Kern County Marijuana Land Use Ordinance Project · Sacramento, CA 95814-3529 ... Strategic Plans,...

I:\Planning\WORKGRPS\WP\LABELS\WO13001.docCC 01/17/2017

Kern County LibraryBoron Branch26967 Twenty Mule Team RoadBoron, CA 93516

Kern County LibraryMojave Branch16916 1/2 Highway 14, Space D2Mojave, CA 93501

Kern County LibraryCalifornia City Branch9507 California City BoulevardCalifornia City, CA 93505

Kern County LibraryKern River Valley Branch7054 Lake Isabella BoulevardLake Isabella, CA 93240

Kern County LibraryRidgecrest Branch131 East Las FloresRidgecrest, CA 93555

Kern County LibraryTehachapi Branch1001 West Tehachapi Blvd - Suite 400Tehachapi, CA 93561

Kern County LibraryWanda Kirk/Rosamond Branch3611 Rosamond BoulevardRosamond, CA 93560

Kern County LibraryWofford Heights BranchP.O. Box 1285Wofford Heights, CA 93285

Kern County LibraryFrazier Park Branch3015 Mount Pinos WayFrazier Park, CA 93225

Kern County LibraryJackson/McFarland Branch500 Kern AvenueMcFarland, CA 93250

Kern County LibraryShafter Branch

Kern County LibraryTaft Branch27 Emmons Park DriveTaft, CA 93268

Kern County LibraryWasco Branch1102 Seventh StreetWasco. CA 93280

Kern County LibraryButtonwillow Branch116 Buttonwillow AvenueButtonwillow, CA 93206

Kern County LibraryDelano Branch925 - 10th StreetDelano, CA 93215

Kern County LibraryLamont Branch8304 Segrue RoadLamont, CA 93241

City of ArvinP.O. Box 548Arvin, CA 93203

Bakersfield City Planning Dept1715 Chester AvenueBakersfield, CA 93301

Bakersfield City Public Works Dept1501 Truxtun AvenueBakersfield, CA 93301

California City Planning Dept21000 Hacienda Blvd.California City, CA 93515

Delano City Planning DeptP.O. Box 3010Delano, CA 93216

City of MaricopaP.O. Box 548Maricopa, CA 93252

City of McFarland401 West Kern AvenueMcFarland, CA 93250

City of Ridgecrest100 West California AvenueRidgecrest, CA 93555

City of Shafter336 Pacific AvenueShafter, CA 93263

City of TaftPlanning & Building209 East Kern StreetTaft, CA 93268

City of Tehachapi115 South Robinson StreetTehachapi, CA 93561-1722

City of Wasco764 E StreetWasco, CA 93280

Inyo County Planning DeptP.O. Drawer "L"Independence, CA 93526

Kings County Planning Agency1400 West Lacey Blvd, Bldg 6Hanford, CA 93230

Los Angeles Co Reg Planning Dept320 West Temple StreetLos Angeles, CA 90012

San Bernardino Co Planning Dept385 North Arrowhead Avenue, 1st FloorSan Bernardino, CA 92415-0182

San Luis Obispo Co Planning DeptPlanning and Building976 Osos StreetSan Luis Obispo, CA 93408

Santa Barbara Co Resource Mgt Dept123 East Anapamu StreetSanta Barbara, CA 93101

Tulare County Planning & Dev Dept5961 South Mooney BoulevardVisalia, CA 93291

Ventura County RMA Planning Div800 South Victoria Avenue, L1740Ventura, CA 93009-1740

U.S. Bureau of Land ManagementCaliente/Bakersfield3801 Pegasus DriveBakersfield, CA 93308-6837

U.S. Bureau of Land ManagementRidgecrest Field Office300 South Richmond RoadRidgecrest, CA 93555

China Lake Naval Weapons CenterTim Fox, RLA - Comm Plans & Liaison429 E Bowen, Building 981Mail Stop 4001China Lake, CA 93555

Edwards AFB, Sustainability Office412 TW/XPO, Bldg 2750, Rm 204-38195 East Popson AvenueEdwards AFB, CA 93524

Federal Aviation AdministrationWestern Reg Office/ Airport Div - Room 300015000 Aviation BoulevardLawndale, CA 90261

Federal Communications Comm18000 Studebaker Road, #660Cerritos, CA 90701

U. S. Fish & Wildlife ServiceDivision of Ecological Services2800 Cottage Way #W-2605Sacramento, CA 95825-1846

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service777 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 208Palm Springs, CA 92262

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceHopper Mtn. (Bitter Creek)Department of Interior2493 Portola Road, Suite AVentura, CA 93003

U.S. Forest ServiceLos Padres National Forest6755 Hollister Avenue, Suite 150Goleta, CA 93117

Sequoia National ForestKern River Ranger StationP.O. Box 3810Lake Isabella, CA 93240-3810

Environmental Protection AgencyRegion IX Office75 Hawthorn StreetSan Francisco, CA 94105

U.S. Dept of Agriculture/NRCS5000 California Avenue, Ste 100Bakersfield, CA 93309-0711

U.S. Army Corps of EngineersP.O. Box 997Lake Isabella, CA 93240

U.S. Army Corps of EngineersRegulatory Division1325 "J" Street, #1350Sacramento, CA 95814-2920

U.S. Postal ServiceAddress Management Systems28201 Franklin ParkwaySanta Clarita, CA 91383-9321

State Air Resources BoardStationary Resource DivisionP.O. Box 2815Sacramento, CA 95812

So. San Joaquin Valley Arch Info CtrCalifornia State University of Bkfd9001 Stockdale HighwayBakersfield, CA 93311

Caltrans/Dist 6Planning/Land Bank Bldg.P.O. Box 12616Fresno, CA 93778

Caltrans/Dist 9Planning Department500 South Main StreetBishop, CA 93514

Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics, MS #40P.O. Box 942873Sacramento, CA 94273-0001

Caltrans/Division of StructuresAttn: Jim RobertsP.O. Box 1499Sacramento, CA 95807

State ClearinghouseOffice of Planning and Research1400 - 10th Street, Room 222Sacramento, CA 95814

State Dept of ConservationDirector's Office801 "K" Street, MS 24-01Sacramento, CA 95814-3528

State Dept of ConservationDivision of Oil & Gas4800 Stockdale Highway, Ste 108Bakersfield, CA 93309

State Dept of ConservationDivision of Oil & Gas801 "K" Street, MS 20-20Sacramento, CA 95814-3530

Office of the State GeologistHeadquarters801 "K" Street, MS 12-30Sacramento, CA 95814

State Dept of ConservationOffice of Land Conservation801 "K" Street, MS 18-01Sacramento, CA 95814

State Dept of ConservationOffice of Mine Reclamation801 "K" Street MS 09-06Sacramento, CA 95814-3529

State Dept of ConservationDiv Recycling Cert. Sec.801 "K" Street, MS 19-01Sacramento, CA 95814

State Mining and Geology Board801 K Street, MS 20-15Sacramento, CA 95814

California State UniversityBakersfield - Library9001 Stockdale HighwayBakersfield, CA 93309

California Energy CommissionJames W. Reed, Jr.1516 Ninth StreetMail Stop 17Sacramento, CA 95814

California Fish & Wildlife1234 East Shaw AvenueFresno, CA 93710

State Dept of Food & Agriculture1220 "N" StreetSacramento, CA 95814

California Highway PatrolPlanning & Analysis DivisionP.O. Box 942898Sacramento, CA 94298-0001

State Office of Historical PresAttention Susan StrattonP.O. Box 942896Sacramento, CA 95296-0001

Integrated Waste ManagementP.O. Box 4025, MS #15Sacramento, CA 95812-4025

State Dept of Parks & RecreationTehachapi DistrictAngeles District - Mojave Desert Sector15701 E. Avenue MLancaster, CA 93535

State Water Resources Control BoardDivision of Drinking WaterAttn: Jesse Dhaliwal, Sr. Sanitary Eng4925 Commerce Drive, Suite 120Bakersfield, CA 93309

Public Utilities Comm Energy Div505 Van Ness AvenueSan Francisco, CA 94102

California Regional Water QualityControl Board/Central Valley Region1685 E StreetFresno, CA 93706-2020

California Regional Water QualityControl Board/Lahontan Region15095 Amargosa Road - Bld 2, Suite 210Victorville, CA 92392

State Lands Commission100 Howe Avenue, Ste 100-SouthSacramento, CA 95825-8202

State Dept of Toxic Substance ControlEnvironmental Protection Agency1515 Tollhouse RoadClovis, CA 93612

State Department of Toxic Substances Control8800 Cal Center DriveSacramento, CA 95826

State Dept of Water ResourcesSan Joaquin Dist.3374 East Shields Avenue, Room A-7Fresno, CA 93726

State Dept of Water ResourcesDiv. Land & Right-of-WayP.O. Box 942836Sacramento, CA 94236

CalRecycleDept of Resources, Recycling, and

Recovery1001 "I" StreetSacramento, CA 95812

Department of Consumer Affairs Bureau of Medical Cannabis RegulationP.O. Box 138200Sacramento, CA 95813

Kern County Agriculture Department Kern County Airports Department County Clerk

Kern County Administrative Officer Kern County Public Works Department/ Building & Development/Floodplain

Kern County Public Works Department/ Building & Development/Survey

Kern County Env Health Services Department

Kern County Fire Dept Fire Marshall Kern County Parks & Recreation

Kern County Sheriff's Dept Administration

Inyokern Municipal Advisory Council1429 Broadway AvenueP.O. Box 1418Inyokern, CA 93527

Mountain Communities Municipal Advisory CouncilP.O. Box 1902Frazier Park, CA 93225

Rosamond Municipal Advisory CouncilP.O. Box 626Rosamond, CA 93560

Tehachapi Municipal Advisory CouncilAttn: Ed Grimes117 Sunrise WayTehachapi, CA 93561

Mojave Town CouncilBill Deaver, PresidentP.O. Box 1113Mojave, CA 93502-1113

Kern High School Dist5801 Sundale AvenueBakersfield, CA 93309

Kern County Superintendent of SchoolsAttention Mary Baker1300 17th StreetBakersfield, CA 93301

KernCOG1401 19th Street - Suite 300Bakersfield, CA 93301

Local Agency Formation Comm/LAFCO5300 Lennox Avenue, Suite 303Bakersfield, CA 93309

Kern County Water AgencyP.O. Box 58Bakersfield, CA 93302-0058

East Kern Air Pollution Control District

San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District1990 East Gettysburg AvenueFresno, CA 93726

Golden Empire Transit1830 Golden State AvenueBakersfield, CA 93301

Delano Mosquito Abatement DistAttention John G. DavisP.O. Box 220Delano, CA 93215

Kern Mosquito Abatement Dist4705 Allen RoadBakersfield, CA 93314

South Fork Mosquito Abatement DistP.O. Box 750Kernville, CA 93238-1298

West Side MosquitoAbatement Dist.P.O. Box 205Taft, CA 93268

North of the River Rec & Parks Dist405 Galaxy AvenueBakersfield, CA 93308

Tehachapi Parks & Recreation DistP.O. Box 373Tehachapi, CA 93561

Bear Mountain Rec & Parks DistP.O. Box 658Lamont, CA 93241

Bakersfield Municipal Airport4101 Truxtun AvenueBakersfield, CA 93309

California City Airport22636 Airport Way, #8California City, CA 93505

Delano City Planning DeptP.O. Box 3010Delano, CA 93216

Inyokern AirportP.O. Box 634Inyokern, CA 93527

Minter Field Airport District201 Aviation StreetShafter, CA 93263

Mojave Airport1434 FlightlineMojave, CA 93501

East Kern Airport DistAttention Stuart Witt1434 FlightlineMojave, CA 93501

East Kern Airport Dist Engineer3900 Ridgemoor AvenueBakersfield, CA 93306

Northcutt and Associates4220 Poplar StreetLake Isabella, CA 93240-9536

Mountain Valley AirportP.O. Box 100Tehachapi, CA 93581

Aero Sports Skypark CorporationP.O. Box 2567Rosamond, CA 93560

Rosamond Skypark/Airport4000 Knox AvenueRosamond, CA 93560

Tehachapi City Hall/Airport115 South Robinson StreetTehachapi, CA 93561

Adams, Broadwell, Joseph & CardozoAttention: Janet M. Laurain601 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 1000South San Francisco, CA 94080

U.S. Air ForceAttn: Steve ArensonWestern Regional Environmental Officer50 Fremont Street, Suite 2450San Francisco, CA 94105-2230

U.S. ArmyAttn: Philip Crosbie, ChiefStrategic Plans, S3, NTCP.O. Box 10172Fort Irwin, CA 92310

U.S. ArmyAttn: Tim Kilgannon, Region 9CoordinatorOffice of Strategic Integration721 - 19th Street, Room 427Denver, CO 80202

U.S. NavyAttn: Steve ChungRegional Community Plans & LiaisonOfficer1220 Pacific HighwaySan Diego, CA 92132-5190

U.S. Marine CorpsCommanding GeneralMCIWEST-MCB CamPenAttn: A/CS, G7Box 555010Camp Pendleton, CA 92055-5246

AT&T CaliforniaOSP Engineering/Right-of-Way4540 California Avenue, 4th FloorBakersfield, CA 93309

Kern Audubon SocietyAttn: Harry Love, President13500 Powder River AvenueBakersfield, CA 93314

Los Angeles Audubon926 Citrus AvenueLos Angeles, CA 90036-4929

Boron Chamber of Commerce27217 Carmichael Street Boron, CA 93516

Center on Race, Poverty & the EnvironmentAttn: Marissa Alexander1999 Harrison Street – Suite 650San Francisco, CA 94612

Center on Race, Poverty & the Environmental/CA Rural Legal Assistance Foundation1012 Jefferson StreetDelano, CA 93215

Defenders of Wildlife/Kim Delfino, California Dir980 - 9th Street, Suite 1730Sacramento, CA 95814

Desert Tortoise Preserve Committee4067 Mission Inn AvenueRiverside, CA 92501

California Farm Bureau2300 River Plaza Drive, NREDSacramento, CA 95833

Mojave Chamber of CommerceP.O. Box 935Mojave, CA 93502

Pacific Gas & Electric Co Matt Coleman, Land Mgt1918 "H" StreetBakersfield, CA 93301-4319

Pacific Gas & Electric CoLand Projects650 "O" Street, First FloorFresno, CA 93760-0001

Sierra Club/Kern Kaweah ChapterP.O. Box 3357Bakersfield, CA 93385

Smart Growth - Tehachapi ValleysP.O. Box 1894Tehachapi, CA 93581-1894

Southern California Edison120 Woodlands DriveWofford Heights, CA 93285

Southern California EdisonP.O. Box 410Long Beach, CA 90801

Southern California EdisonPlanning Dept.421 West "J" StreetTehachapi, CA 93561

Southern California EdisonPlanning Dept.510 S. China Lake Blvd.Ridgecrest, CA 93555

Southern California EdisonPlanning Dept.25625 West Rye CanyonValencia, CA 91355

Southern California Gas Co1510 North Chester AvenueBakersfield, CA 93308

Southern California Gas CoTransportation Dept9400 Oakdale AvenueChatsworth, CA 91313-6511

Verizon California, Inc.Attention Engineering Department520 South China Lake BoulevardRidgecrest, CA 93555

Chumash Council of Bakersfield2421 "O" StreetBakersfield, CA 93301-2441

David Laughing Horse RobinsonP.O. Box 20849Bakersfield, CA 93390

Kern Valley Indian CouncilAttn: Robert Robinson, ChairpersonP.O. Box 401Weldon, CA 93283

Kern Valley Indian CouncilHistoric Preservation OfficeP.O. Box 401Weldon, CA 93283

Santa Rosa Rancheria Ruben Barrios, ChairpersonP.O. Box 8Lemoore, CA 93245

Tejon Indian TribeKathy Morgan, Chairperson1731 Hasti-acres Drive, Suite 108Bakersfield, CA 93309

Kitanemuk & Yowlumne Tejon Indians Chairperson115 Radio StreetBakersfield, CA 93305

Tubatulabals of Kern CountyAttn: Robert Gomez, ChairpersonP.O. Box 226Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Tule River Indian TribeNeal Peyron, ChairpersonP.O. Box 589Porterville, CA 93258

San Fernando Band of Mission IndiansAttn: John Valenzuela, ChairpersonP.O. Box 221838Newhall, CA 91322

Eric Anderson1309 Leisure LaneFrazier Park, CA 93225

Kern River Valley Chamber of CommerceKatherine EvansP.O. Box 567Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Kern River Valley Revitalization, Inc.Attention: Kris Cardoza, SecretaryP.O. Box 83Bodfish, CA 93205

LIUNAAttn: Arthur Izzo2201 "H" StreetBakersfield, CA 93301

Mary Ann LockhartP.O. GGFrazier Park, CA 93225

Metro Water Dist of So CAMs. Rebecca De LeonEnvironmental Planning Team700 N. Alameda Street, US3-230Los Angeles, CA 90012

Tehachapi Resource Cons Dist321 West "C" StreetTehachapi, CA 93561-2011

Solveig A. Thompson29200 Woodview CourtTehachapi, CA 93561-7484

Nature Conservancy West Reg Office201 Mission Street, 4th FloorSan Francisco, CA 94105

Rosamond Community Serv Dist3179 - 35th Street WestRosamond, CA 93560

Eastern Kern Resource Cons Dist300 South Richmond Road

Ridgecrest, CA 93555-4436

Tehachapi Resource Cons Dist321 West "C" StreetTehachapi, CA 93561-2011

Antelope Valley Resource Cons Dist44811 Date Avenue, #GLancaster, CA 93534-3136

Buena Vista Resource Cons DistP.O. Box 756Buttonwillow, CA 93206

Western Kern Conservation Dist.c/o Vernon Chinn8 FollettLemoore, CA 93245

Kern Valley Resource Cons DistP.O. Box 58Weldon, CA 93283

North West Kern Resource Cons Dist5000 California Avenue, Suite 100Bakersfield, CA 93309

Western Kern Resources DistP.O. Box 2393Bakersfield, CA 93309

Wasco Union Elementary School Dist639 BroadwayWasco, CA 93280

Arvin High School900 Varsity StreetArvin, CA 93203

Bakersfield City School DistEducation Center1300 Baker StreetBakersfield, CA 93305

Beardsley School Dist1001 Roberts LaneBakersfield, CA 93308

Blake School DistP.O. Box 53Woody, CA 93287

Panama-Buena Vista School Dist4200 Ashe RoadBakersfield, CA 93313

Buttonwillow Union School Dist42600 Highway 58Buttonwillow, CA 93206

Caliente Union School Dist12400 Caliente Creek RoadCaliente, CA 93518

West Kern Community College DistP.O. Box 22Taft, CA 93268

Delano Joint Union High School Dist1747 Princeton StreetDelano, CA 93215

Delano Union School Dist.1405 12th AvenueDelano, CA 93215

DiGiorgio School DistRoute 1, Box 34Arvin, CA 93203

Edison School DistP.O. Box 368Edison, CA 93220-0368

El Tejon Unified School DistP.O. Box 876Lebec, CA 93243

Elk Hills School DistP.O. Box 129Tupman, CA 93276

Fairfax Union School Dist1501 South Fairfax RoadBakersfield, CA 93307

Fruitvale School Dist.7311 Rosedale HighwayBakersfield, CA 93308-5738

General Shafter School Dist1316 Shafter Road, RR 7Bakersfield, CA 93313

Greenfield Union School DistAttn: Darrell Hawley, Dir of Facilities1624 Fairview RoadBakersfield, CA 93307

Kern Community College Dist2100 Chester AvenueBakersfield, CA 93301

Kern High School Dist5801 Sundale AvenueBakersfield, CA 93309

Kern Valley High SchoolP.O. Box 1027Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Kernville Union School Dist3240 Erskine Creek RoadLake Isabella, CA 93240

Lakeside Union School Dist14535 Old River RoadBakersfield, CA 93311

Lamont School Dist8201 Palm AvenueLamont, CA 93241

Lerdo School Dist331 Shafter AvenueShafter, CA 93263

Lost Hills Union School DistP.O. Box 158Lost Hills, CA 93249

Maple School Dist29161 Fresno AvenueShafter, CA 93263

Maricopa Unified School DistStar Route 2, Box 618Maricopa, CA 93252

McFarland Unified School Dist601 Second StreetMcFarland, CA 93250

Midway School DistP.O. Box 39Fellows, CA 93224

Mojave Unified School Dist3500 DouglasMojave, CA 93501

Mountain View School Dist8201 Palm AvenueLamont, CA 93241

Muroc Unified School Dist17100 Foothill AvenueNorth Edwards, CA 93523

Norris School Dist6940 Calloway DriveBakersfield, CA 93312

Pond Union School District29585 Pond RoadWasco, CA 93280-9772

Richland-Lerdo Union School Dist331 Shafter AvenueShafter, CA 93263

Rio Bravo-Greeley Union School Dist6521 Enos LaneBakersfield, CA 93314

Rosedale Union School Dist2553 Old Farm RoadBakersfield, CA 93312

Semi Tropic School Dist25300 Highway 46Wasco, CA 93280-9540

Shafter High School Dist526 Mannel AvenueShafter, CA 93263

Sierra Sands Unified School Dist113 FelsparRidgecrest, CA 93555

South Fork Union School Dist5225 Kelso Valley RoadWeldon, CA 93283

Southern Kern Unified School DistP.O. Box CCRosamond, CA 93560

Standard School Dist1200 North Chester AvenueOildale, CA 93308

Taft City School Dist820 North 6th StreetTaft, CA 93268

Taft Union High School Dist701 7th StreetTaft, CA 93268

Tehachapi Unified School Dist300 S RobinsonTehachapi, CA 93561

Vineland School Dist.8301 Sunset Blvd.Bakersfield, CA 93307

Wasco Union High School DistP.O. Box 250Wasco, CA 93280

Wasco Public Works Dept.801 - 18th StreetWasco, CA 93280

Shafter-Wasco Resource Cons Dist5000 California Avenue, Ste. 100Bakersfield, CA 93309-0711

Desert Lake Community Service DistrictP.O. Box 567Boron, CA 93516

Arvin Community Services Dist309 Campus DriveArvin, CA 93203

Bakersfield City Public Works Dept1501 Chester AvenueBakersfield, CA 93301

Bear Valley Community Services Dist28999 South Lower Valley RoadTehachapi, CA 93561-6529

Bear Valley Springs AssocEnvironmental Control Committee29541 Rolling Oak DriveTehachapi, CA 93561

Boron Community Service DistP.O. Drawer BBoron, CA 93516

California City Public Works Dept8190 California City Blvd.California City, CA 93505

Frazier Park Public Utility DistP.O. Box 1512Frazier Park, CA 93225

East Niles Community Serv DistP.O. Box 6038Bakersfield, CA 93306

Enos Lane Public Utility Dist22820 Sidding RoadBakersfield, CA 93314

Inyokern Community Serv DistP.O. Box 1418Inyokern, CA 93527

Golden Hills Community Serv DistP.O. Box 637Tehachapi, CA 93581

Lamont Public Utility Dist8624 Segrue RoadLamont, CA 93241

Lost Hills Utility DistP.O. Box 249Lost Hills, CA 93249

Lake Isabella Community Serv DistP.O. Box 3502Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Mountain Communities Municipal Advisory CouncilP.O. Box 1902Frazier Park, CA 93225

Public Utilities Comm Energy Div505 Van Ness AvenueSan Francisco, CA 94102

Mojave Public Utility Dist15844 "K" StreetMojave, CA 93501

So. San Joaquin Muni Utility DistP.O. Box 279Delano, CA 93216

State Dept of Public Utilities Commission505 Van Ness Avenue, Rm 2003San Francisco, CA 94102-3214

Rosamond Community Serv Dist3179 - 35th Street WestRosamond, CA 93560

Aerial Acres Water Company19161 Alma StreetEdwards, CA 93523

Keene Water District246 Powers RoadKeene, CA 95127

Stallion Springs Community Services Dist28500 Stallion Springs DriveTehachapi, CA 93561

Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency6500 West Avenue NPalmdale, CA 93551

Arvin-Edison Water Storage DistP.O. Box 175Arvin, CA 93203

Alta Sierra Mutual Water Co10502 Sequoia Drive, No. 11Wofford Heights, CA 93285

Bakersfield City Water Resource Dept1000 Buena Vista RoadBakersfield, CA 93311

Bella Vista Water CoAttn: Gerald HynemanP.O. Box 15309Weldon, CA 93283

Ashe Water Dist Dept of Water Resources4101 Truxtun AvenueBakersfield, CA 93309

Berrenda Mesa Water Dist14823 Highway 33Lost Hills, CA 93249-9734

Bodfish Water CoP.O. Box 842Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Belridge Water Storage Dist21908 Seventh Standard RoadMcKittrick, CA 93251

Buena Vista Water Storage DistP.O. Box 756Buttonwillow, CA 93206

Buttonwillow County Water DistP.O. Box 874Buttonwillow, CA 93206

Brock Mutual Water Co12001 Brockridge CourtBakersfield, CA 93309

California Regional Water QualityControl Board/Central Valley Region1685 E StreetFresno, CA 93706-2020

California Regional Water QualityControl Board/Lahontan Region14440 Civic Drive, Suite 200Victorville, CA 92392-2306

Casa Loma Water Co1016 Lomita DriveBakersfield, CA 93307

Cawelo Water Dist17207 Industrial Farm RoadBakersfield, CA 93308-9801

California Water Service Co3725 South "H" StreetBakersfield, CA 93304

Edgemont Acres Mutual Water Co16638 Vista Del Oro AvenueEdwards, CA 93523

Davenport Mutual Water Assn.P.O. Box 1503Rosamond, CA 93560

Edmonston Acres Muni Water Co25465 Barbara StreetArvin, CA 93203

Fuller Acres Water CompanyP.O. Box 125Lamont, CA 93241-0125

Edgemont Acres Water CoP.O. Box 966North Edwards, CA 93523

Erskine Creek Water CoP.O. Box 656Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Gosford Road Water Assoc13958 Gosford RoadBakersfield, CA 93313

Friant Water Users Authority854 North Harvard AvenueLindsay, CA 93247-1715

Goose Lake Water Co2515 WheelerBakersfield, CA 93308

Indian Wells Water Management CommitteeP.O. Box 1329Ridgecrest, CA 93556

Greenfield County Water Dist551 Taft HighwayBakersfield, CA 93307

Indian Wells Valley Water DistP.O. Box 1329Ridgecrest, CA 93556

Kern River WatermasterP.O. Box 81435Bakersfield, CA 93380-1435

Kern County Water AgencyP.O. Box 58Bakersfield, CA 93302-0058

Kern Delta Water Dist501 Taft HighwayBakersfield, CA 93307

Kern Water Bank Authority1620 Mill Rock Way, Suite 500Bakersfield, CA 93311

Kern River Valley Water CoP.O. Box 1260Lake Isabella, CA 93240

Kern-Tulare Water Dist5001 California Avenue, Suite 102Bakersfield, CA 93309-1692

La Hacienda Water Co, Inc.P.O. Box 60679Bakersfield, CA 93386-0679

Lake of the Woods Mutual Water Co.7025 Cuddy Valley RoadFrazier Park, CA 93225

Lamont Storm Water DistP.O. Box 543Lamont, CA 93241

Los Angeles Dept of Water & Power111 North Hope Street, Rm 1121Los Angeles, CA 90012

Lebec County Water DistP.O. Box 910Lebec, CA 93243

Long Canyon Water Co903 Monterey StreetSouth Pasadena, CA 91030

Mettler County Water Dist1822 Stevens DriveBakersfield, CA 93313

Lost Hills Water Dist1405 Commercial Way, Suite 125Bakersfield, CA 93309-0620

Terri Middlemiss8016 Lorene AvenueInyokern, CA 93527

North Kern Water Storage DistP.O. Box 81435Bakersfield, CA 93380-1435

Mountain Mesa Water Company12707 Highway 178Lake Isabella, CA 93240

North Edwards Water Dist13525 Fran StreetEdwards, CA 93523-3425

Olcese Water DistP.O. Box 60679Bakersfield, CA 93386-0679

North of the River Muni Water Dist4000 Rio Del Norte StreetBakersfield, CA 93308-1024

Oildale Mutual Water CoP.O. Box 5638Bakersfield, CA 93388

Metro Water Dist of So CAMs. Rebecca De LeonEnvironmental Planning Team700 N. Alameda Street, US3-230Los Angeles, CA 90012

Pinion Pines Mutual Water Co1467 Tecuya StreetFrazier Park, CA 93225

Palm Mutual Water Company12147 Cliff AvenueBakersfield, CA 93306

Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water DistP.O. Box 20820Bakersfield, CA 93390-0820

Rand Communities Co Water DistP.O. Box 198Randsburg, CA 93554

Riverkern Mutual Water CoP.O. Box 856Kernville, CA 93238

Quail Valley Water Dist3200 21st Street, Ste 401Bakersfield, CA 93301

Semi Tropic Water Storage DistP.O. Box ZWasco, CA 93280

Shafter-Wasco Irrigation DistP.O. Box 1168Wasco, CA 93280-8068

Superior Mountain Water Co19474 Enos LaneBakersfield, CA 93312-9501

State Dept of Water Resources Div Land & Right-of-wayP.O. Box 942836Sacramento, CA 94236

Stockdale Mutual Water CoP.O. Box 788Bakersfield, CA 93302

Vaughn Water Co.10014 Glenn StreetBakersfield, CA 93312

Tehachapi-Cummings Co Water DistP.O. Box 326Tehachapi, CA 93561

Tejon-Castaic Water DistP.O. Box 1000Lebec, CA 93243

California Water Service Company7138 Lake Isabella BoulevardLake Isabella, CA 93240

West Kern Water DistP.O. Box 1105Taft, CA 93268-1105

Wheeler Ridge-Maricopa Water Dist12109 Highway 166Bakersfield, CA 93313-9630

Engel & Company, Inc.Attn: Joseph Engel4009 Union AvenueBakersfield, CA 93305

Twin Pines Water Company5712 Alberta StreetBakersfield, CA 93304

Sunselect ProduceAttn: Victor Krahn20570 Pellisier Road

Tehachapi, CA 93561

Renee Westa-Lusk405 Montefino DriveRidgecrest, CA 93555

Ralph De MonteCo-TrusteeDe Monte Family Trust2446 Dunstan StreetOceanside, CA 92054

Dave ReglandCivil Engineer6415 Merlin DriveCarlsbad, CA 92001

Tiger Vitality Collective2222 South Chester Ave. Suite BBakersfield, CA 93304

Michael Braun5450 Stockdale HighwayBakersfield, CA 93309

CannaBusiness LawAttn. Shari506 BroadwaySan Francisco, CA 94133

Life’s Healing Solutions1812 N. Chester AvenueBakersfield, CA 93308

Organic Health Solutions1315 W. Rosamond Blvd. Suite 1ARosamond, CA 93560

Vape n. Bake2689 Sierra HighwayRosamond, CA 93560

Taft Highway Collective3024 Highway 119Bakersfield, CA 93313

Tanner Vest Collective2753 Diamond StreetRosamond, CA 93560

DASA1733 Diamond Street Rosamond, CA 93560

Peach and Medicine2500 S. Chester AvenueBakersfield, CA 93304

Highway 99 Collective2980 Saco RoadBakersfield, CA 93308

Peace and Medicine2340 Niles Street

Bakersfield, CA 93306

Backyard Organics2111 River Blvd.Bakersfield, CA 93305

Knotts Street Collective902 Knotts StreetBakersfield, CA 93305

West Coast Healing3030 Taft HighwayBakersfield, CA 93313

The Plum Tree Collective2873 Sierra HighwayRosamond, CA 93560

Lights Out Wellness1739 Poplar StreetRosamond, CA 93560

Sweet Leaf Organic2011 Niles StreetBakersfield, CA 93305

Prime Spot Wellness2722 100th StreetRosamond, CA 93560

OCC608 Cottonwood RoadBakersfield, CA 93307

Green Flower2532 Edison HighwayBakersfield, CA 93307

Pine Mountain High633 San Gabriel TrailFrazier Park, CA 93225

Cannibal’s Medibals110 Morning DriveBakersfield,CA 93306

Therapeutic Health Center141 N. Chester Ave.Bakersfield, CA 93308

American Organics Club1737 Locust StreetRosamond, CA 93560

The Giving Tree1631 N. Chester Ave.Bakersfield, CA 93308

ASHES6629 Wofford Blvd.Wofford Heights, CA 93285

Hwy. Relief Medical2939 Sierra HighwayRosamond, CA 93560

Green Mile Collective2613 Diamond StreetRosamond, CA 93560

Sticky Icky2125 Edison HighwayBakersfield, CA 93305

Big O Relief16940 Highway 14Mojave, CA 93501

INITIAL STUDY/NOTICE OF PREPARATION

Kern County Marijuana Land Use Ordinance ProjectAmendment to Title 19 – Kern County Zoning Ordinance Focused on Chapter 19.120 (Medical

Marijuana Dispensaries) of the Kern County Zoning Ordinance for Marijuana Facility Permitting

LEAD AGENCY:

Kern County Planning and Natural Resources Department2700 M Street, Suite 100

Bakersfield, CA 93301-2370

CONTACT: MR. SHAWN BEYELER, SUPERVISING PLANNER(661) 862-8614

[email protected]

January 2017

mailto:[email protected]

KERN COUNTY PLANNING & NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENTKern County Marijuana Land Use Ordinance

January 2017 i Initial Study/Notice of Preparation

Table of Contents

1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 11.2 Background ....................................................................................................................... 11.3 Location and Environmental Setting .................................................................................. 31.4 Project Description ............................................................................................................ 71.5 Project Objectives............................................................................................................ 111.6 Proposed Discretionary Actions/Required Approvals ....................................................... 11

2. KERN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM (ENVIRONMENTALDETERMINATION)

2.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ..................................................................... 152.2 Determination.................................................................................................................. 15

3. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Aesthetics ........................................................................................................................ 173.2 Agriculture and Forest Resources .................................................................................... 193.3 Air Quality ...................................................................................................................... 213.4 Biological Resources ....................................................................................................... 243.5 Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................... 263.6 Geology and Soils ........................................................................................................... 273.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .............................................................................................. 303.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................... 313.9 Hydrology and Water Quality .......................................................................................... 353.10 Land Use and Planning .................................................................................................... 393.11 Mineral Resources ........................................................................................................... 403.12 Noise ............................................................................................................................... 413.13 Population and Housing ................................................................................................... 433.14 Public Services ................................................................................................................ 443.15 Recreation ....................................................................................................................... 453.16 Transportation/Traffic ..................................................................................................... 463.17 Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................................ 493.18 Utilities and Service Systems ........................................................................................... 503.19 Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................................................ 53

4. Bibliography ............................................................................................................................... 54


January 2017 1 Initial Study/Notice of Preparation

1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The proposed project consists of an amendment to Title 19 of the Kern County Ordinance Code (KCOC)which shall be known as and may be cited and referred to as, the “Zoning Ordinance of Kern County”,focusing on Chapter 19.120, Medical Marijuana Dispensaries and any other related County ordinances. TheZoning Ordinance and other related ordinances are proposed to be revised to either: (1) ban all medical andrecreational marijuana related activities other than what is allowed under California Proposition 64, AdultUse of Marijuana Act (Proposition 64 or AUMA); or (2) include updated standards and conditions for futurecommercial marijuana cultivation, processing and packaging, and recreational/medical dispensaries andmobile delivery. For the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposedproject includes future activities expected to be undertaken pursuant to the amended ordinance.

1.2 BACKGROUND

1.2.1 Federal vs State Regulatory Background

Challenges arise from the contradiction between state and federal law related to marijuana (cannabis). Atthe State level, California voters approved Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act (CUA), in 1996.The CUA allows a qualified patient and primary caregiver to possess and cultivate as much marijuana as isneeded for personal medical use so long as they have a doctor’s recommendation. The CaliforniaLegislature enacted the Medical Marijuana Program (MMP) in 2003 which further refined the CUA.California voters approved Proposition 64, AUMA, on November 8, 2016. Proposition 64 legalizedrecreational marijuana use for persons age 21 or older, legalized the cultivation of up to six plants forpersonal use for persons age 21 or older, legalized person possession of up to one ounce of flower or up toeight grams of concentrates for persons age 21 or older, established sale and cultivation taxes, establishedpackaging, labeling, advertising, and marketing standards and restrictions, and prohibited marketing andadvertising directly to minors. Under Proposition 64, retail sales of marijuana by state-licensedestablishments are scheduled to begin on January 1, 2018; however, large-scale corporate entities arerestricted until 2023. Proposition 64 did not affect the CUA. Proposition 64 makes it illegal to consumemarijuana in any public placed except for specifically licensed premises; continues to let local governmentsban medical marijuana cultivation and sales; bans vaporization in non-smoking areas; and imposes a 15percent or greater tax increase on medical marijuana.

At the federal level, the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) of 1970 makes it a federal crime for theunauthorized manufacture, distribution, dispensing, and possession of controlled substances (21 USCSections 841 and 844). Further, medicinal use is not recognized for marijuana (21 USC Section 812) at thefederal level. In addition, in 2010 the Attorney General initiated the 2010 Indian Country Initiative relatedto evaluating marijuana enforcement activities in Indian County and government-to-governmentconsultation. In addition, the USDOJ further defined guidance and enforcement for tribes and tribal landin a memorandum dated October 28, 2014, Policy Statement Regarding Marijuana Issues in IndianCountry.

In response to recent state laws legalizing medical and/or recreational marijuana use, the U.S. Departmentof Justice (USDOJ) has issued several memoranda regarding guidance in federal law enforcement relatedto marijuana activity. The USDOJ issued a memorandum dated August 29, 2013, Guidance RegardingMarijuana Enforcement, acknowledging that while the USDOJ is committed to enforcing the CSA, it isalso committed to using its limited investigative and prosecutorial resources to address the most significantthreats in the most effective, consistent, and rational way. This memorandum directed federal lawenforcement to focus on eight priorities, including distribution to minors, criminal enterprises, and



preventing diversion from states where it is legal to states where it is not legal at the state-level. Theguidance memo further state “The Department’s guidance in this memorandum rests on its expectation thatstates and local governments that have enacted laws authorizing marijuana-related conduct will implementstrong and effective regulatory and enforcement systems that will address the threat those state laws couldpose to public safety, public health, and other law enforcement interests” (U.S. Department of Justice[USDOJ], 2013). The USDOJ issued a follow-up memorandum dated February 14, 2014, GuidanceRegarding Marijuana Related Financial Crimes, which addresses the federal law enforcement regardingfinancial transactions involving proceeds generated by marijuana-related conduct (18 USC Sections 1956,1957, and 1960; Bank Security Act [BSA]). The memorandum further states that “prosecutors should applythe eight enforcement priorities described in the August 29 guidance” when determining whether to chargeindividuals or institutions (USDOJ, 2014). The August 29 th memorandum states that federal lawenforcement “In jurisdictions that have enacted laws legalizing marijuana in some form and that have alsoimplemented strong and effective regulatory and enforcement systems to control the cultivation,distribution, sale, and possession of marijuana, conduct in compliance with those laws and regulations isless likely to threaten the federal priorities set forth…” (USDOJ, 2013). The February 14 th memorandumfurther states that the guidance rests on the expectation that states that have enacted laws authorizingmarijuana-related conduct will implement clear, strong and effective regulatory and enforcement systemsin order to minimize the threat posed to federal enforcement priorities (USDOJ, 2014).

Even through marijuana is “decriminalized” under California state law, and even with the guidance issuedthrough memoranda by the USDOJ, marijuana activities continue to be illegal and subject to theprosecutorial discretion of the federal government.

1.2.2 Kern County Regulatory Background

On July 25, 2006, the Kern County Board of Supervisors (Board) passed the County’s first medicalmarijuana ordinance under Chapter 5.84 of the Kern County Ordinance Code (KCOC). The hallmark ofthe “2006 Ordinance” was that all medical marijuana dispensaries (dispensaries) operating in theunincorporated areas of Kern County were required to obtain a license issued by the Kern County Sheriff.The 2006 Ordinance had a significant number of restrictions, including, but not limited to: (1) hours ofoperation; (2) registration of employee names; (3) record maintenance requirements; (4) unlimited accessby law enforcement; (5) security requirements; and, (6) setbacks from schools. Only six dispensaries wereprovided a license under the 2006 Ordinance.

On March 31, 2009, the Board passed Ordinance No. G-7849 (the 2009 Ordinance). The 2009 Ordinancerepealed the licensing scheme set forth in the 2006 Ordinance, and removed the majority of the priorrestrictions imposed on dispensaries. As with the 2006 Ordinance, the 2009 Ordinance was codified underChapter 5.84 of the KCOC. The only restrictions expressly placed on dispensaries under the 2009 Ordinancewere: (1) Dispensaries were only permitted in zoning districts that permitted “pharmacies” under the ZoningOrdinance; and, (2) Dispensaries had to be further than 1000 feet from schools. The 2009 Ordinanceapplied only to “Medical Marijuana Cooperatives or Collectives,” as that term is defined under an AttorneyGeneral’s Guideline related to Dispensaries.

On August 24, 2010 a one-year moratorium was adopted by the Board prohibiting any new dispensariesfrom opening in the County, and prohibiting established dispensaries from moving. On August 2, 2011,that moratorium was extended for another year or until such time as the Board enacted another ordinancespecifically regulating dispensaries.

On August 9, 2011 the Board passed an ordinance, which would have expressly banned all dispensaries inthe County. The “Dispensary Ban” was set to replace the 2009 Ordinance under Chapter 5.84 of the KCOC.The Dispensary Ban was scheduled to take effect on September 9, 2011; however, prior to September 9,2011, a protest petition was filed, and the Dispensary Ban never took effect.



On February 28, 2012, in response to the protest petition, the Board passed the “Repeal Ordinance.” The“Repeal Ordinance” went into effect on March 30, 2012, and repealed Chapter 5.84 (including the 2009Ordinance) of the KCOC in its entirety.

In June of 2012, “Measure G” was approved by 69 percent of the voters in the County. In contrast to allprior dispensary ordinances, Measure G was codified under the County’s Zoning Ordinance, as opposed tothe Health and Safety Ordinance. Measure G permitted dispensaries to operate in Medium and HeavyIndustrial Precise Development Combining Districts in the County. Dispensaries were prohibited underMeasure G from operating anywhere else. In addition, Measure G placed significant restrictions ondispensaries, similar to those restrictions imposed under the 2006 Ordinance. For example, Measure Gimposed: (1) restrictions on limitations on the hours of operation; (2) a site development applicationrequirement; and, (3) setbacks from other dispensaries, schools, churches, parks, and daycare centers.

On February 14, 2014, the Kern County Superior Court ruled that Measure G was invalid and must be setaside because the County did not comply with CEQA prior to the Board placing the ordinance on the June5, 2012 ballot for the voters to adopt.

As a result of the enactment of the Repeal Ordinance and the invalidation of Measure G, there was noprovision in the Kern County Zoning Ordinance that permitted the use of land, buildings, or premises forthe operation of a Marijuana Distribution Facility in the unincorporated portion of the County fromFebruary 14, 2014 until April of 2016.

On April 5, 2016, the Fifth District Court of Appeals ruled in the matter of County of Kern et. al. v. T.C.E.F.et. al., that the County’s Repeal Ordinance violated Government Code Section 9145 because, in responseto the referendum, the County repealed the 2009 Ordinance and the Dispensary Ban, rather than just theDispensary Ban. As a result of that ruling, the Court of Appeals held that the 2009 Ordinance was in fullforce and effect.

On May 10, 2016, the Board passed Ordinance No. G-8630, which added Chapter 5.86 to the KCOC andimposed a moratorium on the establishment of new Medical Marijuana Dispensaries in the County (the“2016 Moratorium”). Pursuant to the Moratorium, “no Medical Marijuana Dispensary(ies) other than thosein existence and operating on the effective date of this ordinance, is permitted within the unincorporatedareas of Kern County during the period of time this ordinance is in effect.” The Moratorium was extendedon June 21, 2016 for ten months and 15 days, pursuant to Government Code section 65858(a).

As of November 18, 2016, the 2016 Moratorium remains in effect and no new dispensaries are permittedwithin the unincorporated areas of the County. Those dispensaries that were in operation prior to the 2016Moratorium must comply with the provisions of the 2009 Ordinance.

1.3 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

Kern County is bounded by Kings, Tulare, and Inyo counties on the north; San Bernardino County on theeast; Los Angeles and Ventura counties on the south; and Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties onthe west (Figure 1, Regional Vicinity Map; Figure 2, Location Map). Kern County is California’s thirdlargest county in land area, encompassing 8,202 square miles, with a width of approximately 67 miles anda length of approximately 120 miles.

The geography of Kern County is diverse containing mountainous areas (Tehachapi Mountains, SierraNevada Mountains, San Emigdio Mountains, and Coast Ranges), valley areas (San Joaquin Valley), anddesert areas (Mojave Desert, Indian Wells Valley, Antelope Valley). The San Joaquin Valley is located inthe central portion of the County and is bounded by several mountain ranges which intersect forming ahorseshoe shaped valley. The Kern County General Plan (KCGP) Update describes the San Joaquin Valleyregion as “the southern San Joaquin Valley below an elevation of 1,000 feet mean sea level” within KernCounty. The lowest point in the County is located in the Valley and is 206 feet above mean sea level



(AMSL). The Valley is characterized by relatively low rainfall, averaging less than 10 inches per year.Summers are relatively cloudless, hot, and dry. Winter is generally mild, but an occasional freeze doesoccur and may cause substantial agricultural damage.

The mountain areas, from east to west, include the Sierra Nevada Mountains, Tehachapi Mountains, SanEmigdio Range, Temblor Range, and parts of the Coast Range. The highest point in the County is 8,831feet AMSL at the summit of Mount Pinos. The average rainfall is approximately 15 inches, but can be ashigh as 35 or more inches. Snow accounts for much of the precipitation above 6,000 feet AMSL.

The Mojave Desert, including Indian Wells Valley and Antelope Valley, is located in the eastern portionof Kern County, east of the Sierra Nevada and Tehachapi ranges and south of the short transverse rangethat connects the southernmost Sierra Nevada Mountains with the San Emigdio Mountains. The desertregion is characterized by less than 10 inches of annual rainfall, and an evaporation rate that exceedprecipitation.

Kern County includes 11 incorporated cities with Arvin, Bakersfield, Delano, Maricopa, McFarland,Shafter, Taft, and Wasco located within the San Joaquin Valley portion of the County and Tehachapi,California City, and Ridgecrest located in the desert portion of the County.

The County contains Intestates (I), U.S. Routes (US), and State Routes (SR). SR-99 provides a majorfreeway servicing the large Central Valley urban areas, including the Metropolitan Bakersfield area. I-5enters the County in the southwest and carries traffic on a north-south alignment from Southern Californiathrough the Central Valley north to Sacramento, on the west side of the Valley, against the coast range. Ineastern Kern County, SR-14 provides linkages to Southern California as well as north to Inyokern, IndianWells, and Ridgecrest. SR-58 provides east-west connections between the Desert and Valley regions,connecting Mojave to Bakersfield through Tehachapi and continuing through Buttonwillow andMcKittrick. Overall, the major regional routes within the County include, but are not limited to, I-5, US-395,SR-14, SR-33, SR-41, SR-43, SR-46, SR-58, SR-65, SR-99, SR-119, SR-138, SR-155, SR-166, SR-178, SR-184, SR-204, SR-202, and SR-223.

KERN COUNTY

N.T.S. Figure 1

Regional Location

N.T.S. Figure 2

Project Vicinity

T U L A R E I N Y OK I N G S

S A N L U I S O B I S P O

L O S A N G E L E SV E N T U R A

S A N TA B A R B A R A

K E R N

33

33

33

33

46

5

5

5

99

99

65

155155

SA

N B

ER

NA

RD

INO

Delano

McFarland

Wasco

Lost Hills

Shafter

BAKERSFIELD

Arvin

Edison

Ridgecrest

Tehachapi

Rosamond

CaliforniaCityMaricopa

Taft

McKittrick



1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

As mentioned previously, the proposed project consists of an amendment to KCOC Title 19, focused onChapter 19.120, Medical Marijuana Dispensaries, of the Kern County Zoning Ordinance, and other relatedordinances. For the purposes of CEQA, the proposed project includes two alternatives that relate to futureactivities expected to be undertaken pursuant to the amended ordinance.

1.4.1 Existing Medical Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance

A total of 29 medical marijuana dispensaries were in operation within the County as of November 18, 2016.Of these 29 dispensaries, 7 are in violation of the moratorium or Kern County Zoning Ordinance Chapter19.120 and the remaining 22 opened before the moratorium and are being reviewed for compliance (referto Figure 3, Existing Dispensary Locations).

As discussed in Section 1.2.2, Kern County Regulatory Background, on March 31, 2009, the Board passedOrdinance No. G-7849 (the 2009 Ordinance). The 2009 Ordinance repealed the licensing scheme set forthin the 2006 Ordinance, and removed the majority of prior restrictions imposed on dispensaries. As with the2006 Ordinance, the 2009 Ordinance was codified under Chapter 5.84 of the KCOC. The only restrictionsexpressly placed on dispensaries under the 2009 Ordinance were: (1) Dispensaries were only permitted inzoning districts that permitted “pharmacies” under the Zoning Ordinance; and, (2) Dispensaries had to befurther than 1000 feet from schools. The 2009 Ordinance applied only to “Medical Marijuana Cooperativesor Collectives,” as that term is defined under an Attorney General’s Guideline related to dispensaries.

On May 10, 2016, the Board passed Ordinance No. G-8630, which added Chapter 5.86 to the KCOC andimposed a moratorium on the establishment of new medical marijuana dispensaries in the County (2016Moratorium). Pursuant to the 2016 Moratorium, “no Medical Marijuana Dispensaries other than those inexistence and operating on the effective date of this ordinance, is permitted within the unincorporated areasof Kern County during the period of time this ordinance is in effect.” As of November 18, 2016, the 2016Moratorium remains in effect and no new dispensaries are permitted within the unincorporated areas of theCounty. Those dispensaries that were in operation prior to the 2016 Moratorium must comply with theprovisions of the 2009 Ordinance.

1.4.2 Proposed Project

The proposed project consists of an amendment to KCOC Title 19 and other related ordinances to either:(1) ban all medical and recreational marijuana related activities other than what is allowed under CaliforniaProposition 64 (Proposition 64), or (2) include updated standards and conditions for future commercialmarijuana cultivation, commercial marijuana processing and packaging, and recreational/medicalmarijuana dispensaries and mobile delivery.

Under Alternative 1, if banned, no marijuana activities and facilities for either medical or recreational wouldbe allowed to occur within unincorporated Kern County. Only the allowance of cultivation and possessionas defined in Proposition 64 would be allowed.

N.T.S.

38

LostHillsLostHills

DelanoDelano

WascoWasco

McFarlandMcFarlandWoodyWoody

GlennvilleGlennville KernvilleKernville

Lake IsabellaLake Isabella

InyokernInyokern

Ridgecrest

ShafterShafter

AltaSierraAlta

Sierra

California CityCalifornia CityTehachapiTehachapi

RosamondRosamond

TaftTaft

McKittrickMcKittrick RosedaleRosedaleBakersfieldBakersfield

MaricopaMaricopa

LamontLamont

ArvinArvin

MettlerMettler

Grapevine

LebecLebecFrazier ParkFrazier Park

MojaveMojaveBoronBoron

OildaleOildaleButtonwillowButtonwillow

5

178

202

223

155

119

46

33

33

4399

99

65

58

58

58

14

395LERDO HWY

BEAR MTN BLVD

5

166

58

Dispensary Locations

Kern County

Legend

Ches

ter A

veCh

este

r Ave

21st St

Stockdale Hwy

California Ave

Columbus St

Bernard St

Panorama Dr

Niles St

E Brundage Ln

Cotto

nwoo

d Rd

S Fa

irfax

Rd

Edison HwyTruxtun Ave

Bell Terrace

Ming Ave

Wilson Rd

Wible Orchard

Ches

ter A

veCh

este

r Ave

21st St

Stockdale Hwy

California Ave

Columbus St

Bernard St

Panorama Dr

Niles St

E Brundage Ln

Cotto

nwoo

d Rd

S Os

wel

l St

S Fa

irfax

Rd

Edison HwyTruxtun Ave

Bell Terrace

Ming Ave

Wilson Rd

Wible Orchard

58

58

99

178

184

204

204

S Os

wel

l St

Rosamond BlvdRosamond Blvd

60th

St W

70th

St W

50th

St W

40th

St W

30th

St W

90th

St W

100t

h St

W

85th

St W

Moj

ave

Trop

ico R

d

Moj

ave

Trop

ico R

d

Sier

ra H

wy

Sier

ra H

wy

Rosamond BlvdRosamond Blvd

60th

St W

70th

St W

50th

St W

40th

St W

30th

St W

90th

St W

100t

h St

W

85th

St W

ROSAMOND

14

1. Tiger Vitality Collective 2222 S. Chester Ave., Suite B

2. Life’s Healing Solutions 11812 N. Chester Ave.

3. Taft Highway Collective 3024 Highway 119

4. Highway 99 Collective 2980 Saco Rd.

5. Peace and Medicine 2500 S. Chester Ave.

6. Peace and Medicine 23444 Niles St.

7. Knotts Street Collective 902 Knotts St.

8. West Coast Healing 3030 Taft Hwy.

9. Backyard Organics 2111 River Blvd.

10. Sweet Leaf Organic 2011 Niles Street

11. OCC 608 Cottonwood Road

12. Green Flower 2532 Edison Hwy.

13. Cannibal’s Medibles 110 Morning Drive

14. Therapeutic Health Center 141 N. Chester Ave.

15. The Giving Tree 1631 N. Chester Ave.

16. Sticky Icky 2125 Edison Hwy.

17. Organic Health Solutions 1315 W. Rosamond Blvd., Suite 1A (Rosamond)

18. Vape n. Bake 2689 Sierra Hwy. (Rosamond)

19. Tanner Vest Collective 2753 Diamond Street (Rosamond)

20. DASA 1733 Sierra Highway (Rosamond)

21. Lights Out Wellness 1739 Poplar Street (Rosamond)

22. The Plum Tree Collective 2873 Sierra Hwy. (Rosamond)

23. Prime Spot Wellness 2722 100th Street (Rosamond)

24. American Organics Club 1737 Locust St. (Rosamond)

25. Green Mile Collective 2613 Diamond St. (Rosamond)

26. Hwy. Relief Medical 2939 Sierra Hwy. (Rosamond)

27. ASHES 6629 Wofford Blvd. (Wofford Heights)

28. Pine Mountain High 633 San Gabriel Trail (Frazier Park)

29. Big O Relief 16940 Hwy 14 (Mojave)

19

24

20

2521

26

28

29

27

17

22

18

23

4

15

14

97

106

12

13

11

1

5

16

2



If updated standards and conditions are approved, Alternative 2 would provide clarification for theappropriate zone classifications where: (1) commercial marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, anddistribution facilities would be an allowable use when full compliance with development standards areachieved; and (2) where dispensaries for either medical and/or recreational marijuana retail sales and mobiledeliveries would be allowed under an approved conditional use permit. A maximum total square footagelimit would be proposed countywide for cultivation and processing and packaging. A maximum numberof dispensaries would be proposed countywide, including limits on overconcentration in unincorporatedcommunities and census tracts. All activities would be subject to also obtaining all required State permitsand appropriate license types.

Revisions to the KCOC Title 19 and other related ordinances would contain the following elements:

· Cultivationo Indoor Cultivation (State License Type 1A,1B, 2A)

§ A total of 35 State licenses (permits) would be allowed countywide for cultivation.These indoor cultivation facilities would be required to obtain State License Type1A, Type 1B, or Type 2A, which are defined below, from the Department of Foodand Agriculture:

· Type 1A, or “specialty indoor,” for indoor cultivation using exclusivelyartificial lighting of less than or equal to 5,000 square feet of total canopysize on one premises.

· Type 1B, or “specialty mixed-light,” for cultivation using a combinationof natural and supplemental artificial lighting at a maximum threshold tobe determined by the Department of Food and Agriculture, of less than orequal to 5,000 square feet of total canopy size on one premises.

· Type 2A, or “small indoor,” for indoor cultivation using exclusivelyartificial lighting between 5,001 and 10,000 square feet, inclusive, of totalcanopy size on one premises.

§ Greenhouses would be an allowable use when full compliance with developmentstandards is achieved in the following zone classifications: A (ExclusiveAgriculture) and A-1 (Limited Agriculture). Greenhouses that cannot fully complywith the development standards would require a conditional use permit.

§ Indoor Cultivation (i.e., warehouses or other structures) would be an allowable usewhen full compliance with development standards is achieved in the followingzone classifications: A (Exclusive Agriculture), A-1 (Limited Agriculture), M-1PD (Light Industrial – Precise Development Combining District), M-2 PD(Medium Industrial – Precise Development Combining District), and M-3 PD(Heavy Industrial – Precise Development Combining District). Indoor cultivationthat cannot fully comply with the development standards, regardless of zoneclassification, would require a conditional use permit. In addition, indoorcultivation would be allowed with a conditional use permit in an existing structureor existing building zoned C-2 PD (General Commercial – Precise DevelopmentCombining District) and CH PD (Highway Commercial – Precise DevelopmentCombining District).

§ A countywide maximum of 650,000 ft2 of indoor cultivation would be allowed inunincorporated portions of the County with the required State permits, appropriatelicenses and, if applicable, conditional use permits. This total would be splitbetween facility sizes as follows:



· Facilities ranging from 5,000 to 10,000 ft2 – up to 10 State licenses with atotal countywide maximum of 100,000 ft2

· Facilities ranging from 10,001 to 22,000 ft2= up to 25 State licenses witha total countywide maximum of 550,000 ft2

o Outdoor Cultivation (State License Type 1, Type 3, Type 4)§ Outdoor cultivation activities would be required to obtain State License Type 1,

Type 3, or Type 4, which are defined below, for the Department of Food andAgriculture:

· Type 1, or “specialty outdoor,” for outdoor cultivation using no artificiallighting of less than or equal to 5,000 square feet of total canopy size onone premises, or up to 50 mature plants on noncontiguous plots.

· Type 3, or “outdoor,” for outdoor cultivation using no artificial lightingfrom 10,001 square feet to one acre, inclusive, of total canopy size on onepremises. The Department of Food and Agriculture shall limit the numberof licenses allowed of this type.

· Type 4, or “nursery,” for cultivation of medical cannabis solely as anursery. Type 4 licensees may transport live plants.

§ Outdoor cultivation would be an allowable use when full compliance withdevelopment standards is achieved in the following zone classification: A(Exclusive Agriculture). Outdoor cultivation that cannot fully comply with thedevelopment standards would require a conditional use permit.

§ A countywide maximum of 150 acres of outdoor cultivation would be allowed inunincorporated portions of the County with the required State permits, appropriatelicenses and, if applicable, conditional use permits.

§ Each individual outdoor cultivation operation would be a maximum of one (1) acrein size.

· Processing and Packaging:o Processing and packaging facilities would be required to obtain the appropriate State

license from the Department of Public Health (manufacturing licenses) and the Bureau ofMedical Cannabis Regulation within the Department of Consumer Affairs (distribution,transportation, laboratory testing).

o Processing and packaging would be an allowable use when full compliance withdevelopment standards is achieved in the following zone classifications: A (ExclusiveAgriculture), M-2 PD (Medium Industrial – Precise Development Combining District), andM-3 PD (Heavy Industrial – Precise Development Combining District). Processing andpackaging facilities that cannot fully comply with the development standards, regardlessof zone classification, would require a conditional use permit.

o A countywide maximum of 300,000 ft2 of extraction/production for active ingredient,production of edibles, infused drinks and solid application would be allowed inunincorporated areas of the County with the required State permits, appropriated licensesand, if applicable, conditional use permits.

· Dispensaries:o Dispensaries would be required to obtain the appropriate State license from the Department

of Medical Cannabis Regulation within the Department of Consumer Affairs (distribution,transportation, dispensary [sale]).

o Dispensaries with mobile delivery would be allowed with a conditional use permit in thefollowing zone classifications: C-1 PD (Neighborhood Commercial – PreciseDevelopment Combining District); C-2 PD (General Commercial – Precise Development



Combining District); CH PD (Highway Commercial – Precise Development CombiningDistrict); M-1 PD (Light Industrial – Precise Development Combining District); M-2 PD(Medium Industrial – Precise Development Combining District); and M-3 PD (HeavyIndustrial – Precise Development Combining District).

o A countywide maximum of 20 dispensaries would be allowed within unincorporatedportions of Kern County with the required State permits, appropriate licenses, andconditional use permits.

o No more than one (1) dispensary would be allowed in each unincorporated communityidentified in the KCGP or Kern County Housing Element.

o Dispensaries would be required to meet all setbacks, including being 1,000 feet or morefrom a school, day care center, or youth center while children are present, as specified inProposition 64.

1.5 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The County has defined the following objectives for the project:

· Provide county-specific land use and fiscal information and policy recommendations to the KernCounty Board of Supervisors for compliance with Proposition 64 (The California MarijuanaLegalization Initiative 2016, also known as the Adult Use of Marijuana Act) and permitting by theState of California for Medical and Recreational Marijuana.

· Implement changes to Kern County Ordinances to reflect Kern County Board of Supervisorsdirection on commercial marijuana-related activities within its boundaries and changes in laws andregulations by outside agencies for the purposes of reducing or eliminating potential significantenvironmental impacts, to the extent feasible, by ensuring that current County regulation reflectsthe County’s interest in protecting the health, safety, and general welfare of residents and visitors.

· Continue Kern County’s ongoing commitment to consult and cooperate with Federal, State,regional and local agencies by periodically reviewing adopted regulations to ensure the long-termviability of Kern County’s resources, and Kern County Board of Supervisors policy direction

· Encourage appropriate economic development that creates jobs and promotes capital investment inKern County to enable the County to invest in capital improvement projects and social programs,which benefit County residents, retail businesses, and capital industries which ensures the County’sfiscal stability.

1.6 PROPOSED DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS/REQUIRED APPROVALS

Consideration and implementation of the proposed project will require certain discretionary actions andapprovals including, but not limited to, the following:

· Consideration and certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report with appropriatefindings and Mitigation Monitoring Program at a hearing by the Kern County PlanningCommission with recommendations forwarded to the Kern County Board of Supervisors foraction.

· Consideration and approval at a duly noticed public hearing by the Kern County Board ofSupervisors of the project, including the amendments of text and exhibits for Title 19 of theKern County Zoning Ordinance and other related ordinances.

Future activities related to commercial medical and recreational marijuana cultivation,processing/packaging and sales of marijuana may require consideration and approval from a variety ofagencies, who will be CEQA responsible or trustee agencies in this environmental process. The specificresponsible agencies may vary, depending upon the nature of the planned activity, location and the



resources impacted by cultivation, processing, and sale activities. A preliminary list of potentiallyresponsible and trustee agencies is provided below. These agencies would oversee future commercialmarijuana activities at the project-level.

State

· California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)o Section 1600 et seq. permits (Streambed Alteration Agreements)o Section 2081 Permit (State-listed endangered species)

· Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (Lahontan RWQCB) and Central ValleyRegional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB)o National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permito General Construction Stormwater Permit (Preparation of a SWPPP)o Regional Water Quality Certification (401 Permit)

· California Department of Transportationo Right-of-Way Encroachment Permito Oversized Loads Permit

· Bureau of Medical Marijuana Regulation· Department of Consumer Affairs· Department of Food and Agriculture· Department of Pesticide Regulation· Board of Equalization· Franchise Tax Board· Department of Justice· Department of Public Health· Industrial Welfare Commission· State Board of Forestry· The Division of Occupational Safety and Health· California Environmental Protection Agency

Local

· Kern County Planning and Natural Resources Departmento Land Use Approval (Conditional Use Permit) for Alternative 2o Land Use Approval (Enforcement Action) for Alternative 1 and Alternative 2o Certification of Environmental Impact Reporto Mitigation Monitoring Program

· Eastern Kern County Air Pollution Control Districto Fugitive Dust Control Plano Authority to Constructo Permit to Operate

· San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Districto Fugitive Dust Control Plano Authority to Constructo Permit to Operate

· Kern County Public Workso Engineering, Surveying and Permit Services Department§ Plan for the Disposal of Drainage Waters§ Grading and Building Plans



o Kern County Roads Department§ Proposed Access Road Design and Encroachment Permit

· Kern County Environmental Health Services Divisiono Food Safety Programo Hazardous Materials Business Plano Septic and Water System Permits

· Kern County Fire Departmento Fire Safety Plano Hazardous Materials Management Plan

· Kern County Board of Supervisorso Amendment to the KCOC Title 19, Zoning Ordinance, and other related ordinances for

either Alternative 1 or Alternative 2o Future Conditional Use Permits for Alternative 2



This page left intentionally blank.



3.0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS(1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by

the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact”answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does notapply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact”answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g.,the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

(2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite, cumulativeas well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

(3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answersmust indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less thansignificant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect maybe significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination ismade, an EIR is required.

(4) “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporationof mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less ThanSignificant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measure and briefly explain how theyreduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from “Earlier Analyses,” as describedin (5) below, may be cross-referenced).

(5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effecthas been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In thiscase, a brief discussion should identify the following:(a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.(b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist where within the scope

of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and statewhether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

(c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less Than Significant With Mitigation MeasuresIncorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlierdocument and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

(6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potentialimpacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside documentshould, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

(7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individualscontacted should be cited in the discussion.

(8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agenciesshould normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effectsin whatever format is selected.

(9) The explanation of each issue should identify:(a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and(b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

(10) Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requestedconsultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1. If so, has consultation begun?Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, andproject proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverseimpacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmentalreview process. (See Public Resources Code section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available fromthe California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Officeof Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisionsspecific to confidentiality.



Aesthetics Discussion:(a) A variety of land uses occur within Kern County, the project boundary area, including agricultural

production, gas and oil industry activities and facilities, roads, renewable energy and transmissionactivities and facilities, and residential, industrial, and commercial land uses. Similarly, the aestheticfeatures of the existing visual environment in Kern County is varied with agricultural and oilproduction/extraction equipment, renewable energy facilities, or the urban environment dominatingthe landscape. Kern County contains scenic vistas along existing trails, including the Pacific CrestTrail. The KCGP and the existing KCOC protect scenic views and vistas. The proposed project wouldeither ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoning regulations to facilitatemarijuana activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zone classifications. However,if activities are allowed per Alternative 2, this would potentially result in a significant alteration toexisting scenic vistas. This potential impact will be further evaluated for both proposed projectalternatives in the EIR.

(b) There are no officially designated state or county scenic highways within the Kern County boundaries;however, the County contains three eligible state scenic highways: (1) SR-14/US-395 from Mojavenorth to the County border; (2) SR-58 from SR-14 east to the County border; and SR-41 within thenorthwestern corner of the County (California Department of Transportation [Caltrans], 2016). Thereis potential for an adverse visual effect on the viewsheds of these Eligible (E) State Scenic Highwaysbecause the proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriatezoning regulations to facilitate marijuana activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinancezone classifications. Therefore, this impact will be further evaluated in the EIR.

(c) The County supports native valley, mountain, and desert plant communities that are partially degradedby past and current development and agricultural activities. The proposed project would clarify the

PotentiallySignificant

Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated

Less ThanSignificant

ImpactNo

ImpactAESTHETICS. Would the project:

a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenicvista?

b. Substantially damage scenic resources,including, but not limited to, trees, rockoutcroppings, and historic buildings within astate scenic highway?

c. Substantially degrade the existing visualcharacter or quality of the site and itssurroundings?

d. Create a new source of substantial light or glarewhich would adversely affect day or nighttimeviews in the area?



ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classifications where future commercial marijuanafacilities are allowable when compliance with development standards are achieved or under aconditional use permit. The elimination of existing marijuana-related facilities, Alternative 1, or theintroduction of commercial marijuana facilities, Alternative 2, could substantially change the visuallandscape, depending on the activity and location. The proposed project’s potential, under bothalternatives, to substantially degrade its existing visual character or quality of the site and itssurroundings will be further evaluated in the EIR.

(d) Future marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution activities, including anyconstruction of new facilities, could generate new sources of light, including night-time lighting forsecurity purposes on new or existing structures, under both proposed project alternatives. Theproposed project, both Alternative 1 and Alternative 2, will provide appropriate zoning regulations tofacilitate marijuana activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zone classifications.The proposed project’s potential, under both Alternatives 1 and 2, to create a new source of substantiallight or glare will be further evaluated in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources aresignificant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluationand Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optionalmodel to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forestresources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer toinformation compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’sinventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest LegacyAssessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted bythe California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, orFarmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to theFarmland Mapping and Monitoring Program ofthe California Resources Agency, tononagricultural use?

b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or Williamson Act contract?

c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or causerezoning of, forest land (as defined in PublicResources Code section 12220(g)), timberland(as defined by Public Resources Code Section4526), or timberland zoned TimberlandProductions (as defined in Government Codesection 51104(g))?

d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion offorest land to non-forest use?

e. Involve other changes in the existing environmentwhich, due to their location or nature, couldresult in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land tonon-forest use?

f. Result in the cancellation of an open spacecontract made pursuant to the California LandConservation Act of 1965 or Farmland SecurityZone Contract for any parcel of 100 or moreacres (Section 15206(b)(3) Public ResourcesCode?



Agriculture and Forest Resources Discussion:

(a) The California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP)identifies areas classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and/or Farmland of StatewideImportance within Kern County; the majority of these lands are located within the Valley portion ofthe County. Both proposed project alternatives involve the development of local regulations that willguide either banning, Alternative 1, or implementing, Alternative 2, future commercial marijuanacultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution activities and facilities within the County subjectto compliance with development standards and specific regulatory oversight. The proposed projectalternatives are not anticipated to convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and/or Farmland ofStatewide Importance to nonagricultural use; however, any conversion is considered a potentiallysignificant impact. Therefore, this impact will be analyzed further in the EIR.

(b) The proposed project alternatives will help clarify the compatibility of future marijuana activities withany Williamson Act contracts. The proposed project alternatives are not anticipated to conflict withexisting agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts; however, any conflict is considered apotentially significant impact. Therefore, this impact will be analyzed further in the EIR.

(c)/(d) The proposed project alternatives will provide clarification of the ban, Alternative 1, of implement theappropriate zone classifications where future commercial marijuana facilities are allowable either incompliance with development standards or with a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. The proposedproject alternatives are not anticipated to result in the loss of forestland or conversion of forestland tonon-forest land. Any loss of forest land is potentially significant. This will be evaluated further in theEIR.

(e) It is not anticipated that the proposed project alternatives will involve other changes to the existingconditions which, due to their location or nature, could result in the conversion of farmland tononagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Any future marijuana activitiesconverting farmland or forestland to non-agricultural or non-forest lands would be potentiallysignificant. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.

(f) Kern County contains lands subject to a Williamson Act Land Use Contract made pursuant to theCalifornia Land Conservation Act of 1965 or Farmland Security Zone Contract. As noted above, theproposed project alternatives will help clarify the compatibility of either a ban, Alternative 1, orimplementation, Alternative 2, of future commercial marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, anddistribution facilities with Williamson Act contract lands. This issue will be further evaluated in theEIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality managementor air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would theproject:

a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of theapplicable air quality plan?

b. Violate any air quality standard as adopted in(c)I or (c)ii, or as established by EPA or airdistrict or contribute substantially to an existingor projected air quality violation?

c. Result in a cumulatively considerable netincrease of any criteria pollutant for which theproject region is nonattainment under anapplicable federal or state ambient air qualitystandard (including releasing emissions whichexceed quantitative thresholds for ozoneprecursors)? Specifically, wouldimplementation of the project exceed any of thefollowing adopted thresholds:

i. San Joaquin Valley Unified AirPollution Control District:

Operational and Area Sources:Reactive Organic Gases (ROG)10 tons per year.Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)10 tons per year.Particulate Matter (PM10)15 tons per year.

Stationary Sources as Determinedby District Rules:

Severe Nonattainment25 tons per year.Extreme Nonattainment10 tons per year.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

ii. Eastern Kern Air Pollution ControlDistrict:

Operational and Area Sources:Reactive Organic Gases (ROG)25 tons per year.Oxides of nitrogen (NOx)25 tons per year.Particulate Matter (PM10)15 tons per year.

Stationary Sources as Determinedby District Rules:

25 tons per year.

d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantialpollutant concentrations?

e. Create objectionable odors affecting asubstantial number of people?

Air Quality Discussion:

(a)/(b) 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 ControlDistrict (EKAPCD) in the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MDAB). The SJVAB is designated nonattainmentfor both the State and Federal 8-hour ozone (O3) and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns indiameter (PM2.5) standards. The SJVAB is also in nonattainment for the State 1-hour O 3 and particulatematter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10) standards. The MDAB is designated non-attainmentfor both the State and Federal 8-hour O3, and the State 1-hour O3 and PM10 standards. In addition, KernRiver Valley, Bear Valley and Cummings Valley were designated as a separate nonattainment area in2008 for PM10; however, they are included in EKAPCD for all other Federal standards. The IndianWells Valley is a separate area for Federal 8-hour O3 (designated as unclassified/attainment for Federalstandards) and PM10 (designated as attainment maintenance for Federal standards).

Under Alternative 1, no marijuana activities or facilities for either medical or recreational would beallowed to occur within unincorporated Kern County. This has the potential for both medical andrecreational marijuana consumers to either drive to facilities outside of unincorporated Kern County,or for mobile delivery services to come into unincorporated Kern County from adjacent areas. Thiscould generate emissions of criteria pollutants that could result in significant impacts to air quality inthe area. This impact is potentially significant.

Under Alternative 2, future commercial marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distributionactivities, including any construction of new facilities, could generate emissions of criteria pollutantsthat could result in significant impacts to air quality in the area. Equipment usage and activities could



result in emissions of PM10, ozone precursors, including NOX, volatile organic compounds (VOC), andother pollutants, which could result in significant impacts to air quality in the area. The sources ofemissions from implementing and enforcing the proposed project would include, but are not limitedto, heavy equipment used to excavate and grade, cultivation equipment, processing equipment, HVAC(heating, ventilation and air conditioning) systems for indoor facility activities, on-road motor vehiclesfor equipment and material deliveries, and on-road motor vehicles for worker commutes, customerspatronizing dispensaries, or for mobile delivery of products to customers. Activity on unpaved roadsand cultivation and processing areas would contribute to PM10 emissions. This impact is potentiallysignificant.

Further analysis of air quality impacts is warranted to determine whether the proposed project,Alternatives 1 and 2, would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable plans forattainment and if so, to determine the reasonable and feasible mitigation measures that could beimposed. These issues will be evaluated in the EIR.

(c) As discussed above, the SJVAB is designated nonattainment for both the State and Federal 8-hour O 3

and PM2.5 standards. The SJVAB is also in nonattainment for the State 1-hour O3 and PM10 standards.The MDAB is designated non-attainment for both the State and Federal 8-hour O3, and the State 1-hour O3 and PM10 standards. In addition, Kern River Valley, Bear Valley and Cummings Valley weredesignated as a separate nonattainment area in 2008 for PM10. Both the SJVAPCD and the EKAPCDrules and regulations apply to both proposed project alternatives activities based on future facilitylocations. Cumulative contributions to the SJVAB and the MDAB could be potentially significant.Emissions will be analyzed in the EIR as related to both the SJVAPCD and the EKAPCD.

(d) Land uses determined to be “sensitive” to air quality include residential areas, schools, convalescentand acute care hospitals, parks and recreational areas, and churches. The proposed project would eitherban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoning regulations to facilitate marijuanaactivities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zone classifications. This will clarifyfuture commercial marijuana-related facility locations including proximity to sensitive resources. Inaddition, impacts related to farming/cultivation equipment, processing equipment, and on-road motorvehicles could result in emissions. Mitigation measures for equipment, on- and off-road vehicles, anddust control that are recommended by the SJVAPCD and EKAPCD will be evaluated as part of theEIR.

(e) Under Alternative 1, no commercial marijuana cultivation and processing facilities would be allowedwithin unincorporated Kern County; however, per Proposition 64, individuals are allowed to grow upto six plants indoors, which has the potential to produce odors depending on the plant variety. UnderAlternative 2, the future commercial marijuana cultivation and processing facilities could produceodors depending on the plant variety. In addition, odors associated with typical vehicle exhaust orfueling of agricultural equipment used for cultivation, harvesting, processing, and distribution, and on-road vehicle exhaust of consumer vehicles or delivery vehicles could also be emitted. The proposedproject alternatives will provide clarification on either banning, Alternative 1, or implementing,Alternative 2, zoning regulations for the appropriate locations of future marijuana industry-relatedfacilities in order to reduce any objectionable odors experienced by the nearby population. This impactis potentially significant and will be evaluated further in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

ImpactBIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directlyor through habitat modifications, on any speciesidentified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies,or regulations or by the California Departmentof Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and WildlifeService?

b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparianhabitat or other sensitive natural communityidentified in local or regional plans, policies,regulations, or by the California Department ofFish and Game or U.S. Fish and WildlifeService?

c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federallyprotected wetlands as defined by Section 404 ofthe Clean Water Act (including, but not limitedto, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) throughdirect removal, filling, hydrologicalinterruption, or other means?

d. Interfere substantially with the movement of anynative resident or migratory fish or wildlifespecies or with established native resident ormigratory wildlife corridors, or impede the useof native wildlife nursery sites?

e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinancesprotecting biological resources, such as a treepreservation policy or ordinance?

f. Conflict with the provisions of an adoptedHabitat Conservation Plan, Natural CommunityConservation Plan or other approved local,regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

Biological Resources Discussion:

(a)-(f) The proposed project is an ordinance amendment to KCOC Title 19 and other related ordinances thatwill apply to the entire unincorporated County, including the three major geographic areas: Valley,Mountain, and Desert. These three regions have the ability to contain sensitive natural communities,including riparian habitat and wetlands, which host a variety of sensitive plant and wildlife species,including several species listed as threatened or endangered at the state or federal level. The County



also includes areas used by wildlife species for migration or dispersal, including portions of the PacificFlyway.

In addition, there are multiple conservation programs or mitigation requirements have been approvedor proposed to comply with State and federal Endangered Species laws including the issuance ofincidental take coverage through habitat conservation plans, federal Section 7 Consultations,Biological Opinions and mitigation measures that are a part of the CEQA and NEPA environmentaldocuments. The following Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) and Natural Community ConservationPlans (NCCPs) have been approved within Kern County:

· Valley HCPs:o Draft Valley Floor HCP (currently under development)o Chevron North American Exploration and Production Lokern HCPo California Resources Corporation Elk Hills HCPo Freeport-McMoRan Oil & Gas (formerly Nuevo-Torch then Plains Exploration and

Production Company) HCPo CRC Non-Unity HCP (formerly Occidental of Elk Hills, Inc. HCP)o Aera Coles Levee Ecosystem Preserve HCP (previously Arco Western Energy HCP)o Chevron Pipeline HCPo Kern County Waste Facilities HCPo Kern Water Bank HCP/NCCPo Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) San Joaquin Valley Operations and Maintenance

Program HCPo Metropolitan Bakersfield HCPo San Joaquin Field Division Aqueduct HCP

· Mountain HCPs:o Tehachapi Uplands Multiple Species HCP

· Desert HCPs/NCCPs:o West Mojave Plan and West Mojave HCPo RE Cinco Solar Facility Project HCPo Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan a joint State and Federal NCCP (within

BLM’s California Desert Conservation Area)

Kern County is also covered by the following recovery plans:

· Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, California· Recovery Plan for Vernal Pool Ecosystems of California and Southern Oregon· California Condor Recovery Plan· Pacific Bald Eagle Recovery Plan

The EIR will assess impacts on known resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. Ifapplicable for the alternative, the EIR would set forth research criteria and report content needed toenable project-level evaluations of resource occurrences and possible significant impacts on sensitivebiological resources. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in thesignificance of a historical resource as definedin CEQA Guidelines §15064.5?

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in thesignificance of an archaeological resourcepursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5?

c. Directly or indirectly destroy a uniquepaleontological resource or site or uniquegeologic feature?

d) Disturb any human remains, including thoseinterred outside of dedicated cemeteries?

Cultural Resources Discussion:

(a)-(c) There is the potential that the proposed project’s future activities could impact historical, prehistorical,and paleontological resources; this is considered potentially significant. The EIR will assess impactson these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, theEIR will set forth research criteria and report content needed to enable project-level evaluations ofresource occurrences and possible significant impacts on sensitive cultural resources. This will beevaluated further in the EIR.

(d) The potential for the discovery of human remains is considered a potential impact. The EIR will assessimpacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for thealternative, the EIR will set forth criteria, report content, and identify measures to be implemented ifany are unexpectedly uncovered during project-level ground disturbing activities. This will beevaluated further in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:

a. Expose people or structures to potentialsubstantial adverse effects, including the risk ofloss, injury, or death involving:

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, asdelineated on the most recent Alquist-PrioloEarthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by theState Geologist for the area or based onother substantial evidence of a known fault?Refer to Division of Mines and GeologySpecial Publication 42.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?

iii) Seismic-related ground failure, includingliquefaction?

iv) Landslides?

b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss oftopsoil?

c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that isunstable, or that would become unstable as aresult of the project, and potentially result in on-or offsite landslide, lateral spreading,subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),creating substantial risks to life or property?

e. Have soils incapable of adequately supportingthe use of septic tanks or alternative waste waterdisposal systems where sewers are not availablefor the disposal of waste water?

Geology and Soils Discussion:(a)(i) Kern County is considered a seismically active area. Kern County has adopted the California

Building Standards Code, 2007 Edition (CCR Title 24), which imposes substantially the samerequirements as the International Building Code (IBC), 2006 Edition, with some modificationsand amendments. The entirety of Kern County is located in a seismic Zone 4, a designationpreviously used in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) (the predecessor to the IBC) to denote the



areas of highest risk to earthquake ground motion. Active faults and fault zones within theCounty borders include, but are not limited to, the San Andreas, Garlock, Owens Valley, WhiteWolf, Kern Canyon, and Sierra Nevada faults.

The Valley region represents the southern two-thirds of the Great Valley geomorphic provinceof California. This geomorphic province is a broad valley bounded by the Sierra Nevada andTehachapi Mountains to the east and south, and the Coast Ranges to the west. The valley trendsnorth-south for over 350 miles, with the Garlock and San Andreas Fault systems forming thesouthern boundary of the province. The Antelope Valley portion of the Mojave Desert isbordered on the north and west by the Tehachapi Mountains and the Garlock Fault, and to thesouth by the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains, and the San Andreas Fault. The desertfloor and the adjacent foothills of the Tehachapi Mountains contain a short transverse range thatconnects the southernmost Sierra Nevada Mountains (to the northeast) with the San EmigdioMountains (to the southwest).

Any future structures are subject to all applicable ordinances of the Kern County Building Code(Chapter 17.08). Adherence to all applicable regulations is required under any new buildingapplications resulting from the proposed project. The proposed project alternatives would notresult in the exposure of people or structure to a risk of earthquake fault or rupture beyond whatcurrently exists within the County; however, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones are locatedwithin the County. Adverse impacts from known fault rupture are considered potentiallysignificant and will be evaluated in the EIR.

(ii) Strong seismic ground shaking could occur within the County, resulting in damage to structuresthat are not properly designed to withstand strong ground shaking. The County is potentiallysubject to moderate to strong ground shaking from local and regional earthquakes. The proposedproject will either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, marijuana-related activitieswithin appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zone classifications. Many future marijuana-related activities would occur within existing structures; however, it is anticipated that some newstructures could also be constructed. All structures are subject to all applicable ordinances ofthe Kern County Building Code (Chapter 17.08). Adherence to all applicable regulations isrequired under any future building applications under both proposed project alternatives.Adverse impacts from known seismic ground shaking are considered potentially significant andwill be evaluated in the EIR.

(iii) As stated above, the proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative2, appropriate zoning regulations to facilitate marijuana-related activities within appropriateKern County Zoning Ordinance zone classifications. Many future marijuana-related activitieswould occur within existing structures; however, it is anticipated that some new structures couldalso be constructed. All structures are subject to all applicable ordinances of the Kern CountyBuilding Code (Chapter 17.08). Adherence to all applicable regulations is required under anyfuture building applications under the both proposed project alternatives. Thus, the potential forsubstantial adverse effects due to seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, areconsidered potentially significant and will be further discussed in the EIR.

(iv) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriatezoning regulations to facilitate marijuana-related activities within appropriate Kern CountyZoning Ordinance zone classifications. Many future marijuana-related activities would occurwithin existing structures; however, it is anticipated that some new structures could also beconstructed. All structures are subject to all applicable ordinances of the Kern County Building



Code (Chapter 17.08). Adherence to all applicable regulations is required under any futurebuilding applications under both proposed project alternatives. Thus, the potential forsubstantial adverse effects due to landslides are potentially significant and the issue will befurther evaluated in the EIR.

(b) As discussed above, the proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative2, appropriate zoning regulations to facilitate marijuana-related activities within appropriate KernCounty Zoning Ordinance zone classifications. Alternative 2 impacts related to futurefarming/cultivation equipment, processing equipment, and other ground disturbing activities couldresult in soil erosion, similar to existing agricultural facilities. Alternative 2 construction activities thatcould result from new buildings and structures associated with the future commercial marijuana-related facilities could also result in soil erosion if the structure locations are not properly designed.In addition, Alternative 1 could result in construction of structures on residential properties in order tocomply with Proposition 64 could also result in soil erosion if the structure locations are not properlydesigned. These impacts are potentially significant and the soil erosion will be evaluated in the EIR.

(c) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana-related activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinancezone classifications. Many future marijuana-related activities would occur within existing structures;however, it is anticipated that some new structures could also be constructed. The EIR will assessimpacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for thealternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content needed to enable a project-levelevaluation of soils regarding the potential that a project-level activity is located on soil that is unstable.Proposed project impacts are considered potentially significant and will be further discussed in theEIR.

(d) Expansive soils generally result from specific clay minerals that expand when saturated and that shrinkwhen dry. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content needed toenable a project-level confirmation of the presence or absence of expansive soils within a futurecommercial marijuana-related facility location. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.

(e) Under Alternative 2, future commercial marijuana-related facilities may include the need for septicsystem/leach lines to support operations. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at theprogram level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, will set forth geotechnicalreport content needed to enable a project-level determination of the ability of soils to support a septictank. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:

a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, eitherdirectly or indirectly, that may have a significantimpact on the environment?

b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy orregulation adopted for the purpose of reducingthe emissions of greenhouse gases?

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Discussion:

(a)/(b) Global climate change is an international phenomenon, and the regulatory background and scientificdata are changing rapidly. In 2006, the California state legislature adopted AB 32, the CaliforniaGlobal Warming Solutions Act of 2006. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 describes how global climate changewould affect the environment in California. The impacts described in AB 32 include changing sealevels, changes in snow pack and availability of potable water, changes in storm flows and floodinundation zones, and other impacts.

As required by AB 32, California Air Resources Board (CARB) determined what the statewidegreenhouse gas (GHG) emissions level was in 1990 and then approved a statewide GHG emissionslimit that is equivalent to that level, which is to be achieved by 2020. CARB approved the 2020 limiton December 6, 2007. CARB’s GHG inventory estimated the 1990 emissions level in California to be427 million metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e). In 2004, the emissions were estimatedto be 480 MMTCO2e.

GHGs emitted by human activity are implicated in global climate change or global warming. Theprincipal GHGs are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (NOx), ozone (O3), watervapor, and fluorinated gases. Fossil fuel consumption in the transportation sector (on-road motorvehicles, off-highway mobile sources, and aircraft) is the single largest source of GHG emissions.

The primary source of GHG emissions from implementation of the proposed project would be mobilesources (motor vehicles); other sources, particularly with respect to Alternative 2, include cultivationand processing equipment, natural gas combustion for space and water heating, electricity, andelectricity for water supply and wastewater treatment. Not all GHGs exhibit the same ability to induceclimate change (i.e., specific GHGs each have their own global warming potential); therefore, GHGcontributions are commonly quantified in carbon dioxide equivalencies, which reflect the globalwarming potential of each GHG relative to CO2.

GHG emissions from both proposed project alternatives will be considered in the EIR on a programlevel. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth report content needed to enable a project-level evaluation of GHG emissions for future commercial marijuana-related facilities. Impacts relatedto GHGs and climate stemming from the proposed project alternatives, and potential conflicts withany applicable plan or policy relative to GHGs, will be evaluated in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:

a. Create a significant hazard to the public or theenvironment through the routine transport, useor disposal of hazardous materials?

b. Create a significant hazard to the public or theenvironment through reasonably foreseeableupset and accident conditions involving therelease of hazardous materials into theenvironment?

c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardousor acutely hazardous materials, substances, orwaste within one-quarter mile of an existing orproposed school?

d. Be located on a site which is included on a listof hazardous materials sites compiled pursuantto Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as aresult, would it create a significant hazard to thepublic or the environment?

e. For a project located within the adopted KernCounty Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan,would the project result in a safety hazard forpeople residing or working in the project area?

f. For a project within the vicinity of a privateairstrip, would the project result in a safetyhazard for people residing or working in theproject area?

g. Impair implementation of, or physicallyinterfere with, an adopted emergency responseplan or emergency evacuation plan?

h. Expose people or structures to a significant riskof loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires,including where wildlands are adjacent tourbanized areas or where residences areintermixed with wildlands?

i. Would implementation of the project generatevectors (flies, mosquitoes, rodents, etc.) or havea component that includes agricultural waste?




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

ImpactSpecifically, would the project exceed thefollowing qualitative threshold:

The presence of domestic flies, mosquitoes,cockroaches, rodents, and/or any other vectorsassociated with the project is significant whenthe applicable enforcement agency determinesthat any of the vectors:

i. Occur as immature stages and adults innumbers considerably in excess of thosefound in the surrounding environment;and

ii. Are associated with design, layout, andmanagement of project operations; and

iii. Disseminate widely from the property;and

iv. Cause detrimental effects on the publichealth or wellbeing of the majority ofthe surrounding population.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials Discussion:

(a)-(c) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana-related activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinancezone classifications. Any future marijuana cultivation and processing, whether at a six-plant scaleunder Alternative 1 or at a larger commercial operation scale under Alternative 2, would involvechemicals such as, but not limited to, pesticides, herbicides, rodenticides, fertilizers, petroleumproducts including diesel, propane and butane, heavy metals related to indoor grow lights, and carbondioxide. For Alternative 1, these chemicals would be obtained for existing gardening supply facilities.For Alternative 2, these chemicals would be delivered to the future commercial marijuana-relatedfacilities. This could create a significant hazard to the public or the environmental through the routinetransport, use, or disposal. These chemicals could create a significant hazard to the public or theenvironment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release ofhazardous materials. While the proposed project would clarify a ban, Alternative 1, or future facilitylocations, Alternative 2, there could still be the potential for a facility to be proposed within 0.25 mileof a school. Distances from schools would vary depending on the facility; however, no facility can becloser than 1,000 feet from a school, daycare or youth center, as requirement of Proposition 64.

The toxicity and potential release of these materials would depend on the quantity, the type of storagecontainer, safety protocols used at future commercial marijuana-related facilities, the location and/orproximity to schools and residences, the frequency and duration of spills or storage leaks, and thereactivity of hazardous substances with other materials. The EIR will assess impacts on these



resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR willset forth criteria and mitigation measures for the operation of future commercial marijuana-relatedactivities, including requiring a hazardous materials business plan. For Alternative 2, this wouldinclude providing a complete list of all materials used at a future facility, how the materials would betransported, and in what form they would be used. If regulations and standard protocols are followedduring the storage, transportation, and usage of any hazardous materials, no substantial impacts shouldoccur. Nevertheless, the proposed project alternatives could have a potentially significant effect andthis issue will be evaluated further in the EIR.

(d) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana-related activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinancezone classifications. Under Alternative 1, any activities would occur indoors within private property,anticipated to be primarily residential land uses, per Proposition 64. Under Alternative 2, there ispotential for future commercial marijuana-related facilities to be located on a site which is included ona list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The EIRwill assess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. Each alternativewill be evaluated in the EIR and, if applicable for the alternative, will set forth research criteria andreport content needed to enable a project-level evaluation of future facility site locations. This issuewill be further evaluated in the EIR.

(e)/(f) The Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) provides a sphere of influence ofany airport as identified by the Kern County ALUCP. In addition, there are several small privateairstrips and local airports within the County. The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative1, or implement appropriate zone classifications where future commercial marijuana-related facilitiesare allowable under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. Both proposed project alternatives couldbe subject to regulations including the ALUCP, the military aviation section of the ALUCP, theMilitary Review Requirements and conformance with Section 19.08.160 (Height of Structures) of theKern County Zoning Ordinance to avoid military flight test airspace for Edwards Air Force Base. TheEIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicablefor the alternative, the EIR will provide criteria and mitigation measures, if determined necessary, toensure compliance of regulations and plans related to airports and airstrips, when applicable, for futurecommercial marijuana-related facilities. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.

(g) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana-related activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinancezone classifications. The proposed project alternatives are not anticipated to result in future marijuana-related activities that could physically impede the existing emergency response plans, emergencyvehicle access, or personnel access to the site. Therefore, the potential for the implementation of theproposed project alternatives to result in future activities that could impair or interfere with emergencyresponse or evacuation plans is considered less than significant. Nonetheless, this impact will beevaluated further in the EIR.

(h) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1 or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana-related activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinancezone classifications. Under both proposed project alternatives, many future marijuana-relatedactivities would occur within existing structures; however, it is anticipated that some new structurescould also be constructed. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level forAlternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and reportcontent needed to enable a project-level evaluation of risk of wildland fires. Impacts are consideredpotentially significant under both proposed project alternatives and will be further discussed in theEIR.



(i) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana-related activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinancezone classifications. There is a chance for future marijuana-related facilities and activities to result infeatures or conditions (such as standing water, agricultural products, agricultural waste, or humanwaste) that would provide habitat for vectors such as mosquitoes, flies, cockroaches or rodents.Therefore, impacts are considered potentially significant under both proposed project alternatives andwill be further discussed in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:

a. Violate any water quality standards or wastedischarge requirements?

b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies orinterfere substantially with groundwaterrecharge such that there would be a net deficit inaquifer volume or a lowering of the localgroundwater table level (e.g., the production rateof pre-existing nearby wells would drop to alevel which would not support existing land usesor planned uses for which permits have beengranted)?

c. Substantially alter the existing drainage patternof the site or area, including through thealteration of the course of a stream or river, in amanner which would result in substantialerosion or siltation onsite or offsite?

d. Substantially alter the existing drainage patternof the site or area, including through thealteration of the course of a stream or river, orsubstantially increase the rate or amount ofsurface runoff in a manner which would resultin flooding onsite or offsite?

e. Create or contribute runoff water which wouldexceed the capacity of existing or plannedstormwater drainage systems or providesubstantial additional sources of pollutedrunoff?

f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?

g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazardarea as mapped on a federal Flood HazardBoundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or otherflood hazard delineation map?

h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard areastructures which would impede or redirect floodflows?




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impacti. Expose people or structures to a significant risk

of loss, injury or death involving flooding,including flooding as a result of the failure of alevee or dam?

j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?

Hydrology and Water Quality Discussion:

(a) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zoneclassifications. Future marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution facilities wouldbe subject to County, State, and Federal water quality regulations. This includes, but is not limited to,required adherence to the federal Clean Water Act, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) requirements, the National Flood Insurance Act, requirements of the California Departmentof Water Resources (DWR), adherence to the requirements of the California Fish and Game Code, theCalifornia Water Code, the requirements of the KCGP, KCOC, etc. The proposed project alternativescould result in a significant impact to hydrology and water quality if future commercial marijuana-related activities result in the violation of any water quality or waste discharge standards. Suchviolations could occur through the creation of erosion, sedimentation, and/or polluted runoff, throughthe accidental release of potentially hazardous materials, including pesticides, or through the dischargeof contaminated groundwater during dewatering activities. It is anticipated that appropriate bestmanagement practices and compliance with applicable regulations would reduce potential waterquality impacts to a less than significant level; however, this potential impact will be evaluated furtherin the EIR.

(b) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana-related activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinancezone classifications. Cultivation activities could potentially deplete groundwater supplies or interferesubstantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or alowering of the local groundwater table level. The County is in the jurisdiction of the two RegionalWater Quality Control Boards (RWQCB): Central Valley Region and Lahontan Region. The EIR willassess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for thealternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content needed to enable a project-levelevaluation of groundwater resources and supply. This potential impact will be evaluated further in theEIR.

(c) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zoneclassifications. Ground disturbing activities under Alternative 2 from future cultivation or from theconstruction of new facilities could potentially alter the existing drainage patterns. These impacts arepotentially significant. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level forAlternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and reportcontent needed to enable a project-level evaluation of drainage patterns. This potential impact will beevaluated further in the EIR.



(d) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zoneclassifications. Ground disturbing activities from cultivation or from the construction of new facilitiescould potentially alter the existing drainage patterns resulting in increased surface water runoff leadingto flooding. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content needed toenable a project-level evaluation of surface water runoff and flooding potentials. This will beevaluated further in the EIR.

(e) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zoneclassifications. Future marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution facilities couldresult in an overall increase in impervious surfaces, which could substantially increase storm waterrunoff. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2.If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content needed toenable a project-level evaluation of surface water runoff. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.

(f) The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zoneclassifications. As discussed above, impacts related to future ground disturbing activities could resultin soil erosion. It is anticipated that Alternative 2 impacts would be similar to existing agriculturalfacilities, which could degrade water quality. Future construction activities that could result from newbuildings and structures associated with the future commercial marijuana-related facilities could alsoresult in soil erosion that could lead to water quality degradation. In addition, accidental release ofpotentially harmful materials, such as pesticides, engine oil, diesel fuel, turbine lubricant, heavy metalsfrom grow lights, and other hazardous materials associated with future personal and commercialmarijuana-related activities could degrade the water quality of nearby streams. Implementation of bestmanagement practices would likely reduce the impact of proposed project activities on surroundingwater quality. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content neededto enable a project-level evaluation of water quality. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.

(g) The proposed project is not anticipated to place housing within a 100-year floodplain. NeitherAlternative 1 nor Alternative 2 are housing projects and would not result in significant residentiallyrelated flood impacts. This is considered no impact and will not be discussed further in the EIR.

(h) The County contains flood hazard areas as delineated on the Federal Emergency ManagementAgency's (FEMA) Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM). The proposed project will clarify aban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zone classifications where futurecommercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with development standards orwith a conditional use permit. Even with this clarification, future marijuana-related facilities could belocated within a flood hazard area. These issues will be evaluated in the EIR.

(i) The San Joaquin Valley region is susceptible to flooding from the failure of the dam at Lake Isabella.In addition, site-specific levees have been created by water districts in the Valley. The proposedproject will clarify whether activities are banned, Alternative 1, or allowed, Alternative 2, withinappropriate zone classifications in compliance with development standards or with a conditional usepermit. Even with this clarification, future facilities could be located within flood hazard areas,including flooding from dam or levee failure. These issues will be evaluated in the EIR.

(j) The County is not located near an ocean would not be subject to inundation by seiche or tsunami. TheCounty does contain enclosed bodies of water, including Lake Isabella, and could not be subject to



inundation by seiche or tsunami. Mudflows are a type of mass wasting or landslide, where earth andsurface materials are rapidly transported downhill under the force of gravity. Mudflow events arecaused by a combination of factors, including soil type, precipitation, and slope. Mudflow may betriggered by heavy rainfall that the soil is not able to sufficiently drain or absorb. As a result of thissuper-saturation, soil and rock materials become unstable and eventually slide away from their existinglocation. The potential for futures structures to be inundated by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow will befurther evaluated in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

ImpactLAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:

a. Physically divide an established community?

b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy, or regulation of an agency withjurisdiction over the project (including, but notlimited to the general plan, specific plan, localcoastal program, or zoning ordinance) adoptedfor the purpose of avoiding or mitigating anenvironmental effect?

c. Conflict with any applicable habitatconservation plan or natural communityconservation plan?

Land Use and Planning Discussion:(a) The proposed project is not expected to result in the division of established communities. The

proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate future commercial marijuana-related activities within appropriate Kern CountyZoning Ordinance zone classifications. Therefore, no impact would occur with respect to physicallydividing an established community and no further analysis is warranted.

(b) The proposed project includes an amendment to the KCOC Title 19 and other related ordinances. Theimpacts of the proposed project alternatives and potential conflicts with other County ordinances andpolicies are not expected to be significant; however, they will be discussed further in the EIR.

(c) As mentioned previously, there are multiple adopted habitat conservation plans (HCPs) or naturalcommunity conservation plans (NCCPs) within the County. The EIR will assess impacts on theseresources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR willset forth research criteria and report content needed to enable a project-level evaluation of any conflictsbetween future commercial marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution activitiesand any adopted HCP or natural community conservation plan. This impact will be discussed furtherin the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

ImpactMINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. Result in the loss of availability of a knownmineral resource that would be of value to theregion and the residents of the state?

b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery sitedelineated on a local general plan, specific planor other land use plan?

Mineral Resources Discussion:(a) Kern County is one of the richest oil-producing counties in the United States. The Valley floor area of

the County and the lower elevations of the surrounding mountain ranges contain numerous deposits ofoil and gas resources, a major economic resource for the County. Mineral resources in Kern Countyinclude numerous mining operations that extract a variety of materials, including sand and gravel,stone, gold, dimensional stone, limestone, clay, shale, gypsum, pumice, decorative rock, silica, andspecialty sand. The State Geologist has classified 2,971 square miles of land in Kern County as MineralResource Zones (MRZs) of varying significance. The proposed project would either ban, Alternative1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoning regulations to facilitate marijuana activities withinappropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zone classifications . The proposed project alternativeswould not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to theregion and the residents of the state. Implementation of either Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 wouldnot preclude future mineral resource development. Therefore, the issue is not discussed further.

(b) As mentioned above, Kern County is rich in mineral resources and contains 2,971 square miles of landwithin MRZs of varying significance. Existing KCGP goals and policies, as well as the existingKCOC, including the Oil and Gas Production Code (Chapter 19.98), would remain in effect withrespect to mineral resources. The proposed project includes an amendment to the KCOC Title 19 andother related ordinances to either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2, appropriate zoningregulations to facilitate marijuana activities within appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zoneclassifications. The proposed project alternatives would not result in the loss of availability of alocally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on the KCGP, any of the County specificplans, or other land use plans. Implementation of either Alternative1 or Alternative 2 would notpreclude future mineral resource development within locally-important mineral resource recovery siteareas. Therefore, the issue is not discussed further.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

ImpactNOISE. Would the project result in:

a. Exposure of persons to, or generate, noise levelsin excess of standards established in the localgeneral plan or noise ordinance or applicablestandards of other agencies?

b. Exposure of persons to, or generate, excessivegroundborne vibration or groundborne noiselevels?

c. A substantial permanent increase in ambientnoise levels in the project vicinity above levelsexisting without the project?

d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase inambient noise levels in the project vicinityabove levels existing without the project?

e. For a project located within the Kern CountyAirport Land Use Compatibility Plan, would theproject expose people residing or working in theproject area to excessive noise levels?

f. For a project within the vicinity of a privateairstrip, would the project expose peopleresiding or working in the project area toexcessive noise levels?

Noise Discussion:

(a)-(c) Land uses determined to be “sensitive” to noise as defined by the KCGP include residential areas,schools, convalescent and acute care hospitals, parks and recreational areas, and churches. Theproposed project will clarify a ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classifications wherefuture commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with developmentstandards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. The KCGP Noise Element sets a 65-decibellimit on exterior noise levels from stationary sources (i.e., non-transportation sources) at sensitivereceptors. The Noise Control Ordinance in the Kern County Code of Ordinances (Section 8.36.020 etseq.) prohibits a variety of nuisance noises between the hours of 9 PM and 6 AM on weekdays and 9PM and 8 AM on weekends. The future marijuana-related facilities would adhere to the provisions ofthe Kern County Noise Ordinance under both proposed project alternatives. The EIR will assessimpacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for thealternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content to enable project-level evaluationof noise level impacts, groundborne vibration and groundborne noise impacts, and evaluate anyincreases in ambient noise levels above existing levels associated with future commercial marijuanacultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution facilities. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.



(d) Many future marijuana-related activities would occur within existing structures; however, it isanticipated that some new structures could also be constructed. Future cultivation andprocessing/packaging activities could result in cyclical noise generation. There may be temporary orperiodic increases in ambient noise levels caused by future marijuana-related activities under bothalternatives. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content toenable project-level evaluation of temporary or periodic noise level impacts associated with futurecommercial marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution facilities. This will beevaluated further in the EIR.

(e)/(f) The Kern County ALUCP provides a sphere of influence of any airport as identified by the KernCounty ALUCP. In addition, there are several small private airstrips and local airports within theCounty. The proposed project would either ban, Alternative 1, or implement, Alternative 2,appropriate zoning regulations to facilitate marijuana activities within appropriate and Kern CountyZoning Ordinance zone classifications. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the programlevel for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will provide research criteriaand mitigation measures to enable project-level evaluation of the potential for future commercialmarijuana-related facilities do not expose individuals working in the project area to excessive noiselevels resulting from any airports located within the ALUCP or near a private airstrip. This will beevaluated further in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:

a. Induce substantial population growth in an area,either directly (for example, by proposing newhomes and businesses) or indirectly (forexample, through extension of roads or otherinfrastructure)?

b. Displace substantial numbers of existinghousing, necessitating the construction ofreplacement housing elsewhere?

c. Displace substantial numbers of people,necessitating the construction of replacementhousing elsewhere?

Population and Housing Discussion:

(a) The proposed project would amend the KCOC Title 19 and other related ordinances to clarify andprovide direction for marijuana-related facilities within unincorporated Kern County. Alternative 1, aban on commercial marijuana facilities, would result in closing dispensaries that opened before themoratorium and are currently being reviewed for compliance by the County. Alternative 1 would notprovide new employment opportunities and, thus, is not likely to result in population growth. UnderAlternative 2, future commercial marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distributionactivities could provide new employment opportunities consistent with adopted KCGP goals andpolicies. This could result in population growth due to increased employment opportunities that maybe associated with Alternative 2. Neither Alternative 1 nor Alternative 2 propose to construct newresidential units, therefore, the proposed project alternative would not directly induce populationgrowth in this regard. The EIR will evaluate impacts on population growth at the program level forAlternatives 1 and 2.

(b)-(c) The proposed project alternatives would not displace a substantial number of people or existinghousing. The proposed project would amend KCOC Title 19 and other related ordinances to clarify aban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classifications where future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in full compliance with development standards or under a conditionaluse permit, Alternative 2. Therefore, the proposed project alternatives would not result in therelocation of existing residential units or people. The proposed project alternatives would have noimpact on the displacement of people or housing resulting in the need for replacement housing. Thiswill not be evaluated further in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

ImpactPUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:

a. Result in substantial adverse physical impactsassociated with the provision of new orphysically altered governmental facilities, needfor new or physically altered governmentalfacilities, the construction of which could causesignificant environmental impacts, in order tomaintain acceptable service ratios, responsetimes, or to other performance objectives for anyof the public services:

i) Fire protection?

ii) Police protection?

iii) Schools?

iv) Parks?

v) Other public facilities?

Public Services Discussion:

(a) The demand for fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and other public facilities could beaffected by future marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution activities. Impactson public services are considered potentially significant. The EIR will evaluate impacts on publicservices at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

ImpactRECREATION. Would the project:

a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood andregional parks or other recreational facilitiessuch that substantial physical deterioration ofthe facility would occur or be accelerated?

b. Include recreational facilities or require theconstruction or expansion of recreationalfacilities that might have an adverse physicaleffect on the environment?

Recreation Discussion:

(a)-(b) The proposed project alternatives do not include the construction of new recreational facilities. Anincrease in population could potentially result from an influx of employees due to an increase inemployment opportunities under Alternative 2. This could result in an increase in the use of parks orrecreational facilities, which, in turn, could require the expansion of recreational facilities. Theseimpacts are considered potentially significant. The EIR will evaluate impacts on recreation at theprogram level for Alternatives 1 and 2.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

ImpactTRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:

a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, orpolicy establishing measures of effectivenessfor the performance of the circulation system,including but not limited to intersections,streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian andbicycle paths, and mass transit?

b. Conflict with an applicable congestionmanagement program, including, but not limitedto, level of service (LOS) standards and traveldemand measures, or other standardsestablished by the county congestionmanagement agency for designated roads orhighways?

i. Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan LOS "C"

ii. Kern County General Plan LOS "D"

c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns,including either an increase in traffic levels or achange in location that results in substantialsafety risks?

d. Substantially increase hazards due to a designfeature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerousintersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farmequipment)?

e. Result in inadequate emergency access?

f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, orprograms regarding public transit, bicycle, orpedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease theperformance or safety of such facilities?

Transportation and Traffic Discussion:

(a)/(b) The proposed project encompasses the entire County and can be split into three main geographic areas:Valley, Mountain, and Desert. The County contains Intestates (I), U.S. Routes (US), and State Routes(SR). SR-99 provides is a major freeway servicing the large central valley urban areas, including theMetropolitan Bakersfield area. I-5 enters the County in the southwest and carries traffic on a north-



south alignment from Southern California through the Central Valley north to Sacramento, on the westside of the Valley, against the coast range. In eastern Kern County, SR-14 provides linkages toSouthern California as well as north to Inyokern, Indian Wells, and Ridgecrest. SR-58 provides east-west connections between the Desert and Valley regions, connecting Mojave to Bakersfield throughTehachapi and continuing on through Buttonwillow and McKittrick.

Overall, the major regional routes within the County include, but are not limited to, I-5, US-395, SR-14,SR-33, SR-41, SR-43, SR-46, SR-58, SR-65, SR-99, SR-119, SR-138, SR-155, SR-166, SR-178, SR-184, SR-204, SR-202, and SR-223. A network of local roadways allow access throughout the County.The proposed project alternatives could add vehicle trips to the network of roadways within the County.These added vehicles would include equipment for future cultivation and processing/packaging,employee trips, customer trips, and dispensary mobile delivery trips. Delivery of future commercialmarijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution materials could include oversize vehicletrips that may travel at slower speeds than existing traffic and, due to their size, may intrude intoadjacent travel lanes. These additional trips, including any oversized trips, may decrease the existinglevel of service (LOS) on area freeways, roadways and intersections. A program-level traffic analysiswill be conducted for Alternatives 1 and 2. Each alternative will be evaluated in the EIR and, ifapplicable for the alternative, will set forth research criteria and report content to enable project-levelevaluation of traffic impacts associated with future commercial marijuana cultivation,processing/packaging, and distribution facilities. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.

(c) As mentioned above, the Kern County ALUCP provides a sphere of influence of any airport asidentified by the Kern County ALUCP. In addition, there are several small private airstrips and localairports within the County. The proposed project would clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implementappropriate zone classifications where future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable incompliance with development standards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. Bothproposed project alternatives could be subject to regulations including the ALUCP, the militaryaviation section of the ALUCP, the Military Review Requirements and conformance with Section19.08.160 (Height of Structures) of the Kern County Zoning Ordinance to avoid military flight testairspace for Edwards Air Force Base. It is not anticipated that the proposed project alternatives wouldresult in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change inlocation that results in substantial safety risks. However, this will be evaluated further in the EIR.

(d) The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classificationswhere future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with developmentstandards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. This will help to reduce future marijuana-related activities being incompatible with existing land uses. The use of the numerous highways andexisting roadway networks that traverse the County provide access to all areas of the County. It is notanticipated that the proposed project alternatives would result in changes to the existing roadwaynetwork; however, there would be the potential for incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).Therefore, the EIR will further evaluate hazards due to potential design features or incompatible usesunder Alternative 1 and Alternative 2.

(e) The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classificationswhere future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with developmentstandards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. Future construction activities that couldresult from new buildings and structures associated with the future marijuana-related facilities wouldgenerate construction trips and potential roadway lane closures that could temporarily increase thedaily traffic volumes on local roadways and intersections, thereby impeding emergency access. It isanticipated that emergency access would be maintained at all times in the vicinity of a future project-level marijuana-related activity. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program levelfor Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and



report content to enable project-level evaluation of emergency access impacts associated with futurecommercial marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution facilities. This will beevaluated further in the EIR.

(f) The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classificationswhere future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with developmentstandards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. The proposed project could result in futuremarijuana-related facilities that would generate construction and operation trips, potential roadwaylane closures, which could temporarily disrupt any bicycle traffic on local roadways and may alsoimpact bus stops or designated bicycle lanes. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at theprogram level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth researchcriteria and report content to enable project-level evaluation of compatibility with adopted policies,plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities and performance or safetyof these facilities. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

ImpactTRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in thesignificance of a tribal cultural resource, definedin Public Resources Code section 21074 aseither a site, feature, place, cultural landscapethat is geographically defined in terms of thesize and scope of the landscape, sacred place, orobject with cultural value to a California NativeAmerican tribe, and that is:

i. Listed or eligible for listing in the CaliforniaRegister of Historical Resources, or in a localregister of historical resources as defined inPublic Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or

ii. A resource determined by the lead agency inits discretion and supported by substantialevidence, to be significant pursuant tocriteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PublicResources Code Section 52024.1. Inapplying the criteria set forth in subdivision(c) of Public Resources Code Section52024.1, the lead agency shall consider thesignificance of the resource to a CaliforniaNative American Tribe.

Tribal Cultural Resources Discussion:

(a) The potential for impacts on tribal cultural resources is considered potentially significant. The EIRwill assess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable forthe alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content needed to enable a project-level evaluation of resource occurrences and possible significant impacts on sensitive tribal culturalresources. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:

a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements ofthe applicable Regional Water Quality ControlBoard?

b. Require or result in the construction of newwater or wastewater treatment facilities orexpansion of existing facilities, the constructionof which could cause significant environmentaleffects?

c. Require or result in the construction of newstormwater drainage facilities or expansion ofexisting facilities, the construction of whichcould cause significant environmental effects?

d. Have sufficient water supplies available to servethe project from existing entitlements andresources, or would new or expandedentitlements be needed?

e. Result in a determination by the wastewatertreatment provider which serves or may servethe project that it has adequate capacity to servethe project’s projected demand in addition to theprovider’s existing commitments?

f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permittedcapacity to accommodate the project’s solidwaste disposal needs?

g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes andregulations related to solid waste?

Utilities and Service Systems Discussion:

(a) The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classificationswhere future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with developmentstandards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. Future marijuana-related facilities andactivities could generate wastewater. The County is in the jurisdiction of both the Central ValleyRWQCB and the Lahontan RWQCB. Any future marijuana-related facility would be subject to theapplicable requirements of the Central Valley RWQCB or Lahontan RWQCB. The EIR will assessimpacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for thealternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content to enable project-level evaluation



of wastewater treatment requirement impacts associated with future commercial marijuana cultivation,processing/packaging, and distribution facilities. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.

(b) The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classificationswhere future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with developmentstandards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. Many future marijuana-related activitieswould occur within existing structures; however, it is anticipated that some new structures could alsobe constructed. Therefore, depending on the type of structure and location, there is a chance that afuture facility could require of septic systems, leach lines, or connection to an existing sewer lines andwastewater treatment system. In addition, future commercial marijuana cultivation andprocessing/packing facilities associated with Alternative 2 would likely have similar water supplyrequirements as other agricultural crops in the area. Each future marijuana-related facility would berequired to comply with applicable local, State, and Federal requirements, as well as best managementpractices. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content to enableproject-level evaluation of water and wastewater treatment needs associated with future commercialmarijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution facilities. This will be evaluated furtherin the EIR.

(c) The proposed project will clarify a ban, Alternative 1, or direct commercial marijuana-related activitieswithin appropriate Kern County Zoning Ordinance zone classifications, Alternative 2. Futuremarijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution facilities could result in an overallincrease in impervious surfaces, which could substantially increase storm water runoff. This couldresult in the need for new or expanded stormwater drainage facilities. The EIR will assess impacts onthese resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIRwill set forth research criteria and report content needed to enable a project-level evaluation ofstormwater and existing capacity of stormwater drainage facilities. This will be evaluated further inthe EIR.

(d) The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classificationswhere future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with developmentstandards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. Future commercial marijuana cultivationand processing/packing facilities have similar water demand requirements as other agricultural crops.It is anticipated that future commercial marijuana dispensaries would have similar water supply needsas the existing medical marijuana dispensaries or a similarly sized commercial facility. Futurefacilities that would involve edible products would have similar water supply needs as other foodrelated businesses, such as a bakery. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the programlevel for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteriaand report content to enable project-level evaluation of water supply associated with future commercialmarijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution facilities. This will be evaluated furtherin the EIR.

(e) The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classificationswhere future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with developmentstandards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. Many future marijuana-related activitieswould occur within existing structures; however, it is anticipated that some new structures could alsobe constructed. Therefore, depending on the type of structure and location, there is a chance that afuture facility could require of septic systems, leach lines, or connection to an existing sewer lines andwastewater treatment system. The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level forAlternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and reportcontent to enable project-level evaluation of wastewater treatment capacity needs associated with



future commercial marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, and distribution facilities. This willbe evaluated further in the EIR.

(f) There are currently approximately 45 active landfills, transfer stations, and composting facilities withinthe County (CalRecycle, 2016). The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implementappropriate zone classifications where future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable incompliance with development standards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. Many futuremarijuana-related activities would occur within existing structures; however, it is anticipated that somenew structures could also be constructed. Waste could be generated from future cultivation activities,processing and packaging activities, and construction of new future facilities or operational activities.Waste could include non-hazardous waste and hazardous waste. The proposed project alternatives arenot expected to generate a significant amount of waste that would exceed the capacity of local landfills.The EIR will assess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. Ifapplicable for the alternative, the EIR will set forth criteria to enable project-level evaluation of solidwaste generation associated with future commercial marijuana cultivation, processing/packaging, anddistribution facilities. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.

(g) The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classificationswhere future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with developmentstandards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. Any future marijuana-related facilities couldgenerate solid waste during thus requiring the consideration of waste reduction and recyclingmeasures. The 1989 California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) requires Kern County toattain specific waste diversion goals. In addition, the California Solid Waste Reuse and RecyclingAccess Act of 1991, as amended, requires expanded or new development projects to incorporatestorage areas for recycling bins into the project design. The EIR will assess impacts on these resourcesat the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for the alternative, the EIR will provideprogram-level mitigation measures or will set forth criteria to confirm that project-level futurecommercial marijuana-related activities will comply with the 1989 California Integrated WasteManagement Act and the 1991 California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991, asamended. This will be evaluated further in the EIR.




Impact


ImpactUnless

Mitigated


ImpactNo

Impact

MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

a. Does the project have the potential to degradethe quality of the environment, substantiallyreduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop belowself-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate aplant or animal community, substantially reducethe number or restrict the range of a rare orendangered plant or animal, or eliminateimportant examples of the major periods ofCalifornia history or prehistory?

b. Does the project have impacts that areindividually limited, but cumulativelyconsiderable? (“Cumulatively considerable”means that the incremental effects of a projectare significant when viewed in connection withthe effects of past projects, the effects of othercurrent projects, and the effects of probablefuture projects)?

c. Does the project have environmental effectswhich would cause substantial adverse effectson human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Mandatory Findings of Significance Discussion:(a) The proposed project will clarify the ban, Alternative 1, or implement appropriate zone classifications

where future commercial marijuana-related facilities are allowable in compliance with developmentstandards or under a conditional use permit, Alternative 2. The EIR’s biological resources section willassess impacts on these resources at the program level for Alternatives 1 and 2. If applicable for thealternative, the EIR will set forth research criteria and report content needed to enable project-levelevaluations of resource occurrences and possible significant impacts on sensitive biological resources.The EIR will also evaluate each proposed project alternative’s contribution to cumulative biologicalresources impacts and propose mitigation that will reduce the impacts.

(b) The proposed project has the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts to aesthetics, agriculture,air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, GHG emissions, hazards andhazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, population andhousing, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. TheEIR will evaluate each proposed project alternative’s contribution to cumulative impacts in these andother areas as further impacts are identified.

(c) The proposed project could potentially result in environmental affects that have adverse impacts onhuman beings, either directly or indirectly. These impacts will be addressed in the EIR for bothAlternative 1 and Alternative 2.



4.0 BIBLIOGRAPHYCalifornia Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2016. California Scenic Highway Mapping System,

Kern County. Online: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/.Accessed December 6, 2016.

CalRecycle. 2016. Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) Facility/Site Listing for Kern County. online:http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/SearchList/List?COUNTY=Kern. AccessedDecember 8, 2016.

U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ). 2013. Memorandum for All United States Attorneys: GuidanceRegarding Marijuana Enforcement. August 29, 2013.

USDOJ. 2014. Memorandum for All United States Attorneys: Guidance Regarding Marijuana RelatedFinancial Crimes. February 14, 2014.

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/.

http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/SearchList/List?COUNTY=Kern.

Kern County Marijuana Land Use Ordinance Project · Sacramento, CA 95814-3529 ... Strategic Plans,...

Documents

Transcript of Kern County Marijuana Land Use Ordinance Project · Sacramento, CA 95814-3529 ... Strategic Plans,...