California City City Council
February 13, 2024

APN: 210-263-11 – 15

INITIAL STUDY FOR A PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA) AND ZONE CHANGE (ZC) AFFECTING FIVE (5) PARCELS WITHIN THE CENTRAL-SOUTHERN CORE OF CALIFORNIA CITY. THE PROJECT IS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS (APN): 210-263- 11; 210-263-12; 210-263-13; 210-263-14; 210-263-15.

I. Purpose and Authority
This Initial Study has been prepared for a proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA 22-04) and adoption of Zoning Amendment (ZC 22-04) for the property located at 10856 Hanover Drive (APN 210-263-14) to amend the General Plan designation from “Neighborhood Commercial” to “Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis and Research” and to rezone the property from Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)” to “Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis – Non-Cannabis (M-3)” to accommodate the existing Padron Metal Finishing Company use.

Pursuant to Public Resources Codes § 21000, and Article 5. Guidelines 15060 – 15065, California City (“Lead Agency”) is conducting an Initial Study to determine if the Project may have a significant effect on the environment. The purpose of this Initial Study is to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Negative Declaration.

Zoning:

All parcels are located within the Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) Zoning District (Article 15. – C1). All five parcels currently take access from Hanover Drive (Dr.) as this road serves as a local collector as it intersects with California City Blvd. (CCB). The parcels are all vacant, with the exception of one parcel represented by APN 210-263-14, and is an improved lot accommodating an industrial and manufacturing business; otherwise known as the “Padron Metal Finishing Company (herein known as the business)”. All five parcels occupy 1.18 net acres (78,408 SF).

The Project is adjacent to, and southeasterly of Hanover Drive which provides primary access to the Project. A major arterial in the City, California City Blvd (CCB), is adjacent to the most southwesterly edge of the Project site, directly adjacent to APN 210-263-15. The Project is surrounded by properties zoned C-1 to the north and across the street from Hanover Drive, the “Multiple Family Residential District High Density” (RM1) zone is located to the east and directly adjacent to APN 210-263-11. There are two zones located to the west of the Project (across CCB). The closest zone is C-1, which only effects one parcel at the southwest corner of CCB and Hanover Dr. Further to the west are two parcels zoned RM1, and then properties zoned “One-Family Residential District Medium Density (R1) westerly of the properties zoned RM1. To the south is the Open Spaces Resource Area (O/RA) zone, which is adjacent to all five parcels.

Public Infrastructure:

Each parcel is adequately served by roadway infrastructure through Hanover Drive. Future driveways are possible from this roadway. As shown in Figure III-1 of the City’s Existing Water System Master Plan a six (6”) inch water main is located within the Right-of-Way (R/W) utility easement. Figure 4 of the City’s Sewer Density Zone Map identifies Sewer Density Zone 5 as covering the parcels; however, no sewer currently exists within 200-feet of Hanover Dr. There are no water wells located on or within reasonable distance from the parcels, as such each parcel has the option of utilizing sub-surface sewage disposal.

Project Description:

The Project will amend the land use and zoning of five parcels, each less than one-acre in size, Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) to Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis (M-3), and in accordance with Article 27 of the California City Municipal Code (CCMC) pertaining to the consideration of zoning amendments.

The procedure for considering a zoning amendment requires the Planning Director to investigate the application and submit a report to the Planning Commission, with a recommended action. The Planning Commission shall hold a duly notified public hearing on the application. The Planning Commission shall 225 - 295 February 13, 2024

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
review the application and receive evidence and testimony concerning the proposed zone change and determine if the change is consistent with the General Plan and application of the zone classification which is being proposed. A change in district boundaries shall not be made conditionally. The Planning Commission shall make its decision and adopt findings within forty-five (45) days following the completion of the public hearing. The Commission shall transmit its decision to the City Council.

The above-referenced description constitutes the proposed development plan and is herein known as “The Project”, which the City has identified as a Project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Given that the Project does not propose any specific development activities other than the continued use of Padron Metal on APN: 210-263-14, encompassing 0.23 acres. This Initial Study will anticipate the highest and best use of the proposed zoning district.

This Project requires the preparation of an Initial Study to review, analyze, and evaluate the possible effects resulting from the rezoning of 1.18 net acres to the Light Manufacturing (M-3) zoning classification and its impact upon the site and surrounding environment. The M-3 zone will authorize both the existing and expanded use proposed under the business. The Project includes the potential expansion of Light Industrial and manufacturing uses, per the proposed zoning district. These facilities are subject to all State Law and regulations including the California Code of Regulations, Title 21, Division 42, Bureau of Light Industrial.

The City of California City allows “Primary Metal Industrials, Fabricated Metal Products, Except Machinery and Transportation Equipment, et. al.” as a Conditionally Permitted Use (CUP) in the M-3 zoning classification. The M-3 zone does excludes SIC 333 & 3341, which are a Conditionally Permitted Use in the Heavy Industrial (M-2) zone.

The development does not propose any new construction at this time. There is an existing business, located on APN 210-263-14, which does not propose any expansion at this time. Future expansion of the business can occur subsequent from the change to zoning and land use. Given the lack of development proposals, the City must evaluate each parcel assuming the highest, best, and most intensive use or uses authorized in the M-3 zone. The Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis (M-3) District is set forth pursuant to Article 21 of the CCMC. The Permitted Uses are those set forth in the commercial districts. These uses do not warrant consideration as the effect is nominal.

The following is a list of uses permitted “by right”, meaning that a discretionary review (e.g., CUP) is not required to establish a business or operation under that use category:

Table 1
Sec. 9-2.2101(b)–Permitted Uses. Light manufacturing, assembly, maintenance, or repair, including:

Apparel Audio arts Electric equipment Electric
supplies
Small electric
appliances
Books
Breweries,
distilleries,
and wineries
Carpet and
rug
Correctional facility
furnishings
Glass/Wood
products
Feed and grain
products
Kennels
Sheet metal
products
Ceramic
products
Machining and
Measuring
Instruments
Manufacturing,
Industries
Modular
structures
Tobacco
Processing
Sec. 9-2.2101(c)–Permitted Uses. Sales, services, and repair, including, but not limited to:
1SIC 333 & 334 is defined as the Primary and Secondary Smelting and Refining of Nonferrous Metals. This major group includes establishments engaged in smelting and refining ferrous and nonferrous metals from ore, pig, or scrap; in rolling, drawing, and alloying metals; in manufacturing castings and other basic metal products; and in manufacturing nails, spikes, and insulated wire and cable. This major group includes the production of coke; (https://secure.industriuscfo.com/industry-metrics/sic/33-primary-metal-industries). Accessed May 19, 2023. 226 - 295 February 13, 2024

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Auto and RV
sales
Broadcasting
studios
Telecommunication
centers
Visual Arts Film Studio Visual Arts
Sec. 9-2.2101(d)–Permitted Uses. Cargo containers incidental to the main use of the lot https://library.municode.com/ca/california_city/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=COOR_TIT9LAUSDE_CH2ZO_ART21MIGINDI_S9-2.2101PEUS Land Use Capacity Analysis:

The approximate depth of each lot is 124 linear-feet measured from the front property line to the rear property line. The approximate width of each lot is 87 linear-feet measured from the westerly property line to the easterly property line. Parcels with APNs 210-263-11 through 210-263-15 are adjacent to roadways, commercially zoned property and a large parcel zoned O/RA. As such, no zoning-related rear or side yard setbacks are required per § 9-2.1302(c) of the CCMC. The City’s codified Building and Fire Codes still require a minimum 4-foot clearance from all property lines. As such, the first four lots have a maximum usable lot area of approximately 7,900 square-feet. Per § 9-2.1302(b), The maximum building area in the CMC District is 30% of the lot area or 2,730 square-feet. The lot depth, of APN 210- 263-11, is 133 linear-feet and the width is 77 linear feet. Since this lot is adjacent to vacant property zoned RM1, the side-yard setback is 20-feet at this condition. As such, the maximum usable lot area of approximately 5,724 square-feet, making the maximum building area approximately 1,700 square-feet.

Based upon the usable lot area for each lot, the maximum building area across all five lots is 12,620 square-feet, which can be utilized by these uses specified within Table 1 without further environmental review. All parcels are currently served by a 6-inch main water line, located within Hanover Drive, which the construction of lateral water connections are available through a permit issued by the City’s water department. A maximum of 12,620 SF is anticipated within the 1.18 acre project site.

The City does not currently provide municipal sewer services to the Project site. As such, the Project may utilize commercial subsurface sewage disposal systems as municipal sewer facilities are not available within 200-feet of the nearest sewer main line2. The nearest sewer trunk line is located approximately 1,900 linear-feet (LF).3 The installation of subsurface sewage disposal systems is dependent upon the type of use ultimately developed. Due to the increased development activities, the City anticipates the extension of sewer facilities within CCB, southernly to the Project site at Hanover Drive.

The Project anticipates being served using on-site generators which are CARB certified and will operate continuously until the extension of transmission infrastructure is available to the City by the current electricity provider, Southern California Edison (SCE).

A. Type of Project: Site Specific ; Citywide ; Community ; Policy .

B. Total Project Area: 1.18-acres (51,400.80 SF)

Residential Acres: 0 Lots: 0 Units: 0 Projected No. of Residents: 0 Commercial Acres:

1.18 Lots: 5 Bldg. Area: 0 Est. No. of Employees: 5
Industrial Acres: 1.18 Lots: 5 Bldg. Area: 12,620 SF Est. No. of Employees: 32 - 126 C. Assessor’s Parcel No(s): 210-263-11; 210-263-12; 210-263-13; 210-263-14; & 210-263-15.

D. Street References: The Project is adjacent to, and southeasterly of Hanover Drive which provides primary access to the Project. California City Blvd (CCB), is adjacent to the most southwesterly edge of the Project site, directly adjacent to APN 210-263-15. 2 An 8-inch sewer main line is located within at the intersection of South Loop Blvd. and CCB, which is approximately 3.5-miles linear feet from the Project site. Ref. Figure 6, City Sewer Plan. City of California City Local Agency Management Program (CCLAMP). 3 Figure 6: Existing Sewer System. California City, Sewer Plan. Local Agency Management Program, Pg. 57. 227 - 295 February 13, 2024

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Brief description of the existing environmental setting of the Project site and its surroundings:

The Project is approximately 1.18-acres and is located within a planned commercial area of the City.

The physical development of the Project site, and the adjacent public Rights-of-Way (R/W), are currently improved to the municipal standard and dedicated to California City. Therefore, concerns with the creation of substandard geometrics, sharp or dangerous turning movement, and roadway safety issues of concern are not anticipated. Future development will review and analyze the potential to create additional unsafe or dangerous road conditions, sub-standard circulation patterns and traffic geometrics, frequent dust pollution; and other similar considerations through the implementation standard development-related Conditions of Approval (COAs) and compliance with the California City Municipal Code (CCMC). Based upon the infill nature of the property, combined with a relatively low development footprint, the Project does not have the potential to create an adverse environmental impacts related to city code permitted noise levels, the existing air quality levels, and/or the quality of the City’s water and sewer system.

The following reports and/or studies are applicable to development of the project site and hereby incorporated by reference:
 City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028, approved October 6, 2009 (City of California City 2009)
 City of California City Draft Environmental Impact Report for the California City Redevelopment Plan (1998)
 City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH#1992062069)
 City of California City Final Environmental Impact Report for the California City Redevelopment Plan (SCH#87130918)
 Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21500 et. seq. The City of California City will serve as the lead agency pursuant to CEQA.

II. APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING REGULATIONS
A. General Plan Elements/Policies:

1. Land Use: Existing: Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)
Proposed: Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis (M-3).

2. Circulation: Hanover Drive will provide the primary point of ingress and egress as this publicly dedicated roadway serves the Project site. Hanover Drive is an existing industrial collector, that takes primary access from California City Blvd. Additional roadway dedication or improvements are not anticipated.

3. Multipurpose Open Space: The Project will not create a need for additional open space and/or active park recreational facilities. Furthermore, the Project does not preclude or remove any active parkland and/or passive open space, trails, bike paths, or other similar facilities. The project is located within, and adjacent to a designated conservation area and will need to address possible interface guidelines set forth by the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) and the Unites States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

4. Safety: The Project is not located upon, or within, an area of hazardous materials as detailed within the applicable state and federal resource maps. The Project is located approximately 4.76-miles southeast of the California Municipal Airport. Therefore, the Project is not affected by Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) of the 228 - 295 February 13, 2024

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
California City Municipal Airport Influence Area (AIA). As such, the Project will not impact airport operations in any manner. The Project will not create any dangerous or hazardous circulation geometrics which would cause a concern for the motoring public.

FIGURE 1

5. Noise: The Project is located within a planned commercial area of the City where the majority of ambient noise generation is caused by the Average Daily Trips (ADT) associated with vehicle traffic trips occurring along CCB. The Project may create an increase in the levels of ambient noise given the adjacency to an existing area of land conservation and will need to address possible interface guidelines set forth by the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) and the USFWS.

6. Housing: The Project is located on vacant land, currently zoned as open space and does not propose to remove or displace any housing, of any type on, or adjacent to the Project boundaries, as no dwelling units on, adjacent to, or near the project site. The City’s Municipal Code does not consider the O/RA zone as a residential zone for purposes of the noise setbacks. The Project will not cause an undue impact or burden upon any existing or planned City, State, or Federal housing program or regulation.

7. Air Quality: The Project will not substantially increase the baseline air quality emissions resulting from either the construction or operations including the potential expansion of Light Industrial and manufacturing uses, per the proposed zoning district. The Project is not anticipated to produce pollutants of concern in excess of SCAQMD thresholds for elements

PROJECT SITE
229 - 295 February 13, 2024

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
such as NOx; SOx; or O3. The Project will require the use of generators (powered by either gas or diesel fuel) during construction and/or initial operations. Generators shall be certified by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and obtain a permit from the East Kern Air Pollution Control District (EKAPCD), as applicable. Southern California Edison (SCE) will provide the project site with both temporary and permanent power service.

B. General Plan Area Plan(s): Open Space
C. Land Use Designation(s): O/RA
D. Overlay(s), if any: N/A
E. Policy Area(s), if any: N/A
F. Adjacent and Surrounding:

1. Land Use Designation(s): Neighborhood Commercial

2. Overlay(s), if any: N/A

3. Policy Area(s), if any: N/A
G. Adopted Specific Plan Information

1. Name and Number of Specific Plan, if any: N/A

2. Specific Plan Planning Area, and Policies, if any: N/A H. Existing Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial (C-1)
I. Proposed Zoning, if any: Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis (M-3) J. Adjacent and Surrounding Zoning: Open Space zoning (O/RA) is located to the south.

Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) is located to the north and west, Multiple Family Residential District High Density (RM1) is located to the east. Light Manufacturing and Research zone to the north.

III. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below (x) would be potentially affected by this Project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” or “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
230 - 295 February 13, 2024

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
IV. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

A PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS NOT

PREPARED
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, described in this document, have been made or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

A PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS PREPARED I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, NO NEW ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED because (a) all potentially significant effects of the proposed project have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable legal standards, (b) all potentially significant effects of the proposed project have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, (c) the proposed project will not result in any new significant environmental effects not identified in the earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, (d) the proposed project will not substantially increase the severity of the environmental effects identified in the earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, (e) no considerably different mitigation measures have been identified and (f) no mitigation measures found infeasible have become feasible.

I find that although all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable legal standards, some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Section 15212 exist.

An ADDENDUM to a previously certified EIR or Negative Declaration has been prepared and will be considered by the approving body or bodies.

I find that at least one of the conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Section 15212 exist, but I further find that only minor additions or changes are necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the Project in the changed situation; therefore, a SUPPLEMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required that need only contain the information necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the Project as revised.

I find that at least one of the following conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Section 15212, exist and a SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the Project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any the following:(A) The Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR or negative declaration;(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be 231 - 295 February 13, 2024

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or,(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR or negative declaration would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project on the environment, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.

Signature Date
Printed Name City Planner
232 - 295 February 13, 2024
Page
9 of 69
APN: 210-263-11 – 15
233 - 295 February 13, 2024

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
V. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ASSESSMENT
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21500–21189), this Initial Study has been prepared to analyze the proposed Project to determine any potential significant impacts upon the environment that would result from construction and implementation of the Project. In accordance with California Code of Regulations, Section 15063, this Initial Study is a preliminary analysis prepared by the Lead Agency, City of California, in consultation with other jurisdictional agencies, to determine whether a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or an Environmental Impact Report is required for the proposed Project. The purpose of this Initial Study is to inform the decision-makers, affected agencies, and the public of potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed Project.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
AESTHETICS Would the Project

1. Scenic Resources
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. (Public views are those that are
experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing
scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; Project Materials.

Findings of Fact: According to the California City General Plan, the City is located within the Mojave Desert, which is characterized by gentle rolling ground surfaces, with low to moderate topographical relief across the desert floor. The immediate vicinity surrounding the Project consists of moderately sloping alluvial plains with a series of steep rock buttes and several arroyos, including Cache Creek, which lies approximately 8-miles south of the project site; the Tehachapi Mountains is located approximately 9-miles to west of the Project site. Death Valley National Park is located approximately 113-miles to the northeast of the Project site. All sites create various scenic vistas throughout California City (California City General Plan, 2009). Based upon the limited size and scale of the Project, impacts to existing or proposed scenic vistas is considered very low.

The adjacent parcels south, east, and west of the project, area currently vacant and undisturbed with scattered vegetation. From the Project site, views of the Tehachapi Mountains to the west are the most prominent but will not be obscured by the proposed height or massing of the proposed buildings. The maximum building height is thirty-five (35’) which is consistent with previously approved 234 - 295 February 13, 2024

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis operations. Further, there is no maximum height development standard in the Light Manufacturing (M-3) Zoning District.4
The Project proposes to develop a mixture of Light Industrial uses. The building construction type, architectural style, and massing, as well as the proposed building elevations, materials, roof pitch will conform and be consistent with applicable development standards, and the theme and style of surrounding parcels and the general environment of the s, which is administered by the City, as part of the development process, in which the proposed site design will be reviewed by the Community Development Department. Pursuant to the California City Municipal Code (CCMC), Sections 9.2.209 and 9.2.211 requires review of Off-Street Parking Facilities, as well as associated lighting standards through the Site Plan Review. A process that also includes the installation of landscaping within the project site which provides enhancement to the surrounding character of the project site. The project's compliance with these standards ensures that impacts affecting the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings are less than significant.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary
AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES Would the Project

2. Agriculture. 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 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 non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined by Public Resources Code
section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Cide section 4526), or Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
4 Sec. 9-2.2103. - Site and Structure Requirements (M1). https://library.municode.com/ca/california_city/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=CD_ORD_TIT9LAUSDE_CH2ZO_ART21MIGINDI_S9-

2.2103SISTREM1
235 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Source: California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997); Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment; City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; Project Materials.

Findings of Fact: According to the California Important Farmland Finder, the Project site is designated as “Urban and Built-up.”5 The soil types are 85% Neuralia, 4% Alko, 4% Cajon, 4% Garlock, and the balance (3%) is Unnamed soils. The composition of such soils, which indicate high likelihood of geomorphic positions such are terraces, backslopes, and alluvial fans;6 all of which are nearly inhospitable to farming uses. The Project will not disturb or convert any designated farmland or other form of agricultural resource. The subject site and surrounding land to the north, east, south, and west is not categorized as “Urban and Built-up” lands. The Project does not contain any properties cataloged as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of local statewide importance. As such no impacts are expected. The Project site is not located in an existing zone for agricultural use or classified as farmland. According to the Williamson Act records, no portion of land within a one-mile radius is recognized as being under a Williamson Act Contract. The proposed Project will not impact or remove land from the City or County’s agricultural zoning or agricultural reserve. No impacts are expected. Based upon the lack of available farmland, contracted land, and soil type a LESA analysis is not required.

The Project is located within an existing urbanizing desert environment that is currently zoned for industrial uses. The Project site, and the surrounding vicinity, does not contain any forest land, timberland, or is located within Timberland Production Zones (TPZ) that have occurred or will occur on the Project site or in the surrounding area because forest vegetation is not characteristic of the Eastern Kern County desert environment. No impacts are anticipated. No forest land, timberland or Timberland Production zoning occurs on the Project site or in the surrounding area because forest vegetation is not characteristic of the Eastern Kern County desert environment. No impacts are anticipated. The Project will not result in conversion of any farmland or forest land because no farmland or forest land is situated within or adjacent to the Project. No impacts are anticipated.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary

3. Air Quality Impacts
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to a substantial pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number or people? 5 UC Davis, NRCS. SoilWeb, https://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/gmap/ 236 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; Project Materials; Kern County Air Pollution Control District (EKAPCD).

Findings of Fact: California City is located within the Mojave Desert Air Basin and is under the jurisdiction of the Kern County Air Pollution Control District (EKAPCD). There are over 3,700-square miles in the eastern portion that Kern County APCD controls, located on the western edge of the Mojave Desert. The high summer temperatures and radiation from the sun can encourage photochemical ozone formation when local sources or transported volatile organic compounds (VOC's) and oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) precursors are present. Kern County is within the jurisdiction of both the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) and the Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District (EKAPCD) in the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MOAB). Projects are evaluated for consistency with the local air quality management plans, which link local planning and individual Projects to the regional plans developed to meet the ambient air quality standards. The assessment takes into consideration whether the Project forms part of the expected conditions identified in local plans (General Plan Land Use and Zoning) and whether the Project adheres to the City's air quality goals, policies, and local development assumptions factored into the regional California Air Resources Board (CARB). In its current condition, the undeveloped Project site is surrounded by mostly vacant land and is not located within proximity of existing residential uses or other densely populated areas of the City or County. As this will likely increase the baseline assumptions for population growth above the level projected in the adopted California Air Resources Board build out assumptions, an air quality study is warranted. Given adequate mitigation measures, the Project would not result in or cause violations to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards or California Ambient Air Quality Standards. Given the potential for “stand-by” generators to be used for future operations, an air quality analysis is required to determine consistency with the local air quality management plan. In the event that the electricity purveyor (Southern California Edison) cannot immediately supply service concurrently with the City’s issuance of certificates of occupancy and business licenses, the project may utilize on-site generators to achieve operational capacity prior to full electrification by SCE. In this circumstance, the project anticipates the utilization of Capstone Green Energy Corporation – Microturbine System Emissions, to provide temporary power in lieu of delaying project operations and awaiting the completion of infrastructure development by Southern California Edison (SCE). The proposed generator will operate 8-hours per day for at-least one year (365 days), with approximately 1,920 operational hours per year. Only CARB-certified generators will be utilized at the facility. While the timeframe of electrical infrastructure by SCE is undetermined, the generators being utilized has already undergone a rigorous certification process by CalEPA and CARB for commercial use in the manner described. An air quality (CalEEMod, 2022.1) analysis was completed, and the results are described below in Table 1-1. The Project does not exceed the daily thresholds for criteria pollutants as set forth by the Kern County/Mohave Air District. Consequently, the Project would not substantially contribute to a significant individual or cumulative impact on existing or projected exceedances of the state or federal ambient air quality standards or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in the emissions of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is designated nonattainment. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. 237 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
TABLE 2-1: PROJECT CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS (Unmitigated) Pollutant Daily
Maximum
Emissions
(lbs./day)
EKAPCD
Maximum Daily
Threshold
(lbs./day)
Exceeds EKAPCD
Threshold?
Reactive Organic Gas (ROG) 1.00 N/A NO
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 1.85 137 NO
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 2.38 548 NO
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) <0.005 148 NO
Particulate Matter (10-microns) (PM10) 0.14 82 NO
Particulate Matter (2.5-microns) (PM2.5) 0.10 82 NO
Source: CalEEMod® | ©2022.1 CAPCOA, Table 2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds, May 16, 2023 Mitigation:

AQ-1: The Project shall comply with Rule 1466, which sets forth requirements to minimize fugitive dust emissions.
7 Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, As Amended, Pg.13 (http://www.kernair.org/Documents/CEQA/CEQA_Guidelines%20&%20Charts.pdf) TABLE 2-2: PROJECT OPERATION EMISSIONS (Unmitigated)
Pollutant Daily Average
Emissions
(Max) (lbs./day)
EKAPCD Maximum
Daily Threshold
(lbs./day)
Exceeds EKAPCD
Threshold?
Reactive Organic Gas (ROG) 0.98 1377 NO
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 1.51 137 NO
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 7.97 548 NO
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 0.02 148 NO
Particulate Matter (10-microns) (PM10) 0.69 82 NO
Particulate Matter (2.5-microns) (PM2.5) 0.15 82 NO
Source: CalEEMod® | ©2022.1 CAPCOA, Table 2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds, May 16, 2023 238 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
AQ-2: Article 11, Section 5-6.1301 of the City Municipal Code requires the reduction and elimination of odors resulting from future Light Industrial and manufacturing uses. The Project is required to implement, maintain in good repair, and comply with City monitoring and enforcement as necessary.

Furthermore, compliance with City Code is required of all projects and is not considered unique mitigation.

Requirements to Minimize Fugitive Dust Emissions
AQ-3: The project proponent shall install a sign, no less than four feet by eight feet in area, and no more than six feet in height. The sign shall provide the name and number of a 24/7 contact for concerns relating to construction noise or dust.

Monitoring: The City Code Enforcement Department will monitor and enforce odor, noise, and other similar complaints. The City Planning Division will monitor compliance of the mitigation measures set forth in the CalEEMOD report and analysis.

Monitoring: The EKAPCD and City Planning Department will monitor implementation of mitigation measures.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the Project

4. Wildlife & Vegetation
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
239 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; Biological Resource Assessment for APN: 225-221-02 and -03 (dated July 6, 2020); Biological Resource Assessment for APN: 225-092-13 (dated May 27, 2021); City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028); Project Materials.

Findings of Fact: A review of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDD) does not indicate instances of observations related to special status or endangered species.8 The proposed project area was characteristic of a disturbed creosote bush (Larrea tridentata) scrub plant community. Furthermore, the site demonstrates a lack of suitable habitat associated with desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) mohave ground squirrels (Xerospermophilus mohavensis). Schismus (Schismus sp.), an invasive grass species that appears to be an indicator of poor Mohave ground squirrel habitat, is the dominant annual within and adjacent to the study site. Mohave ground squirrels are not expected due to lack of required forage and cover plant species. The only perennials are creosote bush, and small decadent individuals of both Anderson thorn (Lycium andersonii) and burro bush (Ambrosia dumosa). No American badgers (Taxidea taxus) or their sign were observed within the study site. No desert kit foxes or their sign were observed during the field survey. No burrowing owls (Athene cunicularia) or their sign were observed during the field survey. No potential cover sites for burrowing owls were observed within the project area. No sensitive plants, specifically, alkali mariposa lily (Calochortus striatus), desert cymopterus (Cymopterus deserticola), and Barstow woolly sunflower (Eriophyllum mohanense) are expected to occur within the Project site, due to lack of suitable habitat. Prairie falcons (Falco mexicanus) and other raptors may fly over the site but there are no nesting or roosting opportunities available within the Project site. Migratory birds would not be expected to nest in the vegetation within the study site. There is a billboard sign within the study site that could provide potential nesting sites. No other state or federally listed species are expected to occur within the proposed project area. Two blue line streams were noted within the study site on the U.S.G.S. topographic map. However, no visible indications of an ephemeral wash or other water features were observed within the study site.

The California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW) began planning for the establishment of, and acquisition of private lands for the conservation of the Mohave Ground Squirrel (MGS). In 2007, CDFW determined that an essential component of any conservation strategy, for the state-listed MGS. The service has identified four “core areas” that have historically supported relatively abundant and widespread MGS populations. There is evidence that these populations will continue to persist given adequate conservation efforts and mitigation strategies. As a Land Mitigation Bank does not currently exist, mitigation credits are reserved for future conservation efforts. The four core areas currently recognized are detailed as follows:
 Coso Range NW to Olancha. Most of the area is within the China Lake NAWS military reservation, with a mixture of BLM, LADWP, and private lands to the west (Inyo County).  Little Dixie Wash (from Inyokern SW to Red Rock Canyon State Park). Most of the area is publicly managed by BLM, with some private and state ownerships as well (Kern County).  Edwards Air Force Base, east of Rogers Dry Lake. This core area is entirely on the United States Air Force (USAF) military reservation; the surrounding lands are in private and BLM ownership (Kern and San Bernardino County).
8 California Natural Diversity Database (CNDD) (https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/california-natural-diversitydatabase). Accessed May 18, 2023. 240 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
 Coolgardie Mesa to Superior Valley. Land ownership was primarily BLM and in private ownership; however, much of the northern portion of this core area is not included within the Fort Irwin Wester Expansion Area (WEA) (San Bernardino County).

The Project is located approximately 50-miles from the Little Dixie Wash conservation area, which is sufficient distance removed from the conservation area. CDFW provides additional analysis to support this potential incremental impact upon MGS habitat, through their Mohave Ground Squirrel Technical Advisory Group (MSG TAG); which is a long-standing committee of MGS technical experts, land management, and regulatory agencies. That being said CDFW remains concerned that the urbanizing effects of the Project will contribute to the diminishment; albeit incremental, upon the MGS habitat. The TAG published a list of conservation priorities in December of 2030 and sets forth five primary conservation priorities intended to support the ongoing conservation of the MGS. These priorities are detailed as follows9:
 Maintain Functional Habitat Connections between Known Populations  Protect Known Core Areas
 Identify Development Zones with Minimal Impact on MGS Habitat  Conduct Research to Clarify the Distribution and Status of the MGS  Conduct Research to Improve Mohave Ground Squirrel Detection Capabilities b) – f) Vegetation communities occurring within the project site were mapped on an aerial photograph and classified in accordance with the vegetation descriptions provided in A Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al., 2009) and cross referenced with the Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland, 1986). In addition, site characteristics such as soil condition, topography, hydrology, anthropogenic disturbances, indicator species, condition of onsite vegetation communities, and the presence of potentially regulated jurisdictional features were noted. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) ArcView software to digitize the mapped vegetation communities and then transferred these data onto an aerial photograph to further document existing conditions and quantify the acreage of each vegetation community. The Project area was characteristic of a disturbed creosote bush (Larrea tridentata) scrub plant community. Mohave ground squirrels are not expected due to lack of required forage and cover plant species. The biological condition of the site indicated that natural habitats (within the project site) have been disturbed as a result of previous grading activities, resulting in a disturbed rubber rabbitbrush vegetation community and heavily disturbed/compacted surface soils throughout. The disturbed nature of the project site has reduced the potential for it to provide suitable habitat for special-status plant species. Based on the results of the habitat assessment and a review of specific habitat preferences, distributions, and elevation ranges, it was determined that special-status plant species identified by the CNDDB and CNPS Online Inventory database are not expected to occur within the project site. The Project site and surrounding vegetation communities provide limited suitable foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of year-round and seasonal avian species reside as well as migrating songbirds that could occur in the area. Nesting birds are protected under the MBTA, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and the CFGC. If projectrelated activities are to be initiated during the nesting season (January 1st to August 31st), a preconstruction nesting bird clearance survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than three (3) days prior to the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities. The qualified biologist shall survey all suitable nesting habitat within the project impact area, and areas within a biologically defensible buffer zone surrounding the project impact area. If no active nests are detected during the clearance survey, project activities may begin, and no additional avoidance and minimization 9 https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=83973&inline 241 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
measures would be required. If an active nest is found, the bird species shall be identified, and a “nondisturbance” buffer should be established around the active nest. The size of the “non-disturbance” buffer should be increased or decreased based on the judgement of the qualified biologist and level of activity and sensitivity of the species. It is further recommended that the qualified biologist periodically monitor any active nests to determine if project-related activities occurring outside the “no-disturbance” buffer disturb the birds and if the buffer should be increased. Once the young have fledged and left the nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, project activities within the “nodisturbance” buffer may occur.

Although not identified in the CNDDB database search of the USGS California City North, California City South, Mojave NE, and Sanborn, California 7.5-minute quadrangles, California horned lark was the only special-status wildlife species observed during the field survey. Based on the results of the habitat assessment and a review of specific habitat preferences, occurrence records, known distributions, and elevation ranges, it was determined that the project site has a moderate potential to support burrowing owl, prairie falcon, and loggerhead shrike; and a low potential to support Mohave ground squirrel. All remaining special-status wildlife species identified by the CNDDB database are not expected to occur within the project site.

Due to the proximity of the project site to existing occurrence records for burrowing owl, pre-construction burrowing owl clearance surveys should be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that burrowing owls remain absent from the project site and impacts to burrowing owls do not occur. In accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW, 2012), two (2) pre-construction clearance surveys should be conducted 14-30 days and 24 hours prior to any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities. Documentation of surveys and findings shall be submitted to the City of California City for review and file. If no burrowing owls or occupied burrows are detected, project activities may begin. If an occupied burrow is found within the development footprint during pre-construction clearance surveys, a burrowing owl exclusion and mitigation plan will need to be prepared and submitted to CDFW for approval prior to initiating project activities. Although Burrowing Owl was not observed during the field survey, the project site is located within the immediate vicinity of areas that do have the potential for sufficient habitat to occur, even though no owls have been observed. The Project is found to have a less than significant impact upon biological resources, with the following mitigation measures incorporated.

Mitigation:

BIO-1: The Project proponent shall conduct two (2) pre-construction clearance surveys should be conducted 14-30 days and 24 hours prior to any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities.

Documentation of surveys and findings shall be submitted to the City of California City for review and file. If no burrowing owls or occupied burrows are detected, project activities may begin. If an occupied burrow is found within the development footprint during pre-construction clearance surveys, a burrowing owl exclusion and mitigation plan will need to be prepared and submitted to CDFW for approval prior to initiating project activities.

BIO-2: If positive findings are determined, through the pre-construction surveys conducted under Mitigation Measure BIO-1, which qualify as suitable habitat is observed, and/or the presence of endangered or threatened species is also observed, then the Project proponent shall conduct the appropriate protocol surveys, prior to any development occurs within the project site to confirm the 242 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
presence/absence of said species. Protocol surveys shall consist of three (3) separate 5-night trapping sessions conducted during specific terms between March 15th and July 15th.

BIO-3: If the protocol surveys conducted as part of Mitigation Measure BIO 2 and qualifying species are found to occupy the project site and/or the construction clearance areas of the Project site, then proponent shall file for, and process to completion, an Incidental Take Permit, in compliance with CDFW’s discretionary authority as defined by Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (Section 15357 of the CEQA Guidelines). Under this Incidental Take Permit, CDFW will review and determine the necessary minimization and mitigation measures; including, but not limited to, the purchase of credits from a CDFW approved conservation or mitigation bank.10 BIO-4: Nesting generally lasts from February to July but may extend beyond this time frame. Grading and other ground disturbing activities occurring during or close to the nesting season shall require a qualified biologist will survey the area as close as possible but no more than one week prior to removal.

If active bird nests are found, impacts to nests will be avoided by either delaying work or establishing initial buffer areas of a minimum of 50-feet (16 m) around active migratory bird species nests. The project biologist will determine if the buffer areas should be increased or decreased based on the nesting bird response to disturbances.

Monitoring: The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) will monitor and establish the mitigation/conservation credit agreement and the City of California City shall monitor the grading permit process and require written clearance, from CDFW, prior to the issuance of a grading permit.

CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the Project

8. Cultural Resources
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; Project Materials.

Findings of Fact: The project is located on an undeveloped parcel. According to the California City General Plan, historic resources are items that are at least 45 years of age or older that also represents a significant time, place, origin, event, or work of a master. Historic resources may be identified as structures and as archaeological sites. The General Plan Cultural Resources Chapter identifies five historic archaeological sites that are recorded within the City. Recorded historic sites included trash scatter, glass and ceramics and potential WWII desert training or military disposal items. As referenced within the Historic and Cultural Element the General Plan, none of these findings were eligible for inclusion under the California State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO). The site is vacant, and no historic structures or features have been identified on or adjacent to the project site. In addition, there are no recognizable potential historic resources, as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, that would be adversely affected by the Project. This includes any object, building, structure, site, area, 10 https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/Banking/Approved-Banks 243 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.

The site is characterized by relatively flat, undisturbed desert land, with scattered vegetation. The Project site is not recognized as a unique archeological features; a site where former human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, have been identified or located; or a site that contains any existing religious or sacred uses. However, per the California City General Plan, if a unique archeological resource or site or human remains are found during excavation, all work will be suspended until the area has been thoroughly examined.

Pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlay adjacent remains, until the County Coroner has examined the remains.

If the coroner determines the remains to be Native America or has reason to believe that they are Native American, the coroner shall contact by telephone within 24-hours of the Native American Heritage Commission. Pursuant to the mentioned California Health and Safety Code, proper actions shall take place in the event of the discovery or recognition of any human remains during project construction activities. Less than significant impacts are expected following the standard conditions which do not address any unique circumstances regarding the proposed site.

As previously discussed in the Cultural Resources section, there are five recorded historic archaeological sites within the City, according to the California City General Plan. These archaeological sites are located in excess of 10-miles to the northeast and not found within the project area. The General Plan Cultural Resources Chapter concluded that no cultural resources were found on the project site or with close proximity to the site (discussed in the Cultural Resources Element). The historical, cultural, and archaeological resources surveys outlined within the California City General Plan indicate that the project site is not listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in any local register. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated with project implementation of the standard mitigation measures. As previously discussed in the Cultural Resources discussion of this document, there are five recorded historic archaeological sites within the City, according to the California City General Plan. The archaeological sites are not found within the project area. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated with project implementation. As previously discussed, the land surveys prepared for the California City General Plan did not indicate the presence of historic resources, cultural resources, and archaeological resources on or near the project site. The California City General Plan states that the City had no Native American Sacred Sites within the City's boundary. Therefore, project implementation is not expected to have a substantial adverse change in a significant Tribal cultural resource. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.

Mitigation:

CUL-1: Pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlay adjacent remains, until the County Coroner has examined the remains. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native America or has reason to believe that they are Native American, the coroner shall contact by telephone within 24-hours of the Native American Heritage Commission.
244 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
CUL–2: If cultural resources are found during project construction, all ground-disturbing activities within 100 feet of the find shall be halted. A Registered Professional Archaeologist shall prepare a Cultural Resources Management Plan in consultation with the consulting tribes and the City Planning Department to include relinquishment of all artifacts through one of the following methods:

1. A fully executed reburial agreement with the appropriate culturally affiliated Native American tribe or band. This reburial area should be away from any future impacts. Reburial shall not occur until all cataloguing; analysis and any necessary special studies have been completed on the cultural resources. Details of contents and location of the reburial shall be documented in a Final Report; OR

2. Curation at a Riverside County Curation facility that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79 and therefore will be professionally curated and made available to other archaeologists/researchers and tribal members for further study. The collection and associated records shall be transferred, including title, and are to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation. Evidence shall be provided in the form of a letter from the curation facility identifying that archaeological materials have been received and that all fees have been paid.

Monitoring: The City Planning Division staff will monitor and enforce compliance.

ENERGY Would the Project

9. Wasteful or Inefficient Energy
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Open Space Element.

Findings of Fact: The Project will reduce its GHG emissions to the maximum extent feasible through energy conservation measures and implementation of the current California Green Building Standards Code in addition to the use of natural light for plant growth and water efficient irrigation for irrigation and landscape design. No impact is anticipated to adopted Energy Conservation plans. a. Less than Significant Impact. The Project would have a potentially significant impact if it would result in the substantial adverse effect due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during Project construction or operation. During plan check, the City reviews plans for compliance with building code requirements specified in CCMC Chapter 8, Building Regulations. As noted on the site plans, the Project shall comply with the California Building Code, California Green Building Standards Code, and the California Energy Code. The California Green Building Standards Code enhances the design and construction of buildings to reduce negative environmental impacts through planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality. Compliance with California Energy Code ensures energy efficiency within new and existing buildings.
245 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
The Project will conform to the 2022 Title 24 energy saving requirements. Based on CalEEMod Outputs shown in Tables 3-1, the proposed Project would use 566,411 kilo-British thermal units per year (kBTU/yr.) of natural gas and 128,386 kilowatt hours per year (kWh/yr.) of electricity. Project-related vehicle trips would also use fuel or electricity.

In addition, construction of the Project would involve fuel and electricity use from construction equipment and hauling, worker, and vendor trips. The Project is located adjacent to a local collector roadway.

Further, as evaluated in Greenhouse Gas Emissions resource section, the Project is consistent with the CARB Scoping Plan for AB32, as well as local Kern County Greenhouse Gases Emissions Reduction Measures11. Compliance with the codes cited above, as noted on the site plans, as well as compliance with these such plans will reduce the potential impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources resulting in no impact. b. Less than Significant Impact. The Project would result in a potentially significant environmental impact if it would conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

As regulatory requirement, the Project would be reviewed for consistency with applicable state and local plans for renewable energy and efficiency. As stated above, the Project would comply with the 2022 California Building Code, California Green Building Standards Code, and the California Energy Code, as amended and in their entirety. Compliance with these regulatory standards and compliance with the aforementioned reduction measures will reduce the impacts of the building through the use of measures such as increasing energy efficiency through installing energy-efficient lighting, consistent with KernCOG Kern County GHG Inventory12.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary

10. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the Project
a) Directly or indirectly cause 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.
11 Kern Council of Governments (KernCOG) GHG Emission Reduction Measures (https://www.kerncog.org/?s=GHG), Accessed Aug. 4, 2021.
12 Ibid.

TABLE 3-1: TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATIONAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION (Unmitigated) Land Use Electricity
(kWh/yr.)
CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr.)
Industrial 128,386 349 0.0330 0.0040 566,411
Source: Table 5.11-Operational Energy Consumption (CalEEMod® | ©2022.1.1.5 CAPCOA) 246 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; General Plan Safety Element; Department of Conservation; University of California Museum of Paleontology. 2019. Databases. https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/collections/databases/. Accessed July 2022; Project Materials.
a– f) Findings of Fact: According to the Safety Element in the California City General Plan, a fault is defined as a fracture in the earth's crust forming a boundary between rock masses that have shifted.

Fault rupture is a break in the ground's surface and associated deformation resulting from the movement of a fault. Rupture would be a potential problem within California City if a strong earthquake occurs along a known or unknown fault within or near the City. According to the California City General Plan, the City is not located in an Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The closest Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone lies approximately 35-miles northeast of the project site, at the Garlock Fault.

According to the Department of Conservations Geological Data Viewer and the General Plan Safety Element, the project property shows no mapped faults on-site per maps prepared by the California Geologic Survey and published by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO). The project area is not located within an earthquake fault zone, and no evidence of surface faulting was observed on the property during the site reconnaissance. Per the findings within the California City General Plan and the project-specific Geotechnical Investigation, surface fault rupture is considered unlikely at the project site. Less than significant impacts are expected.

California City, and the project site, is located in the Mojave Block, also referred to as the Eastern California Shear Zone (ECSZ). The ECSZ is an area of increased seismic activity which stretches from the San Andreas Fault in the Coachella Valley, north-northeast across the Mojave Desert, and northward to the Owens Valley. The numerous faults in the region may accommodate as much as 15 to 20 percent of the relative motion between the North American and Pacific Plates, and according to the California City General Plan, the closest fault to the City is the Garlock Fault. As a result, California City has the potential to experience seismic shaking and seismic-related hazards. The Project will build and 247 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
construct buildings in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC), which establishes minimum structural and seismic standards for all commercial and industrial buildings.

The General Plan Safety Element states that liquefaction is the phenomenon in which loose, saturated, granular soils temporarily behave similarly to a fluid when subjected to high intensity ground shaking.

Liquefaction occurs when three general conditions are present: shallow groundwater, low-density, silty, or fine sandy soils, and high intensity ground motion. Areas of shallow groundwater have a higher susceptibility to liquefaction; however, the groundwater in the City ranges from approximately 384.7 to 482.7 feet below ground level, according to the Existing Sewer System Map (Figure I-1, Well #14) in the January 2018 California City Local Agency Management Program for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems (OWTS)13, which results in a negligible impact from the effects of liquefaction. Per the findings within the California City General Plan, the potential for liquefaction occurring at the project site is considered low. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. As the Project is in southern California, it is likely that the project site will experience at least one moderate to severe earthquake and associated seismic shaking during the Project useable life, as well as periodic slight to moderate earthquakes. In order to ensure the safety of the project site, the proposed Project shall be constructed in a manner that reduces the risk of seismic hazards (Title 24, California Code of Regulations). Standard Conditions of Approval require compliance with the most current seismic design coefficients and ground motion parameters and all applicable provisions of the 2019 California Building Code (CBC).

The California City “Slope of Terrain Map” and “Erosion Hazards” in the General Plan (Figure 6-2, 6- 3, pages 6-4 of the General Plan) classifies the project site's location as having a 0 to 15 percent slope.

The City lists two notable slopes within the City being Galilee Hill and Twin Buttes, that are northeast and southeast of the project site, respectively. Moreover, there are no significant slopes proposed as part of the proposed development; either on-site or being affected through any off-site grading activities. Based upon the Project’s associated earthmoving activities, it is concluded that risks associated with slope instability at the project property are considered low to negligible. In that vein, potential hazards associated with landslide risks are unlikely at the project site and less than significant impacts are anticipated. The Safety Element in the California City General Plan states that land subsidence is the gradual, local settling or sinking of the earth’s surface with little or no horizontal motion. Although a seismic event can trigger subsidence, it can also occur as a result of gas, oil, or water extraction, hydrocompaction, or peat oxidation. The southern portion of the Planning Area has been undergoing gradual land subsidence, with up to four feet of subsidence over a 40-year period.

Although subsidence is not a significant hazard damage to wells, foundations, and underground utilities may occur. The Project site is in the central to western portion of the City and is not as greatly affected by ground subsidence as those properties located in the southern portions of the City.

Per the findings within the California City General Plan and the project-specific Geotechnical Investigation, the potential for ground subsidence occurring at the project site is considered low.

Less than significant impacts are anticipated. The property is not subject to any additional geological hazard such as seiche, mudflow, or volcanic hazard. As stated herein, the property is not located near, or within the general vicinity of a lake or partially enclosed body of water which would be affected by oscillation in the water level (e.g., seiche). As stated in the section on landslide risks, for which mudflow would be a concern. Lastly, the Project is not located near or within a volcano. The Project site is 13 City of California City Local Agency Management Program for Onsite Wastewater Treatment System California City, California (January 2018), Figure 8: California City Groundwater Wells Level; Groundwater Well 2A 248 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
generally flat with a gentle slope in the northeast direction. Development will propose to alter or modify the topography or ground surface feature in a way that will substantially alter the topography or ground surface relief features; including changes that will possibly impact the operation of subsurface sewage disposal systems. The Project also does not propose to create cut or fill slopes greater than 2:1 or higher than 30-feet; therefore, risks associated with irregular or excessive slopes are considered negligible. As expansive soils dry, the soil shrinks; when moisture is reintroduced into the soil, the soil swells. In order to reduce post-construction soil movement and provide uniform support for the buildings to be constructed at the subject site, over excavation and recompaction within the proposed building footprint areas should be performed to a minimum depth of five (5) feet below existing grades or three (3) feet below bottom of the proposed footing, whichever is deeper. Any undocumented fill encountered during grading should be removed and replaced with engineered fill.

Compliance with the City’s General Plan Safety Element, construction of underground utilities will be required to interconnect, and provide, water and sanitary sewer to the project site. According to the Existing Sewer System Map (Figure 6) in the 2018 California City Local Agency Management Program for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems (OWTS), an 8-inch sewer line currently exists at the intersection of CCB and South Loop Blvd., located approximately 1,900 LF14 to the northeast. This is the distance required to install a sewer line within existing City R/W. Future sewer connection to, and initiation of service, is determined by the City Public Works Department. See Figure 2 below:

Figure 2
14 Figure 6, Existing Sewer System.
249 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
According to the City’s Sewer network (Figure 6), details the location of this 15-inch trunk line within the Mendiburu Blvd. R/W. See Figure 3, of this Initial Study:

Figure 3
250 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
The Project will be required to utilize on-site wastewater discharge until sanitary sewer is extended to the property. During construction, portable toilet facilities will be provided consistent with state and local guidelines.

As such, sub-service sewage facilities will be constructed on-site and permitted through the City. The construction site plan will utilize a portable toilet service in compliance with industry regulations until the construction of the permanent facilities and connection to the existing infrastructure. Design for all disposal systems shall comply with industry regulations, as well as the standards outlined in Title 7, Chapter 2 within California City Municipal Code. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.

The construction site plan will utilize a portable toilet service in compliance with industry regulations until the construction of the permanent facilities and connection to the existing infrastructure. Design for all disposal systems shall comply with industry regulations, as well as the standards outlined in Title 7, Chapter 2 within California City Municipal Code. No septic systems are proposed. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.

California City is in the high desert with an elevation range of 2,300 to 4,000 feet above sea level. Its climate is semi-arid, rainfall for the area is less than 6-inches annually, which provides for warm, dry weather in the summer and mild cooler weather in the winter.

The California City Erosion Hazards Map (Figure 6-3) within the General Plan displays most of the City, including the project site, is in an area with none to slight erosion hazards. As previously stated, the project site resides within the Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District, therefore must comply with 251 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
the District’s Regulation IV, Rule 402. The purpose of this Rule is to prevent, reduce and mitigate ambient concentrations of anthropogenic fugitive dust emissions to an amount sufficient to attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). According to Regulation IV, Rule 402, the project shall implement one or more fugitive dust emission control strategies, in order to limit visible dust emissions (VDE) to no more than 20-percent opacity or meet the conditions for a stabilized surface. Some control strategies include applying dust suppressants, controlling vehicular speed, using water trucks, and implementing track-out avoidance measures. The implementation of the fugitive dust emission control strategies will ensure the reduction of ambient concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) by reducing or mitigating anthropogenic fugitive dust emissions.

Impacts of windborne and waterborne soil erosion at the project site will be controlled during project operation after adequate paving, landscaping, and other means of stabilization is incorporated. The proposed plan indicates that offsite run-on to the site is collected and conveyed through to retention basins in-between buildings, and underground retention facilities under the eastern parking lots, in order to avoid onsite flooding. The drainage condition of the project site is subject to the completion of percolation/infiltration studies conducted during the grading process. If infiltration is infeasible, the Regional Water Quality Control Board Guidebook requires compliance with secondary or tertiary treatment measures. Upon completion of the project, the site intends to have both hardscape and softscape surfaces including the main industrial building and Project site landscaping including irrigation, surrounding the buildings and project perimeter. Following the implementation of the fugitive dust emission control strategies and the SWPPP, as well as the compliance with the adopted procedures for grading, erosion at the project site is anticipated to be less than significant.

Impacts of windborne and waterborne soil erosion at the project site will be controlled during project operation after adequate paving, landscaping, and other means of stabilization is incorporated. Upon completion of the project, the site intends to have both hardscape and softscape surfaces including the industrial and manufacturing uses building, and landscaping (consisting of decomposed granite with soil stabilizers) surrounding the buildings and project perimeter. Following the implementation of the fugitive dust emission control strategies and the SWPPP, as well as the compliance with the adopted procedures for grading, erosion at the project site is anticipated to be less than significant.

Numerous resources have been discovered in the County (University of California Museum of Paleontology 2019). The approximately 1.18-acre Project site is characterized by relatively flat, undisturbed desert land, with scattered vegetation. The site is not recognized as a unique paleontological or a unique geologic feature. However, per the California City General Plan, if a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature are found during excavation, all work will be suspended until the area has been thoroughly examined. Therefore, the Project will not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site, or unique geologic feature and no impact would occur.

Mitigation:

GEO-1: If a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature are found during excavation, all work will be suspended until the area has been thoroughly examined.

GEO-2: Per the Compliance Guidelines of the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Project will disturb more than one (1)-acre and will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which will establish Best Management Practices (BMPs) for erosion control.

The Project is also required to comply with AQMD Rule 1466, which also requires dust control measures.
252 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Monitoring: Mitigation Measures will be monitored and implemented by the City Planning Department.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the Project

12. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; General Plan Safety Element; Project Materials.

Findings of Fact: Greenhouse Gas (GHG) is a gaseous compound in the earth's atmosphere that is capable of absorbing infrared radiation, thereby trapping, and holding heat in the atmosphere. Common greenhouse gases in the earth's atmosphere include water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (NOx), ozone, and to a lesser extent chlorofluorocarbons. Carbon dioxide is the main GHG thought to contribute to climate change. In response to growing concern for long-term adverse impacts associated with global climate change, California's Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) requires California Air Resource Board (CARB) to reduce statewide emissions of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2020. In 2016, Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) that requires California to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. In general, the Project will generate GHG emissions through Project-related area sources, energy usage, mobile sources, solid waste disposal, water usage, and wastewater treatment. The Project will add a new land use which produces an increase in operational greenhouse gas emissions is expected. Based upon the CalEEMod Modeling Reporting results, the operational emissions by sector, and compared against the thresholds by aspects of the from future Light Industrial and manufacturing uses are anticipated to generate approximately 2,407 (MT/yr. of CO2e) annually, which is in excess of the 3,000 Metric Tons per Year of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (MT/yr. of CO2e) which is identified in the CARB Scoping Plan. The project will operate under the mandatory regulations found in the most recent Cal Green Building Standards Code for non-residential uses. See Table 4-1, detailing the annual emissions of metric tons of GHGs:

TABLE 4-1: OPERATIONS EMISSIONS COMPARE AGAINST THRESHOLDS (Unmitigated) Criteria Pollutant: Annual Emissions
(max)
(MT/yr. of CO2e) EKAPCD
Threshold for
Residential
Exceeds EKAPCD
Threshold?
Green House Gases (GHG) 2,407 3,000 N/A
Source: CalEEMod® | ©2022.1 CAPCOA, Table 4.1. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds, May 16, 2023.

California's Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32) requires California to reduce its GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. California Air Resource Board (CARB) has identified measures to achieve this goal as set forth in the CARB Seeping Plan. The EKAPCD adopted the interim GHG 253 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
significance threshold for stationary/industrial sources on December 5, 2008 which applies to Projects where the EKAPCD is the lead agency. SB 32 adopted in 2021 requires the state to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2025 reduction target that was first introduced in Executive Order B-10-11. The project will reduce its GHG emissions to the maximum extent feasible through energy conservation measures and implementation of the current California Green Building Standards Code in addition to the use of natural light for plant growth and water efficient irrigation for plans and landscape design. The project will not interfere with the state's implementation of AB 32 or SB 32. As previously indicated, the project would not exceed the air basin threshold, therefore the project's GHG emissions would not conflict with plans and policies adopted for reducing GHGs emissions. Less than significant impacts are expected.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the Project

13. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) 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?
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, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; General Plan Safety Element; Project Materials.

BACKGROUND
The project site is approximately 1.18-acres of vacant desert land and proposes to accommodate 12,620 SF of industrial and manufacturing uses. For the current use in the Project site, the business 254 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
will use, and store, the following materials, in the following quantities, in the normal business operations15:
 Hydrochloric acid (7647010) - 110 Gallons
 Nitric acid 10-20% ( 7697372 ), - 110 Gallons
 Potassium Permanganate (7722647) – 600 pounds
 Sodium Hydroxide (1310732) – 250 pounds
Each chemical substance is regulated by multiple state and federal agencies, including but not limited to the following: SARA 313; the Clean Water Act; the Clean Air Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA); California Proposition 65; the State Right-to-Now; the U.S. Department of Transportation; and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.16 For each chemical, a material safety data sheet (MSDS) is prepared which provides guidance accidental spill or discharge into the adjacent soils or drainages. Storage and disposal is strictly regulated and locally enforced by the California City Fire Department who can perform annual inspection of the business.

The storage of each chemical is described below:
 Hydrochloric Acid should be stored in a cool, dry, well-ventilated area away from sources of moisture and kept away from incompatible materials such as oxidizing agents, organic materials, metals and alkalis. Caustics and corrosive chemical has the ability to corrode metallic surfaces, as such, storage in tightly closed containers and stored in accordance with the manufacturer's and regulatory requirements.
 Nitric Acid should be stored in a secure area away from incompatible materials such as organic compounds, metals, alcohols or moisture. Keep container tightly closed in a cool, dry, wellventilated area. Due to its high risk of adverse health effects, this chemical must be disposed of in accordance with federal, state, and local environmental control regulations.  Potassium Permanganate should be stored in a cool, dry, well-ventilated location, away from flammables, combustibles, and other reducing agents. This is not compatible with strong bases (e.g., Sodium Hydroxide and Potassium Hydroxide); Finely Powdered Metals; Peroxides; and Aluminum, Zinc, Lead, and Copper, and their Alloys.17
 Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) should be stored Sodium hydroxide is successfully stored in 1.9 specific gravity storage tanks of HDPE, XLPE, FRP, carbon steel and titanium. popular tank component materials include PVC/CPVC or 316ss for piping/fittings, epdm for gaskets, and 316ss bolts. other materials include: Hastelloy-c®, Ptfe, and pvdf. Regulatory requirements, and the MSDS specify the following handling and storage procedures18:
o Storage temperatures for caustic tanks should be beneath 100°F for polyethylene tanks and beneath 120°F for carbon steel tanks. If these elevated temperatures are required, 15 Waste Analysis Plan for Padron Metal Finishing. July 20, 2022 16 Material Data Safety Sheets for (1) Hydrochloric acid; (2) Nitric acid 10-20%; (3) Potassium Permanganate; (4) Sodium Hydroxide. www.chemicalsafety.com/ 17 Chemical Education Today: CLIP, Chemical Laboratory Information Profile. https://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/about/governance/committees/chemicalsafety/safetypractices/clip-potassium-permanganate.pdf. (Accessed August 4, 2023).
18 Protank, Sodium Hydroxide Storage Tanks & Specifications. https://www.protank.com/sodiumhydroxide#:~:text=concentrated%20sodium%20hydroxide%20is%20best,promote%20fluidity%20through%20increased%20viscosity. (Accessed August 4, 2023).
255 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
tank annealing and / or NaOH-resistant corrosion barrier coatings should be considered to counteract potential tank damage.
o Freezing point and Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) viscosity varies with concentration. concentrated sodium hydroxide is best stored at temperatures above 70°F to prevent freezing, caustic deposition, and promote fluidity through increased viscosity. o Indoor storage is preferred due to temperature stability. If outdoor storage is required and regular ambient temperatures beneath 65°F are expected, consider utilizing more dilute Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) solutions as freezing points are lower, and / or heated and insulated tank systems.
o Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) Tank heating can be achieved through heating tape, steam coils, or through internal heating with a nickel bayonet-type heat exchanger. A temperature controller should be installed to maintain solution temperature. o Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) storage and piping systems should include venting / overflow vents of diameters at least four times the fill line pipe diameter. sodium hydroxide tank systems should be designed to minimize piping runs, especially for outdoor applications due to NaOH freezing concerns and solid deposition.
o Secondary containment measures are required for all Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) storage conditions and must be engineered to contain 110% of total system volume. double walled tanks are effective in sodium hydroxide containment. o Bulk Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) storage containers should have chemical resistance and specifications verified.

Materials classified as acids and bases must be segregated for storage. Liquid corrosive should ideally be stored below eye level. The sump and any spill control materials should be readily available in case of an accident. Eye wash stations or showers can be a part of your storage building’s interior. U.S.

Chemical storage can address all of these issues and concerns in the planning stages of your building.

These substances are utilized and stored in accordance with CalEPA and Kern County Department of Health regulations. These chemicals and compounds are not being used in quantities that will create a significant impact if accidently released. The chemicals and compounds are regulated by both the state and county and authorization/permits have been obtained from each agency. The operator is responsible for preventing the accidental release of these chemicals and compounds. As such, the operator has taken precautions to prevent the release to the satisfaction of the permitting agencies responsible.

The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR Title 40, Part 261) defines hazardous materials based on ignitability, reactivity, corrosivity, and/or toxicity properties. The State of California defines hazardous materials as substances that are toxic, ignitable, or flammable, reactive and/or corrosive, which have the capacity of causing harm or a health hazard during normal exposure or an accidental release. As a result, the use and management of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances is regulated under existing federal, state, and local laws. State law requires that Light Industrial related waste products are properly disposed of through a qualified vendor. California City Municipal Code mirrors the same requirements; as such, operators of Light Industrial facilities will be required to contract with a qualified disposal service to effectuate the necessary disposal in compliance with state and local laws. 256 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
In addition, other hazardous waste materials, requiring special handling and disposal, must comply with applicable Cal-EPA, Cal-OSCHA, and MSDS protocols19 to reduce their potential to damage public health and the environment. Manufacturer's specifications also dictate the proper use, handling, and disposal methods for the specific substances. The Project does not propose any construction, that would normally involve the temporary management and use of potentially hazardous substances and petroleum products; the nature and quantities of these products would be limited to what is necessary to carry out construction of the project.

According to the Kern County GIS Database, review of the Project materials, and the School District website, there are no existing or planned schools located within a ¼ mile of the Project site.

Implementation Measure S-7, the California City's General Plan states that the City shall require commercial and industrial businesses to meet the procedures for the proper transport, use, and disposal of hazardous waste as required by the Kern County Waste Management Department, and Kern County Department of Environmental Health Services. Less than significant impacts related to the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials are expected.

California City is served by a single Fire Department and Police Department within their City boundaries.

The California City Fire Department is located at 20890 Hacienda Boulevard, approximately 4.1 driving miles southeast of the Project site. The California City Fire Station is staffed by three full-time fire fighters on a 24-hour basis, including a captain, engineer, and fire fighter; however, the Fire Department is designed to be staffed by nine fire fighters. The California City Fire Station has two part-time, seven reserves, and five Fire Department Volunteer positions that City Council has authorized. The fire department is equipped with one wildland patrol unit, one wildland/interface engine, one water tender, and two full-sized fire engines. In addition to fire suppression, additional services the department provides includes Paramedic Advanced Life Support, fire prevention, public education, fire hydrant maintenance, hazardous materials response, nuisance abatement, flood response and aircraft crash and arson investigation. According to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the recommended dispatch-to-arrival time is five (5) minutes, on 90-percent (%) of calls. The California City Fire Department has mutual aid agreements with the Kern County Fire Department, the East Kern County Fire Department, and the Bureau of Land Management. Police protection services within the City are provided by the City's Police Department, located at 21130 Hacienda Boulevard, approximately six (6) driving miles southeast of the project site. The Kern County Coroner's services are provided through the County by the Sheriff's Department and the court system and jails are operated and maintained by Kern County.

CONFORMITY TO GENERAL PLAN SAFETY ELEMENT
The General Plan Safety Element addresses safety within the City established through General Plan policies and implementation measures that seek to reduce the potential for the loss of life, injuries and property damage associated with natural and human-induced hazards.

The proposed zoning classification provides for Light Industrial and manufacturing uses within an area that is naturally segregated from residential neighborhoods or other densely populated land uses. As such, the surrounding land uses constitute land that is primarily vacant. The Project will accommodate a land use (Padron Metal Finishing) that utilizes several chemicals and compounds regulated by CalEPA and the Kern County Department of Environmental Health. The operator currently holds the 19 California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal-EPA); California Occupational Safety and Health Agency (Cal-OSHA); Material Data Safety Sheet (MSDS)
257 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
required permits for the use, storage, and disposal of the chemicals and compounds referenced above.

This action satisfies the requirements of the General Plan Safety Element for the proper handling and disposal of materials of potential concern.

The General Plan Safety Element identifies policies that the Project will conform to:

Policies:
 Require all generators and processors of hazardous waste develop long-term waste management programs in compliance with all applicable federal, state, county, and local requirements.
 Ensure that hazardous materials used by commercial and industrial land uses are properly transported, handled, and used, and that information on their handling, transport, and use is available to the California City Fire Department and other safety agencies in accordance with the Fire Code.
 Reduce the risk of potential spills and exposures to hazards and hazardous materials due to ground transportation by roadway and railway systems.

Implementation Measures:

S-7. The City shall require commercial and industrial businesses to meet the procedures for the proper transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste as required by the Kern County Waste Management Department, the California City Fire Department, and Kern County Department of Environmental Health Services. These procedures shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
a) Submittal of a business plan for small quantity waste generators to the Kern County Department of Environmental health Services and the California City Fire Department. b) Submittal of a source reduction plan for large quantity generators that addresses the potential of treating waste on site and the proper transportation and disposal of waste off site. These plans are reviewed by the Kern County Department of Environmental Health services and the California City Fire Department.
c) Evaluation of funding sources for waste management and disposal programs. d) Coordination with the State Department of Health Services.

S-9. The City shall require that transporters of hazardous waste travel on designated Commercial Hazardous Waste Shipping Routes.

Furthermore, the Project is not located within a ¼ mile of school or other sensitive use, where the accidental discharge would create an impact. The adjacent properties are vacant and future land uses are commercial and residential and not foreseen to create an incompatible land use due to the small quantities of materials used by the operation.

The Project site proposes access from Hanover Drive, via CCB. The existing dedicated roads include fire truck accessible drive widths and a two-way driveway to ensure adequate emergency response access. The proposed design would be subject to a standard review process by the Fire Department to ensure that the site-specific emergency access, water pressure, and other pertinent criteria are met by the project. Less than significant impacts are expected.

AIRPORT HAZARDS
258 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
The California City Municipal Airport is located 4.76-miles northwest of the Project spans over 200- acres within the City. The Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan maps five zones; related to noise and safety levels, for each airport under their jurisdiction. According to this Plan, the Project site is not located within any compatibility zone of the California City's Airport Compatibility. The Kern County Airport Land Use Commission does not hold any restrictions on the height of buildings, structures, appurtenances, plants, and trees above ground level which area in place to prevent a hazard to the safe landing or take-off of aircrafts. In addition, the Project is located outside of the 65 CNEL noise contour zone. According to the 2011 Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan the project is located outside of the Airport Influence Area (AIA) of the California Municipal Airport, therefore the project does not present an inconsistency with the prescribed land uses already determined to be compatible with the Airport’s CLUP.

The project is not subject to the Airport AIA as it is located outside of the influence area. Less than significant impacts are anticipated. The project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip. No impacts are anticipated.

The California City General Plan indicates that major wildland fires are uncommon within the City area due to the vegetation type, the sparseness of the vegetation and the lack of available ground fuel.

According to Chapter 8, of the SHMP, the Project, and its surroundings, are located outside of the Very High and High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) for Local Responsibility Area and outside of the Very High/High/Moderate FHSZ for State and Federal Responsibility Areas.

As mentioned previously, the California City Fire Department is located at 20890 Hacienda Boulevard, approximately five driving miles southeast of the project site. Additionally, the City has a mutual aid agreement with Kern County Fire Department, the East Kern County District Fire Department, and the Bureau of Land Management. Less than significant impacts related to wildland fire are expected.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required.

Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary

14. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the Project
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or
offsite.
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onor offsite. iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
259 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources or polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; General Plan Safety Element; Chapter 8 – State Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP), Project Materials. a– f) Findings of Fact: The proposed project is located within the Fremont Hydrologic Unit of the South Lahontan Basin in the Lahontan Region 6V20. Within Region 6V, the approved Water Quality Control Plan, prepared by SWRCB, provides guidelines for protecting the beneficial uses of state waters within the Region by preserving and protecting their water quality. The project site is located within the Fremont Hydrologic Unit. The receiving water is the Kohen Dry Lake. Beneficial uses of Kohen Lake includes municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, industrial process supply, industrial service supply, groundwater recharge, water contact recreation, noncontact water supply, warm freshwater habitat, Inland saline water habitat and wildlife habitat.

According to the California City 2009 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 1992062069), the only named blue line stream is identified as Cache Creek, which runs through California City from the west towards the northeast, and eventually terminates just south of the Koehn Lakebed outside of the City boundary. Cache Creek lies approximately 8-miles south of the project property, and Koehn Lakebed is approximately 31-miles northeast of the project site. The nature and size of the proposed development prompts compliance requirements with the existing regulations pertaining to water quality standards and waste discharge requirements.

The proposed project will result in temporary and permanent disturbance in an area in excess of one (1) acre in gross area. As a precautionary measure, the developer will comply with the State's most current Construction General Permit (CGP). Compliance with the CGP involves the development and implementation of a project-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) designed to reduce potential adverse impacts to surface water quality during the period of construction. The required plan will identify the locations and types of construction activities requiring Best Management Practices (BMPs) and other necessary compliance measures to prevent soil erosion and stormwater runoff pollution. The plan will also identify the limits of allowable construction-related disturbance to prevent any off-site exceedances or violations.

During construction, the project will also be required to comply with the Eastern Kern Air Pollution Control District (EKAPCD) Rule 402, which requires the project property to implement fugitive dust emission control strategies. Implementation of the control strategies primarily pertains to air quality, but also supports water quality protection through the requirement of soil stabilization measures to prevent sediment erosion and track-out. The concurrent implementation of the required SWPPP and fugitive dust emission control strategies will prevent the potential construction-related impacts to water quality at the site and its surroundings, therefore resulting in less than significant impacts. 20 https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterboards_map.html
260 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
The project will be designed with on-site stormwater detention facilities that, during the life of the project, will comply with the City's drainage requirements by preventing site discharge and transport of untreated runoff. The project will be required to comply with the most current State standards, as well as the standards outlined in the City of California City Urban Water Management Plan and the Water Quality Control Plan for Lahontan Region (Region 6V). Per the project-specific Final Hydrology Report, current drainage requirements for this project fall under the jurisdiction of the City of California City, which requires the entirety of the storm water from the 30-year, 5-day storm to be retained onsite. The site plan, grading design, storm drain design, and retention facilities of the project must be factored in the project specific WQMP development and documentation. Runoff from the impervious surfaces (buildings, hardscape, and pavement) of each drainage management area will be conveyed via surface and piped flows to either corresponding underground retention chambers or retention basins. Each of the retention basins and underground facilities will be sized to retain the incremental increase between the pre-development and post-development volume per City requirements.

As proposed, the stormwater retention and management strategy are required to comply with local and regional requirements for protecting surface water quality and preventing waste discharge violations.

Less than significant impacts are expected. According to the California City Water Master Plan, California City obtains its water from five groundwater wells and an imported surface water supply from the Antelope Valley-East Kern Water District (AVEK). As previously mentioned, the Project is located within the Fremont Valley Groundwater Basin (FVGB). Historic water levels of groundwater wells between 1955 and 1958 indicates that the FVGB is a closed groundwater basin (without subsurface outflow). Long term groundwater level data obtained from the USGS Ground Water Data water levels indicated the groundwater levels in the FVGB have declined significantly since 1955, probably due to the prolonged drought period from 1945 to 1964 and excessive groundwater extraction in the FVGB in the late 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. The most important storage system is the groundwater aquifer, which holds water at a depth of approximately 384.7 to 482.7-feet below ground surface and has slightly risen since 1983.

According to the California City General Plan, the City primarily relies on underground water supplies.

Groundwater wells in California City produced over 93-percent (%) of the water supply in 2000 to 2001.

Per the Urban Water Management Plan, potable well number 10 is the closest facility (at 2.42-miles) within the vicinity of the project site and is located on Assessor’s Parcel Number 203-212-11. According to the General Plan, future water demands will be met by the construction of five new water wells and through additional groundwater purchases within the Antelope Valley-East Kern Water (AVEK) District.

The California City Municipal Code also outlines the importance of water conservation (California City Municipal Code Chapter 1, Article 4, Section 7-1.431). Within this code, the City states that water conservation is a goal of high importance in order to be consistent with State of California and City legal responsibilities to the utilization of water resources. All irrigation within the City complies with the State Model Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) and City Municipal Code that implement water efficiency standards. Additional conservation efforts include the use of drought tolerant landscaping, and new, low flowing plumbing fixtures. Water conserving fixture installations shall be subject to compliance inspection, prior to issuance of final occupancy permits, for the industrial facility.

Given the use, and projected low water and wastewater demands, the Project is not expected to interfere with groundwater recharge conditions. The project includes both underground retention facilities and retention basins, designed to collect and provide sufficient storage for the 30-year and 5-day storm event. This method of stormwater management will therefore facilitate groundwater recharge through infiltration. Infiltration opportunities are also provided in the form of BMPs and 261 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
pervious cover areas in and landscaping design within sufficient densities that will mitigate excess evaporation and evapotranspiration.

The general vicinity surrounding the Project area also includes undeveloped properties with relatively flat topography and scattered vegetation, similar to that found on the Project site. The local hydromorphology is influenced by the presence of intermittent surface drainages originating from the mountains to the west and carrying flows predominantly in a northeasterly direction toward the valley floor. In particular, the project setting is located between the Cache Creek and Koehn Lakebed. Cache Creek is located approximately four miles upstream of the project, and Koehn Lakebed is approximately 19-miles northeast of the project site.

The Project is primarily located within a Zone X FEMA designation, defined as areas determined to be outside the 0.2-percent (%) annual chance floodplain. However, approximately half of APN 210-263- 15 and a very small portion of APN 210-263-14 (the Padron Metal Finishing business) is also located within FEMA Zone AE, which is property subject to flooding by the base or 1% annual chance (100- year) flood, and waves less than 3-feet high. The finished foundation, for the Padron business, is approximately eight (8) vertical inches, which places the business approximately 4.5-feet from the maximum height of the flood zone (2,353.5). The FEMA flood zone AE was established by Firm Panel Map 06029-C3331E (effective September 26, 2008). The floodplain elevation is 2,353.5 feet above the mean sea level. The finished floor elevation, for the Padron Metal Finishing business is 2,358-feet and the southwesterly portion of the business, which is located in the FEMA Zone AE, is a foot higher at 2,359-feet. As such, adequate flood protection already exists from any potential impacts created by the mapped FEMA floodplain.

The property referenced as APN 210-263-15 is located within the FEMA Zone AE, but is currently vacant. There are several protections and implementation measures that can provide adequate protection against future development. The construction of industrial buildings on this parcel can either locate buildings and structures outside the mapped FEMA floodplain or prepare the necessary floodplain analysis (and potential a floodplain model) as a precursor to the preparation of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR).

Project implementation will involve permanent site improvements introducing impervious surfaces in the form of buildings, paving, and hardscape to the previously undeveloped (pervious) land. The size and scope of the Project dictates a low impact development site plan, which does not utilize the entire property to accommodate the proposed facilities and operations through the construction of buildings, parking lot, drive aisles, etc. Portions of the site, located within Zone AE, will be avoided on the implementing site plan to avoid the preparation of a FEMA floodplain map revision. As a result, opportunities to minimize imperviousness through the use of landscaping, natural areas or other pervious surfaces are ample and are subsequently integrated into Project site plan. To prevent changes to local drainage conditions (patterns, quantities, or velocities) and adverse erosion and sedimentation impacts, the Project will implement a storm drain design with flood control facilities sized *-to handle the project-specific conditions.4147
Figure 3
262 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
The proposed grading and hydrology improvement plans will be subject to review and approval by the City to ensure that the proposed grading and drainage conditions are acceptable to the City standards.

As a result, following implementation of an approved grading plan, the project is not anticipated to alter any local drainage course, stream or wash in a manner that would result in erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Following the standard regulations and project design features, less than significant impacts are expected related to the existing drainage patterns and erosion or siltation conditions. A riverine, as defined by the National Wetlands Inventory, includes all wetlands and deepwater habitats contained within a channel, except for: wetlands dominated by trees and shrubs, and habitats with water containing ocean derived salts of 0.5 ppt or greater. However, the intermittent riverine is not considered waters of the United State because it does not connect to another source of water and furthermore is not connected with the Project site.

The proposed project would introduce impervious surfaces (hardscape, asphalt, rooftops, etc.) to a presently undeveloped (pervious) ground condition. In particular, the Project anticipates developing over 50-percent (%) of the project site with impervious materials and coverage. This conversion would typically result in a site-specific increase in the rate and quantity of surface runoff. To manage this onsite condition, the project includes a proposed storm drain design (subject to approval by the City Engineer) with surface and piped conveyances draining into retention basins and underground retention 263 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
structures. The retention basins and facilities will be required to incorporate a capacity to accept and infiltrate the worst-case increase in runoff volume for the 30-year and 5-day storm event.

The Project will introduce engineered surface stability to the previously unimproved road shoulders by intercepting and properly conveying off-site flows toward the existing and future street improvements.

Less than significant impacts are expected.

The Project includes stormwater capture, detention, and on-site treatment that will prevent any substantial increase in the rate, velocity, or quantity of runoff generated from the Project as compared to the existing undeveloped, and pervious, site condition. Runoff, from the Project, that exceeds the 30-year, 5-day storm runoff volume for post-development conditions will discharge from the site in a way that perpetuates the existing drainage condition, which flows off-site to the northeast. The project includes approximately less than half-acre of proposed structures, driveways, parking, and hardscape (impervious areas) and approximately a quarter-acre of proposed landscape or open space (pervious areas). Runoff will be conveyed primarily via surface flows through biofiltration BMPs and eventually to storm drain inlets with inlet filters. The runoff will subsequently be directed to the detention basins or carried via proposed piped flow to the corresponding underground infiltration structures located under the drive aisles. The City will require that BMPs be incorporated into a Final WQMP, to be reviewed and approved by the City.

Through this required compliance, the project will prevent impacts to the local receiving waters and avoid violations to the established water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. Less than significant impacts relative to the substantial degradation of water quality are expected.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) evaluates potential flood hazards for the City.

The FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) serve as the basis for identifying those potential hazards and determining the need for and availability of federal flood insurance. According to FIRM panel 06029C-3310E, the northerly portion of the project is located within Zone A, identified as areas determined to be inside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. However, a narrow portion of the southerly half of the parcel is impacted by FEMA flood zone A. Development proposed within areas of known flood hazards are required to verify the existence of the flood area, through HEC-RAZ modeling based upon updated topographical investigation. The boundaries of the flood plain are either confirmed, modified, or removed altogether. In either case, a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMAR), and ultimately a Letter of Map Revision (LOMAR) is required for submittal, review, and concurrence by FEMA. Once confirmed, the Flood Hazard Insurance Rate Maps are revised, per the LOMAR.

Less than significant impacts are expected.

Improvements within the areas of flood hazards are required to utilize fill dirt and raise the existing grade at least one-foot above the flood plain elevation, as determined by the aforementioned modeling.

Furthermore, concrete foundations are required to be at-least twelve (12) inches above the proposed fill elevation. The project is not located near an existing levee or dam; therefore, no impacts are expected pertaining to this topic.

Less than significant impacts are expected.

The project site is not located near a body of water that would pose potential seiche or tsunami impacts.

The project site is underlain by Hydrologic Soil Type C, which is characterized for having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. Type C soils consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained, or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse 264 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. With the relatively shallow gradients that characterize the vicinity, the erosive nature and mudflow potential is reduced. As stated previously, the proposed site plan includes retention facilities sized to contain the 30-year, 5-day storm runoff volume for post-development conditions. Only flows in excess of the project's retention requirements would be allowed to exit the project area, therefore, less than significant impacts are expected.

The project site is not located near a body of water that would pose potential seiche or tsunami impacts.

The project site is underlain by Hydrologic Soil Type C, which is characterized for having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. Type C soils consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained, or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. With the relatively shallow gradients that characterize the vicinity, the erosive nature and mudflow potential is reduced.

As stated previously, the proposed site plan includes retention facilities sized to contain the 30-year, 5- day storm runoff volume for post-development conditions. Only flows in excess of the project's retention requirements would be allowed to exit the project area, therefore, less than significant impacts are expected.

Mitigation:

HYD-1: The Project shall prepare and submit a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to the issuance of the first grading permit.

Monitoring: The City’s Public Works Department will enforce and monitor these mitigation measures.

LAND USE/PLANNING Would the Project

18. Land Use
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028 Findings of Fact: a) The Project consists of five (5) parcels situated at the southeasterly corner of CCB and Hanover Drive. Each parcel was subdivided as part of a planned commercial/residential development, but have yet to be occupied with the exception of Padron Metal Finishing Business, on Parcel 14. Within this general area of the City, approximately 30% of the existing parcels are improved and occupied with business uses and these uses range from light manufacturing, industrial, to commercial uses. Due to the scattered nature of these parcel improvements, a community has not been established within the Project area; therefore, no community can be divided or marginalized. b) The Project site is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) and City/County records indicate that the Project has been zoned commercial since at least 2005. The surrounding parcels have been improved with light manufacturing uses and the Kern County Assessor’s Office have also been collecting property taxes under a Light Manufacturing use for nearly two (2) decades. The change from Commercial to Manufacturing/Industrial land uses can only yield approximately 12,600 SF of building improvements, which complement the surrounding land uses adjacent to CCB, between Hanover Dr. and South Loop Blvd. The existing, and proposed, uses within the Project vicinity are similar to the 265 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Project and constitute compatible development with the underlying zoning and land use. As such, the Project will not cause a significant environmental impact as no conflict with land use policy, underlying plans or existing regulations will be affected. The Project does not conflict with the City’s General Plan, including its land use designation and associated land use policies. The Project does not conflict with the adopted Air Quality Management Plan, or other adopted plan or policy that will impact the Project site or the surrounding environment.

No impacts are anticipated to land use or planning zoning or land use standards.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary
MINERAL RESOURCES Would the Project

22. Mineral Resources
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region or the residents of the State?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element; Chapter 5; Figure 5-3: Mojave Desert Designated Areas Map; Project Materials.

Findings of Fact: According to Chapter 5, of the California City General Plan, there are no mineral resources within the City’s General Planning Area. In the eastern portion of the Mojave Specific Plan, it contains areas with mineral resources consisting of several gravel pits. In the western portion of the North Edwards Specific Plan is a mineral extraction owned by Rio Tinto (Borax) Mine that is the world’s largest sodium borate deposit. This includes the world’s largest open pit borax mining operation (more than 600 feet deep) near the community of Boron.

According to the California Geological Study (CGS) Mineral Land Classifications, no areas, or sites of mineral resource and/or SMARA study areas exist on, or within the vicinity, of the Project site. The property is not listed as an active or historical mineral resources mine. In addition, the Project site is not located within an active or potential area of aggregate extraction pursuant to Map Sheet 52, which was updated in 2018 providing guidance on aggregate sustainability areas within the state.

The nature of the project does not involve the extraction of mineral deposits. Construction of the Project would rely on existing local and regional aggregate resources from permitted facilities within the region. The project is not expected to result in a considerable extraction and/or loss of known mineral resources that are considered important to the region or residents of California. Additionally, there are no specific known mineral resource deposits or. facilities on or near the project. No impacts are expected related to the loss of availability of known mineral resources. As previously discussed, there are no mineral resources within the City of California City. The closest mineral resource to California City is in the City of Mojave, approximately 35-miles southwest of the project site. As determined in the previous discussion, the project site is located within an area that is not designated, has not been evaluated or studied, and is not historically known to contain mineral and/or aggregate deposits of value.

This zone designation applies to areas of no known mineral occurrences where geologic information 266 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
does not rule out either the presence or absence of significant mineral resources. Overall, the Project site is not recognized as a mineral resource recovery site delineated in the City of California City General Plan or the resource maps prepared pursuant to SMARA.21 No impacts are expected.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary
NOISE Would the Project result in

23. a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity or the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport, would the project expose people be residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; Kern County General Plan; Kern County Development Ordinance; California City Airport Master Plan and Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.

Findings of Fact: The project site shall comply with the property development standards outlined in the California City Municipal Code for commercial Light Industrial and manufacturing facilities. The Project is not located within the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) of the California Municipal Airport.

Impacts from aircraft noise will not have an impact. Therefore, impact is anticipated to the airport operations. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated.

The Project is not located near (or within the vicinity) of any railroad or rail spur. As such, no impact is anticipated to occur. The property is not located near, or within the vicinity, of a major highway. The City’s Planning Area is particularly bounded by the State Highway 58, along its southern boundary and State Highway 14 as well along its western boundary. These highways are not located close enough to impact future patrons or employees of the Project. The property is not located near (or within the vicinity) of another major source of noise. The City’s Planning Area is particularly bounded by the State Highway 58, along its southern boundary and State Highway 14 as well along its western boundary. These highways are not located close enough to impact future patrons or employees of the Project.

Noise is defined as unwanted sound that disrupts normal activities or that diminishes the quality of the environment. It is usually caused by human activity that adds to the existing acoustic setting of a locale. Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB).

The human ear does not respond uniformly to sounds at all frequencies, being less sensitive to low and high frequencies than to medium frequencies that correspond with human speech. In response to this, the A weighted noise level or scale has been developed to correspond better with peoples' 21 Department of Conversation, “Mines Online” (https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mol/index.html). Accessed February 6, 2023. 267 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
subjective judgment of sound levels. This A-weighted sound level is called the "noise level" referenced in units of dB(A).

Land uses determined to be "sensitive" to noise as defined by the Kern County General Plan (KCGP)22 include residential areas, schools, hospitals, parks, and recreational areas, senior centers, and churches. The KCGP Noise Element sets a sixty 60-decibel dB(A) limit on exterior noise levels from stationary sources (i.e., non transportation sources) at sensitive receptors. With the exception of periodic noise release from the California City Airport, the ambient noise level can be anticipated to occur below the maximum threshold established by City Ordinance. The Noise Control Ordinance in the Kern County Code of Ordinances (Section 8.36.020 et seq.) prohibits a variety of nuisance noises between the hours of 9 PM and 6 AM on weekdays and 9 PM and 8 AM on weekends. The future marijuana-related facilities would adhere to the provisions of the Kern County Noise Ordinance under both proposed project alternatives. In evaluating human response to noise, acoustical analysis compensates for the response of people to varying frequency or pitch components of sound. The human ear is most sensitive to sounds in the middle frequency range used for human speech and is less sensitive to lower and higher-pitched sounds. The “A” weighted scale, abbreviated dB(A). The noise exposure information developed during the preparation of the Noise Element does not include all conceivable sources of industrial, commercial, or agricultural noise within the City, but rather focuses on the existing sources of noise which have been identified by the City as being significant. Section

19.04.252 in Kern County Zoning Ordinance defines exterior noise levels as "the noise level near the exterior of a structure usually within 50-feet of the structure. Kern County has implemented standards for sensitive areas for new projects, where in those sensitive areas outdoor noise levels are to be mitigated to below or 65dB Lin and similarly 45dB(A) or below in interior residential or inside other sensitive interior spaces.

The City of California City has the authority to establish land use noise standards and corresponding restrictions under the City's Noise Ordinance. A range of noise standards apply to different receiving land uses based on sensitivity and compatibility. In general, land uses with a higher sensitivity to noise (residential, schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, nursing homes and recreation) are assigned lower ambient noise thresholds than land uses deemed less sensitive (industrial and commercial). According to the Government Code, noise exposure contours should be developed in terms of the Day-Night Average Level (Ldn) or Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) for transportation-related noise sources. These descriptors represent the weighted energy noise level for a 24-hour day after inclusion of a 30dB(A) penalty for noise levels occurring at night between the houses of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The CNEL descriptor includes a penalty of about 4.8dB(A) for noise levels occurring during the evening hours 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. The CNEL explanation was developed for the quantification of aircraft noise, and its use is required when preparing noise exposure maps for airports within the State of California.

The Noise Element of the City's General Plan identifies vehicular traffic as the principal source of noise in the community. The General Plan Area is particularly reasonably close to State Highway 58, along its southern boundary and State highway 14, and the SFRR to the west. The project property is currently vacant with vacant commercial lands, industrial and manufacturing uses to the west and northwest. The Project proposes to construct a Light Industrial – Non-Cannabis operations. The 22 Kern County General Plan, Kern County Planning Department. 2700 “M” Street, Suite 100. Bakersfield, CA 93301 (https://psbweb.co.kern.ca.us/planning/pdfs/kcgp/KCGP_Complete.pdf). Accessed February 6, 2023. 268 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
anticipated noise impacts, from such an industrial and manufacturing use, will not exceed the evaluated noise generation factors established within the commercial land use.

Section 19.80.030.1 within Kern County Zoning Ordinances restricts noise generated by commercial or industrial uses within 500-feet of a residential use or residential zone district. The Project will not generate noise that exceeds an average 65 dB/Ldn between the hours of 7 AM and 10 PM and shall not generate noise that exceeds 65 dB/Ldn, or which would result in an increase of 5 dB(A) or more from ambient sound levels, both are superior, between the hours of 10 PM and 7 AM.

As discussed previously, the Project is adjacent to Open Space zoning to the south only. Urban-level development is planned to the north, east, and west. The Project is designed to reduce impacts upon adjacent sensitive receptors, within these residential neighborhoods, by complying with the minimum 200-foot setback between Light Industrial buildings and existing residential zones. No sensitive species or residential properties or units are located within a ¼ of the Project.

Construction-related Noise:

The construction activities of the Project are expected to generate short-term noise increases compared to the existing levels. A temporary incremental increase in noise levels along local roadways is expected to occur during the transport of workers and equipment to and from the site.

Noise increases will also be generated by the actual on-site construction activities, which based on location and context, will occur within 500-feet of existing residential zoning and occupied units. As such, it is important to acknowledge and disclose the maximum noise levels generated from all possible stationary construction sources.

Below is a table that identifies the accepted stationary noise level impacts that result from construction related activities:

THIS SECTION LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
269 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Based upon this, which is generated from the FHWA Construction Noise Model User’s Guide (2006), the loudest source of construction noise is 80 dBA, Lmax. The shortest distance from the project’s construction activity to the nearest residential property (APN: (210-062-18) is located about 2,106.57- feet, which is adequate to mitigate construction sound impacts. The noise levels are measured at 50- feet and sound dissipates pursuant to the inverse square law; for which it can be shown that for each doubling of distance from a point source, the sound pressure level decreases by approximately 6 dB.

Notwithstanding the ambient noise level currently being generated from this segment of CCB., the sound attenuation from the point source emitter is calculated by the formula Lp(R2) = Lp(R1) - 20ꞏLog10 (R2/R1). This results in an unmitigated annenuated sound pressure ((dB(A)) of 83.15, at the property line of the adjacent residential zone. City ordinance limits the maximum noise level, in residential zones, to a maximum of 65 dB(A), at the property line and a maximum interior noise level of 45 dB(A). This results in an excess of approximately 18 dB(A); however, it is important to account for the noise attenuation characteristics of the residential home construction.

Therefore, we can reasonably assume that standard building construction in warm climate area such as southern California offers an exterior-to-interior attenuation rate of 12 dB(A). Taking the more conservative approach, between 20 dB(A) and 12 dB(A) the highest level of stationary construction equipment noise is 90 dB(A), at a maximum of 50-feet, this results in a maximum noise level of 71.15 270 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
dB(A), which is in excess of the allowable interior noise level by approximately 27 dB(A) above the maximum base ambient noise level allowed. With the incorporation of a temporary construction noise barrier that complies with the FHWA Noise Barrier Design Handbook.

Any new construction required for a future Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis facility would generally occur during daytime hours, typically from 6 AM to 6 PM; however, the Kern County Noise Control Ordinance (Title 8 of the Kern County Code of Ordinances) limits all construction activities to take place between 6 AM and 9 PM, Monday through Friday, and between 8 AM and 9 PM on Saturdays and Sundays. If construction work is performed between dusk and 9 PM or dawn and sunrise (approximately 6 AM), construction crews would use minimal illumination to perform the work safely.

California City Noise Ordinance Section 5-1.406 interior noise standards for Residential zones states that between the times of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., the allowable interior noise level at 45 dB(A) and 55 dB(A) between 7:00a.m. and 10:00 p.m.

During construction, the Project is also expected to follow common industry standards that will help limit noise level increases. For example, all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, should be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and the engines should be equipped with shrouds. Approved haul routes shall be used to minimize exposure of sensitive receptors to potential adverse levels from hauling operations. Truck haul routes are anticipated to include service from CCB., in a westerly direction, then traveling north along CCB and then accessing the site via Hanover Dr. All construction equipment shall be in proper working order and maintained to reduce backfires.

The construction activities of the Project are expected to generate a short-term noise increases compared to the existing levels. Two types of noise impacts are anticipated during future construction activities. First, the transport of workers and equipment to the site would incrementally increase noise levels along the local roadways leading to and from the site.

Operational-related Noise:

During the life of the Project, all industrial and manufacturing operations will be conducted in the interior of enclosed structures, facilities, and buildings, as mandated by the local zoning ordinance.

All future operations, including materials management, will occur indoors and within the fenced limits.

Outdoor activities will be limited. These include vehicular access and circulation in the Project’s parking lot and drive aisles; access to the trash enclosures for waste management (disposal and pick up); access to the outdoor utilities for maintenance purposes (e.g. chillers, septic or sewer systems, storm drain system components). While the Project would result in an increase in noise levels compared to the existing undeveloped condition, the nature and intensity of operations that would occur in the proposed structures are not expected to result in the generation of noise levels that would surpass the community noise and land use compatibility standards. The Project is expected to result in an incremental increase in traffic-related noise levels on the local roadways and less than significant impacts are expected.

Vibration is defined as the mechanical motion of earth or ground, building, or other type of structure, induced by the operation of any mechanical device or equipment located upon or attached to.

Vibration generally results in an oscillatory motion in terms of the displacement, velocity, or acceleration of the ground-or structure(s) that causes a normal person to be aware of the vibration by means such as, but not limited to, sensation by touch or visual observation moving objects. 271 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Groundborne vibration, also referred to as earth borne vibration, can be described as perceptible rumbling, movement, shaking or rattling of structures and items within a structure. Groundborne vibration can generate a heightened disturbance in residential areas. These vibrations can disturb residential structures and household items while creating difficulty for residential activities such as reading or other tasks. Although, groundborne vibration is sometimes perceptible in an outdoor environment, it is not a problem as it is when this form of disturbance is experienced inside a building. Groundborne vibration can be measured in terms of amplitude and frequency or vibration decibels (VdB). Trains, buses, large trucks, and construction activities that include pile driving, blasting, earth moving, and heavy vehicle operation commonly cause these vibrations. Other factors that influence the disturbance of groundborne vibration include distance to source, foundation materials, soil, and surface types.

The Project is surrounded by vacant land and is separated from the nearest existing residential uses by a minimum distance of approximately one half mile directly to the northwest. The existing source of groundborne vibration is attributed to daily traffic volumes along CCB. Construction of the Project is expected to involve the temporary use of vehicles and equipment that would result in shortterm groundborne vibration increases within the permitted construction hours established by the City. During the life of the Project, all routine operations will occur within the proposed structure and during the permitted hours of operation, as mandated by the county ordinance and conditioned by the City. The routine operation of vehicles accessing the Project would cause an incremental increase in groundborne vibration, but not in levels that would be deemed inconsistent with the existing industrial setting or excessive in nature, such that would impact residential uses. Less than significant impacts related to excessive groundborne vibration noise levels are expected. The primary permanent noise sources will be vehicles traveling to and from the site and grounds maintenance equipment. The vehicle mix will be comparable with existing vehicles on surrounding roads. The proposed project is not expected to result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Noise generated by vendors, visitors and employees is expected to be consistent with noise levels at any Light Industrial: NonCannabis/Research development and will not exceed county standards. Project-related vehicles will be consistent with vehicles already using area roadways.

The Project property and most of its surroundings are undeveloped. Therefore, this setting does not represent an existing source of ambient noise. The Project site is not located adjacent to or within proximity to any residential land uses or other sensitive receptors. Noise resulting from the Project operations is anticipated to be largely contained in the proposed structures, while noise resulting from traffic noise caused by the Project is not expected to substantially increase the current ambient levels in a way that would impact sensitive receptors. Less than significant impacts related to permanent increase in ambient noise levels are expected.

Two types of noise impacts should be considered during the construction phase. First, the transport of workers, equipment, and building materials to and from the construction site will incrementally increase noise levels along the roadways leading to and from the site. Second, the noise generated by the actual on-site construction activities should be considered. The increase, although temporary in nature, could be audible to noise receptors located along the roadways utilized for this purpose. High noise levels would also result from all construction activities, whether associated with specific facilities on specific sites, or with the extension pipelines to and from these sites. 272 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Most of development in the City has occurred within the central core. An area comprising approximately twelve sections of land (7,680 acres) in the southwest portion of the land area within the City’s corporate limits. The remaining development in the City has occurred in the northeastern portion; an area located about twelve miles northeast of the central core along Twenty Mule Team Parkway and Randsburg Mojave Road. The project is located approximately 25-miles west of Twenty Mule Team Parkway and approximately 19-miles from Randsburg-Mojave Road. The City’s General Plan Land Use Element includes a summary of the standards of population density and building intensity recommended for the various districts and other territory covered by the plan.

The Project will produce a temporary and intermittent increase in ambient noise levels during construction. During Project site preparation, grading and construction, the contractors will be expected to utilize properly maintained construction equipment consistent with the manufacturer’s standards. Construction activities are required to take place within the designated hours established by standards of California City. Less than significant impacts related to temporary or periodic ambient noise levels are expected.

The Project is not located within the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP) of the California Municipal Airport.

Impacts from aircraft noise will not have an impact.

Mitigation:

Pursuant to CCMC, Article 4. – Noise and Vibration, the following mitigation is applied:

NOI-1: On-site noise generating construction and demolition activities shall be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Exceptions require that a permit be obtained beforehand from the Permits and Licenses Committee of the City.

NOI-2: The construction contractor shall ensure that all powered construction equipment shall be equipped with appropriate mufflers. The construction contractor shall ensure that all equipment is properly maintained to prevent additional noise due to worn or improperly maintained parts. The construction contractor shall use quieter equipment as opposed to noisier equipment (such as rubber-tired equipment rather than metal-tracked equipment), wherever possible.

NOI-3: The construction contractor shall locate construction staging areas as far as possible from sensitive uses near the project’s northern and western boundary.

NOI-4: The construction contractor shall establish a noise disturbance coordinator. The noise disturbance coordinator shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall be required to implement reasonable corrective measures such that the complaint is resolved. Notices sent to residential units within 500- feet of the construction site and all signs posted at the construction site shall list the telephone number for the noise disturbance coordinator.

Monitoring: Mitigation measures shall be implemented through compliance with the permit review and issuance process.
273 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15

24. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the Project
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Housing Element.

Findings of Fact: The California City planning area is comprised of 130,200 acres (203.44 square miles).

This represents an increase of 11,200 acres resulting from the 1991 Municipal Reorganization #91-1 that comprised a 21,000-acre annexation and 4,800-acre detachment. The total 203.44 square miles planning area also represents the official City limits of California City. California City completed the 2002 Annexation, Detachment, Sphere of Influence Amendment (the City has Jurisdictional Boundaries and Coterminous Sphere of Influence), Redevelopment Area Expansion General Plan Update (Including the Housing Element), and Automotive Test Course Project. This action did not impact the availability of parcels for housing. It detached some environmentally sensitive areas and annexed some land suitable for economic development.

Based upon the 2009-2028 General Plan, the total of all single and multiple-family residential land designations represents 25 percent (33,500 acres) of the California City planning area. The residential land use designations of the General Plan and related zoning classifications show approximately 21,474 available (vacant) residential lots in the Central Core. The current population of California City is 13,972 as of July 1, 2017.

The proposed facility consists of 12,620 SF of Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis and manufacturing uses, and related, but ancillary Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis processing and manufacturing. The facility is estimated to staff a maximum of 5 employees with a single shifts. The proposed Project may encourage relocation for employment. However, the number of employees is expected to come from existing residents primarily.

The Project does not have a residential component. Improvements to roads and other infrastructure associated with the Project would not induce substantial growth to the area. Less than significant impacts are expected.

The entire property is currently vacant land, with one existing metal fabricating business and is designated by the City General Plan as commercial. The Project area does not include any existing residential units and would not displace any existing housing or require replacement housing. No impacts are anticipated.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary
274 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
PUBLIC SERVICES Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

25. Fire Services
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Safety Element.

Findings of Fact:

Fire services are provided to the project area by the California City Fire Department (CCFD). The fire department operates out of a single location, located at 20890 Hacienda Blvd, California City, CA 93505, approximately 1.56-miles from the project site. The station has four paid fire fighters on duty per day. The CCFD maintains a fleet of two structure engines (one front-line and one reserve), one brush engine, one brush patrol, one squad/off road rescue, and two staff SUV’s. The CCFD maintains mutual aid and automatic aid agreement with Kern County Fire and Edwards Air Force Base Fire, resulting in the ability of three engines being dispatched; a standard duty response that ensures a minimum number of firefighters arrive at scene per National standards. Mutual aid is an agreement among emergency responders to lend assistance across jurisdictions provided resources are available and is not to the detriment of their own service area. At buildout, the facility will have an approximate building ground floor area (GFA) of approximately a 12,620 SF facility; under a Class B Occupancy; which does not create a substantial increase in the need for additional fire suppression and planning services.

Development of the project increases demand on fire services, however based on the site proximity to the City’s existing fire station, the proposed project could be adequately served without the expansion of a new fire facility and adequate response times would be met. Additionally, the project would be required to implement all applicable and current California Fire Code Standards. This would include installation of fire hydrants as well as sprinkler systems inside the buildings. Furthermore, the project will be reviewed by City and Fire officials to ensure adequate fire service and safety as a result of project implementation. The project will also be required to comply with the City’s Development Impact Fees (DIF) to assist with the funding of public facilities and services, including fire, therefore, less than significant impacts are expected.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary

26. Police Protection
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Safety Element.

Findings of Fact:

Police services are provided to the project area by the California City Police Department (CCPD). The police department operates out of a single location and is located at 21130 Hacienda Blvd, approximately 2-miles from the project site. Per the Police Department website, the CCPD has 13 sworn officers and 6 support staff, totaling 19 positions. Based on the 2021 Census, California City 275 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
has a population of 13,707 persons, resulting in an officer to resident ratio of 0.95 per 1,000 population. A suite of safety and security measures will be incorporated into the project. A more detailed, comprehensive security plan is required by the City during the regulatory permit phase. This will include specific locations and areas of coverage by security cameras; location of audible interior and exterior alarms; location of exterior lighting; name and contact information of Security Company monitoring the site and any additional information required by the City.

Although the project may require additional demand for police services, the demand is not expected to hinder the City’s ability to provide police protection services and adequate response times would be met. Furthermore, the project will be reviewed by City and Police officials to ensure adequate fire service and public safety concerns are adequately addressed by the Applicant, prior to Certificate of Occupancy of the first building permit for a non-residential building. The project will also be required to comply with the City’s Development Impact Fees (DIF) to assist with the funding of public facilities and services, including police, therefore, less than significant impacts are expected.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary

27. Schools
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Safety Element.

Findings of Fact: The proposed project falls under the Mojave Unified School District (MUSD).

Development of the project would not create a direct demand for school service. Approximately 5 permanent (full-time) jobs will be retained by the Project. Employment generated by the project would not be expected to draw a substantial number of new residents that would generate school age children requiring public education or substantially alter school facilities or the demand for public education and no new facilities would need to be constructed. Additionally, any future development will be required to pay Development Impact Fees (DIF) to the Mojave Unified School District, developer impact fees to assist in offsetting impacts to school facilities. At the time of writing, current development fees are $3.79 per SF for residential and $0.61 per SF for commercial/industrial projects (Level I Developer Fee Study for Mojave Unified School District, 2018). Less than significant impacts to school services are expected. As discussed below, the proposed project would not create substantial additional demand for public park facilities, nor result in the need to modify existing or construct new park facilities. No impacts are expected to city parks.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary

28. Parks
The Project would not create substantial additional demand for public park facilities, nor result in the need to modify existing or construct new park facilities. No impacts are expected to park. As previously discussed, the Project proposes to construct a 12,620 SF commercial Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis and manufacturing uses. Properties immediately to the north, east, south, and west of the project are in a vacant state. Furthermore, a maximum of 150 employees will be generated by the Project, the addition of which is not anticipated to cause a substantial increase to the current existing neighborhood 276 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
community, regional or pocket parks. Therefore, no impacts are expected relative to use or deterioration of existing parks. The Project buildout will not substantially degrade any existing or planned recreational facility. Upon the development of Parcel 15, the City will require the construction of a Class II Bike Trail adjacent to the curb-line of CCB, which is required pursuant to the City’s Bike Plan Element of the General Plan. In addition, the Project will be required to pay park land impacts not offset by the construction of the aforementioned bike trail. In addition, the City’s fees will address the incremental need that results from this Project upon recreational trails, bikeways, or service paths. No construction or expansion of other recreational facilities is required for Project implementation and no impacts are anticipated.

29. Other public facilities: Libraries
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Safety Element.

Findings of Fact: Library services are provided by the Kern County Library system with the nearest branch located in the City at 9507 California City Boulevard. The Kern County Library provides a full range of services and resources to over 850,000 people in every city and unincorporated area of Kern County through a network operated at Kern County Library Headquarters. The Kern County Library system includes 24 branches and 2 bookmobiles available to serve the County population.

Development of the project would not create a direct demand for school service. Approximately 5 permanent (full-time) jobs will be retained by the Project. Employment generated by the project would not be expected to draw a substantial number of new residents that would generate school age children requiring library services or substantially alter existing library branch facilities or the demand for new facilities would need to be constructed.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary

30. Health Services
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Safety Element.

Findings of Fact: According to the City Fire Chief, there are multiple choices for hospital care to serve City residents. These choices depend upon the severity and type of medical treatment required. In addition, hospital related care also depends on bed availability and the patients’ preference, if not emergent. A number of hospitals that a patient could be transferred to for minor issues such as less critical conditions, stabilizing patience, and minor surgeries. These minor incidences are typically served by Adventist Health-Tehachapi Valley in Tehachapi, which is located approximately 25-miles from the City’s western edge. Furthermore, Ridgecrest Regional Hospital is located approximately 30- miles from the east edge of the city and even Barstow Community Hospital; which is located approximately 55-miles from the southwest edge of town also provides non-trauma related care. If trauma level care is necessary, patients are transported to the Antelope Valley Hospital in Lancaster, which is located approximately 30-miles from the south edge of the city.

Mitigation: No Mitigation Required
Monitoring: No Monitoring Necessary
277 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15

31. 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?
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?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Open Space Element.

Findings of Fact: As discussed herein, the proposed Project would not create substantial additional demand for public park facilities, nor result in the need to modify existing or construct new park facilities.

No impacts are expected to park. As previously discussed, the Project proposes to construct a 12,620 SF commercial Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis and manufacturing uses. Properties immediately to the north, east, south, and west of the project are in a vacant state. Furthermore, a maximum of 150 employees will be generated by the Project, the addition of which is not anticipated to cause a substantial increase to the current existing neighborhood community, regional or pocket parks.

Therefore, no impacts are expected relative to use or deterioration of existing parks. The Project buildout will not substantially degrade any existing or planned recreational facility. Upon the development of Parcel 15, the City will require the construction of a Class II Bike Trail adjacent to the curb-line of CCB, which is required pursuant to the City’s Bike Plan Element of the General Plan. In addition, the Project will be required to pay park land impacts not offset by the construction of the aforementioned bike trail. In addition, the City’s fees will address the incremental need that results from this Project upon recreational trails, bikeways, or service paths. No construction or expansion of other recreational facilities is required for Project implementation and no impacts are anticipated.

Mitigation:

REC-1: The Project will construct a Class II Bike Trail adjacent to the curb-line of CCB. Which is required pursuant to the City’s Bike Plan Element of the General Plan.

Monitoring: Mitigation will be monitored by the City’s Planning Department staff.

TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the Project

32. Circulation
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
278 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
State
Senate Bill 743
SB 743, which was signed into law in 2013, initiated an update to the CEQA Guidelines to change how lead agencies evaluate transportation impacts under CEQA, with the goal of better measuring the actual transportation-related environmental impacts of any given project. Under CEQA, cities, counties, and other public agencies must analyze real estate and transportation projects to determine whether they may have a significant impact on the environment. One key determination under CEQA is the transportation impact of these projects. Traditionally, transportation impacts have been evaluated by examining whether the project is likely to cause automobile delay at intersections and congestion on nearby individual highway segments, and whether this delay will exceed a certain amount (this is known as Level of Service or LOS analysis). Automobile delay, as described solely by LOS or similar measure of traffic congestion, is no longer considered a significant impact under CEQA, except in locations specifically identified in the Guidelines. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099(b)(2).) This provision took effect when the update to the CEQA Guidelines was certified in late 2018. (Guidelines, § 15064.3.) Guidelines section 15064.3 specifies that VMT analyses are voluntary until July 1, 2020. A recent appellate court decision (Citizens for Positive Growth and Preservation v. City of Sacramento (2019) 43 Cal.App.5th 609) confirmed that traffic congestion is no longer an environmental impact under CEQA, and VMT is not a required element of transportation analyses until July 1.

Regional Setting:

At the center of the transportation planning process is the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Updated on a 4-year cycle, the RTP is a long-term (20+ year) blueprint for the region’s transportation system, and encompasses projects for all types of travel, including freight, intermodal, and aviation. The plan includes the Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) designed to help reduce emissions from passenger vehicle travel. The plan is accompanied by a program level environmental document that analyzes cumulative impacts, and the regional air quality conformity analysis required by federal regulations. Included in the 2018 RTP is the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) required by California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, of Senate Bill (SB) 375. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) set Kern greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions from passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks at 5 percent per capita by 2020 and 10 percent per capita by 2035 as compared to 2005. In addition, SB 375 provides for closer integration of the RTP/SCS with the Regional Housing needs Allocation (RHNA) ensuring consistency between low-income housing need and transportation planning. Kern COG engaged in the RHNA process concurrently with the development of the 2014 RTP. Current and recent transportation plan goals generally focus on balanced transportation and land use planning that:
 Maximize mobility and accessibility for all people and goods in the region.  Ensure travel safety and reliability for all people and goods in the region.  Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transportation system.  Maximize the productivity of our transportation system. 279 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
 Protect the environment and health of residents by improving air quality and encouraging active transportation (e.g., bicycling and walking).

Local
City of California City – General Plan Circulation Element The Circulation Element of the General Plan contains policies and objectives that are considered applicable to the proposed Project as identified below.

Policies:
 Provide an arterial system that serves the major centers of activity within the urbanized areas and provides capacity for the highest traffic volumes and longest trip lengths. To the extent feasible, direct access onto arterials from individual parcels should be restricted.  Require that new development of major traffic generating projects restrict direct access onto arterials or collectors through the project design, which may include any combination of the following measures deemed acceptable by the City:
o Access to other surrounding streets
o The limitation on the number and location of direct access point; and/or o The use of reciprocal access easements with other adjoining properties.  The City shall require the completion of planned arterial and collector streets as they become necessary to serve new development or to meet cumulative traffic demands in the City.  This shall be accomplished by the following:
o Adopt a street improvement program based on a current surface maintainability and traffic impact priority system.
o Coordinate the street improvement of necessary street facilities as a condition of land development.

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The City relies upon the Environmental Checklist Form included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines to determine the significance of environmental impacts. As it applies to the Project, the Project would have a significant impact on Transportation if it would result in:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, considering all modes of transportation including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d. Result in inadequate emergency access
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? 280 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
The Project is required to detail compliance with the City’s Final California City General Plan Circulation Element (Chapter 3), by providing a balanced circulation system to meet the needs of the residents, businesses, and visitors to California City. According to Figure 3-1 and Figure 3-2, of the General Plan, the Project is not subject to any transit, bicycle, pedestrian, or other multi-modal elements established by the City’s General Plan. Furthermore, the Project is required to make improvements to segments of the frontage roadway, which is designated as Divided Collector (78-foot R/W) roadway per the Kern County Circulation Element.

Furthermore, each county in California is required to develop a Congestion Management Program (CMP) that analyzes the links between land use, transportation, and air quality. The Kern County Council of Governments (KERNCOG) is the County’s Congestion Management Agency. The KERNCOG prepares and periodically updates the County’s CMP to meet federal Congestion Management System guidelines and state CMP legislation. The most recent CMP is included within KERNCOG’s Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), and was completed in April 2012, does not indicate any roadways or multi-modal improvements established in the KERNCOG CMP, relative to the Project area. According to Appendix A of the LRTP, in the 2011 Kern County Congestion Management Program, Highway 14 and Highway 58 are the only roads in proximity to the Project site listed as part of the CMP System of Highways and Roadways. These roads are not directly adjacent to the Project site. Thus, the Project will not conflict with a CMP due to the distance between the Project site and these covered roadways and their apportionment of traffic trips have been built into the build-out assumptions for the overall city land uses. The GP identifies that sidewalks, bike lanes, off-street trails and golf cart routes are especially important along major roadways in the community. Within the City, adequate public transportation choices including expanded bus routes and service and other transit choices such as shuttles, light rail, and rail where feasible. The City currently provides service through existing public transportation opportunities such as include public transit, Amtrak, and other private carriers such as Greyhound. Transit services include intracity, demand-responsive, and fixed-route operations. The Project will not produce a need for increases in transit services or require the substantial alteration of existing facilities and/or services. As no facilities currently exists, and the expansion of which is not required or contemplated by the proposed project, then no conflict will occur upon any program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Therefore, the Project will have a less than significant impact.
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Changes to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines were adopted in December 2018, which require all lead agencies to adopt Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as a replacement for automobile delay-based level of service (LOS) as the new measure for identifying transportation impacts for land use projects. This statewide mandate took effect July 1, 2020. To aid in this transition, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) released a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December of 2018) (Technical Advisory).

VMT Analysis Methodology
For the purposes of this analysis the recommended VMT analysis methodology and thresholds recommended by the Technical Advisory and supported by OPR’s Guidelines have been used. As outlined in the Technical Advisory, mixed-use projects such as the proposed Project need to evaluate each component of the project independently and apply the relevant significance threshold for each 281 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
project type (i.e., office, retail, etc.). For the purposes of this VMT analysis, the evaluation of VMT will focus on the industrial/manufacturing uses (i.e., commercial and Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis uses) only. Consistent with Technical Advisory recommendations, local serving retail that is typically less than 50,000 SF will tend to improve retail destination proximity and short trips, which in turn reduces VMT.

According to the Technical Advisory, uses such as the lodging, retail, and destination-orientated uses, proposed by the
Project are presumed to create a less-than-significant impact.

The Technical Advisory provides for the following recommended threshold for industrial land use projects which used for the Project: A proposed project exceeding a level of 15 percent below existing regional VMT per employee may indicate a significant transportation impact.

Project Screening Analysis
The Technical Advisory provides details on appropriate “screening thresholds” that can be used to identify when a proposed land use project is anticipated to result in a less-than-significant impact without conducting a more detailed analysis. Screening thresholds are broken into three types:
• Project Type Screening
• Map Based Screening based on Low VMT Area
• Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening
For the purposes of this analysis, the initial VMT screening process has been conducted with using the Map Based Screening based on Low VMT Screening Tool (Screening Tool), which uses screening criteria consistent with the screening thresholds recommended in the Technical Advisory.

Project Type Screening – Projects that are consistent with the current Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or general plan, and that generate fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips be presumed to have a less-than- significant impact on VMT. Based on the Project’s trip generation (see Attachment A), the Project is not consistent with the City’s general plan and would generate more than 110 daily vehicle trips, therefore, the Project would not be eligible to screen out based on project type screening.

The Project Type screening threshold is not met.

Table 5-1: VMT Summary Information:

Land Use Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) (daily) Annual VMT (year) Weekday Saturday Sunday Trips/Year
Light Industrial: 2,537 1,018 2,557 847,807
Total 2,537 1,018 2,557 847,807
Source: Table 5.9 Operational Mobile Sources; 5.9.1 – VMT Trip Generation23 Low VMT Area Screening
The Screening Tool uses the sub-regional Kern COG – VMIP 2 Model Development Report to measure VMT performance within individual traffic analysis zones (TAZ’s) within the Kern COG region. The 23Source: CalEEMod® | ©2022.1 CAPCOA, Table 5.9. Operational Mobile Sources, May 16, 2023 282 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Project’s physical location based on parcel number was selected within the Screening Tool to determine the relevant TAZ’s VMT as compared to the jurisdictional average. The Project boundary is located in TAZ 1457 and appears to be within a low VMT generating TAZ based on daily total VMT per service population. As measured by the baseline year of 2020, a total of 357 households and 13, nonfarm labor related jobs, were identified. An increase in Households and Employment, in 2046 is 532 and 0, respectively. The increase is not considered significant or substantial in either households or employment, located within TAZ 1457, by the year 2046.

Table 5-2: Kern County TAZ Data:

Kern County TAZ 1457
TAZ 1457
2020 Households 357
2046 Households 532
2020 Employment 13
2046 Employment 13
Household Change 2015-2042 175
Employment Change 2015-2042 0
Figure 4: 2042 Household and Employment Data:
283 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
SOURCE : https ://kerncog.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html ?webmap=bb9f1df531d743f1a91c26478fe29c46 Based on a review of the land use information contained within TAZ 1457 for the KERNCOG Trip Generation base year (2020) model, the zone includes exceptionally low levels of employment and low amounts of population and household data. The proposed Project would increase the number and type of employment uses within the TAZ. However, the increases are considered incremental as the 3,00- acre project area is 0.1% of the total TAZ area and therefore is consistent with the underlying assumptions considered in TAZ 1457
The Low VMT Area screening threshold is met.

Conclusions
The Project is located within a Low VMT Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) and will not significantly increase the amount of employment or households as compared to the underlying assumptions in the TAZ.

Project VMT does not require mitigation measures to reduce trips and levels that would be less-thansignificant.

Level of Significance: Less than Significant

PROJECT SITE
284 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The proposed Project does not propose any design features that would increase traffic hazards, as the Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan Circulation Element, and project-level infrastructure improvements will be established as Conditions of Approval to improve adjacent roadways. The Project is located adjacent to CCB., which is classified as an Arterial/Major Highway in the General Plan Circulation Element (Page 92).24 An Arterial/Major Highway is a divided road with four through lanes, providing for the movement of traffic to and from the planning area; the movement of traffic to and from activity centers within the planning area and the planning sub-areas; and the distribution of traffic to and from the highways. The driveways do not have the potential to change the geometric design of CCB. In a manner that would substantially increase hazards due geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections). The Project design and operations are subject to City approval, per the Site Plan Review (SPR) process, which will ensure sufficient design and access in constructed to City’s standards.

Level of Significance: Less than Significant
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
The Project does not propose any design features that would increase traffic hazards, as the Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan Circulation Element and project-level infrastructure improvements will be established as Conditions of Approval to improve CCB. The Project can be accessed by CCB., which roadway is classified as an Arterial/Major roadway in the Kern County Circulation Element (Page 92). An Arterial/Major roadway is defined as a minimum 110-foot right-ofway divided road with three through lanes, providing for the movement of traffic to and from the development. CCB. Is identified in the General Plan as accommodating a maximum daily traffic volume in excess of 50,000 vehicle trips.25 Project improvements will improve and reduce potential hazards such as existing geometric design features considered unsafe. (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections). Through compliance with these standard City requirements for road improvement, impacts to transportation are less than significant. As a standard condition of approval for future development, access roads shall be provided to within 150-feet to all portions of the exterior building walls and shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 24-feet. The construction of the access roads shall be all weather and capable of sustaining 60,000 lbs., over two (2) axels, for commercial developments.

Approved vehicle access, either permanent or temporary, shall be provided during construction. Level of Significance: Less than Significant.

Mitigation:

TRANS-1: Vehicle Miles Travel (VMT) Reductions Measures:
 T-8: Provide Ridesharing Program (voluntary)
 T-19-A: Construct or Improve Bike Facility
 T-19-B: Construct or Improve Bike Boulevard
 T-29: Reduce Transit Fares
 T-11: Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool
24 https://psbweb.co.kern.ca.us/planning/pdfs/kcgp/KCGPChp2Circulation.pdf (accessed July 22, 2022) 25 https://maps.kerncounty.com/H5/index.html?viewer=KCPublic (accessed July 22, 2022) 285 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
 T-14: Provide Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure  T-26: Increase Transit Service Frequency
 T-28: Use Cleaner-Fuel Vehicles
 T-33: Locate Project near Bike Path/Bike Lane
 T-34: Provide Traffic Calming Measures
 T-42: Implement Telecommute and/or Alternative Work Schedule Program Monitoring: Mitigation will be monitored by the City’s Public Works Department.

33. Tribal Cultural Resources
a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1 (k); or,
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c). of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 for the purpose of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance to a California Native tribe.

Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Open Space Element.

Findings of Fact: California city (acting in their capacity as the lead agency) initiated consultation with the eight NAHC tribes, as required by the AB 52 Tribal Consultation procedures. During the 30-day consultation, one comment was received from the FTBMI Administrations stating that - "This address is outside of the jurisdiction of the FTBMI." No other tribal consultation was received by the lead agency.

As previously discussed in the Cultural Resources discussion of this document, there are five recorded historic archaeological sites within the City, according to the California City General Plan. The archaeological sites are not found within the project area. Additionally, a cultural resource survey was completed by the California Archaeological Inventory Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center for California City's General Plan. The cultural resource survey was concluded that no cultural resources were found on the project site or with close proximity to the site (discussed in Cultural Resources:

Sections 8-9). The historical, cultural, and archaeological resources surveys outlined within the California City General Plan indicate that the project site is not listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated with project implementation. As previously discussed, the land surveys prepared for the California City 286 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
General Plan did not indicate the presence of historic resources, cultural resources, and archaeological resources on or near the project site. Additionally, the California City General Plan states that the City had no Native American Sacred Sites within the City's boundary. Therefore, project implementation is not expected to have a substantial adverse change in a significant Tribal cultural resource. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.

Mitigation:

TRB-1: Pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlay adjacent remains, until the County Coroner has examined the remains. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native America or has reason to believe that they are Native American, the coroner shall contact by telephone within 24-hours of the Native American Heritage Commission.

Monitoring: The City Planning Division staff will monitor and enforce compliance UTILITY AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the Project

34. Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, Electric, Gas
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm
water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which would cause environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry, and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to serve
the project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity of
local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Safety Element.

Findings of Fact:

Wastewater utility services:

The California City Water Department provides sewer services to the city and the project site. The City's wastewater system consists of numerous gravity lines and lift stations. The Wastewater Operations Division provides maintenance of all wastewater collection and transportation and oversees the treatment 287 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
for the City in addition to monitoring and implementation of wastewater regulations. Sanitary sewers are cleaned regularly, and their condition is monitored on a regular basis. According to the California City Urban Water Management Plan Update 2017, California City owns and operates 1.5 million gallons per day (MGD) extended aeration activated sludge tertiary treatment facility (WWTP) and all domestic sewer collection systems within the City limits. The existing California City Wastewater Treatment Facility, located at 30835 Nelson Drive, is designed to treat an average flow of 1.5 MGD and peak flow of 3.0 MGD, where in 2015, the influent flow was 0.8 MGD. A city-maintained sewer line currently lies within CCB., stopping at South Loop Blvd., the project proposes to connect to the existing infrastructure which will provide service to the Project site, upon permitting of new construction.

The project is proposing 12,620 SF retain commercial Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis uses. Wastewater is expected to be minimal as the project would only require up to 150 standard/regular employees, in three (3) shifts. The project is not expected to exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the State Regional Water Quality Control Board (SRWQCB) (Fremont Valley Sub-basin). In addition, City and other local and governmental agency review will ensure compliance with all current and applicable wastewater treatment requirements. Less than significant impacts are expected.

The Project is located approximately 1,900 linear-feet from the closest municipal sewer connection, which is an eight (8”) sewer main trunk line according to Figure 6 of the City’s Existing Sewer System Map. The Project will be required to connect to the City’s sewer system upon completion new construction. The accidental discharge of hazardous materials is not considered significant as these materials are required to comply with strict storage requirements, as discussed in Section 13.

The City of California City operates one wastewater treatment plant located at 30835 Nelson Drive, approximately 6.84-miles east of the project site. All City sewage is collected into sewage mains and delivered to the 1 MGD sanitary facility. The existing wastewater treatment facility collected domestic wastewater to approximately 20 percent of the City’s sewer system the remaining 70-percent (%) is served by onsite septic systems. The existing California City Wastewater Treatment Facility is designed to treat an average flow of 1.5 MGD and peak flow of 3.0 MGD. Currently, the average influent flow is

0.8 MGD. The proposed project is designed to connect into the existing water and sewer facilities, as outlined in the 2002 Water Master Plan for California City, and the 2017 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). As of 2018, this zone was at 2.7% total use, according to Table 2 (page 88) of the FINAL LAMP referenced above. Since little development has occurred in the last 2.5 years, the approximate 52% of capacity is adequate to accommodate the Project’s operational impacts upon existing sewer facilities. The operation and construction of these facilities will comply with the requirements of the City, and the State Regional Water Quality Control Board. Connections into sewer infrastructure once installed, will undergo review by City Staff to ensure wastewater capacity and compliance. Additionally, sewer installation and connection fees in place at the time of development or connection would be collected. As determined previously, the average influent flow (0.8 MGD) for the Wastewater Treatment Facility is lower than the capable average flow (1.5 MGD) and peak flow (3 MGD). Due to the size and the nature of the project, the wastewater treatment provider is anticipated to have adequate capacity for project implementation. Less than significant impacts to wastewater treatment are expected.

Potable water utility services:

California City Water Department provides domestic water service in the project vicinity. The City provides approximately 4,430 active service water connections to its incorporated area (203 square miles). The City maintains approximately 313 miles of water main lines ranging in size from 4 to 21 288 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
inches in diameter, and a 20-inch transmission line connects the City wells to the reservoirs located in the foothills. As stated in the prior discussion, the California City Wastewater Treatment Facility, which is designed to treat an average flow of 1.5 million gallons per day, and peak flow of 3.0 MGD.

Groundwater is the primary source of domestic water supply in California City. According to the Urban Water Management Plan, California City currently uses six groundwater wells and surface water purchased from the Antelope Valley East Kern Water Agency (AVEK) for its groundwater supply. The project property lies within the Fremont Valley Groundwater Sub-basin, within the Lahontan Region (Region 6). The project site is managed by the Fremont Valley Groundwater Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Group (IRWMG), which consists of California City, Mojave Public Utility District (MPUD), and the Antelope Valley East Kern Water Agency (AVEK).

As stated in prior discussions, the groundwater wells in California City produced over 93-percent (%) of the water supply in 2000 to 2001. Per the Water Master Plan, the closest well to the project site, Well #10. According to the California City General Plan, future water demands for the City will be met by the construction of new water wells and through additional purchase of AVEK water. According to the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) updated in 2017, the addition of two new wells will assist in the City's goal in meeting future water demands from 2020 through 2040. The following infrastructure includes Well No. 1 in 2018 and Well No. 11 in 2019. As stated in the UWMP, it is projected that in 2040 the City will be using 82.3 percent of the current water production capacity. It is noted that

82.3 percent capacity utilization in 2040 is conservative and that for the foreseeable future, the City has excess production capacity that will handle system demands year around and during worst case summer demand months.

Cooling or heating systems that use water can dissipate heat acquired by the liquid with one of two methods — closed loop or open loop. The critical difference between these is the amount of exposure the water has to the air. While sometimes more economical to install, open systems can have numerous problems with contaminants getting into the water of the cooling tower. Depending on the temperature, water can also evaporate or freeze from the open cooling tower. A closed circuit system keeps the water completely enclosed inside pipes, preserving water volume and quality. Due to the lower maintenance requirements of a closed system, this type may have a lower price over time than a higher maintenance open circuit system. Existing and new customers of the City’s municipal water system are required to obtain mechanical, plumbing, and/or electrical permits from the City and must comply with applicable codes and regulations.

As required by the policies of the General Plan, the City will continue to cooperate with IRWMG and other agencies/jurisdictions in implementing a groundwater replenishment and ensuring the viability of the Fremont Valley Sub-basin. The proposed development will be expected to follow water conservation guidelines to mitigate impacts to public water supplies. Examples of these water conservation methods include water conserving plumbing fixtures, drought tolerant landscaping, and drip irrigation systems.

The project proposes to connect to the existing 6-inch water line located in Hanover Drive. Additional domestic water improvements necessary to serve this development will be identified by IRWMG and approved by the City of California City. Less than significant impacts to water supply are expected.

Solid waste disposal and recycling services for the City of California City are provided by Waste Management (WM). However, Waste Management does not provide removal of Light Industrial: NonCannabis byproducts or waste generated from the manufacturing, testing, and packaging processes.

As such, the City is currently undergoing a procurement for a solid waste contract to specifically manage 289 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
solid waste generated from the Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis uses. The Project will be required to comply with the future regulations resulting from these procurements. Solid waste generated by the project would consist of standard household/office waste. Commercial waste and recycling collected from the proposed Project will be hauled to the CA City Recycling and Transfer Station (15-AA-0401).

Waste from this transfer station is then sent to a permitted landfill or recycling facility within Kern County. These include Bena, Boron, Mojave-Rosamond, Ridgecrest, Shafter-Wasco, Taft, and Tehachapi Landfills. Cal Recycle data indicates that these landfills have 3 to 90-percent (%) of their remaining estimated capacity, with the Mojave-Rosamond Sanitary Landfill having the lowest remaining capacity, 3-percent (%), and the Boron Sanitary Landfill with approximately 90-percent (%) remaining capacity.

Solid Waste:

Additionally, solid waste generated by a medical marijuana facility would be minimal and would comply with all Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis waste regulations. Less than significant impacts to solid waste are expected. Solid waste disposal and recycling services for the City of California City are provided by Waste Management (WM). Solid waste generated by the project would consist of standard household/office waste. Unused plant material will be composted and reintroduced into soil composite. Commercial waste and recycling collected from the proposed Project will be hauled to the CA City Recycling and Transfer Station (15-AA-0401). Waste from this transfer station is then sent to a permitted landfill or recycling facility within Kern County. These include Bena, Boron, MojaveRosamond, Ridgecrest, Shafter-Wasco, Taft, and Tehachapi Landfills. Cal Recycle data indicates that these landfills have 3% to 90-percent (%) of their remaining estimated capacity, with the MojaveRosamond Sanitary Landfill having the lowest remaining capacity, 3-percent (%), and the Boron Sanitary Landfill with approximately 90-percent (%) remaining capacity. Additionally, solid waste generated by a medical marijuana facility would be minimal and would comply with all Light Industrial:

Non-Cannabis waste regulations. Less than significant impacts to solid waste are expected. The City of California City contracts with Waste Management to serve the solid waste disposal needs of the city, including the project. The project will comply with all applicable solid waste statutes and guidelines.

No impacts are expected relative to solid waste statues and regulations. a) Electricity: The property will be served by Southern California Edison (SCE) which has an obligation to serve and provides electrical service to several properties along CCB. As such, no impact is anticipated. In the circumstance that electrical service is delayed by SCE, the project will utilize CARB-certified generators on a temporary basis. b) Natural Gas: Recently, the City has expanded natural gas service to the north and eastern planning areas. The property will not likely require natural gas service, but service is available if needed. As such, no impact is anticipated.
c) Communications: The Project will not require telecommunications service. As such, no impact is anticipated.
d) Storm water drainage: The Project is served by the City public works department. No expansion of service is anticipated. As such, no impact is anticipated. e) Street Lighting: The Project is served by the City public works department. No expansion of service is anticipated. As such, no impact is anticipated. 290 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
f) Maintenance of public facilities; including roads: The City Public Works Department will accept a dedication of the ultimate improvements prior to the commencement of Project operations.

Maintenance of the road will be provided by a public entity, the City. As such, no impact is anticipated.
g) Other government services: The operations of the future Project will comply with the City’s Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis Program and all provisions of the City Municipal Code.

Mitigation:

UTIL-1: The Applicant is required to obtain “will-serve” letters for water and wastewater utilities from California City Public Works. The same is required for “dry utilities” not provided by the City, such as natural gas (Sempra Energy); electricity (SCE); and telecommunications (Verizon Wireless).

Monitoring: Mitigation shall be monitored by the Public Works Department.

35. WILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility areas classified as very high hazard severity zone, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate pollutant concentrations from a wildlife or
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks,
emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan Safety Element. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection:

State Responsibility Areas for Fire Protection
Findings of Fact: The Project will not expose people or structures to the risks of downslope or downstream flooding or landslides from post-fire instability. As previously mentioned, the parcel in which the Project is proposed is not located within or near a state responsibility area or an area classified as high fire. As such, no impacts can or will occur. According to the Cal-Fire, Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Map Viewer, the Project site is located in a Local Responsibility Area (LRA). The nearest Very High Severity Zone (VHSZ) is located approximately 214-miles easterly, from the Project site. a) The Project will not result in an impact to an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan due to the infill nature of the Project. The anticipated structures will comply with county and local fire codes, including the development of an evacuation plan which is required by City Ordinance.
b) The Project is not located on a parcel of land that is constrained by slopes or subject to other factors that will exacerbate wildfire risks. The property is sparsely vegetated with low-lying 291 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
scrub brush and mostly decomposed granite, having been compacted for decade through wind and water erosion.
c) The Project is located on an in-fill parcel, with existing paved access along CCB. and is not within an area designated as high fire. The construction of public infrastructure improvements will have no impact upon wildfire risks.
d) The Project will not expose people or structures to the risks of downslope or downstream flooding or landslides from post-fire instability. As previously mentioned, the parcel in which the Project is proposed is not located within or near a state responsibility area or an area classified as high fire. As such, no impacts can or will occur.

MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

36. Does the Project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, 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?
Source: City of California City Municipal Code; City of California City Final General Plan 2009-2028; California City General Plan.

Findings of Fact: As concluded in the Biological and Cultural Resources sections of this document, the proposed project expansion would result in no impacts or less than significant impacts with mitigation to these resources. The project is compatible with the City of California City General Plan land use designation and its surroundings. The project will not significantly degrade the overall quality of the region's environment, or substantially reduce the habitat of a 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 of endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Less than significant Impacts with mitigation is expected.

37. Does the Project have impacts which 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, other
current projects, and probable future Projects)?
Source: Staff review, Project Application Materials
Findings of Fact: The Project shall meet or exceed all applicable state and local laws and regulations pertaining to the business and activities, including the duty of obtaining any required state licenses.

The facility would be compatible with the future land uses described by the City’s Commercial Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis program. Based upon the information and mitigation measures providedwithin this Initial Study and implementation of the Project is not expected to result in impacts that, when considered in relation to other past, current, or probable future projects, would be cumulatively considerable. Less than significant impacts are expected. 292 - 295 February 13, 2024
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

APN: 210-263-11 – 15
Mitigation: The Project will establish a Mitigation/Monitoring and Reporting Matrix to implement the required Mitigation Measures.

Monitoring: City Staff will review, implement, and ensure ongoing mitigation.

38. Does the Project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Source: Staff review, Project application
Findings of Fact: As discussed in the various sections throughout this Initial Study, the proposed project would not include a land use that could result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. The City of California City has established regulations pertaining to commercial Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis facilities to ensure these businesses do not conflict with the City's General Plan, its surrounding uses, or become detrimental to the public's health, safety, and welfare. The City's review process of Light Industrial: Non-Cannabis facilities and facility operations will ensure that the regulations are fully implemented. Based upon the findings provided in this document, and mitigation measures and standard conditions incorporated into the project, less than significant impacts are expected.

V. EARLIER ANALYSES
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 as per California Code of Regulations, Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

Earlier Analyses Used, if any:
 City of California City General Plan Environmental Impact Report (http://www.californiacity-ca.gov/CC/index.php/planning/planning-publications)  KernCOG 2018 Regional Transportation Plan
(https://www.kerncog.org/category/docs/rtp/)
Location Where Earlier Analyses, if used, are available for review:

City of California City
23000 Hacienda Boulevard
California City, CA 93505-2293
(760) 373-8661
VI. AUTHORITIES CITED
Authorities cited: Public Resources Code Sections 23083 and 23083.05; References: California Government Code Section 65088.4; Public Resources Code Sections 23080(c), 23080.1, 23080.3, 23082.1, 23083, 23083.05, 23083.3, 23093, 23094, 23095 and 21151; 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) 121 Cal.App.4th at 1309; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 302 Cal.App.4th 656.

Revised: 10/24/2023 1:05 PM
Initial Study (210-263-11; 210-263-12; 210-263-13; 210-263-14; 210-263-15)_Screen Check 04 Draft (10-24-2023) 293 - 295 February 13, 2024
294 - 295
February 13, 2024
295 - 295
February 13, 2024