owls should be mitigated by one or more of the following measures:
 Avoiding occupied burrows during the breeding season
 Purchasing and permanently protecting 6.5 acres of foraging habitat per pair or unpaired resident bird impacted
 Creating new burrows or enhancing others when destruction of occupied burrows is unavoidable
 Implementing passive relocation if owls must be moved; and/or  Providing funding for long‐term management and monitoring of protected lands.

4.3.5 Avoid impacts to nesting birds.  Vegetation shall not be removed from a project site between March 15 and September 15.  A qualified biologist should survey all shrubs and structures within the project site for nesting birds, prior to project activities (including construction and/or site preparation).

4.3.6 The listed desert native plants (in Biological Resource Section) shall not be removed except under a Tree or Plant Removal Permit.

4.3.7 The listed native plants may not be harvested except under a permit.

3.d
Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 10 TABLE 2‐1: SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS/
IMPACT

MITIGATION
Hydrology/Water Quality/
Increases in water demand of the magnitude
projected under the revised General Plan can
be accommodated with by the City’s existing
supplies and allocations.

Less than significant impact with mitigations.

Policies and action strategies included in the General Plan Conservation and Open Space element , including provisions geared toward cooperation and collaboration with regional water agencies and encouraging  that water‐saving features such as low‐flow fixtures and xeriscape landscaping be incorporated into the design of future development projects will have the effect of reducing project impacts even further NOISE/
Development expected to occur within the
General Plan time horizon would result in
temporary construction noise and would also
cause increases in vibrations from trucks and
vehicles associated with construction activity.

Less than significant impact with mitigations.

6.3.1 Establish limitations on construction noise generation, thereby reducing construction noise impacts below the level of significance.

6.3.2 Established limitations on vibration levels for construction thereby reducing its impacts below the level of significance.

Population/Housing/
Both housing and employment growth within
the planning area are projected to increase at a
two percent annual rate through 2020. The
existing jobs/housing ratio would remain
essentially unchanged.

No Impact.

No mitigation required.

PUBLIC SERVICES AND

UTILITIES/
The level of growth projected under the Plan,
including build‐out of the 12 sites identified as
most likely to be developed by 2020, can be
accommodated by the City’s existing public
services delivery network.

Less than significant impact
No mitigation required.

Recreation/
Demand for parks and recreation services
associated with development anticipated under
the revised General Plan can be accommodated
by the existing parks and recreation service
delivery network.

Less than significant impact
No mitigation required.

TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION/
The projected 2020 roadway network can
accommodate all projected population,
employment and housing growth while
maintaining acceptable levels of service across
all roadway segments and intersections.

Less than significant impact with mitigations.

10.3.1 The City shall implement the policies and action strategies enumerated under Goals 1‐3 of the General Plan Circulation Element.

3.d
Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 11 3) AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GASES
Note: The City of Barstow commissioned an Air Quality Analysis Report from First Carbon Solutions that is included as an appendix to this report. What follows is a summary of existing air quality conditions, anticipated impacts of development proposed under the general plan and mitigation measures intended to offset the impact of planned development on local air quality.

The technical report commissioned by the City contains some recommended policies and mitigation measures that are not included in the EIR but will be considered on a case‐by‐case basis as each development project anticipated under the plan is submitted for review and approval. In general, the City intends to rely primarily upon incentives, as opposed to mandates, to offset adverse air quality impacts of proposed development.

3.1   Existing Conditions
The City of Barstow is located in the western portion of the Mojave Desert and has relatively good air quality in relation to other portions of central and southern California. The primary local sources of air pollutants within the planning area include Interstate Highways 15 and 40, State Route 58 and the Burlington‐Northern Santa Fe rail line and classification yard. Other local stationary sources of air pollutants include the City’s wastewater treatment facility, the Marine Corps Logistics Base and the Barstow Sanitary Landfill.  These sources, however, are dwarfed by the pollutants that migrate into the area from the San Joaquin Valley to the west and the Southern California air basin to the south. Because Barstow lies downwind of both of these highly polluted regions local air quality is diminished by factors beyond the control of the community.

Despite the presence of significant quantities of pollutants from outside of the Mojave air basin, the community has generally good existing air quality. Data from the local monitoring station indicate that the city in 2012 (the most recent year for which data are available) had zero days in which its air quality exceeded state or federal standards for carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide or particulate matter. With respect to ozone, however, local air quality exceeded the more stringent state standard on 36 days in 2012 while exceeding the more stringent federal standard for nitrogen dioxide on 7 days.

Air basins where federal or state ambient air quality standards are exceeded are referred to as “non‐attainment” areas. Because Barstow exceeded these standards for ozone and nitrogen dioxide for several days in 2012 and for particulate matter on two days in 2011 Barstow is defined by law as a nonattainment area. The City’s high ozone and nitrogen dioxide levels result primarily from pollutants imported from outside the region, while its particulate matter is generated by strong desert winds; none of these factors fall within the powers of local governments or residents to influence or control.

With regard to greenhouse gas emissions, the State of California, through AB 32 and SB 375, has mandated that local jurisdictions reduce the amount of emissions within their jurisdictions to the levels that prevailed in 1990 by the year 2020. Also under this legislation, localities are required to adopt Climate Action Plans that set forth strategies for achieving the mandated

3.d
Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 12 GHG emissions requirements. The goals, policies and action strategies set forth in the revised General Plan and this Master Environmental Impact Report are intended to address state regulatory requirements concerning both air quality and greenhouse gas emissions.

3.2   Project Impacts
The results of the air quality analysis conducted under the auspices of the General Plan Master Environmental Impact Report are summarized below:
1) The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Less than significant impact
2)  The project would not violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Less than significant impact 3) The project would 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 (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Significant and unavoidable impact 4) The project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Less than significant impact
5) The project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Less than significant impact
In essence, the City’s air quality consultants have concluded that the nature and scope of development being contemplated under the revised general plan (i.e. two percent annual population and household growth with new development focused primarily in 12 designated areas) would not significantly affect local air quality. This is primarily because under the growth scenario envisioned by the plan vehicular traffic at major intersections would remain uncongested, thereby avoiding the creation of “hot spots” that generate high pollution levels.

Although the actual air quality impact of local development under the revised general plan would be negligible, because Barstow is already defined as a nonattainment area, any project that would result in the emission of pollutants for which the area is out of attainment constitutes, by definition, a significant unavoidable impact under the California Environmental Quality Act. Since it is impossible to mitigate air quality impacts to a level at which absolutely no pollutants are emitted it is necessary for the City to adopt a Statement of Overriding Consideration concomitant with approval of the General Plan and certification of the Master EIR. This statement, permitted under CEQA, simply acknowledges that despite the presence of significant unavoidable environmental impacts the project is being approved in consideration of other factors, such as the need for the community of Barstow to prosper and grow.

CEQA also requires agencies to assess the impact of projects on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. To address this requirement the City asked First Carbon Solutions to provide an

3.d
Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 13 analysis of GHG impacts that is also appended to this report. With regard to the estimated impact of the revised General Plan on GHG emissions, the report prepared by the City’s air quality consultants concluded the following:
1) The project would generate direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions that would not result in a significant impact on the environment.

Less than significant impact with mitigation.
2) The project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases.

Less than significant impact with mitigation.

Although the City Council will be asked to adopt a Statement of Overriding Consideration with regard to air quality impacts of the revised General Plan and the plan with mitigations is not expected to generate significant impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, the City’s intent is to mitigate adverse air quality and GHG impacts of planned development to the most practicable feasible extent. The measures contained in the following section have been formulated with this objective in mind.

3.3 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures

3.3.1 Incorporate 1 bike parking space for every 20 motor vehicle parking spaces into the design of multi‐family, commercial and industrial development projects.

3.3.2 Encourage installation of electrical outlets on exterior walls of front and rear of residences to promote the use of electrical landscape maintenance equipment.

3.3.3 Provide incentives, such as relaxed parking requirements and density bonuses, to equip garages with level electric vehicle charging stations.

3.3.4 Encourage alternative work schedules for new commercial and industrial development.

3.3.5 Utilize biological sequestration (e.g. planting one tree per 10 metric tons of Co2 per year) to offset the greenhouse gas impacts of for industrial and commercial development.

3.3.6 Establish a municipal energy fund and accept contributions of $ 15 per metric ton of Co2 generated in lieu of on‐site air quality mitigation. Utilize fund proceeds for GHG offsets such as tree plantings, bicycle route striping and signage and open space acquisition.

3.3.7 Increase allowable residential densities from 6 to 7 units per acre in single family districts and from 16 to 20 in multi‐family districts to encourage compact urban development and shorter vehicle trips.

3.d
Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 14 3.3.8 Increase acreage of lands designated for diverse use development to encourage co‐ location of jobs and housing.

3.3.9 Endeavor to reduce the City’s existing 1.4 jobs: housing ratio by encouraging the development of residential land uses to provide more housing options for people working in Barstow.

3.3.10 Continue to explore and implement options for converting the City’s municipal vehicle fleet to low emissions vehicles.

3.3.11 Incorporate pedestrian paths and bicycle lanes and routes into the City’s circulation network and the design of residential and commercial development projects.

3.3.12 Promote a compact pattern of urban development by utilizing the Interim Open Space/ Resource Conservation land use designation on lands located on the periphery of the planning area until such time as sufficient urban infrastructure is extended to such locations.

3.3.13 Pursuant to the provisions of the 2006 California Global Warming Solutions Act, prepare a local Climate Action Plan or utilize provisions of the Climate Action Plan currently being prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments.

3.3.14 Incorporate bus turnouts into the design of commercial and multi‐family residential projects.

3.3.15 Prohibit the installation of wood‐burning fireplaces and stoves in new residential construction.

3.3.16 Support infill development by improving and enhancing infrastructure serving vacant infill properties.

3.3.17 Require construction, grading, excavation, and demolition activities to incorporate appropriate best management practices (BMPs) to reduce fugitive dust emissions. (See Air Quality Analysis in Appendix for list of possible BMPs).

3.3.18 Locate new air pollution point sources such as, but not limited to, industrial, manufacturing, and processing facilities, an adequate distance from existing and planned residential areas and sensitive receptors.

3.3.15 Utilize the City’s environmental review process to incorporate additional air quality mitigation measures into the design of future proposed development projects employing an incentives‐based approach as an alternative to mandates. 4) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Note: The City of Barstow commissioned a Biological Technical Report from Circle Mountain Biological Resources is included as an appendix to this report. What follows is a summary of

3.d
Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 15 existing conditions pertaining to biological resources , anticipated impacts of development proposed under the general plan and mitigation measures intended to offset the impact of planned development on sensitive biological resources. The technical report commissioned by the City contains some recommended mitigation measures that are not included in the EIR but will be considered on a case‐by‐case basis as each development project anticipated under the plan is submitted for review and approval.

4.1 Existing Conditions
Barstow is located in a high desert ecosystem that features a rich diversity of plants and animals. Many of the species of flora and fauna found within the planning area are quite common while others are less common, several of which have been designated as either threatened species or species of special concern.

The biological technical report contains voluminous information concerning both common and uncommon plant and animal species that are found within the Barstow planning area. The report also provides site‐specific information concerning the locations within the Barstow area at which these species are likely to be found. This section of the EIR focuses on uncommon species that may be particularly worthy of environmental protection.

With regard to plants, there are at least 10 special status plant species and 1 special plant resource (i.e., Creosote Bush Rings larger than 10 feet in diameter) found in the Barstow area, including the following:

Barstow Woolly Sunflower
Beaver Dam Breadroot
Chaparral Sand‐Verbena
Creamy Blazing Star
Creosote Bush Rings
Emory’s Crucifixion Thorn
Mojave Fish‐Hook Cactus
Mojave Menodora
Mojave Monkeyfolower
Parish’s Phacelia
Spiny‐Hair Blazing Star
Concerning uncommon animals, the following species have been identified in the Barstow area:

Mojave Fringe‐Toed Lizard
Agassiz’s Desert Tortoise
Burrowing Owl
Cooper’s Hawk*
Ferruginous Hawk*
Golden Eagle*
LeConte’s Thrasher

3.d
Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 16 Loggerhead Shrike
Northern Harrier*
Osprey*
Prairie Falcon*
Swainson’s Hawk*
Vaux’s Swift*
Yellow‐Billed Cuckoo*
Mojave Ground Squirrel
American Badger
Desert Kit Fox
*Migratory birds unlikely to be adversely affected by future development in Barstow

4.2 Project Impacts
The effects of development anticipated under the revised General Plan on sensitive biological resources are likely to be largely site‐dependent. In general, infill development on properties surrounded by existing urban use and development on sites that have already been impacted by human activity, whether infill or on the periphery of developed areas, are less likely to have an adverse impact on species of concern than projects on parcels located in sensitive habitat areas that have not been disturbed by previous activities.

The biological technical report that is appended to this EIR contains extensive mapping of the Barstow planning area that documents specific locations at which sensitive plant and animal species or habitat that could accommodate such species have been observed. In addition to the biological technical report the City’s consultants conducted of field reconnaissance of twelve sites considered most likely to be developed within the 2015‐2020 time horizon of the revised General Plan (see General Plan Exhibit L‐2). The results of this field reconnaissance, also included as an appendix to this EIR, identify which species and habitats that have been encountered at these specific locations.

Based on the field reconnaissance survey and other supporting documentation contained in the biological technical report, three of the likely development sites surveyed are free of sensitive plant and animal species and could be readily developed without adversely impacting biological resources. These sites include:
 Parcel 5b, located at the northwest intersection of Lenwood Road and I‐15  Parcel 6, the Spanish Trail Specific Plan Area, located in the vicinity of L Avenue and Main Street; and
 Parcel 12, located on Old Route 66 between the highway and the BNSF railroad tracks.

Most infill properties surrounded by existing development within the city limits could also be developed without resulting in adverse biological resource impacts. The remaining sites shown on Exhibit L‐2 of the General Plan are likely to require additional site‐specific analysis of biological resource impacts once specific site development plans are submitted for review.

3.d
Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 17 4.3 Biological Resources Mitigation Measures

4.3.1 Proposed development on sites identified by the Biological Technical Report and/or accompanying Reconnaissance Survey included as attachments to this EIR as having evidence of the presence of desert tortoises, Mojave fringe‐toed lizards, burrowing owls or Mojave ground squirrels shall require that protocol surveys consistent with applicable federal and/or state guidelines be conducted to verify or refute the presence of these species. On sites at which the presence of one or more of these species is verified the impact of proposed development on these species shall be minimized or mitigated in accordance with the guidelines detailed in the Biological Technical Report.

4.3.2 Federal and state incidental take permits shall be required for development projects that are determined to have adverse impacts on desert tortoise habitat; state permits may also be required for projects adversely impacting the Mojave ground squirrel – applicants are strongly advised to request that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife draft its permit to identify both the tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel as “covered species” to avoid subsequent delays in permit processing.

4.3.3 Minimization measures such as hiring a biological monitor to remove all tortoises from fenced construction areas and distributing tortoise awareness information to construction personnel who are prohibited from driving cross‐country, littering or bringing pets into the area shall be employed to minimize direct impact to tortoises and occupied habitat:

4.3.4 Adverse impacts of development projects on burrowing owls should be mitigated by one or more of the following measures:
 Avoiding occupied burrows during the breeding season, between February 1 and August 31
 Purchasing and permanently protecting 6.5 acres of foraging habitat per pair or unpaired resident bird impacted
 Creating new burrows or enhancing others when destruction of occupied burrows is unavoidable
 Implementing passive relocation if owls must be moved; and/or  Providing funding for long‐term management and monitoring of protected lands.

4.3.5 Pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code vegetation shall not be removed from a project site between March 15 and September 15 to avoid impacts to nesting birds. If it is necessary to commence project construction between March 15 and September 15, a qualified biologist should survey all shrubs and structures within the project site for nesting birds, prior to project activities (including construction and/or site preparation).

3.d
Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 18 4.3.6 The following desert native plants or any part of them, except the fruit, shall not be removed except under a Tree or Plant Removal Permit in compliance within Section

88.01.050 of the San Bernardino County Development Code:
 Dalea spinosa (smoke tree) with stems two inches or greater in diameter or six feet or greater in height.
 All species of the genus Prosopis (mesquites) with stems two inches or greater in diameter or six feet or greater in height.
 All species of the family Agavaceae (century plants, nolinas, yuccas).  Creosote Rings, 10 feet or greater in diameter.
 All Joshua trees.
 Any part of the following species, whether living or dead:
o Olneya tesota (desert ironwood).
o All species of the genus Prosopis (mesquites).
o All species of the genus Cercidium (palo verdes).

4.3.7 Pursuant to the California Food and Agriculture Code the following native plants, or any parts thereof, may not be harvested except under a permit issued by the commissioner or the sheriff of the county in which the native plants are growing:
 All species of the family Agavaceae (century plants, nolinas, yuccas).  All species of the family Cactaceae (cacti), except for the plants listed in subdivisions (b) and (c) of Section 80072 (i.e., saguaro and barrel cacti), which may be harvested under a permit obtained pursuant to that section.
 All species of the family Fouquieriaceae (ocotillo, candlewood).  All species of the genus Prosopis (mesquites).
 All species of the genus Cercidium (palo verdes).
 Senegalia (Acacia) greggii (catclaw acacia).
 Atriplex hymenelytra (desert holly).
 Dalea (Psorothamnus) spinosa (smoke tree).
 Olneya tesota (desert ironwood), including both dead and live desert ironwood. 5) HYDROLOGY/ WATER QUALITY

5.1 Existing Conditions
Water supplies in Barstow are sufficient to accommodate existing needs as well as future growth projected to 2020 under the revised General Plan. Additionally, the City has access to 247 acre feet of water rights from the Odessa Water District that have not yet been allocated.

The local water distribution system, however,  is in significant need of improvements due to aging and deteriorating lines in the older parts of the planning area, in addition to lines throughout the area that are undersized for meeting current fire flow demands. Although maintenance and upgrading of this system falls under the responsibility of the private water

3.d
Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 19 purveyor, Golden State Water, it is incumbent upon the City of Barstow to ensure that due diligence is taken by the private purveyor in maintaining and upgrading the system.

5.2 Project Impacts
Population and household growth between the present and the General Plan horizon year of 2020 will result in marginal increases in water demand. If such growth occurs at the two percent annual rate forecast under the plan the City’s population will increase approximately 12 percent by 2020 Assuming that this growth occurs within homes and developments that are designed for reduced water use (i.e. low‐flow toilets, showers and appliances, xeriscape, etc.) the actual increase in water use likely to occur in association with this new development should be on the order of seven to eight percent.

Increases in water demand of the magnitude projected under the revised General Plan can be accommodated with by the City’s existing supplies and allocations. The impact of the project on hydrology and water resources is, therefore, insignificant.

5.3 Mitigation Measures
Because the impact of General Plan implementation will be less than significant mitigation measures are not required. Nevertheless, policies and action strategies included in the General Plan Conservation and Open Space element , including provisions geared toward cooperation and collaboration with regional water agencies and encouraging  that water‐saving features such as low‐flow fixtures and xeriscape landscaping be incorporated into the design of future development projects will have the effect of reducing project impacts even further. 6) NOISE
Note: The City of Barstow commissioned a Community Noise Analysis from Vista Environmental that is included as an appendix to this report. What follows is a summary of existing conditions pertaining to noise, anticipated impacts of development proposed under the general plan and mitigation measures intended to offset the impact of planned development on community noise levels.

6.1 Existing Conditions
Barstow is a generally quiet community that does not have a large portion of its land uses adversely affected by high noise levels. Exceptions to this tendency include lands located in close proximity to Interstates 15 and 40 and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railway and its classification yard. There are large areas of the City near the freeways and railroads that exceed the City’s 65 dBA CNEL exterior noise standards. Exhibit N‐1 in the General Plan Noise Element provides an illustration of all properties that fall within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour.

Although the community does not currently have a significant number of noise‐generating industrial land uses, efforts to attract industrial development may lead to the establishment of

3.d
Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 20 new industries that could generate potentially harmful noise levels. To address this concern, lands designated for industrial use have been located as far as practicable from existing residential land uses. In the event that industrial uses are proposed in the vicinity of residences noise analysis accompanied by appropriate mitigation measures shall be required of project applicants.

6.2 Project Impacts
Exhibit N‐2 in the General Plan Noise Element illustrates the extent to which noise contours in the planning area are expected to expand as a result of development anticipated under the Plan. The City’s noise consultants have concluded that, based on General Plan growth assumptions “there is certainty that stationary noise created from future development contemplated by the proposed project would not expose persons to noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan”.  Moreover, “no analyzed roadway segment at 100 feet from the centerline would exceed the City’s most restrictive exterior noise standard for new residential, hotel and motel, and institutional uses of 65 dBA CNEL for the year 2020 without project conditions”.

The proposed project’s permanent noise increases from the generation of additional vehicular traffic would not exceed established state and local safety thresholds.  Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels. Impacts would be less than significant.

Development expected to occur within the General Plan time horizon would result in temporary construction noise and would also cause increases in vibrations from trucks and vehicles associated with construction activity. At present, the City has no policies in place to address construction and vibration noise. To address this, policies have been included in the revised General Plan Noise Ordinance.

6.3 Mitigation Measures

6.3.1 Strategy 2.B.1 of the revised General Plan Noise Element exempts construction activities from the operational noise standards set forth in Table N‐1 of the Noise Element between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. and enforces the standards outside of these hours. This establishes limitations on construction noise generation, thereby reducing construction noise impacts below the level of significance.

6.3.2  Strategy 2.B.2 of the revised General Plan Noise Element incorporates San Bernardino County’s established limitations on vibration levels (0.2 inches per second at the property line or nearest sensitive receptor as the City of Barstow’s standard for vibration noise, thereby reducing its impacts below the level of significance.

3.d
Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 21 7) POPULATION/ HOUSING

7.1 Existing Conditions
The City of Barstow currently has a jobs/housing ratio of 1.4/1 resulting from the fact that many of the people who work in Barstow live in other communities and commute to work. This existing imbalance of housing and employment results in higher degrees of traffic congestion, road noise and air pollution than would be the case if the City’s jobs/housing balance were closer to 1/1.

7.2 Project Impacts
Both housing and employment growth within the planning area are projected to increase at a two percent annual rate through 2020. In the event that this was to occur, the existing jobs/housing ratio would remain essentially unchanged. The project as planned would, therefore, have no impact on population and housing from an environmental analysis standpoint. In the event that the pace of residential development were to exceed the rate of commercial and industrial growth the balance between jobs and housing would become more equitable, resulting in favorable environmental impacts.

Conversely, should the pace of employment‐generating development exceed the rate of housing growth, adverse impacts on traffic, noise and air quality could result although these impacts would not exceed the thresholds of significance established for any of these environmental criteria in the absence of a major commercial or industrial project that significantly exceeded the growth parameters included in this analysis, in which case additional environmental review and mitigation would be required on the part of project proponents.

7.3 Mitigation Measures
None required unless development is proposed that would exceed the growth parameters assumed under the revised General Plan.
8) PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES

8.1 Existing Conditions
The City currently has sufficient public services and utilities, including roadways, wastewater treatment capacity, storm drainage, streets, lighting and power to accommodate the existing population as well as the growth rates anticipated during the time period covered by the revised General Plan. Significant capital improvements to the City’s public facilities infrastructure have been made over the past several years, including upgrades to the Rimrock and Montara sewage collection systems, installation of water lines to serve the Barstow Industrial Park and improvements to the Kitchen‐Dean Wash storm water drainage system. The effect of these improvements has been to improve the overall quality of public facilities serving the residents of Barstow and to position the community for future economic development by ensuring the availability and functionality of existing public infrastructure.

3.d
Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 22 8.2 Project Impacts
The level of growth projected under the Plan, including build‐out of the 12 sites identified as most likely to be developed by 2020, can be accommodated by the City’s existing public services delivery network.

The impact of the project on public services, therefore, is less than significant. Further, projected growth will also facilitate further improvement and expansion of public facilities in Barstow to the extent that project proponents contribute to the costs of expanding sewer, water and storm drainage infrastructure. From this perspective, not only are the potentially adverse impacts of the project less than significant, but project implementation could actually have beneficial effects on the City’s public services and services.

8.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
9) RECREATION

9.1 Existing Conditions
Parks and recreation services available to Barstow residents exceed all existing standards for communities of its size.

9.2 Project Impacts
Demand for parks and recreation services associated with development anticipated under the revised General Plan can be accommodated by the existing parks and recreation service delivery network.

Moreover, impact fees associated with future residential development, as well as general fund revenues derived as a result of planned residential, industrial and commercial growth, provide potential sources of funding for network enhancements. The impact of the project on recreation will, therefore, be less than significant.

9.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
10) TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION
Note: The City of Barstow commissioned a Traffic Study from Advantec Consulting Engineers that is included as an appendix to this report. What follows is a summary of existing conditions pertaining to vehicular and non‐motorized traffic, alternative transportation routes and facilities and the anticipated impacts of development proposed under the general plan on these community attributes, accompanied by mitigation measures intended to offset the impact of planned development on traffic and transportation networks and facilities in Barstow.

3.d
Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 23 10.1 Existing Conditions
The Circulation Element of the revised General Plan contains a discussion of existing traffic and transportation conditions in Barstow that is based upon the traffic analysis referenced above and included in an appendix to this report. For the most part, existing traffic conditions in Barstow are well within acceptable limits as defined by the General Plan. Exceptions to this general tendency include weekend traffic along Interstates 15 and 40 and in the vicinity of Lenwood Road and Outlet Center Drive and deteriorating road conditions in portions of the community. The City has undertaken numerous capital improvement projects over the past several years to address these shortcomings associated with the local circulation network.

Among the most significant of these recent circulation network improvements is the reconstruction of numerous roadways, including the following:

Muriel Drive between Rimrock Road and Armory Road
Armory Road between Muriel Drive and Barstow Road
Country Club Drive between West Main Street and Capella Drive Second Avenue between East Main Street and Hutchinson Street Mountain View Street between Lillian Drive and East Main Street West Main Street between Second Avenue and Avenue H
Mount Vernon Avenue between Mountain View Street and Grace Street Arville Avenue between Virginia Way and E Dessert View Drive Cozy Lane between Second Avenue and Third Avenue
Second Avenue Between Mountain View Street and Grace Street First Avenue between Mountain View Street and Virginia Way Virginia Way between Barstow Road and Mount Vernon Avenue Elizabeth Street between Caliente and Belinda Avenue
Belinda Avenue between Virginia Way and Mountain View Street Fairview Street between Caliente Avenue and Second Avenue Grandview Street between Mount Vernon Street and Second Avenue Dessert View Street between Second Avenue and Mount Vernon Avenue Parkway Street between Second Avenue and First Avenue
Arville Avenue between Mountain View Street and Grandview Street Helen Ruyon Drive between Mountain View Street and Virginia Way Mountain View Street between Lillian Drive and First Avenue Frances Drive between Mountain View Street and Kelly Street Elm Drive between Mountain View Street and Kelly Street Agnes Drive between Mountain View Street and Kelly Street North Muriel Drive between Mountain View Street and E. Main Street Adele Avenue between Mountain View Street and Villafana Street Kathleen Avenue between Mountain View Street and Villafana Street Villafana Street between Lillian Drive and Muriel Drive Montery Avenue between Armory Road and Rimrock Road.

Windy Pass from Barstow Road to east of Karen Court
Starlight Street between Deseret Avenue and Monterey Avenue

3.d
Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 24 Candlelight between Deseret Avenue and Monterey Avenue Rimrock Road between Barstow Road and Montara Road
Montara Road between Rimrock Road and Aurora Street
Armory Road between Muriel Drive and Montara Road
Karen Court
Broadway Avenue between Armory Road and Guadalupe Drive Opal Avenue between Armory Road and Rimrock Road
Clarence Griego Drive between Church Street and Forane Street Higgins Road between Rimrock Road and Armory Road
Sunset St between McBroom Ave and Sunset Ct
Sunset Court
Aurora Way
Church Street between west of Broadway to Higgins Road
De Anza Street between west of Broadway Avenue to Higgins Road Paloma Street between Broadway Avenue and Higgins Road
Forane Street between Broadway Avenue and Montara Road
Calico Drive
Solana Court
Palo Court
Broadway Court
Serrano Circle between Serrano Street and Lenwood Road
Serrano Street between Lenwood Road and Serrano Circle
In addition to the reconstruction of the above roadways the City has undertaken an aggressive pavement preservation initiative under which over three dozen roadway segments have been improved. Also of significance is the $ 1.8 million capital expenditure in constructing circulation network improvements in the vicinity of Lenwood Road, Serrano Drive and the Outlet Malls.

These improvements have greatly reduced traffic congestion at this location during peak weekend and holiday hours.

The effect of the above projects has been to alleviate existing traffic conditions while improving the quality of many of the roadways traveled by Barstow residents. Interestingly, however, fewer Barstonians travel via single‐occupancy vehicle (65.7%) than is the case statewide (73%) according to the 2010 US Census. Additionally, Barstow has a higher proportion of workers utilizing carpools (20%) than the state of California’s workforce as a whole (11.7%). For this and other reasons, alternative transportation routes and facilities, such as park and ride lots, bicycle lanes and pedestrian pathways and transit routes and stops are of particular salience in the City of Barstow. It is anticipated, therefore, that many of the circulation network enhancements that occur over the next several years will be geared toward facilitating increased use of alternative modes of transportation.

3.d
Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 25 Traffic engineers typically employ a term called “Level of Service” (LOS) to describe roadway conditions, using a lettering system ranging from A to F. LOS “A” refers to smoothly flowing traffic with no delays while LOS “F” refers to gridlock in which traffic is not moving at all. Cities in their General Plans define what constitutes an “acceptable” level of service for roadways and intersections in their particular communities. General Plan circulation elements in urban communities characterized by high traffic congestion are likely to define LOS “D” as acceptable whereas many suburban and rural cities choose a higher minimum acceptable level of service, typically “C”. Goal 1, Policy 1A of the Circulation Element of the revised Barstow General Plan defines LOS C as the minimum acceptable level of service along all roadways and at all intersections.

All of the local roadway segments and intersections included in the traffic study conducted for the General Plan Revision are currently operating at LOS C or better. While Interstate 15 in the vicinity of the Outlet Malls may approach or exceed LOS D on some weekends and holidays, these traffic conditions are beyond the scope of city officials to address. Planned improvements to Interstate 15 could alleviate these conditions but are unlikely to occur within the 2015‐2020 time frame of the revised General Plan.

10.2  Project Impacts
As detailed in the General Plan Land Use Element, Barstow is projected to grow at an annual rate of approximately two percent from 2015 – 2020 with development expected to be comprised of a combination of infill and certain specified commercial, industrial and residential projects identified on Exhibit L‐2 of the General Plan. Based upon these overall and locational growth projections and taking into consideration improvements to the local roadway network expected to occur within the General Plan time horizon Advantec Consulting Engineers has analyzed the likely impact of project implementation on roadway levels of service throughout the community. The report concludes that the projected 2020 roadway network can accommodate all projected population, employment and housing growth while maintaining LOS C or better across all roadway segments and intersections.

Although the Advantec Traffic Study estimates that all of the growth the City is projecting to occur by 2020 can be accommodated while maintaining acceptable levels of service it is essential to emphasize that these conclusions are based on the assumption that all of the circulation network improvements identified in the General Plan Circulation Element will be implemented within the 2015 – 2020 time horizon of the revised General Plan. From this perspective, the circulation goals, policies and strategies listed in the General Plan should be regarded as mitigation measures geared toward improving existing traffic conditions as well as accommodating planned population, household and employment growth.

3.d
Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 26 10.3 Mitigation Measure

10.3.1 The City shall implement the policies and action strategies enumerated under Goals 1‐3 of the General Plan Circulation Element.
11) ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Section 15126.6(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires EIRs to describe “… a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.

An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision making and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives that are infeasible. The lead agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives for examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those alternatives. There is no ironclad rule governing the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of reason.”
The “project” in this instance is the revision of the General Plan for the City of Barstow.

Alternatives to the project would, therefore, include: 1) a “no project” alternative under which the City opted not to revise its General Plan; and 2) an alternative project that would direct future growth to locations other than those designated on the General Plan Land Use Diagram (Exhibit L‐1 in the General Plan Land Use Element) and the Map of Likely Development Sites (Exhibit L‐2 of the Land Use Element). These two alternatives will be discussed briefly below, followed by a determination of the environmentally preferable alternative.

11.1 No Project Alternative
Under this alternative the existing General Plan that was adopted in 1997 would continue to be the document that governs land use and development patterns in the City for the foreseeable future. It is important to note that development would continue to occur under this alternative; the term “no project alternative” in this instance does not constitute a “no growth” alternative.

Continued development under the existing General Plan would likely have more adverse environmental impacts than under the revised General Plan, for the following reasons:
 Allowable residential densities are higher in the revised General Plan than under the existing document. This allows for a more compact pattern of urban growth than would be likely to occur under the no project alternative.

3.d
Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 27  The revised General Plan has an Open Space/Resource Conservation land use designation as well as an Interim Open Space/Resource Conservation designation that sets aside specific sites for permanent open space while ensuring that others are developed at a future date when services can be extended to them in a timely, cost‐ effective and less environmentally intrusive manner. Under the no project alternative, by contrast, assignment of the “Specific Plan” land use designation to the majority of acreage in the planning area makes leapfrog development and its associated adverse environmental impacts more likely than under the revised General Plan.  Under the existing General Plan there are far fewer properties designated for diverse land uses than under the revised Plan. There is, therefore, less flexibility and fewer incentives for developing projects that locate jobs in closer proximity to housing, perpetuating a pattern of separated land uses that exacerbate adverse impacts on traffic, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions.
 The revised General Plan contains policies and action strategies that incorporate innovations in building design and construction, transportation alternatives and resource conservation that have come to light since the 1997 adoption of the existing General Plan. Under the no project alternative in which development would proceed in accordance with standards nearly two decades old these environmentally beneficial approaches to land use planning and management would be less available to local policymakers.

11.2 Northern Development Alternative
The revised General Plan anticipates and in some respects guides most future development to occur to the south and southwest of the planning area. An alternative approach to accommodating anticipated future urban growth in Barstow would be to attempt to direct it elsewhere, such as to the northern portion of the City and its sphere of influence. This approach was considered and rejected for both environmental and economic reasons.

Environmentally, lands located in the vicinity of northernmost portion of the City have been determined to be among the most critical habitat areas for the desert tortoise. Additionally, there have been documented instances of groundwater contamination in the vicinity of the northern part of the planning area that could pose potential health threats if the area were to become more heavily populated, resulting in an increased drawdown of the water table.

From an economic standpoint, because this portion of the community is less readily accessible to the I‐15 transportation corridor and lacks the well‐developed public facilities infrastructure that exists in the vicinity of the sites identified for future development in the revised General Plan, it is regarded to be of lesser interest to prospective commercial and industrial developers.

Thus, although the City could designate properties in this vicinity for a higher intensity of future development, the private investment necessary to bring meaning to such designations would likely be difficult to attract.

3.d
Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 28 11.3 Environmentally Preferable Alternative
Section 16126.6(e) of the CEQA Guidelines discusses the need for lead agencies to identify an “environmentally preferable alternative” as part of its analysis of alternatives to the proposed project. In this instance, because of the lower allowable densities and the absence of open space land use designations and updated policies concerning building design, transportation and resource conservation associated with the no project alternative and the potentially adverse biological and hydrologic impacts of the northern development alternative, the revised General Plan as proposed constitutes the environmentally superior alternative of the three that have been analyzed.
12) GROWTH‐INDUCING IMPACTS
Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to:
“discuss the ways in which a proposed project would foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects, which would remove obstacles to population growth.”
As discussed in the Land Use Element of the revised General Plan the changes in land use designations associated with the revised Plan will remove barriers to future growth by replacing the “Specific Plan” designation with more descriptive designations that lessen the pre‐approval burdens on prospective developers while providing more guidance to them concerning the nature and location of urban growth that is desired by the City. In this respect, the General Plan revision project may be regarded as growth‐inducing.

Because, however, the revised General Plan seeks to direct growth to the least environmentally intrusive sectors of the planning area while containing goals, policies and strategies designed to effectively mitigate adverse environmental impacts, the significance of the project’s growth inducing impacts will be minimized. Moreover, because Barstow has sufficient capacity to absorb the amount of growth anticipated under the plan and because the General Plan identifies sites capable of being developed with minimally adverse impacts, it is possible that development activity will be attracted to the community that might otherwise have occurred in areas with less excess capacity and greater environmental sensitivity. For example, development that occurs in the Mojave Air Basin would have less severe impacts on air quality than in the South Coast or San Joaquin Valley Air Basins. Similarly, traffic increases associated with development projects in Barstow would not elevate congestion to a level of significance whereas a like amount of traffic increase in more heavily impacted communities and regions would exceed the level of significance from an environmental review standpoint.

It may be reasonably concluded, therefore, that although the General Plan revision project could have growth‐inducing impacts, these impacts will not rise to a level of significance within

3.d
Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 29 the 2015‐2020 time horizon that is the focus of the Revised General Plan and Master Environmental Impact Report.
13)   CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
In assessing the cumulative environmental impacts of implementation of the revised Barstow General Plan one must consider the amount of development anticipated in Barstow in relation to the scope of likely development throughout the High Desert region. Table LU‐2 of the San Bernardino County General Plan provides an estimate of the combined “build‐out potential” of the High Desert’s five local spheres of influence. The combined cumulative build‐out potential of Adelanto, Apple Valley, Barstow, Hesperia and Victorville is estimated at 67,017 residential units, 27,668,593 square feet of commercial space and 90,073,344 square feet of industrial space. The amount of development expected to occur in Barstow by the 2020 horizon year of the revised General Plan is 1,200 housing units (representing 1.79% of the High Desert’s build‐ out potential according to the County General Plan), 1,028 square feet of commercial uses (3.7% of High Desert build‐out potential) and 1,000,000 square feet of industrial uses (1.1% of the High Desert’s build‐out potential). Generally speaking, the amount of growth anticipated in Barstow under the proposed project is cumulatively negligible in relation to the overall level of growth that could be accommodated with the build‐out of the High Desert region.

In terms of the specific nature of likely cumulative environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, these would be limited primarily to air quality. As noted in Section 3.2 above, due primarily to the migration of contaminants from the heavily polluted South Coast and San Joaquin Valley air basins, as well as the prevalence of fugitive dust caused by the region’s high winds and desert landscape, Barstow is technically defined as a “nonattainment” area. As such, any increase in air pollution associated with development approved under the revised General Plan would, by definition, constitute a significant cumulative impact, particularly in conjunction with air pollution causing development occurring elsewhere on the High Desert. For this reason, the City Council will be adopting a Statement of Overriding Consideration concurrent with the certification of the Master Environmental Impact Report for the Barstow General Plan Revision.

Regarding cumulative biological resource impacts, because Barstow’s sister cities on the high desert, as well as more distant desert communities such as Lancaster have already developed to the point at which threatened species such as the desert tortoise have been eradicated, the impact of the proposed project would be more local than cumulative and can be mitigated to an acceptable level of significance through the implementation of policy measures and project‐ specific design features.

Concerning traffic impacts, because all local streets and intersections would remain at LOS C or better for the duration of the planning period and because traffic congestion on regional thruways such as I‐15 and I‐40 is the result of regional and national traffic volumes that are beyond the scope of the City to control or mitigate, the cumulative impact of the proposed project on traffic is less than significant.

3.d
Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 30 Overall, therefore, the cumulative impacts of implementing the revised Barstow General Plan will not require mitigation beyond the measures specified in this document and its supporting attachments. Further, because the revised General Plan actually anticipates lower levels of residential, commercial and industrial development than the document it succeeds, the cumulative impact of the proposed project is actually lower than would be the case if the revisions to the General Plan were not adopted and put into effect. 14) MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The implementation of each of the mitigation measures specified in this report and summarized in Table 2‐1 report will be monitored annually by planning staff and consultants where applicable in conjunction with preparation of the Annual General Plan Progress Report. The results of this mitigation monitoring process will be presented to the Planning Commission for review and comment.

Additionally, as individual development projects are approved and built planning staff will conduct on‐site field investigation to assure that agreed upon project‐specific mitigation measures are incorporated into approved projects in a timely and effective manner. The results of these investigations shall be included in the annual mitigation monitoring report to the Planning Commission.

3.d
Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) General Plan
Master Environmental Impact Report
Mitigation Monitoring Program
Date: September, 2014

3.d
Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element)

1.0 MONITORING PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE

1.1 LEGISLATIVE MANDATE
Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires public agencies to adopt mitigation monitoring or reporting programs for all projects for which an environmental impact report or "mitigated" negative declaration has been prepared. This law is intended to ensure the implementation of all mitigation measures adopted through the CEQA process.

The program defined in this document is intended to satisfy the spirit of the law, and is based on significant research of ongoing monitoring programs throughout the state.

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project encompasses the comprehensive revision of the City of Barstow’s General Plan. The project includes the review and revision of land uses within the sphere of influence, updating of environmental review and analysis of existing and future development and modernization of the primary planning document for the City of Barstow.

2.0 ROLES/RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROCEDURES

2.1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) for the proposed project will be in place through all phases of implementation of the project.

The Environmental Monitor (EM) will share responsibility for the operation of the Monitoring Program with the City's Environmental Coordinator (EC). The EM is responsible for managing the technical advisors and coordinating monitoring activities with City Staff. The EM is responsible for directing the preparation of Compliance Reports and filing of same with the City's designated EC. The EC is responsible for coordinating the efforts of various City reviews and maintaining project files.

Monitoring Team
The following briefly outlines the key positions in the program and their respective functions:

Environmental Monitor (EM): Manager of monitoring program – City Planner Technical Advisors: Experts in various fields to assist EM in monitoring effort.

This team includes: biologist, project geotechnical engineer, traffic consultant, civil engineer, etc.

Environmental Coordinator (EC): Staff member assigned to receive and maintain files related to monitoring reports and coordinate City staff monitoring efforts. EC will receive monitoring reports from EM.

3.d
Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element)

2.2 MITIGATION MONITORING PROCEDURES
The Environmental Monitor (EM) manages the efforts of all members of the non-City monitoring team and coordinates these efforts with key City staff. The City's Environmental Monitor (EC) will coordinate the activities of City staff.

Others require the help of a technical advisor or consultation with City staff. In all cases, it is the EM or EC's responsibility to inform all parties of the proper timing and completion of reports.

It is the intent of this program for the City Planner (or appointed designee) to oversee the monitoring and be responsible for submitting a mitigation report, as required by the City. The program is designed so that the Environmental Monitor and Technical Advisors complete the compliance reports and contact City inspectors and plan checkers as necessary.

2.3 PROGRAM OPERATIONS
Mitigation Measures shall be implemented as specified by the Mitigation Monitoring Program Matrix.

During any project phase, unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The City Planner or designee (EM) of the City, with advice of staff or another City Department, is responsible for recommending changes to the mitigation measures, if needed. If mitigation measures are refined, the change will be documented by the City Planner (or designee) and the appropriate design, construction, or operations personnel shall be notified of the refined requirements.

3.0 AREAS IN WHICH MEASURES ARE TO BE MONITORED
The following issue areas require mitigation measures for the proposed pipeline project. The mitigation requirements are based on the analysis contained in the Environmental Analysis for the project. These measures are listed in the attached matrix, which shows the timing and responsibilities, for all mitigation measures adopted for the project.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases
Biological Resources
Hydrology and Water Quality
Noise
Population/Housing
Public Services and Utilities
Recreation
Traffic and Transportation

3.d
Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Mitigation Monitoring Program / General Plan Master EIR General Plan Master EIR Mitigation Monitoring ProgramSeptember 2014 Page 34A Mitigation Requirements
Number Category Mitigation Measure
Key CityDepartmentResponsibility Timing
Sign‐offDate
I AESTHETICS NoneII AGRICULTURAL

RESOURCES
None.

III AIR QUALITY AND

GREENHOUSE
GASES
Incorporate 1 bike parking space for every 20 motor vehicle parking spaces into the design of multi‐family, commercial and industrial development projects.

PlanningDepartment
Project Reviewprior to theissuance of any
planning or buildingpermits
Encourage installation of electrical outlets on exterior walls of front and rear of residences to promote the use of electrical landscape maintenance equipment.

BuildingDepartment
Prior to issuance of
any constructionpermits.

Provide incentives, such as relaxed parking requirements and density bonuses, to equip garages with level electric vehicle charging stations.

Encourage alternative work schedules for new commercial and industrial development.

Utilize biological sequestration (e.g. planting one tree per 10 metric tons of Co2 per year) to offset the greenhouse gas impacts of for industrial and commercial development.

Establish a municipal energy fund and accept contributions of $ 15 per metric ton of Co2 generated in lieu of on‐site air quality mitigation. Utilize fund proceeds for GHG offsets such as tree plantings, bicycle route striping and signage and open space acquisition.

3.d
Packet Pg. 328
Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Mitigation Monitoring Program / General Plan Master EIR General Plan Master EIR Mitigation Monitoring ProgramSeptember 2014 Page 35A Number Category Mitigation Measure
Key CityDepartmentResponsibility Timing
Sign‐offDate
III. AIR QUALITY AND

GREENHOUSE
GASES
Increase allowable residential densities from 6 to 7 units per acre in single family districts and from 16 to 20 in multi‐family districts to encourage compact urban development and
shorter vehicle trips.

Increase acreage of lands designated for diverse use
development to encourage co‐location of jobs and housing.

Endeavor to reduce the City’s existing 1.4 jobs: housing ratio by encouraging the development of residential land uses to provide more housing options for people working in Barstow.

Continue to explore and implement options for converting the City’s municipal vehicle fleet to low emissions vehicles.

Incorporate pedestrian paths and bicycle lanes and routes into the City’s circulation network and the design of residential and commercial development projects.

Promote a compact pattern of urban development by utilizing the Interim Open Space/ Resource Conservation land use
designation on lands located on the periphery of the planning area until such time as sufficient urban infrastructure is extended to such locations.

Pursuant to the provisions of the 2006 California Global Warming Solutions Act, prepare a local Climate Action Plan or utilize provisions of the Climate Action Plan currently being prepared by the Southern California Association of
Governments.

Incorporate bus turnouts into the design of commercial and multi‐family residential projects.

Prohibit the installation of wood‐burning fireplaces and stoves in new residential construction.

Support infill development by improving and enhancing
infrastructure serving vacant infill properties.

Require construction, grading, excavation, and demolition activities to incorporate appropriate best management
practices (BMPs) to reduce fugitive dust emissions. (See Air Quality Analysis in Appendix for list of possible BMPs).

Locate new air pollution point sources such as, but not limited to, industrial, manufacturing, and processing facilities, an adequate distance from existing and planned residential areas and sensitive receptors.

3.d
Packet Pg. 329
Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Mitigation Monitoring Program / General Plan Master EIR General Plan Master EIR Mitigation Monitoring ProgramSeptember 2014 Page 36A Number Category Mitigation Measure
Key CityDepartmentResponsibility Timing
Sign‐offDate
III. AIR QUALITY AND

GREENHOUSE
GASES
Utilize the City’s environmental review process to incorporate additional air quality mitigation measures into the design of future proposed development projects employing an
incentives‐based approach as an alternative to mandates.

IV. BIOLOGICAL

RESOURCES
Proposed development on sites identified by the Biological Technical Report and/or accompanying Reconnaissance Surveyincluded as attachments to this EIR as having evidence of the presence of desert tortoises, Mojave fringe‐toed lizards, burrowing owls or Mojave ground squirrels shall require that protocol surveys consistent with applicable federal and/or state guidelines be conducted to verify or refute the presence of these species. On sites at which the presence of one or more of these species is verified the impact of proposed development on these species shall be minimized or mitigated in accordance with the guidelines detailed in the Biological Technical Report.

IV. BIOLOGICAL

RESOURCES
Federal and state incidental take permits shall be required for development projects that are determined to have adverse impacts on desert tortoise habitat; state permits may also be required for projects adversely impacting the Mojave ground squirrel – applicants are strongly advised to request that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife draft its permit to identify both the tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel as “covered species” to avoid subsequent delays in permit
processing.

Minimization measures such as hiring a biological monitor to remove all tortoises from fenced construction areas and distributing tortoise awareness information to construction personnel who are prohibited from driving cross‐country, littering or bringing pets into the area shall be employed to minimize direct impact to tortoises and occupied habitat

3.d
Packet Pg. 330
Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Mitigation Monitoring Program / General Plan Master EIR General Plan Master EIR Mitigation Monitoring ProgramSeptember 2014 Page 37A Number Category Mitigation Measure
Key CityDepartmentResponsibility Timing
Sign‐offDate
IV. BIOLOGICAL

RESOURCES
Adverse impacts of development projects on burrowing owls should be mitigated by one or more of the following
measures: Avoiding occupied burrows during the breeding season, between February 1 and August 31
 Purchasing and permanently protecting 6.5 acres of
foraging habitat per pair or unpaired resident bird
impacted
 Creating new burrows or enhancing others when
destruction of occupied burrows is unavoidable
 Implementing passive relocation if owls must be moved; and/or
 Providing funding for long‐term management and
monitoring of protected lands.

Pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code vegetation shall not be removed from a project site between March 15 and September 15 to avoid impacts to nesting birds. If it is necessary to commence project construction between March 15 and September 15, a qualified biologist should survey all shrubs and structures within the project site for nesting birds, prior to project activities (including construction and/or site preparation).

The following desert native plants or any part of them, except the fruit, shall not be removed except under a Tree or Plant Removal Permit in compliance within Section 88.01.050 of the San Bernardino County Development Code:
 Dalea spinosa (smoke tree) with stems two inches or
greater in diameter or six feet or greater in height.
 All species of the genus Prosopis (mesquites) with stems two inches or greater in diameter or six feet or greater in height.
 All species of the family Agavaceae (century plants,
nolinas, yuccas).
 Creosote Rings, 10 feet or greater in diameter.
o

3.d
Packet Pg. 331
Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Mitigation Monitoring Program / General Plan Master EIR General Plan Master EIR Mitigation Monitoring ProgramSeptember 2014 Page 38A Number Category Mitigation Measure
Key CityDepartmentResponsibility Timing
Sign‐offDate
IV. BIOLOGICAL

RESOURCES
 All Joshua trees. Any part of the following species, whether living or dead:
o Olneya tesota (desert ironwood).o All species of the genus Prosopis (mesquites). o All species of the genus Cercidium (palo verdes).

Pursuant to the California Food and Agriculture Code the following native plants, or any parts thereof, may not be harvested except under a permit issued by the commissioner or the sheriff of the county in which the native plants are growing:
 All species of the family Agavaceae (century plants,
nolinas, yuccas).
 All species of the family Cactaceae (cacti), except for the plants listed in subdivisions (b) and (c) of Section 80072 (i.e., saguaro and barrel cacti), which may be harvested under a permit obtained pursuant to that section.
 All species of the family Fouquieriaceae (ocotillo,
candlewood).
 All species of the genus Prosopis (mesquites).
 All species of the genus Cercidium (palo verdes).
 Senegalia (Acacia) greggii (catclaw acacia).
 Atriplex hymenelytra (desert holly). Dalea (Psorothamnus) spinosa (smoke tree).  Olneya tesota (desert ironwood), including both dead
and live desert ironwood.

V. HYDROLOGY/
Water Quality
Policies and action strategies including provisions geared toward cooperation and collaboration with regional water agencies and encouraging that water‐saving features such as low‐flow fixtures and xeriscape landscaping be incorporated into the design of future development projects.

3.d
Packet Pg. 332
Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Mitigation Monitoring Program / General Plan Master EIR General Plan Master EIR Mitigation Monitoring ProgramSeptember 2014 Page 39A Number Category Mitigation Measure
Key CityDepartmentResponsibility Timing
Sign‐offDate
VI. NOISE Set construction activity hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. and enforces the standards outside of these hours. This establishes limitations on construction noise generation, thereby reducing construction noise impacts below the level of significance.

Established limitations on vibration levels (0.2 inches per second at the property line or nearest sensitive receptor.

VII. POPULATION/

HOUSING
None
VIII. PUBLIC SERVICES

AND UTILITIES
None.

IX RECREATION None.X TRAFFIC AND

TRANSPORTATION
The City shall implement the policies and action strategies enumerated under Goals 1‐3 of the General Plan Circulation Element.
mitmon1

3.d
Packet Pg. 333
Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) I-40

APPENDIX G

CITY OF BARSTOW

PLANNING DEPARTMENT

INITIAL STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Project Title: General Plan Revision

2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Barstow
220 E. Mt. View St., Ste. A
Barstow, CA 92311

3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Gaither Loewenstein (760) 255-5177

4. Project Location: Citywide and Sphere of Influence (surrounding area)

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:

City of Barstow
220 E. Mountain View Street
Barstow, CA 92311

6. General Plan Designation: n/a

7. Zoning Designation: n/a

8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Revision of City General Plan

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project’s surroundings:

North: Unincorporated lands, primarily open space with some residential South: Unincorporated lands, primarily open space with some residential East: Unincorporated lands, primarily open space with some residential West: Unincorporated lands, primarily open space with some residential

10. Other Public Agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement).
none

3.d
Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element)

I-41
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture and
Forestry Resources x Air Quality
x Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils x Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials x Hydrology/Water Quality
Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources x Noise
x Population/Housing x Public Services x Recreation
x Transportation/Traffic x Utilities/Service
Systems x Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
x I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

May 20, 2014
Signature Date
Gaither Loewenstein City of Barstow
Printed Name For

3.d
Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element)

I-42
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the Lead Agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, “Earlier Analyses,” may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.

See State CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address sitespecific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

3.d
Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element)

I-43
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.

3.d
Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-44
Issues:

I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista? x
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway?
x
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
x
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
x
SUBSTANTIATION:

Because the City contains a number of residences from which unobstructed desert views are available it is possible that development approved under the revised general plan will affect desert views in some cases. Mitigation measures, such as siting of buildings, open space buffers and landscaping shall reduce the significance of these impacts.

Certain commercial and industrial uses that may be approved under the revised General Plan are likely to create new sources of light or glare. Mitigation measures, such as the use of reflective lighting devices designed to minimize spillover glare, shall reduce the significance of these impacts.

Proposed Mitigation:

Possible mitigation measures to be implemented on a project-by-project basis may include landscape buffers, adjustments to building site locations, reflective caps on exterior lighting and open space buffers that distance new uses from existing residences.

II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES: In
determining whether impacts to agricultural resources
are significant environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model
to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest
resources, including timberland, are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to

3.d
Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-45
information compiled by the California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s
inventory of forest Land, including the Forest and
Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy
Assessment project; And forest carbon measurement
methodology Provided in Forest Protocols adopted by
the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
x
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract? x
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))?
x
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
x
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?
x
SUBSTANTIATION:

There are no significant agricultural or forestry resources that would be affected by the project in the vicinity of the project area. There are no lands zoned for agricultural use whose zoning would conflict with the proposed project and there are no lands in the vicinity of the project area under Williamson Act contracts.

Proposed Mitigation:
n/a
III. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the
significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied

3.d
Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-46
upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan? x
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
x
c) 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 (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
x
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? x
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people? x
SUBSTANTIATION:

None of the development anticipated under the revised General Plan would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan for the Mojave Desert Air Basin in which the project area is located, nor would the project contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violations. The Mojave Desert Air Basin is in a nonattainment area for ozone and PM10 (particulate matter in excess of 10 microns) according to the California Air Resources Board and projects anticipated under the revised General Plan, if not properly mitigated, could result in a net increase in these pollutants.

Proposed Mitigation:

Possible mitigations to be addressed in the environmental analysis may include watering of construction sites to reduce particulate matter impacts, restrictions of certain construction activities on high wind days, encouragement of non-ozone generating modes of transportation, such as walking, bicycles, electric and hybrid vehicles and ridesharing, enhancement of the circulation network to incorporate expanded pedestrian pathways, bikeways, park-and-ride facilities and intersection improvements to reduce vehicle idling and requirement of project-specific design features to reduce adverse air quality impacts.

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
x

3.d
Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-47
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
US Fish and Wildlife Service?
x
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
x
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?
x
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
x
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?
x
SUBSTANTIATION:

According to the City’s biological consultant, Ed LaRue of Circle Mountain Biological Consultants, 10 plant species, 2 reptile, 12 bird, and 4 mammal species reported from the Barstow area have been assigned a special status designation by either U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2008), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (2014a), and/or California Native Plant Society (2014; see the end of this appendix for an explanation of CNPS’ status designations). Unless otherwise noted, the following species have either been observed in the region by CMBC personnel between 1990 and 2014 or have been reported to the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFW 2014a):

Plants
Barstow wooly sunflower
Beaver Dam breadroot

3.d
Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-48
Chaparral sand-verbena
Creamy blazing star
Emory’s crucifixion thorn
Mojave fish-hook cactus
Mojave menodora
Mojave monkeyflower
Parish’s phacelia
Spiny-hair blazing star
Reptiles
Agassiz’s desert tortoise
Mojave fringe-toed lizard
Birds
Burrowing owl
Cooper’s hawk
Ferruginous hawk
Golden eagle
LeConte’s thrashe
Loggerhead shrike
Proposed Mitigation:

In light of the prevalence of various threatened and sensitive species the City has contracted with Circle Mountain Biological Consultants for a detailed biological resources study that will accompany the General Plan Master Plan Environmental Impact Report.

Mitigation measures to be included in the EIR may include compensatory habitat acquisition, enhancement of existing habitat, consideration of alternative development sites designed to mitigate adverse habitat impacts, siting of buildings to minimize adverse impacts and relocation affected specimens where applicable.

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource
as defined in §15064.5 of the State
CEQA Guidelines?
x
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the
State CEQA Guidelines?
x
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
x
d) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
x

3.d
Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-49
SUBSTANTIATION:

The California Office of Historic Preservation lists seven historical and archaeological resources in the vicinity of the Barstow general plan area, none of which would be adversely impacted by development projected under the revised General Plan.

Proposed Mitigation:
n/a
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i) 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? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
x
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? x
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction? x
iv) Landslides? x
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil? x
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?
x
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
x
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?
x

3.d
Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-50
SUBSTANTIATION:

According to maps issued by the State Geologist there are two earthquake faults located in the vicinity of the Barstow general plan area; one to the northwest and one to the immediate south of the developed portion of the City. Consequently, residents are already subject to some risk associated with possible seismic activity. Since there are no habitable structures expected to be developed along these mapped faults under the revised general plan, there will be no significant increase in seismic risk beyond that which already exists in the planning area.

Proposed Mitigation:
n/a
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS -- Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may have
a significant impact on the environment?
x
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
x
SUBSTANTIATION:

The Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) adopted by the California Legislature in 2006, requires the adoption of policies and regulations and the development of strategies designed to reduce aggregate greenhouse gas emissions associated with urban development and other land uses. Because development that may occur under the auspices of the revised General Plan may result in increased greenhouse gas emissions, these impacts, if not adequately mitigated, could potentially be significant. To examine these potential impacts in greater detail the City has contracted with First Carbon Solutions/Michael Brandman Associates to conduct a detailed analysis of the air quality impacts of development expected to occur within the Barstow planning area within the 2014-2020 time parameters of the revised general plan. This study shall be incorporated into the General Plan Master EIR and mitigation measures designed to reduce the significance of greenhouse gas impacts will be adopted.

Proposed Mitigation:

3.d
Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-51
In addition to the air quality mitigation measures discussed previously in this initial study document, possible measures to be employed to address greenhouse gas impacts may include biological sequestration (eg. planting trees that can absorb carbon from the atmosphere), installation of residential and commercial electric vehicle chargers, bicycle racks, increased use of locally-sourced building materials, establishment of air quality mitigation funds, increases in allowable residential density and encouragement of ridesharing and alternative work schedules.

VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
x
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?
x
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
x
c) Be located on a site which is included on
a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
x
d) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
x
e) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
x
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
x
g) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where
x

3.d
Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-52
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas
or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
SUBSTANTIATION:

None of the development anticipated under the revised General Plan is expected to result in adverse impacts associated with hazards and/or hazardous materials. In the event that projects are proposed during the course of the 2015-20 time horizon of the revised General Plan separate environmental impact analysis and mitigation will be required on a project-by-project basis.

Proposed Mitigation:
n/a
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements? x
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of
preexisting nearby wells would drop to a
level which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
x
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or areas including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site?
x
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding onor off-site?
x
e) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
x

3.d
Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-53
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality? x
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
x
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows?
x
i) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
x
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow? x
SUBSTANTIATION:

To address the hydrologic and drainage impacts of anticipated development under the revised General Plan the City has contracted with Merrill-Johnson to conduct an analysis of these issues, including proposed mitigation measures that will be incorporated into the General Plan Master EIR.

Proposed Mitigation:

Mitigation measures to be deployed to address hydrologic and drainage impacts shall include improvements to the City storm drainage system, site design parameters designed to address drainage impacts and incorporation of xeriscaping and other watersaving features into residential, commercial and industrial development projects.

X. LAND USE AND PLANNING -- Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community? x
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
x
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community x

3.d
Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-54
conservation plan?
SUBSTANTIATION:

The revised General Plan will include land use goals, policies and strategies that will be adhered to over the course of the planning period, thereby maintaining consistency with established land use plans and other related plans.

Proposed Mitigation:
n/a
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES -- 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?
x
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?
x
SUBSTANTIATION:

None of the development anticipated under the revised General Plan will have an adverse impact on the availability or recovery of mineral resources.

Proposed Mitigation:
n/a
XII. NOISE -- Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of
noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies?
x
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive ground borne vibration or
ground borne noise levels?
x
c) A substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
x
d) A substantial temporary or periodic x

3.d
Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-55
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
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 expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
x
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?

SUBSTANTIATION:

The revised General Plan Noise Element will establish noise thresholds and the Master EIR will include mitigation measures designed to keep noise resulting from development from exceeding these thresholds. The City has contracted with First Carbon Solutions/Michael Brandman Associates to conduct an analysis of noise impacts likely to result from development anticipated under the revised General Plan. This analysis, along with mitigation measures derived from it, will be incorporated into the General Plan Master EIR.

Proposed Mitigation:

The General Plan Master EIR will include a variety of noise mitigation measures, including siting buildings to minimize noise impacts, use of landscape buffers, sound walls (where appropriate), installation of noise filters and buffers on industrial buildings and placement of structures likely to generate harmful noise levels at a safe distance from noise-sensitive land uses.

XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project:
a) Induce substantial 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)?
x
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
x
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X

3.d
Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-56
SUBSTANTIATION:

The City’s population is estimated to grow by approximately two percent annually under the revised General Plan. As the City’s economic development objectives come to fruition, additional commercial and industrial development is expected, which will result in increased demand for residences. This could necessitate an expansion of the City’s circulation infrastructure and may require additional infrastructure expansion to accommodate planned development.

Proposed Mitigation:

The revised General Plan will include a framework for infrastructure expansion to accommodate planned growth, as well as mitigation measures designed to reduce the significance of adverse impacts associated with said growth and the assessment of impact fees to finance the costs of infrastructure improvements necessitated by planned development.

XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection? x
Police protection? x
Schools? x
Parks? x
Other public facilities? x
SUBSTANTIATION:

The City has sufficient parkland under its standard of five acres per 1,000 residents to accommodate all of the growth anticipated under the revised General Plan. Taking into consideration student generation factors utilized by the Barstow Unified School District (.5015 elementary, middle-school and high school students generated for each singlefamily residential unit; .5241 students generated for each multi-family unit), combined with the estimated two percent increase in residential units anticipated under the revised General Plan, the District currently has sufficient excess capacity to accommodate

3.d
Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-57
projected enrollment growth associated with plan implementation. BUSD estimates current excess capacity at 438 students (elementary) 494 (middle) and 877 (high school), while planned residential growth is expected to generate approximately 907 new students at all K-12 levels combined by 2020.

Proposed Mitigation:

The Safety Element of the revised General Plan will include standards for police and fire protection that will be achieved or maintained through the implementation of impact fees to support increased facilities where needed. No mitigation measures will be required for school or park impacts.

XV. RECREATION --
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?
x
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?
x
SUBSTANTIATION:

Although the amount of development projected under the revised General Plan is not expected to exceed the parkland standard threshold, such development is likely to result in increased use of existing parks and recreational facilities that could result in deterioration of existing facilities.

Proposed Mitigation:

To the extent that increased facilities use results in accelerated deterioration it may be necessary to allocate more general fund revenues to parks and recreational facilities maintenance or to increase user fees to offset facilities deterioration.

3.d
Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-58
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance or policy establishing measures
of effectiveness for the performance of
the circulation system, taking into account
all modes of transportation including
mass transit and non-motorized travel
and relevant components of the
circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets, highways
and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle
paths, and mass transit?
x
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standard
establish by the county congestion
management agency for designated
roads or highways?
x
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic
levels or a change in location that results
in substantial safety risks?
x
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
x
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? x
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle,
or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
decrease the performance or safety of
such facilities?
x
SUBSTANTIATION:

The Circulation Element of the revised general plan will include minimum standards for level of service on all roadway segments and intersections. The City has contracted with First Carbon Solutions/Michael Brandman Associates to assess the impact of planned growth on the circulation network. The circulation study, accompanied by mitigation measures designed to reduce adverse traffic impacts in a manner that maintains established minimum levels of service, will be incorporated into the General Plan Master EIR.

3.d
Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-59
Proposed Mitigation:

Among the mitigation measures likely to be included in the Master EIR are intersection improvements, construction of new roadways, increased utilization of non-single occupancy vehicles, bicycles and walking, strategies intended to improve jobs/housing balance, park and ride facilities and improvements to mass transportation availability and use.

XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -- Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
x
b) Require or result in the construction of
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
x
c) Require or result in the construction of
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
x
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
x
e) 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?
x
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project’s solid waste disposal needs?
x
g) Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
x
SUBSTANTIATION:

The City has sufficient wastewater treatment capacity and water allocations to accommodate the level of growth anticipated under the revised General Plan. Recent improvements to the wastewater treatment facility have resulted in increased capacity and improved performance of treatment systems. To the extent that development occurs in the southwest portion of the City additional water storage/transmittal facilities may be needed.

3.d
Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I-60
Proposed Mitigation:

The City has contracted with Merrill-Johnson to assess the impact of planned development on municipal utilities and service systems. This technical report, accompanied by recommended mitigation measures, will be incorporated into the General Plan Master EIR. Mitigation measures may include construction of new water storage and transmittal facilities in the southwest portion of the City.

XIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE –
a) Does the project have the potential to
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, 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?
x
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)?
x
c) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
x
SUBSTANTIATION:

The General Plan Master EIR will include analysis of impacts (a) through (c) and will be accompanied by mitigation measures designed to reduce the significance of such impacts as indicated previously in this document
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resource Code. Reference: Section 65088.4, Gov. Code; Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.05, 21083.3, 21093, 21094, 21095, and 21151, Public Resources Code; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d. 296 Leonoff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d. 1337; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v.

Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v.

City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th656.

3.d
Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element)

NOTICE OF PREPARATION
To: From:

Gaither Loewenstein, Economic
Development and Planning Manager
City of Barstow
220 E. Mountain View Street
Barstow, CA 92311
(760) 255-5177
[email protected]
Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report The City of Barstow will be the lead agency and will prepare an environmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information which is germane to your agency’s statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project.

The project description, location, and the potential environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. A copy of the Initial Study ( is is not ) attached.

Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice.

Please send your response to Gaither Loewenstein, Economic Development and Planning Manager, at the address shown above. We will need the name of a contact person in your agency.

Project Title: General Plan Revision
Signature: Date:

May 20, 2014
Title:

Economic Development and Planning Manager
Telephone:
760-255-5122
Reference: California Code of Regulations, Title 14, (CEQA Guidelines) Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375.

3.d
Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: MasterEIR (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 361848.3 1
RESOLUTION NO. -2024

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF BARSTOW, ADOPTING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REPEAL THE 2014-2020 5TH CYCLE HOUSING

ELEMENT AND ADOPT THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE PERIOD OF 2021-2029, IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE HOUSING ELEMENT LAW.

WHEREAS, the California Legislature has found that “California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the state’s environmental and climate objectives” (Gov. Code Section 65589.5.); and
WHEREAS, the Legislature has further found that “Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration” (Gov. Code Section 65589.5.); and WHEREAS, the Legislature recently adopted the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) which states that “In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita… California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over 7 years”; and WHEREAS, State Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65580 et seq.) requires that the City Council adopt a Housing Element for the eight-year period 2023-2031 to accommodate the City of Barstow (City) regional housing need allocation (RHNA) of 1,520 housing units, comprised of 172 very-low income units, 228 low-income units, 300 moderate-income units, and 820 above moderate-income units; and
WHEREAS, to comply with State Housing Element Law, City of Barstow has prepared Housing Element 2023-2031 (the Housing Element) in compliance with State Housing Element Law and has identified sites that can accommodate housing units meeting the City’s RHNA; and WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 65350 et. seq., adoption of the Housing Element constitutes a General Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Sections 65352 – 65352.5 the City mailed a public notice to all California Native American tribes provided by the Native American Heritage Commission and to other entities listed; and
WHEREAS, No California Native American tribe requested consultation.

WHEREAS, the City conducted extensive community outreach over the last 4 years including 18 various public meetings and 1 public workshop before the City Council; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 65585 (b), prior to adoption of AB 215, the City submitted a draft of the Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on August 2, 2021; and

3.e
Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: Reso 6th Cycle HE - Nov. 2024 (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 361848.3 2
WHEREAS, on September 7, 2021, the City posted the draft Housing Element and requested public comment for a 30-day review period; and
WHEREAS, on September 21, 2021, the City received a letter from HCD providing its findings regarding the draft Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, on October 1, 2021, the City published a revised draft Housing Element responding to HCD’s findings and requested public comment on the draft; and WHEREAS, on March 16, 2022, the City received a letter from HCD providing its findings regarding the draft Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 65585 (b), on June 25, 2024, the City posted the draft Housing Element and requested public comment for a 7-day review period, and on July 2, 2024, the City submitted the draft Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for its review; and
WHEREAS, on August 15, 2024, the City met with and received notification from HCD providing its findings regarding the draft Housing Element; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 65585 (b), on August 22, 2024, the City posted the draft Housing Element and requested public comment for a 7-day review period, and on August 29, 2024, the City submitted the draft Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for its review; and WHEREAS, on September 27, 2021, the Planning Commission held a duly and properly noticed public hearing and recommended that the City Council adopt the Housing Element; and WHEREAS, on November 4, 2024, the City Council conducted a duly and properly noticed public hearing to take public testimony and consider this Resolution regarding the proposed Housing Element, reviewed the Housing Element and all pertinent maps, documents and exhibits, including HCD’s findings, the City’s response to HCD’s findings, the staff report and all attachments, and oral and written public comments
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby finds that, based on substantial evidence in the record:

1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated by reference into this action.

2. That this General Plan Amendment will not adversely affect the objectives, policies, general land uses or programs specified in the General Plan because this proposal incorporates and is consistent with said objectives, policies, general land uses and programs identified in the plan; and

3. That this General Plan Amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the residents in the community because this proposal is consistent with the Hazards Element of the General Plan and new development shall be subject to further environmental review/discretionary action; and

3.e
Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: Reso 6th Cycle HE - Nov. 2024 (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) 361848.3 3

4. That this General Plan Amendment will not adversely affect the orderly development of the properties and/or area as it is consistent with objectives, policies, general land uses and programs identified in the General Plan.

5. The Housing Element substantially complies with Housing Element Law, as provided in Government Code 65580 et seq., and contains all provisions required by State Housing Element Law.

6. As required by Government Code Section 65585(e), the City Council has considered the findings made by the Department of Housing and Community Development included in the Department’s letter to the City of Barstow dated August 30, 2024, consistent with Government Code Section 65585(f), the City Council has changed the Housing Element in response to the findings of the Department to substantially comply with the requirements of State Housing Element Law as interpreted by HCD.

7. The City of Barstow 2015-2020 5th Cycle Housing Element is hereby repealed in its entirety, and the City of Barstow 2021-2029 6th Cycle Element, as attached to this Resolution, incorporated herein, is adopted.

8. This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption by the City Council.

9. The Community Development Director or designee is hereby directed to file all necessary material with the Department of Housing and Community Development for the Department to find that the Housing Element is in conformance with State Housing Element Law and is further directed and authorized to make all non-substantive changes to the Housing Element to make it internally consistent or to address any non-substantive changes or amendments requested by the Department to achieve certification.

10. The Community Development Director or designee is hereby directed to distribute copies of the Housing Element in the manner provided in Government Code Sections 65357 and 65589.7.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Barstow at a regular meeting of said Council held on November 4, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
_______________________________
Paul Anthony Courtney, Dr. B.A., Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________ ____________________________ Andrea Flores, City Clerk Matthew T. Summers, City Attorney

3.e
Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: Reso 6th Cycle HE - Nov. 2024 (5799 : Adoption of the 2021-2029 6Th Cycle Housing Element) Joint Special Council/BFPD
11/4/24 06:00 PM
City Clerk / Records
Maribel Hernandez
Other
Doc ID: 5802

AGENDA ITEM
AGENDA MATTER:

MEASURE Q RESIDENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION TERMS AND UPCOMING VACANCIES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

During the Council Meeting on October 21, 2024, Council Member Rose, with support from Mayor Pro Tem Noble, requested a list of the current Resident Oversight Commission members along with their respective terms.

The Resident Oversight Commission as follows:

District 1: Peggi Fries 12/2025
District 2: Vacant
District 3: Ben Rosenberg 12/2024
District 4: Marsha Weasma 12/2024
At-Large: Martha O’Brien 12/2024
DISCUSSION:

On February 4, 2019, during the City Council meeting, Ordinance 960-2019 was adopted, establishing Barstow Municipal Code Chapter 2.26 (“Resident Oversight Commission”) under Title 2 (“Administration and Personnel”). This ordinance formed a Resident Oversight Commission tasked with reviewing and reporting on the expenditures of the 1% Local Transactions and Use Tax known as Measure Q.

Then, on November 18, 2019, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 963-2019, which created a new Chapter 2.26 (“Resident Oversight Commission”) under Title 2 (“Administration and Personnel”) to clarify the term lengths for Resident Oversight Commissioners.

On December 31, 2024, the terms for the At-Large representative Martha O’Brien, District 3 representative Ben Rosenberg, and District 4 representative Marsha Weasma will expire. Additionally, the District 2 representative position previously held by Mrs. Kimberly Johnson has become vacant due to her relocation outside the city limits.

As noted in Ord No. 963-2019 Sec. 2.26.030 - The City Council may elect to cause public notice of commission position vacancies and receive applications from interested residents on a city-wide basis.

Alternatively, the Mayor may request nominations of applicants from each Council Member for an eligible appointee residing in their district, with the Mayor nominating one eligible appointee residing anywhere in the city. Upon receipt of each nomination, a majority vote of the city Council will confirm the appointment.

In the event that the city receives no applicant from one or more electoral districts, the council may appoint that commissioner without regard to the district in which they reside. 4 Packet Pg. 359
Joint Special Council/BFPD
11/4/24 06:00 PM
City Clerk / Records
Maribel Hernandez
Other
Doc ID: 5802

AGENDA ITEM
In light of the upcoming elections on November 5th, staff recommends initiating the application process on November 14th, with a deadline set for December 16th. Current committee members who wish to continue serving must reapply, as there will be new members on the Council. The election results are expected to be certified by December 5th at the latest, allowing the Council to review applications and recommend new members at the second Council Meeting in January 2025.

Staff will announce the search for qualified and interested individuals to serve on the Commission through the Daily Press and will make the application accessible on the City’s website (both the home page and Measure Q page) as well as at the front counter of City Hall. Additionally, outreach for the Commission vacancies will be conducted via social media.

For your reference, Ordinance No. 963-2019 is attached.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no financial impact for this item.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:
. Instruct the City Clerk to publicize the openings for the Measure Q Residential Oversight Commission, setting the application submission period from November 14, 2024, to December 16, 2024; and
. Schedule Council appointments for the second meeting in January 2025. 4 Packet Pg. 360

4.a
Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: Ordinance 963-2019 ROC with Clarified Term Limits (5802 : Measure Q Resident Oversight Commission Terms and Upcoming

4.a
Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: Ordinance 963-2019 ROC with Clarified Term Limits (5802 : Measure Q Resident Oversight Commission Terms and Upcoming

4.a
Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: Ordinance 963-2019 ROC with Clarified Term Limits (5802 : Measure Q Resident Oversight Commission Terms and Upcoming