The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-04-04; Planning Commission; Resolution 2925r a 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO- 2925 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION OF GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY THE ENCINA BASIN WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT FACILITIES PLAN. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD CASE NO.: PCD/GPC 89-6 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 20th day of 1989, hold a duly noticed publ i c hearing as prescribed by 1 aw to con request, and WHEREAS, at said publ ic hearing, upon hearing and consi testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the i submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, tt Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declarat NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the P1 anning Con f 01 1 ows : A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, th Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative C according to Exhibit "ND", dated September 22, 1989, and I'PII", 12, 1989, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the findings: Findinas: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidenc project may have a significant impact on the environment provid, mi tigation measures included as conditions below are incorporat project . 2. The project assumes that all facilities will be located in distl such as existing rights-of-way or easements in which other presently exist. 3. Subsequent environmental review may be required if the distt cannot be utilized. \\\ \\\ I d) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 3.0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Conditions: 1. Mitigation measures identified on page 13-4 to 13-5 of the dr Basin Water Reclamation Project Phase I Program Facilities Pla fully incorporated within any proposed implementation of the p 2. Once the location of the proposed facilities such as undergrou reservoirs, pump stations and pipes have been identified, environmental review shall be conducted. 3. High efficiency pumps and motors will be utilized throughout tht water system. 4. An on site biological and cultural analysis shall be conducted the environmental review for any specific site or project. 5. Construction dust shall be mitigated through standard du: measures approved by the City of Carlsbad. 6. Should any reservoirs be placed underground, the sites shall t to their previous condition or enhanced to a condition appropri' surrounding development. Above ground reservoirs shall be SCI landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ PC RES0 NO. 2925 -2- I * 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10: 11 12 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day 1990, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Schramm, Commissioners: Schl ehuber McFadden, Erwin, Marcus & Hal 1. NOES : None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 I 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CARLSBAD PLANN~NG COMMISSI( ATTEST : I MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLEK PLANNING DIRECTOR PC RES0 NO. 2925 -3- MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Various locations throughout the City to incluc La Costa north and south and RVR Go1 f Courses, agricultural fields of thc Gayay and Fazee and the Interstate 5 landscape. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A conceptual water reclamation storage and distril system to reuse tertiary treated wastewater for 1 andscape irrigation. The will meet State Health Title 22 standards. The water will come from two ex' water reclamation plants (Gafner WRP, owned by Leucadia County Water Di 1 and meadowl ark WRP owned by Val leci tos County Water District). The City of Carl sbad has conducted an environmental review of the above desc project pursuant to the Guide1 ines for Implementation of the Cali, Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of th of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Mitigated Negative Declaj (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact o environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification fo action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is o in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing Planning Department within thirty (30) days of date of issuance. 1 DATED: September 22, 1989 CASE NO: PCD,'GPC 89-6 Planning Director APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLISH DATE: September 22, 1989 af 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 * (619) 431 rial:. LU: 3raLe LL~.~I ~r~yl~uube, I-vv '=w rreer, Km. ILI, wcramenru, ~n ~JOIY -- yo '44J"JOIJ NOTICE OF CCUPLETIW AND ENVIR-NTAL DOCWENT FORM b /onl_ See NOTE Bel 1. Project Title Encina Basin Water Reclamation Project Phase I Program Facilities Plan 2. Lead Agency: City of Carlsbad 3. Contact Person: Gary Uayne/Rald'! Anc 3a. Street Address: 2075 LaS Palmas Drive 3b. City: Carlsbad 3c. County: San Diego 3d. Zip: 92009 3e. Phone: 619-438-1161 PROJECT LOCATION 4. County: San Dieso 4a. City/Comnunity: Carlsbad 4b.(optional) Assessor's Parcel No. 4c. Section: Tup. Ra For Rural, 5a. Cross streets: 5b. Nearest Comnunity: 6. Within 2 miles of: a. State Huy No. 1-5 b. Airports Palomar Airwrt c. Uaterc 7. DOCUMENT TYPE 8. LOCAL ACTION TYPE 10. DEVELOPMENT TYPE W 01 - General Plan Update 01 - Residential: Units Acres 01 - NOP 02 - New Element 02 - Early Cons 03 - General Plan AmerKbnent 03 X Neg Dec 04 - Master Plan 04 - Draft EIR 05 - Annexation 05 - Supplement/ 06 - Specific Plan (if so, prior SCH # 07 - Redevelopnent Subsequent EIR 1 08 - Rezone NEPA 09 - Land Division 06 - Notice of Intent Tract Map, etc.) 07 - Envir. Assessment/ 10 - Use Permit - (Subdivision, Parcel Map. 02 - Office: Sq. Ft. Acres Employees - 03 - Shopping/Comnercial: Sq. Ft. Acres Empl oyees 04 - Industrial: Sq. Ft. Acres Emp 1 oyees 05 __ Seuer: HGD 06 - Water: MGD 07 - Transportation: Type 08 - Mineral Extraction: Mineral FONSI 08 - Draft EIS 11 - Cancel Ag Preserve 09 - Pouer Generation: Wattage OTHER 12 X Other Public Facility Type: 09 - Information Only Improvements 10 X Other: Reclaimed Water Storaqe and D' 10 - Final Docwnt 9 TOTAL ACRES: 11 - Other: 11. PROJECT ISSUES DISCUSSED IN DOCUMENT 01 - Aesthetic/Visual 08 - Geologic/Seismic 15 - Seuer Capacity 22 - Water 02 - Agricultural Land 09 - Jobs/Hwsing Balance 16 - Soil Erosion 23 - Uetlan 03 - Air Quality 10 - Minerals 17 - Solid Uaste 24 - Wildli 04 - Archaeological/Historical/ 11 - Noise 18 - Toxic/Hazardous 25 - Grouth Paleontological 12 - Public Services 19 - Traffic/Circulation 26 - Incg OS - Coastal 13 - Schools 20 - Vegetation 27 - Cmlz 06 - Fire Hazard 14 - Septic Systems 21 - Mater Quality 28 - Other -07 - Flooding/Drainage 12 FUNDING (approx.) Federal $ State $ Total S 15,321,000 to 18.070.000 13 PRESENT LAND USE AND ZONING: Several potential locations in Carlsbad. Specific sites uill go through de analysis. 14 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A conceptual uat landscape irrigation. The water uill me Meadowlark U.R.P. 15. SIGNATURE OF LEAD AGENCY REPRESENTATI NOTE: Clearinghouse will assign identi project (e.g. from a (Notice of P 0 REVlEWING AGENCIES W Resources Agency Air Resources Board Conservation Fish and Game Coast a1 Commi ss i on Caltrans District Cal trans - Planning Caltrans - Aeronautics - CTRPA (Cal TRPA) - TRPA (Tahoe RPA) - Bay Conservation & Dev’t Comm Parks and Recreat i on Office of Historic Preservation Native American Heritage Comm State Lands Comm Pub1 ic Uti1 ities Comm Cal i forni a Highway Patrol Boating and Waterways Forestry State Water Resoruces Control Board - Headquarters Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region - Division of Water Rights (SWRCB) Division of Water Quality (SWRCB) Department of Water Resources Recl amat i on Board Solid Waste Management Board Colorado River Board Energy Comm Food and Agri cul ture Health Services Statewide Health P1 anning (hospital s) Housing and Community Dev’t Corrections General Services Office of Local Assistance - Public Works Board Office of Appropriate Tech. (OPR) Local Government Unit (OPR) Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy Other FOR SCH USE ONLY Date Received at SCH Catalog Number Date Review Starts Proponent Date to Agencies Consultant Date to SCH Contact Phone C1 earance Date Address Notes : w 0 s ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 (TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. PCD/GPC 89-06 DATE : June 12, 1989 I. BACKGROUND 1. APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad 2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: Ralph Anderson, Direc of Utilities & Maintenance, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, 92009 3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: 11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written under Section I11 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) YES MAY BE 1. Earth - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X X d. The destruction, covering of modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel or a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? w 2. - Air - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patters, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? -2- w - YES MAY BE - NO x X X X X " x X X X X " K 0 0 - YES MAY BE 4. Plant Life - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? X c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise - Will the proposal significantly increase existing noise levels? 7. Lisht and Glare - Will the proposal sig- nificantly produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? -3- w w YES - MAY BE 9. Natural Resources - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of UDset - Does the proposal involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. Population - Will the proposal signif- icantly alter the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housinq - Will the proposal signif- icantly affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. TransDortation/Circulation - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking? c. Impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? -4- - NO 7 1 - - 1 E 2 x X X X X X X e 0 YES MAY BE 14. Public Services - Will the proposal have a significant effect upon, or have signif- icant results in the need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Enersv - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities - Will the proposal have significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water? X d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. Human Health - Will the proposal have significant results in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? -5- I 0 w YES MAY BE - NO 18. Aesthetics - Will the proposal have significant results in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in creation of an aesthetically offensive public view? x 19. Recreation - Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X - 20. Archeolosical/Historical/Paleontolosical - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure, object or building? X 21. Analyze viable alternatives to the ProPosed Droiect such as: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. A. The project is a conceptual water reclamation storage and distribution system. The project as such will be a phased development. B. Since the project is a conceptual water reclamation storage and distribution system, alternative site designs will be evaluated and explored on a case by case, site by site basis. C. Alternative scales of water reclamation projects were explored within the draft Encina Basin Water Reclamation Project Phase I Program Facilities Plan. This plan identified various environmental and financial scenarios for water reclamation. The proposed plan is the most environmentally and economically feasible alternative identified. D. Various sites will be utilized to implement the conceptual water reclamation storage and distribution system. The system basically involves undergrounding storage tanks and reclaimed water lines. Alternate uses above ground would be possible. E. As explained in item "A" above, the project will be phased. In addition, the amount of water reclamation use will determine the feasibility of developing expanded facilities at a future time, -6- . e e 2 1 ( Cont inuedl : F. As explained -in item llA" &I lrBlr above, the project is a concep water reclamation storage and distribution system. Alterna sites will be explored on a case by case site by site basis. environmental review. ' addition, these alternative sites will undergo deta G. A "no project" alternative would eliminate the potential to I reclaimed water for landscape purposes. This would encot additional potable water supplies. The productive use of recl; water is an environmentally preferred alternative to the crei of additional potable water supplies. -7- m w - YES MAY BE - NO 22. Mandatory findinss of sisnificance - a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? (ttCumulatively con- siderablel' means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 111. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 1. EARTH RESOURCES: The project is a conceptual water reclamation storage and distribution system. As such exact locations of facilities for the system have yet to be fully defined. There may be unstable geologic conditions or changes in topography or ground surface relief due to these facilities. However, detailed environmental analysis will be conducted for each specific site once those specific sites are fully identified. -a- ..- w 0 ~ DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued) 3- WATER: The pro%ct concept is to utilize reclaimed water for land: irrigation. Reclaimed water may change the quality of groundwat A detailed study Of this potential impact to ground waters was pro\ in the draft Encina Basin Water Project Phase I Program Facil: Plan. As such a series of mitigation measures were developed incorporated into the final plan. These mitigation measures assure that no significant impact to groundwaters will be widen to the project. 4&5. PLANT AND ANIMAL LIFE: The project Will involve excavation for water lines and storage tanks. This change to the natural lan affect sensitive plant and animal life. A detailed environmen of each specific site, once they are known, will be required to a no reduction in the numbers of unique or rare endangered species P 16. WATER: By utilizing water twice through reclamation, the project effectively extend water capacity. This will have a benef environmental impact by eliminatingthe need for expanded potable sources. This reuse however, will require dual water lines and sensitive landscape treatment where reclaimed water is used. This be fully incorporated into the land use planning process and eliminate any significant impact on water utilities. 20. ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL: See items 4 & 5 above. As with plar animal life potential destruction of archeological or his resources may occur due to site specific implementation of the cc plan. As such detailed archeological/historical resource invent will be conducted for each specific site once they are known. -9- w w VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS 1s TO CERTIFY THAT I HAV E ABOVE MITIGATING MEASU AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION -11-