HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-12-04; Planning Commission; Resolution 3318t 0 e
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3318
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR THE CITY-WIDE WATER RECLAMATION
MASTER PLAN.
CASE NAME: CMWD RECLAIMED WATER MASTER PLAN
CASE NO: PCD/GPC 91-4
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 4th day of December,
1991, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request,
and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning
Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit
"ND", dated September 27, 1991, and "PII", dated September 9, 1991, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findings:
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may
have a significant impact on the environment.
2. Since this action does not involve any site devleopment, no impacts to traffic or
sensitive resources will result.
3. AU improvements suggested through the Water Reclamation Master Plan will
undergo project specific environmental review.
...
0 e
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
1
2 by the following vote, to wit:
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day of December, 1991,
3
4
I AYES: Chairman Holmes, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Savary,
Erwin, Noble & Hall.
5 NOES: None.
6 ABSENT: Commissioner Schramm.
7 ABSTAIN: None,
8 41 t P\ ,A I: 8 1 jj .[ A 3 i y o,*,=nfl@- ; "., ?, $ 1 f j i( !
9 kvq;b</3L&,*2[y$ t ;re [$; t ) @ QutGv? $$ g-"-*#.~ L
4
10 ROBERT HOLMES, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION I.x ATTEST:
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PC RES0 NO. 3318 -2-
0
City
a
of Carlsbad
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: City of Carlsbad - Citywide Water Reclamation Master Plan
PROJECT DESCEUPTION: Review of the Carlsbad Municipal Water District‘s Reclaimed
Water Master Plan for consistency with the City‘s General Plan.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said
review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant
impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this
action is on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning
Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the
public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the .Planning Department within
30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Don Neu in the
Planning Department at 438-1 161, extension 4446.
DATED: SEPTEMBER 27,1991
CASE NO: PCD/GPC 914 Planning Director
APPLICANT: CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
PUBLISH DATE: SEPTEMBER 26,1991
DN:d
2075 Las Palmas’Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 - (619) 438-1 161
STATE OF CALIFORNIA a e PETE WILSON. Goverri
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
oct 21, 1991 ,
DON NEU CITY OF CARLSBAD
2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009
,Subject: CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT - PCD/GPC 91-4
SCH # 91091077
Dear DON NEU:
The State Clearinghouse submitted the ab,ove named. environmental document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is
closed and none of the state agencies have comments. This letter
acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
Please call Tom Loftus at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. When contacting the Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight-digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly.
Sincerely, ,.
Ls;-L-;nL -L-.
David C. Nunenkarnp Deputy Director, Permit Assistance
..
..
ENVTRON &AL IMPACI' ASSESSMENT FO #PART 11
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) &
BACKGROUND
CASE NO. PCD/GPC 91-L
DATE: SeDtember 9. 1991
1. CASE NAME:r Carlsbad Municbal Water District's Reclaimed Water Master Plan
2. APPLICANT: Carlsbad Municipal Water District
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 5950 El Camino Real
Carlsbad. CA 92008
(619) 438-2722
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED:
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Review of the District's reclaimed water master plan for consistenc
with the Citv's General Plan
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct a
Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environmen
The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checkli
8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project ar
provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environment
Impact Report or Negative Declaration.
* A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project ( any of its aspects may cause a sigmficant effect on the environment, On the checklist, "NOf will be checkc to indicate this determination.
* An EIR must be prepared. if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of tl
project may cause a- sinnificant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negati
Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemc
insirmificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings YES-sig" and YES-insi
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form und
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussi
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
e
PHYSICAL EXWRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
1. Result in unstable earth conditions or
increase the exposur: of people or property
to geologic hazards?
2. Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features?
3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils
either on or off the site?
4. Result in changes in the deposition of beach
sands, or modification of the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake?
5. Result in substantial adverse effects on
ambient air quality?
6. Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature?
7. Substantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters)?
8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface
water, ground water or public water supply?
9. Substantially increase usage or cause
depletion of any natural resources?
10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
11. Alter a significant archeological,
paleontological or historical site,
structure or object?
-2-
0
YES
(sig)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
YES
(insig)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NO
X
X
X
X -
X -
X -
X -
X -
x
X
-
-
X -
a 0
BIOLOGICAL, ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
plants)?
13. Introduce new species of plants into an area,
or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species?
14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other farmland of state or local
importance?
15, Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, all water dwelling organisms
and insects?
YES YJ3 NO
big> (insig)
- - - X
- X -
X - -
X - -
16. Introduce new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the
migration or movement of animals?
I"ANFJ?JvlRoNMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
X - -
YES YES NO
(*I (iwig)
17. Alter the present or planned land use
of an area?
18. Substantially affect public utilities,
schools, police, fire, emergency or other
public services?
-
-
-
-
X -
X 7
-3-
e
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control system? ,
20. Increase existing noise levels?
21. Produce new light or glare?
22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
23. Substantially alter the density of the
human population of an area?
24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand
for -additional housing?
25. Generate substantial additional traffic?
26. Affect existing parking facilities, or
create a large demand for new parking?
27. Impact existing transportation systems or
alter present patterns of circulation or
movement of people and/or goods?
28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic?
29. Increase traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
30. Interfere with emergency response plans or
emergency evacuation plans?
31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an
aesthetically offensive public view?
32. Affect the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities?
4-
0
YES YES
(sig)
-
- -
- -
- -
- -
-
-
-
-
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
NO
(insig)
X
X
X
d
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X -
X
X -
X -
0 e MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO
big) (insigl
33. Does the project have the potential
to substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat 0f.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.
34. 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.)
X - - -
X - - -
35. Does the project have the possible
environmental effects which are in-
dividually limited but cumulatively
considerable? . ("Cumulatively con-
siderable" 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.)
36. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X - -
- - X -
-5-
0 0
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The City of Carlsbad 'Water Reclamation Master Plan - August 1990" was developed to provide the City wit;
a feasible water reclamation plan to serve identified reclaimed water markets. The Master Plan identified use
of reclaimed water as including (1) irrigation for agriculture, golf courses, freeway and median landscap&
parks, school turf, residential, commercial, and industrial landscaping; (2) industrid/commercial uses SUC:
as boiler water, cooling tower makeup water, air conditioning uses,, and process water; (3) ecolo&al use such as Iagoon/strearn enhancement and groundwater recharge. The reclaimed water system win reduce th
demand for potable water iupplies.
The planning period for the master plan extends from today through 2015. The plan addresses all aspecl
of the reclaimed water system including treatment facilities, pumping facilities, distribution pipelines, an
storage facilities. Pipelines are proposed to run in existing or proposed streets where practicable. While.th
Master Plan identifies facilities and generalized locations detailed engineering and design work will need t
be completed for each component of the reclaimed water system and will require individual environment;
review. As a result of the site specific environmental review required the Water Reclamation Master Plan h:
been determined not to produce any adverse environmental effects at this level of planning.
PHYSICAL, ENVIRONMENT
d
1. No unstable earth conditions or increased exposure of people to geologic hazards will result as tk
Water Reclamation Master Plan does not involve individual project approval. Detailed site specific plar
for each component of the reclaimed water system will require environmental review.
2. The proposed master plan does not contemplate site specific grading as improvement plans have nc
been developed at this stage in the planning process for each component of the system. The majoril
of the necessary improvements will occur at existing facilities or in existing or proposed streets.
3. Each project suggested in the master plan will receive environmental review. Therefore, no site specif
soils impacts will result from this plan.
4. Eventual development of the improvements contained in the master plan will result in a reclaimed watl
system which has its source beginning from existing treatment plants and operating within pipelin
thereby not impacting beach sands, river channels or the ocean floor.
5. Implementation of the master plan will require projects involving excavation which may have
temporary construction impact by increasing the quantity of airborne dust. This will be reviewed {
an individual project basis where specific mitigation in keeping with the requirements of the Ciq Engineering Department can be imposed.
6. Analysis of an increased potential for odors to be generated from treatment plants will be assessed
the time specific reclaimed water designs are considered.
7. The proposed reclaimed water system will not modify any natural water course. Distribution pipelin
will be reviewed for potential environmental impacts upon the submittal of detailed alignment pla
-6-
e 0
8. The master plan when implemented should cause a reduction in the demand for and use of potable
water supplies by enabling reclaimed water to be used as permitted by Federal and State regulations
where it will not be detrimental to public health.
9. See # 8 above.
10. Construction of each project will produce an incremental increase in usage of fossil fuels, however, the
impacts of this incremental increase will be reviewed on the specific project level.
11. The Water Reclamation Master Plan contains only conceptual locations for facilities, The existence 0: any archaeolo$cally or historically sigruficant site will be evaluated with the individual projec.
environmental review when more detailed location and grading information is available.
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
12. The reclaimed water system will involve construction at already disturbed treatment plant locations an(
pipelines are proposed to run in existing or proposed streets where practicable. Because this mast(
plan does not involve site specific project review individual projects will require environmental analys:
to evaluate any impacts to plant and animal species including habitats and introduction of new specie:
13. See #12 above.
14. The master plan identifies agricultural irrigation as a market for reclaimed water. The availability
reclaimed water may encourage and enable remaining agricultural users to remain in business or expa
their operations.
15. See #12 above.
16. See #12 above.
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
17. The master plan is based on present and planned land uses therefore no alteration is proposed.
18. The reclaimed water master plan provides a guide for development of a needed supplemental pul
utility which will not adversely impact existing public utilities or services.
19. The master plan identifies new and modified sewer systems needed in order to develop a reclain
water system. When implemented this system will reduce the demand for potable water which will
an environmental benefit.
20. The potential increase in noise levels for construction of the improvements necessary for this sy~
and operation of facilities will be evaluated through project level environmental review.
-7-
e e.
!I. The potential for the creation of significant adverse new light or glare is minimal as the primary need
for permanent lighting will be at'treatment facilities which presently exist.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29,
30.
31.
Federal and State agencies regulate the water quality standards for the use of reclaimed water. All
facilities identified in the master plan will be required to meet these standards thereby not creating a
significant risk that hazardous substances may be released.
See #I 7 above.
See #I7 above.
his master plan will provide for an alternative source of water for various uses Which wih increasr
the likelihood that future development will be able to proceed in accordance with the General Plan
Potential traffic impacts will be evaluated on a project by project basis.
The reclaimed water master plan does not affect any existing parking facilities nor does it create ,
parking demand as it is only conceptual and any site specific parking impacts will be evaluated wit1
each improvement project.
See #2S above.
This master plan does not appear to affect any waterborne, rail or air traffic as a result of the natur
of this type of project. Individual projects will be subject to environmental review.
See #25 above.
No conflicts with emergency response plans will be created as a result of the implementation of th
master plan.
Impacts to scenic vistas or the creation of aesthetically offensive public views will be considered at tf
project level when detailed plans are available for review.
32. The master plan provides for an alternative source of water that can be utilized for irrigating city par
and playing fields in order to maintain the quality and quantity of existing recreational opportunitic
33. As discussed previously, the site specific environmental issues related to the recommend1
improvements will be reviewed on a project by project basis. This includes any long-term or cumulati
effects as well as any direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings.
34. See #33 above.
35. See #33 above.
36. See #33 above.
-8-
0 e
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT 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') alternate sites for the proposed, and
g) no projeit alternative.
a) The reclaimed water master plan proposes phasing of improvements.
b) No site specific designs are proposed with this master plan. Alternative designs will be considered at t:
individual project level.
c) The scale of improvements recommended by the master plan are based on the City's General Plan and t
identified markets for reclaimed water. Alternate scales of development would not provide the necessa
level of service.
d) See "b' above.
e) The master plan proposes development which is to be phased through to the year 2015. Development v
be based upon the availability of financing and market demand.
f) See "b' above.
g) The no project alternative would conflict with Statewide efforts to conserve potable water.
-9-
0 e
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
- X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATni DECLARATION will be prepared.
- I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a signifkant effect on the environment, because tl
environmental effect's of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction wi
previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is require
Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared.
- I find that although the proposed project could have a sipficant effect on the environment, there w
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached
sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative
Declaration will be proposed.
- I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENT1 IMPACT REPORT is required.
n
?-/6-9/ JdI7JL
Date Signature
silei.li -- Planning Director
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE1
-10-
0 0
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES 54
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDtTION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
,'
Date Signature
DN:vd
-11-