HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-09-20; City Council; 5193; GPA-49 from O-S to "G"CITY OF r*RLSBAD
. ' "• I n T t i al:
AGENDA BILL NO. &J 7 3 Dept7 Hd.
DATE: September 20, 1977 CUy AUy
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING ; City Mgr. _j\
SUBJECT:
CASE NO: GPA-49 - FROM 0-S (OPEN SPACE) TO "G" (GOVERNMENTAL)
APPLICANT: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
STATEMENT OF THE MATTER
Application for a General Plan Amendment from 0-S (Open Space) to "G" (Governmental)
on property located on the northeast corner of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport
Road. The site is approximately 230 acres, however the portion requested for
changes is the relatively flat 58 acre portion. San Diego County originally pur-
chased this parcel to assure a clear zone for the airport.
When adopting the present General Plan the City placed this entire parcel under
Open Space because it was assumed that no development would take place under the
clear zone and most of the remainder is a steep canyon. The City was aware of the
relatively flat area outside of the clear zone, but there was not time for a detail
survey to determine the size or exact boundaries. Therefore the entire 230 acres
were placed in open space. The County now wishes to use the relative flat portion
for governmental operations. The flat portion is a physical extension of the already
existing industrial area that contains Beckman Instruments that is zoned M and
General Planned as PI. The city staff suggested to the county that the change be
made to Governmental Facilities rather than Planned Industrial so that there would
be assurance that the land would remain for public service. Staff feels the location
near the geographic center of Carlsbad and at the intersection of two major streets
makes the site ideal for governmental facilities.
The Environmental Impact Report for this project was prepared by the county since
the county is the lead agency (i.e., the agency responsible for carrying out the
project). The City is a "Responsible Agency" under State Law, and must therefore
consider the EIR when taking action on the project. The county's certified EIR is
therefore submitted for your information. Mitigating measures cannot effectively be
applied to this application, however, subsequent applications for CUP's will be required
since the zoning ordinance requires all public buildings be processed by a Conditional
Use Permit. The change to "G" will guide development of public facilities. The
county has submitted a Conditional Use Permit application for a Refuse Transfer
Station that will be heard by the Planning Commission on September 14, 1977. The
results of this action will be available to you at the City Council meeting.
EXHIBITS
Staff report dated, August 2, 1977
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1396
County's EIR
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission recommeds that GPA-49 be approved changing the Land Use
Designation from "OS" to "G". Staff concurs with this recommendation and recommends
that the City Council direct.the City Attorney to prepare documents approving GPA-49
as per Planning Commission Resolution No. 1396.
FORM PLANNING 73
AGENDA BILL NO. 5193 -2- September 20, 1977
9-20-77 Following the public hearing the matter was referred to the
City Attorney for preparation of documents necessary for
approval changing the Land Use Designation from "OS" to "G"
in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution #3196.
TO:
FROM:
CASE NO.:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
City of Carlsbad
Planning Department
STAFF REPORT
August 2, 1977
DCC
Planning Department
GPA-49
County of San Diego
Approval of a General Plan Amendment to Change the Land
Use Designation from 0-S (Open Space) to G (Governmental
Facilities) to Enable Construction of a Solid Waste
Shredder and Transfer Station
SECTION I - RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of GPA-49 based on the following findings:
1) The proposed Land Use Element Amendment is consistent with other
elements of the General Plan because:
a) The canyon designated on the Open Space and Conservation Element
is to remain in open space.
b) The property is adjacent to other governmental and industrial
properties.
2) The subject application has complied with the Carlsbad Environmental
Protection Ordinance of 1972 because:
a) An EIR has been prepared by the County and will have been certified
by the Board of Supervisors prior to any Planning Commission
action on the project.
b) The City has, as a responsible agency, considered the certified
EIR for the project.
3) The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the appli-
cable City Public Facilities Policies and Ordinances because:
a) Although sewer service is not available for the property, it
may be available in the future. The General Plan allows develop-
ment only at such time as all public facilities and services
are ensured. This can be appropriately governed through future
discretionary actions of the City.
( SECTION II - BACKGROUND..:(
Location and Descr.ption of Property:
The 58 acre property is located on the northeast side of El Camino Real
between Sunny Creek Road and Palomar Airport Road. The majority of
the site was previously cultivated, with the remainder of the site covered
with the inland sage scrub community. A detailed description of the site
is contained in the project EIR.
Existing Zoning:
Subject Property
North
South
East
West
OS
OS
R-l-10,000
OS
M
and OS
Existing General Plan
Subject Property:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Land Use:
OS
OS
PI
OS
PI
G, and OS
Subject Property:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
CMWD District
Vacant
Vacant
Office
Past History and Related Cases:
N/A
Environmental Impact Information:
The County has prepared an EIR for the subject project. It is slated to
be certified by the Board of Supervisors prior to the August 24th Planning
Commission hearing. The County is the "Lead Agency" for the shredder
project (i.e., the agency responsible for carrying out the project). The
City is a "Responsible Agency" under State law, and must therefore con-
sider the Lead Agency's EIR prior to taking any action on the project.
Any mitigation measures which are
applied as conditions of approval
shredder.
Carlsbad's responsibility may be
to the Conditional Use Permit for the
General Plan Information:
At the time when the City approved the amended Land Use Element of the
General Plan (October 1974), the County had no intended use for the sub-
ject property. The site is, in fact, a portion of a larger 230 acre
parcel which was purchased by the County to provide an
system for Palomar Airport. Consequently, the City designated the air-
port approach area (54 acres) as G (Governmental Facility) and designated
the remainder of the site (176 acres) as Open Space on the Land Use Map.
The County now proposes that 58 acres of the open space area'be designated
-2-
that,
on
G to allow for construction of a solid waste shredder and transfer station
and a possible municipal corporation yard (central location for City
police, water, utilities and maintenance services.)
The property is within the Special Treatment designation for the Palomar
Airport influence area. This special treatment designation' indicates th
in addition to the underlying land use designation, special corisideratio
should be given to the property due to the noise and safety impacts of
Palomar Airport.
The Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan shows the
canyon east of the subject site as a part of the City-wide open space
linkage. This area is proposed to remain in open space.
PUBLIC FACILITIES:
There are no assurances that public facilities will be available to
serve any future uses proposed for the site. However, the General Plan
designation does not indicate the availability of services nor does it
ensure immediate development rights. The General Plan does assist the
City in planning for long-range service obligations. In the short term,
service availability is best judged at the time of discretionary actions
such as subdivision maps, site development plans, etc.
The City Council did accept the application from the County based on the
fact that sewage generate-d by the use (onsite restrooms only) is proposed
to be accommodated by a septic tank system.
MAJOR PLANNING CONSIDERATION:
Is the governmental facilities designation compatible with the surrounding
airport, manufacturing and open space uses?
DISCUSSION
Staff does not believe that it is appropriate to prejudge the merit of
future uses proposed for the site at the time of General Plan Amendment
application. The City will have the opportunity to review specific
development proposals for the site in the future.
The questions pertinent to the General Plan Amendment are:
Is the proposed change compatible with the influence of Palomar
Airport?
Is the site physically suited to governmental use?
Is the governmental use compatible with surrounding industry?
In answer to the first question, a governmental facility designation
encompasses a wide variety of uses which may or may not be compatible,
with an airport. Compatibility with the airport is ensured through the
Special Treatment designation, the future zoning designation, and
development conditions.
v .
-3-
The site is a knoll bordered by a vegetated canyon on the east and north.
Half of the site was previously cultivated, but is now covered with
adventitious plant species.
The canyons and open space areas to the north, east and south can help
to buffer the site from nearby "sensitive" areas such as the Carlsbad
Oaks property, the Dawson/Los Monos Preserve and the Sunny Creek Road
area.
Staff believes that the governmental facilities designation is compatible
with the surrounding industrial properties because of the additional
Airport/Special Treatment overlay.
DHW:jp
Exhibits: Location Map
Topo Map
Draft EIR
-4-
Case Date Rec'd:Date: #~«3-77 PC Date#-v
Description of Request:
-no
LAM
dress or o c a t ion o fRe g u e s t : /J/g .
ppl icant:
Engr. or Arch.
Brief Legal:' ' ' '
)£>
o 7?r/^_o///9 F
'Assessor Book:Page:Parcel:_
General Plan Land tfse Description: /).S
Existing Zone: O/^feO ,-^yQ^>gJ£Proposed Zone:
Acres: .^3 No. of Lots: /~ DU's.
School^Di strict: */s
WaterySnnitation District:
DU/Acre~
V/ithfn Coast Plan Area:Coast Permit Area:
fJb*) r-/3
FORM PLANNING 52
_s/_ JjTLiCi SH-isi v«- pr-n...,., ...-—--> —-;- -~".<A ' ,.-,;.-.--->-«•*a { .V--~- '/•*" -.».<-.- w.» «•« •"> A ' ( ____-*-.---•
1 / i V "«,. — , r.
--- •«/ ; \ -xf*J/ ) ,":* -• -:i
K' ' / \ 'X. i ,-x / >x
'' ? ' xX•-' fi'' ^^
a1-1/// /^j>(i^';
!/ / (\ V^A'^^-
a' / ^7\\VxWs
^-r-r-^' •
^.*-'
'X
i ,->!!*,"*>• ^
' ' !-
t1 •'• '«.> •'-
O ' '• "o -
<•> '- .;
ffi -'
:-o
K-
,
ri ,*»
t.' o*!
ll. ,- ,
K. ,•; ";
•'-' ^. •"*- ••-. .
«•!>••(V, :- .
!*'•>-
L' 1
— — -
UJ
r~" —x
Si
**Q H-— CO_J
0 K
CO Ul
\ 1
KCO<^s<
O *"VCE_J |-
<
0_
(
_— -^
g
k. Q !
IP'-
^^4V , «*<^$«i *^ x *.
:5^S -< ^> :•s^ ;.. , . ?
» i . . *• > a ; -i.15 • -5-' ;
'jo - ;• -
• 1 'f J 1 " •*
'••'-:- ' '= -
i- — 30^^
:
•4
^'
»'.
,
i
=•-
JT
A
v'
^Ov
^ ir, \
' vl\ ^""^ v\ J1
. .' B V \ '
= 3
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. 1396
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, CONCERNING A
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION FROM O-S (OPEN SPACE) TO G
(GOVERNMENTAL FACILITIES) TO ENABLE CONSTRUCTION
OF A SOLID WASTE SHREDDER AND TRANSFER STATION
ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE
OF EL CAMINO REAL BETWEEN SUNNY CREEK, ROAD AND
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD.
CASE NO: GPA-49
APPLICANT: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property as
shown on the attached map, Exhibit "A", has been filed with the
City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request
as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 24th.day of
August, 1977, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed
by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering
the testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons who desired
to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to
the General Plan Amendment and found the following facts and
reasons to exist:
1) The proposed Land Use Element Amendment is consistent with
other elements of the General Plan because:
a) The canyon designated on the Open Space and Conservation
Element is to remain in open space.
b) The property is adjacent to other governmental and
industrial properties.
XXX
XXX
XXX
2) The subject application has complied with the Carlsbad
2 Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1972 because:
2 a) An EIR has been prepared by the County and will have been
certified by the Board of Supervisiors prior to any
^ Planning Commission action on the project.
5 b) The City has, as a responsible agency, considered the
certified EIR for the project.
6 3) The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the
applicable City Public Facilities Policies and Ordinances
because:
8 a) Although sewer service is not available for the property,
g it may be available in the future. The General Plan
allows development only at such time as all public
3_Q facilities and services are ensured. This can be a
appropriately governed through future discretionary actions
U_3_ of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT resolved by the Planning Commission
__ of the City of Carlsbad as follows:J-O
_. A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
_ f. B) That in view of the findings heretofore made and considering
the applicable law, the decision of the Planning Commission
..- is to approve GPA-49 located on the north side of El Camino
Real between Sunny Creek Road and Palomar Airport Road.
17 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
IB City of Carlsbad Planning Commission held on August 24, 1977 by
19 the following vote to wit:
20 AYES: Commissioner Larson, Rombotis, L'Heureux,
o-j Watson, Woodward.
22 NOES: Commissioner Fikes, Jose.
23
24 ERIC LARSON, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
26
27
^~-/,,*s^-rj>^( '..-. /^^!^;^4^
2Q JAMES C. HAGAMAN^x SE"C;RETARY
From OS
ToG
GENERAL PLAN -ATIENDMENT-W COMPLIED FROM 500 SCALE STREET
ATLAS PAGE 7, AND GENERAL PLAN-ELEMENT MAP, CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA,
EXHIBIT "A"
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
RE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA-49
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad will hold a Public Hearing at the City Council Chambers,
1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 7:00 P.M. on Tuesday,
September 20, 1977, to consider an application for a General Plan
Amendment from OS (Open Space) to G (Governmental Facilities) on
property generally located on the northeast side of El Camino Real
between Sunny Creek Road and Palomar Airport Road and as shown on
the attached map.
APPLICANT: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
PUBLISH:September 7, 1977 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
*•»..«..,»
COUNTY OF SAN
INTER-DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
August 4, 1977
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Board of Supervisors
Environmental Review Board
Planning Commission
Exhibit No. .
Date
Paloraar Solid Waste Transfer Station, a Public Project 0'J7842),
HAD Log #77-7-34
The Environmental Review Board (ERB) has reviewed the enclosed Environmental
Impact Report (EIR). Based on the discussion of the issues that follows, the
ERB recommends that:
1. The EIR be certified as being complete and in conpliance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
2. It be found that the project as proposed will have substantial adverse .
(significant) but raitigatible impacts on Noise, So 1ar Wind Antennae
System.
3. The attached Mitigating Measures be made a condition of project approval.
ERB DELIBERATIONS
On notion of Mr. Buckner, seconded by Mr. Mattly, the above recommendations are
made to the approving authority for this project. •
Ayes: 6 - Bernard, Evans, Hurlburt, Buckner, Mattly, Byers
Noes: 0
Abstention: 0
Absent: 1 - Alberson
On motion of >!r. Buckner, seconded by Mr. Bernard, noise is found to be signif-
icant but mitigatible. Vote: 6/0/0.
«
On Motion of Mr. Byers, seconded by Mr. Mattly, impacts on the Solar Wind
Antennae are found to be significant but mitigatible. Vote: 5/0/1. Mr. Evans
voted no, stating that he felt that the.impacts to the antennae system were
already mitigated by the proposed project design.
Respectfully submitted,
ROBEWV L. ROGERS, Secretary
Environmental Review Board
RLR:JPR:ss
Palomar Solid Waste Trarr'T
Station, A Public Projec.
CUJ7842), HAD Log P77-7-34
-2-August 4, 1977
Enclosures:A. EIR Discussion, Pages A-l to A-5
B. Letters of Public and Other Agency Comments With Response,
Pages 3-1 to B-4
C. Draft EIR, Prepared by County of San Diego, Department of
Transportation, Environmental Services Division.
D. Supplemental Information Provided by the Applicant
Copies: Anna Pecus, IPO C#A655)
ENCLOSURE A
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DISCUSSION
PROJECT: Paloraar Solid Waste Transfer Station, A Public Project, EAD Log #77-7-34
PROJECT DESCRIPTION -',
The proposed project is to establish a solid waste shredding facility capable
of recovering Ferrous (iron) materials. The shredded waste will be transported
to existing sanitary landfills: either to the Bonsall or San Marcos landfills.
The shredding of waste material will extend the life span of the San Marcos
facility from its present 3 to 5 year life span to an estimated 20 year life
span. The life span extention effect of the operation of the shredder as dis-
cussed in this EIR is not discussed in the EIR for the San Marcos Sanitary
Landfill.
The project site is located northeast of the intersection of Palomar Airport
Road and El Caraino Real in the City of Carlsbad: on a County-owned 21 acre
parcel.
EXISTING ZONING
The existing zoning is 0-S, Open Space, in the City of Carlsbad, which under
Carlsbad zoning allows agricultural and recreational uses.
MAJOR ISSUES
1. Noise (See the Following Mitigating Measure)
Noise levels estimated to be in the range of 95-100 dB(A) at a dis-
tance of 50-feet from the shredder will be generated by the shredding
operation unless effective noise reduction techniques are employed,
and noise levels at the nearest property line will be in the range
of 33-33 dB(A) and a 60 dB(A) noise level will exist at a distance
of approximately 3,140-feet from the shredding operation. As a result,
without adequate mitigation, the 60 dB(A) noise contour produced by
this project will envelope an area of approximately 690 acres ~ in
contrast to the 21 acre project site itself. This impact can be miti-
gated.*
Mitigating Measure
Construction of the shredder building should utilize materials which
will insure that noise levels produced by project related activities
do not exceed 60 dB(A) in areas outside of the 21 acre project sites
as a result of activities related to this project.
ENCLOSURE A-2
2. Sewage Disposal (No Mitigating Measure Proposed;'See the Following
Applicant proposed project modifications)
No sewage facilities will be available in the area during the next
two years as a result of a moratorium by the City of Carlsbad for
this area.
The proposed project will produce approximately 4,000 gallons of waste '
water per day created from approximately 20 employees and periodic
washdown of equipment. Percolation tests indicate that proper sewage
disposal cannot be achieved /ia a septic tank-leach line system.
The applicant has presented the alternative of utilizing: 1) chemical
toilets and a sump system for the washdown of equipment and recycling
of water; 2) the cleaning of machinery by seepers and vacuum devices
rather than by a water wash-down method, or 3) other such methods, such
as evapotranspiration, that will avoid discharge of waste water.
3. Scenic/Visual (See the Following Mitigating Measure)
The proposed project will result in a building 36-feet in height which
will visually impact a planned 400-acre development immediately to
the east.
Mitigating Measure
The building exterior should be of a nature that the building will
blend in with existing color and textures of the area.
4. Archaeology (See the Following Mitigating Measures)
Three archaeological sites are found in or immediately to the project
site. Two Luiseno milling stations were reported in the Archaeological
Survey Report, prepared by the Department of Transportation and a
A third trail camp (SDi-50-92), indicated by Chione sp. shell fragments
littering the rim of an adjacent canyon, was later discovered by the
Environmental Analysis Division. These sites are theorized to have
been marginal elements of a more widespread regional settlement pattern
involving vegetation and animal- resources around Agua Hedionda Creek
and its major tributaries. The marine shell species probably were
gathered prehistorically at Agua Hedionda Lagoon and consumed by a
single individual while enroute to some unknown inland destination.
Ecofact residue at these sites could contribute to a better understanding
of dietary habits in specific time periods.
ENCLOSURE A-3
Mitigating Measures
Prior to grading of the site the following mitigation steps shall
be conducted to the satisfaction of the Environmental Analysis Divi-
sion:
A. Record *CE123 and ?CE124 sites at the District II Clearinghouse
which will then register all information at the State Historic
Preservation Office in Sacramento.
• B. Conduct a current institutional record search at both San Diego
State University and the San Diego Museum of Man.
C. Provide a revised "Culture History" section evaluating all current
publications and manuscripts available for the Carlsbad region;
a revised "Research Potential" section based upon field evaluation
by a qualified field archaeologist and potential contribution
to regional research. This revised report shall be written by
a qualified archaeologist.
D. Provide photographs of each milling feature; metric measurements;
and a scaled map including a plot of all associated artifacts
on each site that will be impacted by grading or project related
activities to the satisfaction of the Environmental Analysis Division.
E. Conduct a rectilinear post-hole series to.the satisfaction of the
Environmental Analysis Division on each site that will be impacted
by grading or project related activities to test for potentially
buried cultural strata and map the location of all post-holes
on a scaled map with contours and a north arrow.
F. All results of the post-hole series, the items specified in
measures ARCHAEOLOGY (C) and (D), and evidence that measures
ARCHAEOLOGY (A) and (B) have been accomplished should be submitted
in report form to the satisfaction of the Environmental Analysis
Division. ~~
5. Biology (No Mitigating Measures Proposed)
Implementation of this project will result in the destruction and/or
major reduction of habitat quality of on-site inland sage scrub com-
munity. This vegetation represents the edge of a contiguous belt
of vegetation adjacent to a tributary of Agua. Hedionda Creek and is
utilized extensively by area wildlife.
Three plants considered threatened and/or of limited distribution have
been identified from the property: Adolnhia califomica, Selaqinella
c^inerascens, and Thick-leaf Manzanita, Arctostanhylos glanduLosa
erassi folia. In addition to the above species, Summer-Holly,
Comarostanylos diversifolia was found to be common on the property.
This species is a candidate species for the California Native Plant
Society's list of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. Summer-
Holly occurs on dry slopes at low elevations in chaparral near the
coast and is found only in San Diego County and adjacent Baja California.
ENCLOSURE A-4
1. Arctostaphylos glandulosa Eastw. ssp. crassifolia (Jeps.) Wells.
Thickleaf manzanita
This species is known only from San Diego County: along the
coastal areas, in and around the Del Mar and Encinitas areas.
This species is considered to be endangered as of 1974 (CNPS),
and of declining population vigor.
A total of 11 individuals occur on the property.
Federal R/E Status: Proposed as an Endangered species (both
1975 and 1976).
2. Adolphia califomica Wats.
Adolphia
This species is known from southwestern San Diego County and
northern Lower California: along dry canyons and washes within
Chaparral and Coastal Sage Scrub plant communities (as defined
by Munz and Keck, 1949; 1950). This species is considered as of
1974 to be a species of limited distribution, but not rare and/or
endangered. Its population vigor is stable or increasing.
A census of individuals was not conducted, however, estimates
indicate that approximately 200 individuals on the property.
Federal R/E Status: Not proposed as a threatened or an endangered
species (1975 or 1976).
•*• Selaginella cinerascens A.A. Eat.
Spike-Moss
This species is known from southwestern San Diego County and
adjacent Lower California. Found on dry slopes and mesas within
Coastal Sage Scrub and Chaparral plant communities (as defined
by Munz and Keck, 1949; 1950), this species is considered as of
1974 to be a species of limited distribution, but not rare and/or
endangered. Its population vigor, relative endangerment, and
rarity are not known with any degree of certainty, and its general
population distribution is only poorly known.
Several excellent mats of this species occur throughout the prop-
erty in the areas dominated by native vegetation.
Federal R/E Status: Not proposed as a threatened or an endangered
species (1975 or 1976).
ENCLOSURE A-5
6. Disruption of Solar Wind Antennae System (See the Following Mitigating
Measure)
Implementation of the project without adequate mitigation will inter-
. fere with the University of California's Solar Wind Antennae System
operated by the Physics Department of the University of California,
San Diego campus. This antennae system is unique in the United States
and is part of an extensive and complex experiment funded by the
National Foundation. This electrically sensitive antennae system,
located on the Dawson-Los Honos U. C. Preserve, slightly less than
1 mile from the project site, will be affected by electrical inter-
ference generated by the proposed project if effective mitigation
measures are not implementedi,
Mitigating Measures
A. All new electrical lines should be undergrounded to prevent above.-
ground level electrical arcing (common to above ground level trans-
mission lines) in the vicinity of the solar wind antenna system
such that electrical interference is minimized.
B. In consideration of the need of the University of California for
a radio-quiet environment in the vicinity of the project, the
applicant will consult with the University during project design,
and will work with the University to mitigate any radio interfer-
ence resulting from the project.
7. Grading (No Mitigating Measures Proposed)
Approximately 54,000 cubic yards of earthwork is proposed for 4.5
acres of the site, resulting in grading of 12,000 cubic yards per
acre. The grading will be balanced cut and fill operation with a '
maximum cut of 24.5 feet and minimum fill of 13 feet.
8. Agriculture (No Mitigating Measure Proposed)
Project implementation will have an adverse effect on agriculture
by removing 10 acres of land from agricultural use within the coastal
dependent agriculture zone.Las Flores soils (Class IVe; Storie Index
» 31) are found on approximately 10 acres of the project property.
Th'?se soils are considered to be valuable for the cultivation of flowers,
range, and truck crops.
ENCLOSURE B
LETTERS OF PUBLIC AMD OTHER AGENCY COMMENT WITH RESPONSE
Citv of Carlsbad:
2.
491. V.'ill the project increase fire hazard?
Staff Response: Operation of the shredder facility will take place
within buildings and the area adjacent to the building will be cleared
such that the fire hazard is not expected to be substantially increased.
Are there any rare plants on the property, such as Adolnhia californica
or Dichondra occidentalis? . -
Staff Response: See Major Issue -5, BIOLOGY
3. Is there any possible air safety hazard associated with Palomar
Airport?
Staff Response: The building location and size is out of the direct
flight pattern of Palomar Airport and is not expected to create an
impact on the operation of the Airport.
4. Will the project attract snail rodents?
Staff Response: This possibility exists. However, the refuse will
be kept inside buildings while being processed and will be hauleu
daily to a sanitary landfill, thus minimizing this problem.
5. Will noise or odor from the shredder be discernible to a development
east of the project site?
Staff Response:— The noise issue was treated in the Major Issue of
Noise. Odor is not expected to be a problem as the refuse will be
enclosed within the proposed building and hauled away daily with
daily cleanup of the shredding machinery.
6. Has anything been proposed to eliminate loose trash from escaping
from trucks and tractor trailers transporting the refuse to and from
the site?
Staff Response: Escape of material from transport vehicles is regu-
lated by the California Vehicle Code, subject to enforcement by the
California Highway Patrol.
7. Ho you know how the proposed structure will look? Definite plans
have not been developed at this tine. What is the proposed exterior
material?
Staff Response: Mitigation Measures to minimize visual impacts arc
in the Noise mitigation included in this EIR.
CICLCSVRF. B-2
8. Will the project site be fenced?
Staff Response: Page 2 of the draft states that security fencing
will be constructed.
California Department of Fish and Game;
Stated that they had no comment at this tine.
San Diego County Archaeological Society, Inc.: -.-
1. What are the possibilities of a subsurface component at each site?
Staff Response: Such resources cay be on the project property: see
ARCHAEOLOGY mitigating measures.
2. 'Would subsurface testing such as post-hole testing be adviseable and,
if not, why not?
Staff Response: Yes, in this case post-hole testing would be advise-
able (see Mitigating Measures for Archaeology).
3. With a reported San Pieguito site containing nilling features, could
the tools and the slicks be related?
Staff Response: The Division Archaeologist does not believe that
a San Dieguito conponent is represented at these sites. Presence
of one tool in itself comprises an isolated find.
4. Exactly where was the tool at W1203 (CE £12-1) in relation to the slick
at that site?
Staff Response: The exact location of the tool at V.'12n3 (CE "124)
was not provided in the technical report and will have to be plotted
in the nap required in the Mitigating Measure for Archaeology.
3. V.Tiat is the rationale for assigning both slicks to the Luiseno culture
and the tools to the San Dieguito culture?
Staff Response: Bedrock milling features are considered by most
authorities to represent a late cultural intrusion into Southern
California after 1,000 B.C. Since this site is located within the
• sphere of influence of the Luseno culture^it might be rationally
concluded that these nilling slicks are Luiseno. However, the Luiseno
culture is a historic manifestation. Since there is a lack of evidence
to indicate that this site is historic, it is also possible that these
features represent Dr. Clenent Meighan's San Luis Rey II complex.
The writer of the technical report interpretated a scraping tool to
be a "typical" San Dieguito tool. However, such a classification
of artifacts is extremely tenuous and should only be attempted by
a specialist well-versed in litliic classification. Therefore, the
Division Archaeologist questions the "San Dieguito type" interpretation
for the reasons provided above.
ENCLOSURE B-3
ft. What are the qualifications of the two people who performed the field
survey? Are they qualified as per the County Guidelines.
Staff Response: Mr. Gary Fink has net the qualifications as an archaeo-
logists as per the San Diego County Procedures for Environmental Impact
Review. Mr. Fink did not take part in the field survey but did review
the report written by Ms. Hightower. At the present tine Ms. Hightower
is not recognized as a qualified archaeologist per the above cited
San Diego County Procedures for Environmental Inpact Review.
California Heritage Foundation
1. Has Mr. (sic) Ilightower a "A in the proper field and worked 400 hours
(2-1/2 nonths) full-tine experience apprenticeship under a "qualified"
archaeologist and as a supervisor?
Staff Response: See response to iten 6, letter fron the San Diego
Archaeological Society.
2. Why did your staff accept the archaeology report done by a student
worker who does not neet County standards?
Staff Response: The question implies that thezreport was accepted
with the knowledge that a question existed relative to the qualifi-
cations of the individual that prepared the report. Such a conclusion
would not be correct. A failure to resolve this question, however,
does not invalidate"the EIR provided that the EIR does neet the .
requirements of the State EIR Guidelines.
Russell L. Kaldenber^
Several questions were presented by Mr. ICaldenberg regarding the adequacy and
accuracy of the archaeology report and request photographs of the site be taken.
Also, several questions were asked regarding the activity of Mr. Fink with'
regards to survey and report preparation. Mr. Kaldenherg reconnended that
a complete and competent report be conducted before project completion.
Staff Response: See Major Issue *4 and the associated ARCHAEOLOGY Mitigating
Measures.
University of California
This letter expresses a concern for the electrical facilities which will he
needed for the project. At present, a solar wind antenna experiment is being
conducted in the vicinity, this experiment is the only one being conducted
in the United States and is extremely sensitive to electrical disturbances.
The University of California recommends , becuase of the lack of details on
machinery and systems design, that they be consulted during the design phase
so that potential problems can be identified and corrected.
Staff Response: See Major Issue *f-. and its associated Mitigating Measures.
ENCLOSURE B-4
Woodside/Kubota 5 Associates. Inc.
Comments addressed the adequacy of the present road construction design and its
ability to handle additional heavy truck traffic,
Staff Response: The problem of debris from hauling vehicles is addressed in the
City of Carlsbad letter, question number 6. Noise issue was addressed in Major
Issue #1, NOISE.
1200 ELM AVENUE PI \ f H TELEPHONE:
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA 92008 VWwt/?7/J (714)729-1181
Cttp of Cartebab
July 14, 1977
San Diego County Environmental
Review Board
Environmental Analysis Division
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, CA 92123 .
RE: Draft EIR for Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station-- Log 77-7-34
I have reviewed the draft Environmental Impact Report for the pro-
posed Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station and have the followingcomments:
1. On page 2 the EIR states that the project is within reach of
sewer, electricity and water-services. This statement should
be clarified in that sewer transmission facility is available
but the City has adopted ordinances declaring a moratorium on
the issuance of building permits due to the unavailability of
sewer services. The City Council reserved the sole discretion
to issue building permits to the governmental agencies if they
determine the project is necessary and in the public interest.
(Attached Ordinances # 7047 and 7048 for your review)
2. There is no discussion, on the impact of the project on fire •
protection services. Will the project increase fire hazard?
3. Page 4, 3rd paragraph - The City will act on the General Plan
Amendment only after certification of the EIR by the Board oTJSUpervl sors. ~
4. Page 5, Our records indicate that two plant species of special
significance were observed on property within about 2000-4000
feet of the project site. These species are Adolphia Californica
(California Adolphia) and Dichondra Occidental is (Pony Foot).
The adolphia is identified as endangered, and the Dichondra
Occidentals is rare and endangered. Both of these species were
found in association with the inland sage scrub community.
(SOURCE: Biological Survey of the Tootsie-K Ranch, prepared
for RECON by Biological Analysis Group). Is there any possibility
that these species occur on the subject property?
5. Is there any possible air safety hazard in constructing a 36 ft.
high building in such close proximity to' Palomar AirportY
San Diego County Environmental .
Review Board
July 14, 1977
page 2
6. Will the project attract small rodents (scavengers such as rats
and mice) ?
7. The City is presently preparing a master plan for a residential
community on the 400 acre site east of the proposed shredder
site. Will noise or odor from the shredder be discernible on this.
property? Vlil.l the structure be visible from the adjacent property?
From £1 Camlno Real ?
8. Has anything been proposed to eliminate loose trash from escaping.
from trucks, and tractor trailers transporting the refus.e ..to *n Q
from the site?
9. Do you know how the proposed structure will look? What is the
proposed exterior material?
10. Will the project site be fenced to separate the shredder from the
nearby open space areas?
11 What are the various advantages/disadvantages and the technological
feasibil ity of expanded resource ..recovery?" """
Please call Dana Whitson of my staff if you have any questions con-
cerning these comments.
Sincerely,
-ames C.
//Planning Director
DHW:JCH:jp
ORDINANCE NO. 7047
•AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AS AN URGENCYMEASURE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY . - .'':-'.OF'CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER '
18.04 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY
THE ADDITION OF SECTION 13.04.170 TO IMPOSE
A MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING '
PERMITS IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD DUE TO
THE UNAVAILABILITY OF SEWER SERVICE SUBJECT- TO CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS. . -l .'-.... •>- .
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does
ordain as follows: •
SECTION 1: That Title 18, Chapter 18.04, of' the Carlsbad
Municipal Code is amended by the addition of Section 18.04.170 :
to'read as follows:
"18.04.?.7Q Moratorium — Sewer. Notwithstanding any
provisions of this Chapter to che contrary, no building permit
shall be issued, nor shall any application therefor be accepted,
in the City of Carlsbad except as follows: ..
- 1. Permits for work in that portion of the City of Carlsbad
within the- service territory of the San Marcos or Leucadia County
Water Districts may be processed upon the presentation by -the
applicant of- a valid sewer connection permit from such district.. ,.•
'Such permit shall be presented to the City.of. Carlsbad Building
Department concurrently with the application for the building
permit. The Director of Building and Housing shall verify that
the permit is valid prior to issuance of the building permit.
2. Building permits may be processed and-issued when
the City Manager determines, pursuant to provisions of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code, that no new sewer, connection permit
would be necessary in connection with"--th^,1,work. The City Manager1
determination may be appealed to'the Cit-^VCouncil whose decision
shall be final. .*'.'. •• • ' ' .
3-. Structures existing within the City of Carlsbad's ••"..;
sewer service area as of the date of this ordinance, being served
by septic tanks, may obtain a sewer connection permit if the
City's public Health Officer certifies that the septic tank has
failed and constitutes a health hazard.
4. Permits for construction for the Plaza Camino Real
expansion pursuant to-the contract between the Plaza Camino
Real, the City of Carlsbad and the Carlsbad Parking'Authority
dated November 5, 1975, nay be processed and issued..
. -5. Building permits may be processed and issued for any
public-project undertaken by the City of Carlsbad.
. 6. Building permits may be processed and issued where
the Carlsbad Municipal Code provides for an alternate method of.
sewage disposal. •
7« The City Council may grant exceptions for projects of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1 13
S •
14,
I cS'. <a
15
16
17
5
18
19
20
.21
22
23
24
25
25
27
' 28
•other governmental agencies if the City Coun'co.i in its sole
discretion determines that the pr^ect is necessary and in the
public interest. •*.
8, Building permits may issue for all those projects
for which applications for building permits were on file in the
Carlsbad Building Department as of 5 P.M. on April 19, 1977."
DECLARATION OF URGENCY: This is an emergency ordinance
adopted as an urgency measure pursuant to California Government
Code Section 36937 and shall take effect immediately. The City
of Carlsbad, by contract/ owns certain .capacity rights in the
Encina Water Pollution Control Facility. The City Council has
received a series of reports from its Public Works Administrator :-
indicating that after taking into account the amount of sewer . '.
capacity required for building permits in process/ governmental
'projects, certain contractural obligations, and other matters,
the City of Carlsbad as of April 19, 1977 was at its capacity
in the Encina Facility. It is not possible for the City of
Carlsbad to exceed that capacity without violating provisions of
Federal and State law and its contractural obligations to the
other members of the Joint Encina Facility. Since the City- of
Carlsbad has no additional capacity rights, in the sewer treatment
plant, and no other, currently available means of disposing of more
sewage, the Council has no alternative but to impose a City-wide
* . ' . "
building moratorium until such time as there is some change in the
situation. This action is necessary for the immediate preservation
of the public health and safety since, in the absence of the
moratorium, buildings" could be constructed in the City without
adequate provisions for the disposition of sewage which is a
situation that is of immediate danger, to the public health, safety
and welfare.* • '
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall'be effective
iiluiiediately upon passage, ^The City Clerk of t>. City of Carlsbad
shall certify to the-adoption of this ordinance and cause it to
» * •
be published once in the Carlsbad Journal within fifteen days
after its adoption. • .
CODIFCATION: This ordinance shall not be codified.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at an adjourned regular
meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad", California
held on the 26th day of April, 1977 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
*
ABSENT: None
Co.uncilmen Frazee, Packard, Skothlcki and
Councilwoman Casler
Councilman Lewis /
. ROBERT C. FRAZEB^ Mayor
ATTEST:
MARGASET E. ADAMS, City Clerk
(SEAL)
3.
ORDINANCE K). 7048
^j*
' .. • .AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
•"OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTED
AS AN URGENCY MEASURE PROHIBITING THE APPLI-
CATION FOR AND APPROVAL OF DISCRETIONARY
APPROVALS PURSUANT TO TITLE 20, OR TITLE 21., .
' ' OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE DUE TO THE-UN- •
AVAILABILITY OF SEWER SERVICE SUBJECT TO ••"'• ''
CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS. t •
WHEREAS, the City Council has by the adoption of an
Emergency Ordinance declared a City-wide moratorium on the
issuance of building permits due to the unavailability of sewer
services; and •
f »
• . WHEREAS, the Planning Department will undertake, by
direction of the City Council, a comprehensive review of Title 20
regarding subdivisions, and Title 21 regarding zonir.gs, in the
City of Carlsbad. Such review to take cognizance of the problem
of the lack of sewer service and prepare recommendations as to
whether or not the Municipal Code needs to be revised in "order
to deal with the situation in regards to discretionary land use
approvals. Such recommendations to also include consideration
* •
of some fonu of allocation system in the event additional
amounts of capacity become available to the City; and
WHEREAS, the City .Council has determined that it is
necessary to protect the public safety, health and welfare to
adopt this urgency measure as an interim ordinance prohibiting
any further applicatipn for or approval of discretionary approvals
to prevent adding increased demand to an already insufficient
amount of sewer capacity and to insure that an allocation system,
if adopted, fairly can apply to all.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the. City Council of the
City of Carlsbad, California, as follows:
*^»
• . SECTION 1: That all processing and approval of discretion-
ary entitlements pursuant to Title 20 or Title 21 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code as of the effective date of this ordinance is
hereby prohibited subject to the following exceptions:
1. Applications for approvals located within that portion
of the City of Carlsbad within the service territory of the San
Marcos or Leucadia County Water Districts may be accepted and
processed provided the applicant submits in conjunction with his
application a letter from such district indicating that the ';•'
. . -* .
sewer services are available in connection with the development.
• * * • -
The application may be approved if the City Council finds that
sewer service remains available and will continue to remain
available concurrent with.need in connection with the development.
2. Applications for conditional use permits, variances,
reversions to acreage, certificates of compliance and adjustment
plots may be accepted, processed and approved if the City Manager
determines that the approval of such item will not require any
new sewer connection, permit. -The City Manager's determination
may be appealed to the City Council, whose decision shall be final.
* •
3. Discretionary'approvals in connection with the Plaza
•
Camino Real expansion may be processed, accepted and approved.
. 4. Any necessary applications for projects undertaken
by the City of Carlsbad may be accepted, processed and approved.
5. The City Manager is authorized to take all the steps
* . *
necessary to proceed with the annexation of the Paloraar Airport
t •
and any applications necessary in that regard may be accepted,
sr-iCl
2Co
V
D
O
E"
§
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
.20
25
24
25
26
.27
28
6. Any application for which the Carlsbad Municipal Code
* ~^k
provides an. alternative method of sewer, disposal for the project
site/ may be accepted, processed and approved.
7. The City Council may grant exceptions for projects
•of other governmental agencies if the City Council in its sole
discretion determines that the project is necessary and in the
• .
public interest. - ' •
8. The staff may continue to process and the City.Council
may consider whether or not to approve applications which were
on file with the City of Carlsbad on or before April 19, 1977.
/
SECTION 2: This Interim Ordinance is adopted as an urgency
measure pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858 for
the reasons set out in the recitals hereto and shall take effect
immediately.
SECTION 3: The City Clerk of the City of Carlsbad shall
certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be
published once in the Carlsbad Journal .wi-thin fifteen days after •
its adoption. • • .
APPROVED, PASSED AND-ADOPTED at an adjourned regular meeting
of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on
the 26th day of April, 1977. by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Councilman Frazee, Lewis, Packard, Skotnicki and
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Councilwoman'Casler
ROBERT C. FPAZEE,
ATTEST:
MAKGAHET E. ADAMS', City Clerk
(SEAL)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
350 Golden Shore
Long Beach, CA 90802
(2L3) 590-5H3
July 12, 1977
EDMUND G. BROWN JR . Governor
San Diego County
Environmental Review Board
Environmental Analysis Division
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, CA 92123
Gentlemen:
this project at this time.
B** you for the opportunity to review and cow* on this doo^ent.
Sincerely,
Robert D. Montgomery
Regional Manager
Region 5
,eco
San Diego County Archaeological Society, Inc.
237 Fowles Street
Oceanside, CA 92054
July 12, 1977
County of San Diego
Environmental Analysis Division
9150 Chesapeake Road (MS 0175)
San Diego, CA 92123
Gentlemen:
Rei Palomar Solid Waste Transfer
Station
BAD Log No. 77-7-3^
We have received the Draft EER referenced above and appendices to same and
request your consideration of the following comments.
Will sites W1202 (CE#123) and W1203 (CB#12^), both of which are located near
project "boundaries, be destroyed by construction of the solid waste transfer
facility? A plot map should be provided showing construction plans in
relation to the sites. Is project redesign possible to accomodate preservation
of the sites?
Better documentation of W1202 and W1203 is necessary, particularly if this record
is; all that will remain of these-cultural resources. The slicks and tools should
"be-measured and drawn to scale. Photographs would be beneficial for the record.
The sites have been classed to be of minor significance, however site significance
can not be adequately evaluated without the following data.
What are the possibilities of a subsurface component at each site?
Would subsurface testing such as post hole testing be adviseable and, if not,
why not?
With a reported San Dieguito site containing milling features 'could the tools
and the slicks be related?
°. Exactly where was the tool at W1203 (CS?124) in relation to the slick at that site?
- What is the rationale for assigning both slicks to the Luiseno culture and
the tools to the San Dieguito culture?
.The statement for research potential for these sites is unsatisfactory as it •
evades the issue. .
A current record search should be obtained from the San Diego Museum of Man.aiSftv-.j.-.-
San Diego State University. A record search for archaeological sites in the ••
project area and surrounding vicinity three years ago in 197^ is not adequate.
The proposed mitigation is insufficient. If the sites consist entirely of the
slicks and tools described in this report, mitigation can be aided by the
documentation outlined above. Post hole testing should be considered to rule
out a subsurface component if doubt exists on this point. A surface collection
of the tools should be done and the report should indicate the repository for
the data. Did the heavy chamise cover at W1202 (C3# 123) permit adequate ground
visualization or should reinspection be done in conjunction with ground clearance
prior to construction activities? Construction workers are not qualified to
County of San Pi ego
Environmental Analysis Division
Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station
BAD Log No . 77-7-3^
Page Z
recognize archaeological and historical resources uncovered during project
construction and apparently no other provision has teen made for this. A
qualified archaeologist will "be required to assume this duty if this is a
necessary phase of this project.
On page 3 reference is made to a report "by G. Fink in 197^ regarding the
San Pieguito I cultural phase in the Poway area. The 197^ report listed
in the bibliography makes r.o reference to San Dieguito I in the Poway area.
The proper reference should be included in the bibliography. Again., on
page j5» the reports by R, Carrico and G. Fink are not referenced properly.
The report briefly mentions sixteen sites in the vicinity of the project area.
These sites should all be identified by si^e number. A description of these
sites and at least a general statement of their location (if a map is omitted)
in relation to the project area should be included. If not within-the scope
of this project to attempt to relate the newly located sites to others in the
the information should at least be presented for others to study.
Sincerely,
Walker
EIR Review Committee
San Diego County Archaeological Society, Inc.
I-ttf P.O. Box 187 • Encinitas, California 92024v
0° • July IS, 1977 '
County of San Diego
Ihvironneiital Analysis Division
915C Chesapeake ?.oad (113 OI?5)
San Diego, CA 92123
: Palomar Solid "Jasts Transfer
O"CS-"wXC11
IAD log ::o. 77-7-31-'
Gentlensn:
I ;:ould like to add the following cements to those -stressed i;i r.y
letter of July 12, 1977, regarding the Palor.ar Solid ".."asts Cransfer
Station.
A better description should be provided of the location of the t-.ro sites
. on the subject property.
Specifically ::hat contribution did Hen Hedges of the San Disgo Museun of
llan and Da\"id Hanna of San Diego -State University n?J:a to. this report,
particularly in vie" of the fact that a record search -as not done?
'T"iat are the qualifications of the t-ro people ::ho perfomsd the field-
survey? Are they qualified as per the County Guidelines?
I sinply can not understand how the archaeologists on the Environmental
Analysis Division staff could accent this rercrt as adenuate.
Sincsrely,
&.^.t: .* •;'''.* >--'
Carol 'Jallcer
HE?, ?veviaw Conciittee
San Diego County Archaeological Society, Inc.
P.O. Box 187 • Encinitas, California 92024
July 29,1977
San Diego County Environmental Review Board
Environmental Analysis Division
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, California 92123
Dear Sirs,
Re: Palomar solid Waste Transfer Station (Public Project)
Log §77-7-34
We have the following comments about the archaeological
survey report for this project:
1. New record checks at San Diego State University and San
Diego Museum of Man should be made. Additional sites
may have been recorded for the area since 1974.
2. The references to the reports by Carrico and Fink on
page 5 are not correctly documented.
3. The last sentence on page 5 states the "the possibility
of sites appeared to be much -better." The meaning is >•
not clear - better than what?
4. The San Diego County Procedures for Environmental
Impact Review .state that a survey must be conducted
by a .qualified archaeologist and the report prepared
by the archaeologist. Neither of these requirements
is satisfied by this report. It is our opinion that
i.s*. the Environmental Analysis Division should reject the
report on these grounds.
*
5. Mitigation of the reported sites should at least
contain, in one document, measurements, drawings and
photographs of the slicks. The artifacts found, asso-
ciated with them should be shown on a scale drawing
to illustrate their relative locations.
Sincerely
Thomas Kf Campbell |
EIR Review Committee
//V7**
JUL19 1377 L~
July 12, 1977 O^f/c^'' /;/'V'
AI^PI
Mr. Randall Hurlburt, Chairman
ErviRcr.TMEUTAL REVIEW SCARD
9150 Chesapeake Read
San Diego, California
Mr. Cha i rman:
The California Heritage Foundation (CM?) has reviewed
the proposed Palomar Solid Jaste Transfer Station and
offers the following comments and Questions for ycur
consideration under the California Environments1 duality
Act of 1970 and People v. County of Kern;
1. . Do your staff give preferential treatment
to Community Services Agency an:: Integra"ed
Planning Office 113s over private citizen's 113s?
There is a notable difference between what you require
for.Rick Engineering, Dresselhaus Engineering, Lomas
Santa ?e, etc, in their projects and the flimsy
document you submitted for public review. "ve examined
an old EIR by Environmental Analysis Systems, Inc.
and found it to contain reams more scientific dat?
than the project under question.
2. v7hy did your staff accept the archaeology report
done by a student worker who does not meet County
standards? A source at the Research Center, at the
Anthropology Division of California State University,
San Diego informed us that it is common knowledge
that the only supervising archaeologist in the field
and writer of the report does not have a 3ach9lor's
of Arts Degree and is not qualified according to the
San Diego County ZIR Guidelines.
Has Mr. Hightower a 3A in the proper field '?.nd worked
400 hours (2h. months) full time experience apprentice-
ship under a "qualified" archaeologist and as =3 supervisor?
Does "reviewed by" mean that Ms. ?ink is qualified and
walked with Mr. Hightower in the field and assisted in
the penning of the report? Your guidelines st^.te
that only a qualified archaeologist can survey alone
and write reports.
".7e believe your staff archaeologists should be reprimanded
for this apparent preferential treatment.
July 12, 1977
-2-
3. Pursuing the adequacy of the archaeology report,
we then compared '.Vestec Services' San Zli jo Hills -42
report (50 manuscripts and articles) and =econ ' s
Mc>:illian''s Bonita Valley View (25 manuscripts and
books) to the County report on this project.. You
should note that your staff only read 2 books and
2 manuscripts!
It is apparent to our untrainef eyes that the two
sites reported on the project property were not adequetly
examined or evaluated. In fact, it appears th=Jt your
staff attempted to write-off these sites ar.d hstr« in
fact denied the public adequet data to make our own
evaluation.
Is it not a violation of professional ethic of the Association
of Environmental Professionals to utilize an EI3. to justify
a project?
We suspect that the biology, geology, air quality, and other
sections are equally inadequet with the above issue. Having
no faith in your County document '.7A-UJQ0225, we respectfully
request that all the technical studies be redone by private
consulting companies which totally lack bias and .fully
conform to San Diego County Guidelines.
Respectfully,
•William Mishquish
California Heritage Foundation
I860 3, Sscondido llvd
Escondi3o, CA 92025
31111 Balsa Avenue
Barstow, CA 92311
San Diego County
Environmental Analysis Division
915>0 Chesapeake Drive
San Di3go, CA 92123
Subject: palonar Solid. Waste Transfer Station (Public
project) SAD Log llo. 77-7-3^
Thank you for the opportunity to revi_w the above 213.
I support additional solid waste projects as they are
necessary to support our urban way cf life. With the
rapid growth of north County, this particular project
seems especially vital.
I would, though, offer a few corients en the cultural
resources situated en the project site. First, the
mere identification of two milling areas and the assign-
ment to Luisenic origins does not constitute either
scientific disclosure of >he project resources nor does
it identify the source or significance of the resource.
llowhere is there any r.iention of the possibility of Hidden
or proceedures which were used to test for the possibility
of depth of site or extent of site. It is a well known
phenomena that many milling sites have hidden midden
which is discovered only through subsurface testing. A
case in point is the Kitchen Cr::-ek site where subsurface
components were found in a bib of r. on-midden appearing
soil on the northern extent cf the site. Rancho Park
llorth, Site A also appeared to contain only a thin veneer
of midden until testing indicated its subsurface depth
of over k feet. Will a subsurface testing program
consisting of at least a radial or rectilinear pesthole
series be provided at these r.iilling stations?
A coiaaon error of cultural history appears when discussing
the occurrence*of two San Dieguito flakes. There is
absolutely no mention in any published literature of an
isolated flake with patination be.ing San Diejuito, Claude
Warren of the University of I'evada at Las Vegas, h:i.s stated
at many sy.iposiuns that San Dieguito sitos are defined by
a complex of attributes not by patina on flakes. To state
that two flakes, oxidized by Ccasual woather patterns,
are San Dieguito and exist in a matrix with a "Luiseno"
nilling site opposes any an-hropclo ical logic which has
been developed to contend with our li-tlo known cultural
heritage. If the report contains such a statement it
should also contain contextual references on defining
San Dieguito flakes by isolated flakes, because what the
author is saying is that "these two flakes are between
6900 and cLOO years old while the site was used cniy
between 1000 and 100 years ago. Can the author supply
SAD Log !To. 77-7-3!}.(2)
llaldenborg
25 June 1977
such verified, published sources?
Were photographs taken of the sites, if so whore are
these photographs on file? Uere the two "San Dieg.ito"
flakes measured, weighted, p".:o to graphs d and skotched?
Was a Munsell color chart used on the patinated ourface
so degree of patinaticn could be utilized for ac.uitio.-al
studies?
Finally, I believe the author to be highly co:.:petent and
a diligent worker. But, I an uncertain if she neets
the qualifications outlined by the County's own standards.
One i5ust have a BA in Anthropology or a related field,
1 believe that Ils . High tower is working 0:1 her 3A but
has not yet achieved it. Until that tine I _'eel that
1-Ir. Fink should author the report or pr-j.-i^re the report •
of the work completed by I-Is. High tower. Reviewing c.
Did Hr. Fink visit the site? Did I-Ir. Fink actually
review the local literature? If he did, he neglected
a plethora of EZH literature in the area by local
environmental inpact authors such as hiraself, Berryr.^in,
Carrico, Zsell, HE C Oil (Bull), Ike, Ilaldenberj;-, and
even Hoop. All archaeological sites are too valuable to
be second guessed since they are a part of our national
heritage and are non-renewable resources. A first-class
and complete report of every archaeological or historic
resource is obligatory if we are to really understand
our valuable cultural heritage. I find that the archaeo-
logical report does not fulfill this need, but with sorie
revision and added thought process it certainly can do
so. I would h.pe that the County Department of Transport-
ation and the 3?.3 would insure that a cor.ipiete and competent
report xie couplet od before project corpletion.
u?hank you.
Russell L. I.aldenberg
Writing in. the interest of Cultural Resource Protection
and sound environmental
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFC NIA SYSTEMWIDE ADM. ISTRATION
BERKELEY • DAVIS • IRVINE • LOS ANGELES • RIVERSIDE • SAN DIECO • SAX FRANCISCO I "-V J^f^ >J.° SANTA BARBARA • SANTA CRUZ
Office of the Vice President — BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94720
Agriculture & University Services
Mr. John Rieger
Environmental .Analysis Division
Environmental Review Board of San Diego County
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, California 92123
Re: Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station '
Dear Mr. Rieger:
The purpose of this letter is to provide some background on the
University's Natural Land and Water Reserves System (Nu\RS), especially
the component known as the Dawscri Los Monos Canyon Reserve, and to
convey comments on the Draft Environmental Inpact Report.: Palcmar
Solid Waste Transfer Station, Project UJ7842 and the supplemental
infonration contained in the response to the En\7iromnental Analysis .
Division memo dated June 16,' 1977. This project is proposed for
a location less than one mile southwest of the University's Dawson
Los Monos Canyon Reserve.
Established by the Board of Regents in 1965, NLWRS has as its
objective to secure and protect for scientific and educational use
a system of reserves featuring samples of undisturbed ecosystems
broadly representing the diversity of California's natural environment..
Twenty-three such "outdoor classrooms and laboratories" located
around the state are managed by the various carouses of the University.
These sites are maintained as free as possible from disturbance by
human activity so that natural ecological processes are preserved
for study.
The Dawson Los Monos Canyon Reserve, administered with four other
reserves in the County by the San Diego canpus of the University,
was one of the original components of NLWRS. It continues to provide
an essential example of riparian chaparral and coastal sage scrub
habitat in the System. In addition it serves as a secure, remote
location for a passive receiving antenna used in astrophysics
research.
The San Diego campus planning office in consultation with appropriate
faculty members has submitted the attached memorandum commenting on
the Palomar project as it may affect the integrity of the Dawson
Los Monos Canyon Reserve. I 'urge that you accomodate the recommen-
dations contained in that memorandum, especially the request that
there be consultation between the County and the University during
the design and construction phases of the project. Please address
your response to these comments and recommendations to:
Associate Vice Chancellor Donald H. Sites
Facilities Management
202 Matthews Campus
University of California, San Diego
La Jolla, California 92093
It would be appreciated if this office were also to receive copies
of correspondence directed to Associate Vice Chancellor Sites.
Sincerely,
C ''' L *'""• ''->• 'J. Roger Samuelsen
Director, Natural Land and
Water Reserves System
Attachment
cc: Associate Vice Chancellor Donald H. Sites wo/attachment
Patricia Collum, Community Planner w/attachment
Associate Professor Paul Dayton "
Cathy Cook "
Sally Marks • "
Associate Professor Barnaby Rickett "
Associate Professor William Coles "
Eobert Dering "
SAN DIEGO: OFFICE O" "HE ASSOCIATE VICE CHANCELLOR-
FACIUT1. -lANAGEMENT
July 26, 1977
MR. J. ROGER SAHUELSEN
Director,
Natural Land and Water Reserves System
'SUBJECT: Dawson Reserve - Proposed Palomar Waste Station
Dear Roger: ;
As you know, we have been reviewing the Draft Enviroriental
Impact Report: Palomar Solid Wasts__Transfer Station and the
supplemental information concainec in tna response no the
Environmental Analysis Division nemo dated June 16, 1S77.
Based on these documents, we have two specific concerns with
the proposed solid waste transfer station:
(1) The level of noise from the waste compaction
machinery is of concern. We would require that
••the ambient noise level at the Reserve remain
at or below that required by the Noise Abate-.
. ment Control sections of the San Diego County
Code for the R-l Zone (50d3(A) from 7 A.M. to
7 P.M., 45dB(A) from 7 P.M. to 10 P.M., and
AOdB(A) from 10 P.M. to 7 A.M.*) We would
further recommend that if the station is con-
etructed, noise attenuation measures which will
confine any noise above 60dB(A) within the
Bounty's property boundaries be instituted.
Radio interference generated by the equipment
could halt the en-going research project which . •
is based on a passive receiving antenna on the
'Reserve. With respect to this concern, we must
* take exception to section 2A of the response to
the Environmental Analysis Division's memo of
June 16, 1977 to the Department of Transporta-
tion. This section states in part that the
* As reported in Department of Transportation, Community
Services Agency, Co, of San Dieeo, "Noise Study for Palomar
Airport Solid Waste Transfer Site," W.A. No. UJ7S24,
December 1976, page 6.
.* m
Mr. J. Roger Samuelsen
July 26, 1977
Page Two
Reserve '"...will not be impacted, directly or
. indirectly, by the project." In fact, the research
may be irreparably damaged by the project. The
antenna array, together with the effects of radio
interference and our recommendations on how to
minimize it, are described below.
1) Description of Project - The antenna is a
square array (70 meters x 70 meters) of yagis,
receiving at 73.3 MHz with a bandwidth of 1.0
MHz. This is one of three antenna arrays
used to study the solar wind by analyzing
the interplanetary scintillations in the
radio signals from cosmic radio sources.
The research with these antennas is funded
by the Atmospheric Sciences Division of the
National Science Foundation (Grant No. ATM-
75 13451). The principal investigators are
Professors Coles, Rickett and Rumsey of the
Applied Physics and Information Science
Department, University of California at San
Diego. The scientific results from these
arrays have revealed the structure of the
solar wind out of the ecliptic plane and the
nature and distribution of turbulence in the • - •
solar wind; these have been published in the
scientific literature. The system is unique
in the U.S.A. and depends vitally on each of
the three antennas operating in a radio-quiet% ' environment. . ,„.• . ..'•'• .•<*••'• .• •••••
ii) Effect of Development on the Antenna^Operation
The presence of man-made radio interference is
• • the major source of lost data from our 73.3 ,. . -
, MHz arrays. This takes the form of interference -:.'
' from a) electric-power poles (arcing); b) auto-
motive ignition; c) any defective electrical
device in which arcing occurs; d) C3 radios
off their proper frequency.
Ill) Recommendation to Minimize Radio Interference
Power lines should be laid uncergrcuna co elimi-
nate arcing of insulators. The interference is
particularly severe when a line of sicht exists
to the antenna. This would be particularly im-
portant if 21 kilovolt lines are used. We
Mr. J. Roger Samuelaen
July 26, 1977
Page Three
have had very serious problems from 73.8
MHz interference generated from the existing
21 kV lines in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed station. Although the SDGE company
has responded by replacing some faulty in-
• sulators and cleaning and tightening others,
such problems tend to recur after a few
years. In .addition, all electrical machinery
(such as drives for hammermill and separator)
should be shielded in metal enclosures.
«
Whether the transfer station will impact current Reserve
activities depends upon the nature of the equipment which
will be used and whether or not mitigation measures are taken.
Since the exact nature of the station's equipment is unknown
at this time, and because problems may arise in the future
which cannot be anticipated in the present, in addition to
the above recommendations we would request a written communi-
cation from an appropriate 'County agency to.the effect that
(1) the University will be consulted throughout the design
phase of the facility and (2) any unanticipated problems which
arise in the future will be settled "by mutual agreement. We
applaud the ecologically sound rationale behind the proposed
operation and merely wish to protect the Reserve from en-
croachment and preserve the integrity of associated research.
If.the recommendations outlined above are accepted, the
University will not oppose the project.
Sincerely,
Original ^igncd by
DONALD H. SITES
Donald H. Sites
Associate Vice Chancellor
Facilities Management
•r
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO
BERKELEY • DAVIS • IRVINE • Ll)!> A.VCCLES • HIVEIXSIDE • SAN DIECO • SAN FRANCISCO ' SANTA BARBARA • SANTA CHl'Z
OFFICE OF THE ASSOCIATE VICE CHANCELLOR-
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
LA JOLLA, CALIFORNIA 92093
August 4, 1977
County of San Diego
Environmental Review Board
Environmental Analysis Division
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, California 92123
Subject:
Gentlemen:
Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station,
Log 77-7-34
The purpose of this communication is to inform you that
University of California and County Department of Sanitation
and Flood Control officials have met to discuss potential
impacts of the above referenced project on astrophysics
research being conducted on University property near the
project location. During this meeting, the University
supplied information concerning the antenna operation's
toleranc-'s for radio interference. It is our understanding
that the Department of Sanitation and Flood Control will
attempt in good faith to implement reasonable recommendations
made by the University with respect to the design and
construction of the facility and to mitigate any unanticipated
interference discovered during its operation.
We, therefore, r-ecommend that items 3 and C under "Mitigating
Measures" for Major Issue r~G of the Environmental Impact
Report be deleted and a new item B be inserted as follows:
"In consideration of the need of the University of California
for a radio-quiet environment in the vicinity of the project,
the applicant will consult with the University during project
design, and will work with the University to mitigate any
radio interference resulting from the project." Item A should
remain as is.
Sincerely,
Donald H. Sites
Associate Vice Chancellor
Facilities Management
cc: E. Shepherd
COMSULT4MO.
WOODSIDE/KUBOTA & ASSOCIATES, INC.
u
L-J•MOIMBBK*
2965 Roosevelt St. « P. O. Box 1095 • Carlsbad. California 92008 • (714) 729-1194
July 29, 1977
San Diego County
Environmental Review Board
Environmental Analysis Division
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, Ca. 92123
Subject: Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station, Public Project,
Log #77-7-34 - Carlsbad Municipal Water District
Gentlemen:
thank you for the opportunity to respond to the draft E.I.R. for the
subject project which is a proposed facility immediately adjacent to
the administration and operations center of the Carlsbad Municipal
Water District. We have reveiwed the draft E.I.R. in detail and
offer the following comments for your consideration:
1. With respect to public water service to the proposed facility,
our District is working with the City of Carlsbad and the County
of San Diego for the design and construction of an arterial water
main that will provide adequate water service and fire protection
service for the proposed solid waste transfer station as well as
a proposed City of Carlsbad operations center. Upon the completion
of such facilities, this Dtstrict will provide complete public water
service.
2. The draft E.I.R. contains considerable information regarding the
impact of traffic upon the major highways that will service the
proposed facilities. We note a complete absence of an evaluation
of the structural capability of these highways to accomodate the
additional heavy truck traffic that will be generated by this new
facility. Specifically, the section of Palomar Airport Road easter-
ly of El Camino Real within the City limits of Carlsbad is currently
being systematically destroyed by the heavy traffic. As a daily
user of that important highway, I have noted the dramatic deteri-
oration.
In Orange County, Santa Ana
nnn
CONSUL TINO
• NOINKKHB
County of San Diego
July 29, 1977
Page 2
3. The draft E.I.R. is silent with respect to the highly visible
problem for the control of debris which becomes scattered along our
•highways as the various hauling vehicles move towards the disposal
point. Over the years Water District personnel have observed rampant
disregard for containment of trash resulting in litter along the
highways. We suggest you address this problem and identify alterna-
tive solutions.
4. As immediate neighbors to the transfer station, we would expect
that the opinions expressed in the draft E.I.R. relating to noise
control will be demonstrated in fact at such time operations commence
We trust that these comments will merit your attention and please contact
the undersigned if you have any questions. In addition, please advise
this office as to the time and place of the various proceedings relating
to this draft E.I.R. - ^_^^
/ Very truly yours/ . /
Y. /Kubota, District Engineer
Ca-'rlsbad Municipal Water District* ^-> ~
cc: Carlsbad Municipal Water District
Legal Counsel
Lovell Hulbert ~~
R. E. Shepherd
JYK/wv
CMWD
COL'NTY OF SAN DIEJD
':££-Q R J MA5SMAN
ENCLOSURE D
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION !ld9 2 55is Overland Av*San Diego. California 72123
owe.,.. COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY T...Pho«.s mo
County Engineer & Road Commissioner
County Surveyor
County Airports
July 28, 1977
TO: Environmental Review Board (0175)
FROM: Director of Transportation (0332)
SUBJECT: A Possible Occurrence of Arctostaphyllos glandulcsa
ssp. crassifolia an Endangered Subspecies, on the Site of '
the Proposed Palomar Transfer Station.
A possibility of the occurrence of Arctostaphyllos olandulosa ssp.
erassi folia (an endangered subspecies of Eastwoods Manzanita) on the
site of the proposed Palomar Transfer Station was brought to the attention
of the Environmental Services Group.
A subsequent investigation revealed one individual closely matching the
description of A._ glandulos.a ssp. c'rassifol ia and A.-5.- ssp. olandulosa
described in Munz, 1974, Abrams, 1960 and Jepson, 1925 within the project
boundaries (See Map 1). In addition, several other individuals were
found along the side of a dirt road south of the project site. A dense
stand covering about 500 square feet was found in a small canyon between ,
the dirt road and the site boundary.
A positive identification of these'plants as Arctostaphvllos gjandulosa
ssp. crassifolia was not made. According to the literature researched,
the branchletts of JL glandulosa ssp. crassifolia are not glandular,
whereas in this population, the branchletts ranged from slightly glandular
to very glandular. Observation of the fruit would help identify these
plants; however, there were no fruits on any of the plants. In addition,
A., gla.ndul.osa ssp. crassi folia is reported to have dark green leaves
. while glandulosa gland.ulosa. has dull green leaves. The leaf color of
the population encouniered on and near the project site is best described
as intermediate between the two.
This species is extremely variable (Abrams, 1960), and the genus
Arctostaphvllos is known to hybridize freely (Munz, 1974). Jepson
(Jepson, 1925) lists_A_. qlandulosa var. crnssifolia as an alternate
naming of Ai tomentosa_.yar. crassifolia. The evidence suggests that this
ERB 2 July 28, 1977
population may represent a hybridization of A., qlandulosa ssp. crassifolia
and_A_. qlandulojsa ssp. qlandulosa: however, much more work would be
required to clarify the taxonomic status of this population.
At present, there are no plans for any construction activity within
about 100 feet of the individual which is within the project boundaries.
Furthermore, since this individual is surrounded by large boulders
and borders a small canyon, no future construction at this location is
likely. The area south of the project site which contains most of the
population is designated permanent open space.
l^ajci^u
R. J. MASSMAN
Director of Transportation
RJM:KAL:lab
Attachment _ •
cc: Department of Sanitation and Flood Control
REFERENCES
Abrams, Leroy. An Illustrated Flora of the Pacific Coast. Stanford
University Press. 1960.
Jepson, WLA. A Manual of the Flowering Plants of California. University
, of California Press. 1925.
Munz, P.A., A Flora of Southern California. University of California
Press. 1974.
C
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
PALOMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION
Carlsbad, California
Project UJ7842
March 1, 1977
Contents
Page
I. Description of Project 1
A. Location 1
B. Objectives , 1
II. Environmental Setting 3
A. Topography ' 3
B. Land Use ' 3
C. Biology 4
D. Geology 5
E. Archaeology 6
F. Noise 7
G. Climate and Air Quality 7
H. Traffic/Circulation 9
I. Energy 9
/• III. Environmental Impacts 9
A. Biology ' ' 9
B. Geology 10
G. Archaeology 11
D. Noise 11
E. Air Quality 12
F. Traffic 13
G. Energy 15
•*
H. Economics • 16
IV. Summary of Beneficial and Adverse Environmental Impacts 16
V. Mitigation Measures 18
VI. Alternatives to the Proposed Project 18
VII. Short-term vs. Long-term Impacts . 19
(^ VIII. Irreversible Environmental Impacts 20
IX. Growth Inducing Impacts of the Project 20
X. Agencies, Organizations and Individuals Consulted 20
Table of Appendices
Appendix 1 - Biology
Appendix 2 - Geology
Appendix 3 - Archaeology
Appendix 4 - Noise
Appendix 5 - Air Quality
Appendix 6 - Energy i
In the interest of conserving energy and paper, we have not included copies
of the technical reports with the draft EIR. Each appendix has been summarized
in the body of the report. If you wish to review one or more appendices,
they are available at the following locations:
1) Environmental Analysis Division V
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, GA 92123
2) Department of Sanitation and Flood Control
5555 Overland Avenue, Bldg. 2
San Diego, CA 92123
3) The County Branch Library nearest the project site.
I. Description of Project
A. Location
The Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station will be located about 1600 feet
northeast of the intersection of El Caraino Real and Palomar Airport Road
in north coastal Sari Diego County. The project site is entirely within the
city limits of Carlsbad. Vista is 4.3 miles to the northeast, and San
Marcos is 5.3 miles east. Palomar Airport, a county-operated facility,
is to the west across El Camino Real. (Map 1 - Vicinity Map)
B. Objectives
This project is the construction and operation of a resource recovery
refuse transfer facility on county-owned land. This operation will produce
shredded solid waste materials which can be more easily disposed at
sanitary landfill sites without using excessive amounts of cover material.
Recovery of recyclable material will also be done at the project site.
Because of the current shortage of available landfill sites, and the
large volume of solid wastes generated annually in the county, an alter-
native to the potential shortage of landfill space is needed. This transfer
station and associated landfill will serve as a replacement for the closed
county landfills previously operated at Palomar Airport and Encinitas.
The transfer station will initially be capable of receiving and processing
166,000 tons of solid waste per year and will.increase to 220,000 tons per
year by 1982. The facility will shred wastes, separate ferrous metals
for resale, and compact the remaining material into large tractor trailers
for efficient transportation to appropriate disposal sites.
Perhaps the most important purpose of shredding is the savings in
space and earth cover material. Shredded solid wastes compacts with less V
effort and has a greater density than unshredded solid wastes. Less
material is required for periodic covering.
Currently there are approximately 50 shredder operations in the U.S.
and Canada. At this time shredding is most commonly employed to prepare
refuse for landfilling; however, it is probable that resource recovery
will provide the major impetus for future increases in the number of
shredder operations. Shredding facilitates resource recovery by reducing
refuse to small 4* nominal size particles which can be processed by
resource recovery equipment such as magnetic separators, air classifiers.
and electronic sorting equipment. Most resource recovery systems require
shredding as one of the first steps in the overall process.
The facility will consist of approximately three buildings (1. 6000 *•
square feet and 36 feet high, 2. 2000 square feet and 24 feet high,
3. 3000 square feet and 24 feet high), conveyor belts, shredder machines,
magnetic separators, trailer loaders, pavement, security fencing, utilities,
parking and appurtenant items for complete operation. All processing
operations will be done in enclosed buildings to reduce noise and odor
impacts. Approximately 11,000 square feet of space may be required.
Some buildings may be as high as 36 feet. The project site is within
•»
reach of sewer, electricity, and water services.
A similar, although more extensive, resource recovery plant is
currently operating in the El Cajon area. This facility has full resource
recovery capability, while the Palomar project will only shred the solid
waste and separate ferrous metals.
L
r
o•H
•P
co
M
re
79
(3
co
•rl-Pao
o<u•nO 2 •/
o Z
si-i
(3 O
3= 2
Not included in this project, but planned for the future, are devices
to recover additional resources from processed trash. Sufficient ground •
and building space will be reserved to add additional equipment, which
might include the following items: 1) an air classifier which will
separate paper and other organics from heavier items, 2) extracting
equipment to separate out zinc, brass, copper and aluminum, 3) glass
extraction, if it becomes economically feasible, 4) automobile and truck
tire recovery, and 5) energy conversion process.
II. Environmental Setting of the Proposed Project
.t
A. Topography
The Palomar Transfer Station will be situated on 21 acres of County-owned
land in the southwesterly portion of the City-of Carlsbad. The general
vicinity consists of gently rolling hills' with an occasional canyon or
creek bed among them. The elevations adjacent to the site range from v
200 to 400 feet above mean sea level. The Pacific Ocean is 4.25 miles
to the west. The site includes a creek, which is tributary to Agua
Hedionda Creek, directly east of the project location.
Elevations on the site range from 290 to 370 feet above mean sea
level. Natural drainage crosses the property in a north to south pattern,
until it is diverted southeast by a natural channel and eventually empties . -
into Agua Hedionda Creek.,
B. Land Use
There are several land uses in the general vicinity of the proposed
Palomar Transfer Station. The land to the west contains the Palomar
Airport, while to the south is land owned by the County of San Diego in
conjunction with the F.A.A.'s clear zone requirements. To the southwest
of the site are 2 small buildings owned by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District.
3
To the north are two light manufacturing businesses similar to the
ones occupying the industrial park south of Palomar Airport Road. Most
of the land in this direction has been disturbed by agriculture in the
past, but is now vacant.
The predominant land use in this area of the county is agriculture,
although urbanization is reducing this land use.
The Palomar Transfer Station is not in conformance with the City of
Carlsbad's General Plan. Current zoning for the subject property is 0-S
(open space). The City of Carlsbad is considering an amendment to its
General Plan to designate the area for government use.
The nearest residence is more than 0.3 mile north of the project
site, while the closest private industry is 0.4 mile to the northwest.
C. Biology
The majority of the proj-ect site is located in an area previously
used for farming activities. It presently supports introduced and native
grasses and forbs. Indicative species of this disturbed environment are
mustard, tumbleweed, filaree, and various grasses such as wild oat.
An inland sage scrub community (Thorne 1976) covers approximately
one-half of the shredder site. This is the western fringe of a larger
inland sage/mixed chaparral complex located east and north of the project.
(Refer to Vegetation Map,* included in the Biology Appendix) Species
such as scrub oak, manzanita, lemonadeberry, and prickley-pear cactus
were noted here.
Animals observed on the site and in the vicinity are indicative of
the disturbed conditions of this environment.
Avian raptor species noted included one white-tailed kite, one
red-tailed hawk and one turkey vulture. This seems to indicate a sub- (
stantial small mammal population such as various species of rodents and
rabbits. This is further indicated by the large amount of fecal material
containing mammal fur observed in this area. The scat was identified
to be from the coyote. Other large carnivorous mammals expected are
the bobcat and gray fox.
No reptiles were observed as the biology field survey was conducted
:
during the winter. Most reptilian species become inactive during this
time of year. A pacific tree frog was heard in the inland sage community.
A small drainage swale, containing no water, runs through this area.
(Refer to Vegetation Map included in the Biology Appendix)
No rare or endangered species were observed. The California Native
Plant Society maps were checked for the presence of any rare or endangered ,
plant species. These maps did not show any recorded rare or endangered
plants growing in or around the project site.
If further information on this subject is required, the Biology
Appendix is available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division,
the Department of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch
library nearest the project site.
D. Geology . * . -
There are three geologic formations of sedimentary origin that are
exposed in the project area. From youngest to oldest, these are the
Del Mar formation, the Point Loma formation, and the Lusardi formation.
The Del Mar Formation is the youngest formation in the project
area and consists locally of fine to medium grained sandstones and mudstones
with thin interbedded layers of shale. The age of the Del Mar Formation
•
is well established as Eocene on the basis of its stratigraphic relationship
and its fossil content.
The Point Loma Formation, the middle member of the Cretaceous Rosario
Group, consists of dark gray to green shales with interbedded layers of
fine grained, gray to yellow, highly cemented sandstones. The Upper
Cretaceous age of the Point Loma Formation is based on abundant collections
of mollusks, foraminifera and coccoliths.
The Lusardi Formation, the lower member of the Rosario Group, is
a massive boulder and cobble conglomerate with lenses of medium grained
/-*sandstone. In the project area the Lusardi Formation is composed almost
entirely of weathered quartz diorite boulders and granitic debris. The
Lusardi is generally thought to be overlain with apparent conformity by,
and interfingered with, the Point Loma Formation. No fossils have been
collected from the Lusardi Formation but its apparent stratigraphic
position indicates an age of early Late Cretaceous.
No landslides were found on the project site, but a landslide is
present on the southeastern wall of the large canyon east of the site.
The portion of the project site underlain by the Del Mar formation,
should not be susceptible to sliding.
If you require further information on this subject, the appendix
r*is available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the
Department of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch
library nearest the project site. (See Table of Appendices)
E. Archaeology
An archaeological survey of the Palomar Transfer Station site was
done by Janet Hightower, archaeologist with the Department of Transportation.
6
Two small archaeological sites of minor significance were discovered
and recorded. " ^
Site CE#123 consists of two small milling areas and a non-associated
tool. Two grinding slicks and a San Dieguito tool were the only cultural
remains present. Site CE&124 consists of one grinding slick with no
artifacts or midden observed. -: "
If you require further information.on this subject, the Appendix
is available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, thei
Department of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library
nearest the project site. (See Table of Appendices)
F. Noise
The present noise level at the site is very low, with L^Q levels of
31 dB(A) during the night and 45 dB(A) during the day. On-site noise is
generated from traffic oh El Camino Real and aircraft noise from Palomar \
Airport".
If you require further information on this subject, the Appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)
G. Climate and Air Quality
*
Temperatures are moderate in the project area. The mean daily
maximum in July and August is 82°F but higher readings of over 100°F
have been recorded during September and October. Minimum readings during
the summer average near 60°F. During the winter months the minimum averages
42QF while afternoon readings will range in the upper 60°F's.
Precipitation is light in tte Palomar Airport area. The mean of
v fourteen years of available records shows 16.28 inches per year. Normally,
there are about 28 days per year with 0.10 inch or more of precipitation.
Typically, this area receives about 233 clear days per year, 62
days of partly cloudy weather, and 70 cloudy days. The wind is usually
out of the west or southwest, although winds from other directions may
occur under various climatic conditions.
Relative humidity during the winter months ranges from about 55 to
75 percent, while summer readings' might average about 5 percent higher,
The nearest Air Pollution Control District monitoring station is
in Oceanside, 8 miles to the northwest. There is a monitoring station
in Escondido, but due to its inland location, Oceanside.would more closely
approximate the air quality conditions of the Palomar transfer site.
Air quality conditions measured in total oxidants parts per million
(PPM) at the Oceanside station during 1975 were:
Average of Daily Number of Hours
Maximum Hourly Exceeding Federal
Period • Averages (PPM) Standards (O.Q8PPM)
January .04 7
February .04 0
March No Data 2
April -.05 2
May .06 16
June .06 13
July .06 4 '
August .05 ' 5
September .08 37
October .07 38
November .07 29
December .05 9
If you require further information on this subject, the Appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest
the project site. (See Table of Appendices)
8
H. Traffic/Circulation
Access to the proposed Palomar Transfer Station will be provided (
from El Camino Real, a major highway, and Palomar Airport Road.
El Camino Real extends from the City of Oceanside to within a mile
of San Elijo Lagoon. Near the site, it contains 48 feet of driving
lanes, 14 feet of two-way left turn lanes and 16 feet of paved shoulders.
Current Average Daily Traffic (ADT) is 7,000. The existing peak traffic
capacity is 30,000 ADT.
i.
Palomar Airport Road connects Interstate 5 to the western fringe
of San Marcos. It has- 64 feet of paved roadbed width west of El Camino
t
Real. East of El Camino Real the average width of Palomar Airport Road is
36-40 feet. Existing traffic is 4,000 vehicles per day, but the road can
accommodate up to 18,000 ADT.
Since 1974 there have been three accidents, all non-fatal at the
intersection of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real. -
I. Energy
The existing site is in an undeveloped state, and thus consumes
or conserves no energy.
III. Environmental Impacts
A. Biology
Most of the project "area has been disrupted by previous agricultural
activities. As a consequence, most of the construction (4-5 acres) and
road grading will primarily result in loss of grasses and forbs. The
majority of these plants are short-lived and would eventually be replaced
by species of the climax community (such as laurel sumac, sage brush,
etc...); therefore, their loss is minimal. /
9
The construction of the solid waste transfer station will also
remove approximately 4-5 acres of inland sage/mixed chaparral vegetation.
This is a relatively small portion of a much larger stand of inland
sage/mixed chaparral vegetation. This stand extends approximately
one-half mile north, 1,000 feet east, and 1,500 feet southeast of the
project site.
Approximately 10 acres of wildlife habitat will be lost due to
construction activities. This loss will be relatively unimportant and
have minimal impacts as the area is very disturbed.
Animals such as small rodents and reptiles, incapable "of escaping
construction activities could be destroyed. Others may migrate to
surrounding areas and compete with resident wildlife for food and shelter.
Noise from construction and shredding operations could affect some
shy wildlife species in the vicinity. California seagulls, scavengers
of refuse, should not be attracted to this site as the refuse will be
processed daily in enclosed buildings, compacted into trailers, and then
transferred to a sanitary landfill for proper disposal.
If further information is required on this subject, the Appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest
the project site.
«
B. Geology
This project will not seriously affect the understanding of the
geologic exposures found in the area. The project will be located on the higher
10
elevations, away from the floor and lower walls of the adjacent canyon.
•If you require further information on this subject, the appendix is '..
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)
C. Archaeology
Both sites discovered are of minor scientific importance. The recordation
of them is sufficient to mitigate impact which will occur as a result of this
project. Both sites have been submitted to the San Diego Museum of Man for
recordation.
If you require further information on this subject, the appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices) (
D. Noise
The major source of noise, when the Palomar Solid Waste Transfer
Station becomes operational, will be the shredding operation and
vehicular traffic. The noise generated by the shredder
will be in the range of 95-100 dB(A) at distance of 50 feet. Depending on the
.type of construction used for building and housing the shredder, the 100 dB(A)
noise level would be reduced to 55 dB(A) at a distance of 500 feet. This
distance is based on the assumption that the shredder would act as a point
source of noise and the noise dropoff rate would be 6 dB(A) per doubling
of distance.
The Federal Highway Administration has established environmentally
acceptable Leq levels adjacent to highways in terms of adjacent property i
use or development. The maximum Leq level for residential areas is 67 dB(A)
11
and for parks, cemeteries and similar facilities, 57 dB(A). No levels have
been established for undeveloped lands. The estimated on-site sound levels
can be evaluated relative to these criteria.
California Vehicle Code Section 23130 specifies noise limits for certain
sized vehicles, operating speeds and distances from the roadway. For a gross
vehicle weight of 6,000 pounds or more at 50 feet from the center of the lane
of travel, the noise limit is 86 dB(A) if the speed is less than 35 miles
per hour (mph) and 90 dB(A) if the speed is greater than 35 mph. Large
vehicles are restricted to 80 dB(A) after 1977; 70 dB(A) after 1987.
When the Transfer Station becomes operational, it is anticipated that
the initial daily traffic volume increase on El Camino Real and Palomar
Airport Road to the site will be 200 passenger cars and pickup trucks, 135
collector trucks and 35 haul trucks. The present Leq generated' by traffic
on El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road near the site are 61 dB(A) and
70 dB(A) respectively. It is anticipated the increase in traffic will produce
an increase in the Leq of both roads less than 4 dB(A).at 50 feet from the
near lane of traffic.
The noise impact on the property adjacent to the Palomar Solid Waste
Transfer Station, along El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road due to the
operation of the Transfer Station and increase in traffic will not be significant.
If you require further information on this subject, the appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)
E. Air Quality
Air quality will be impacted both locally and regionally by this project.
Locally, the vehicle exhaust emissions now associated with the travel to the
12
Encinitas Landfill will be redirected to the Palomar site. A 1982 projected
maximum of approximately 35 tons per year of pollutants from vehicles bringing s~
trash to be processed will be dispersed along the final two miles of the transfer
station access roads. It must be remembered that 90% of these emission volumes
(not the transfer vehicles moving shredded materials) are already existing
at the Encinitas Landfill, and will simply be transferred to the Palomar
site when it begins operation. The reduced trip distance for private vehicles
and trash haulers more than compensates for the extra miles per trip by the
transfer vehicles. i .
Another beneficial local impact will involve the dispersal of shredded
trash at a landfill. Approximately 4.4 tons/year of vehicle emissions will
be conserved locally at the Bonsall landfill (currently the only existing landfill
in the vicinity) due to the reduced heavy equipment required for shredded
. . trash. If unprocessed trash were brought directly to the landfill, another
bulldozer and scraper would be required for a total of six hours every workday. (
On a regional level a beneficial impact will result when this project
is implemented. If this facility were not opened, the additional miles
private citizens and trash haulers would have to travel to get to the Bonsall
landfill would be the cause of the increase of pollutants to the regional
air cell.
If you require further information on this subject, the appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis.Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)'
F. Traffic
Traffic on El Camino Real in the vicinity of the transfer station entrance
is expected to increase by an average of 375 vehicles per day by 1932. This <
13
additional traffic would be comprised of 135 trash packers, 3 trucks hauling
ferrous metals for recycling, 200 private automobiles and pickups and 35 prime
movers (trucks hauling the shredded trash to the nearest available landfill).
Three hundred seventy-five vehicles added to the existing traffic on either
road, El Camino Real or Palomar Airport Road, equivalent to 750 ADT, will result
in traffic volumes well within the capacity of these roads (see traffic table).
The transfer station will be open 6 days a week, Monday through Saturday.
It will result in no significant traffic impacts.
The current adopted County General Plan Circulation Element (Sheet 4)
shows both Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real as prime arterials with
capacities of 40,000 each. 'The County's Integrated Planning Office has
projected ADT's for 1995 of less than 30,000 on both roads in the vicinity
of the project.
Traffic .Table
Road
Name
Existing
ADT
' Current
Capacity
(ADT)
1995
Projected
ADT
(IPO)
*1995
Circulation
Element
Capacity
(ADT )'
Palomar Airport
(West of El
Caraino Real)
Palomar Airport
(East of El
Camino Real)
El Camino Real
(North of Palomar
Airport Road)
El Camino Real
(South of Palomar
Airport Road)
4,020
5,480
5,920
6,350
18,000
18,000
30,000
30,000
8,000
27,000.
19,000
30,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
40,000
* Road improvements would be constructed to provide this capacity only as necessary
to accommodate population growth.
14
G. < Energy
*
The Palomar Transfer Station will net a surplus of energy on a comparison .>•
of consumption and conservation. The following is a summary of the energy
"balance sheet."
Section 1 - Energy Consumed Section 2 - Energy Conserved
On-Site Reduced
Equipment 153,060,000 BTU/day Public 65,015,126 BTU/day
Usage Driving
Distance
Transpor- Recovered
tation of 36,733,270 BTU/day Metal 535,000,000 BTU/day
Shredded
Trash Reduced
Equipment
TOTAL 189,793,270 BTU/day Usage at 6,076,130 BTU/day
Landfill
(After trash
shredding)
TOTAL 656,091,306 BTU/day
As can be seen by subtracting the "consumed" value from the "conserved"
value, a surplus of 466,298,036 BTU/day in the form of energy conserved, is
realized. Assuming the shredder is operated 312 days per year, this results
in a savings of 145,390,000,000 BTUrs per year. This figure is equivalent to
the energy potential of over 1 million gallons of petroleum fuels each year.
The facility will be designed to allow the future addition of more
recovery equipment including a device to separate and recover aluminum. Total
energy requirement for production per ton of shipped aluminum is approximately
200,000,00'Q BTU. Recycled aluminum consumes only 25,000,000 BTU per ton, a
net saving of 175,000,000 BTU per ton. One-half percent (\%} of the total
incoming trash weight at the Palomar site is expected to be reclaimable
aluminum. When the 220,000 ton/year maximum of solid waste material is reached
at the Palomar Transfer Station, it is expected that about 1100 tons per year i
of recyclable aluminum will be salvaged per year.
15
If you require further information on this subject, the appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division,- the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)
H. Economics
Initial construction cost for the transfer station will be $3.5 million.
Fixed equipment such as the shredder, conveyers and magnetic separators will
cost approximately $673,000 a year to: operate. The mobile equipment (trucks
and trailers) needed to transport the shredded material to the Bonsall Landfill
will cost approximately $3CO,000 a year.
Seven-percent of the -bulk incoming volume of trash will be recoverable
ferrous metals. At a 90% recovery rate, 10,080 tons per year of saleable
scrap iron and other ferrous metals can be recovered and recycled. At an
average price of $25 a ton, this will generate revenues of about 3252,000
a year. This revenue will help 'offset the operational costs mentioned above.
A shredder transfer operation is currently about 25% more expensive than
a regular landfill. Due to increased resistance by citizens to landfills.
trash disposal will necessarily become more expensive. Shredder operations
and ultimately full resource recovery will be a large portion of the solution
-to this pressing problem.
IV. Summary of Beneficial and Adverse Environmental Impacts
Beneficial
Due to the ferrous metals recovered and the transfer station's centralized
location,over 145 billion BTUs are expected to be conserved annually. That
represents energy equivalent to over 1 million gallons of petrolo^n fuels
each year.
16
Although the additional traffic generated by the Palomar Transfer
Station will add a maximum of 35 tons of pollutants annually along the ('
final two miles of access roads, the overall air quality impact will be
beneficial. If the facility were not opened, an additional 99.8 tons/year
of pollutants would be dispersed by vehicles driving the additional miles
necessary to reach the Bonsall site. Four and four-tenths (4.4) tons of
emissions per year will also be conserved at the Bonsall landfill due to
the reduced need of labor to cover shredded trash.
Adverse
Ten (10) acres of land previously disturbed by agriculture will be
graded and built upon. This construction will result in the loss of
existing grasses and habitat for animals in the area.
The two minor archaeology sites found within the project boundaries
will be covered by construction activity. The San Diego County Department
of Transportation archaeologist has indicated, however, that the recording
of these sites with the San Diego Museum of Man and surface collection
of artifacts, is sufficient to mitigate them. This has been done by-
Department of Transportation archaeologists.
Increased noise levels will result from both the on-site shredding
operation and the increased vehicular activity of El Camino Real and
Palomar Airport Road. Existing attenuation techniques can reduce processing
* •noises to an acceptable level. The noise increase associated with the 1982
maximum traffic generated by this project is 4 dB(A), Leq.
Traffic will increase on both El Camino Real and Palomar Airport
Road. An average of 373 vehicles per day generated by this project,
expected to be reached by 1982, will be an increase well within the capacity
of both roads. I
17
The transfer operation will cost about three-quarters of a million
dollars per year. This is roughly 25 percent higher than the operating
costs of a landfill. As technology increases, and resource recovery
becomes more efficient, the cost per ton for an operation such as the
one proposed will become financially comparable to landfills.
.V. Mitigation Measures
1. Dust control will be maintained on site.
2. Design of the facility and the access road will include all
appropriate safety criteria.
3. Any cultural remains discovered during construction will be
reported to a qualified archaeologist for evaluation and consideration.
4. Noise from the plant operation will be attenuated to acceptable
levels, at the property line, according to the County's noise ordinance.
5. The site will be landscaped to blend in with surrounding native
vegetation. All buildings will be painted earthtone (light brown) to
minimize the visual impact from the main roads.
6. Blowing of waste and waste fragments will be prevented by the
use of enclosed structures.
VI. Alternatives to the Project
A. No Project
If this project is not implemented, an opportunity to reclaim or
recover usable materials and conserve landfill volume will be lost.
The Encinitas Landfill closed in April 1977. Public and private
*
collectors from Carlsbad, Vista, San Marcos, Escondido and surrounding
.rural areas in the vicinity are now served only by the Bonsall Landfill.
Waste from the southern portion of the San Dieguito area is transported to
the City's Miramar Landfill. The lack of a centralized disposal site
to replace Encinitas would be costly in terms of driving distances,
18
energy consumption, trash hauling costs and the remaining life of existing
landfills. . ' . (^
B. Alternative Sites
Several sites were evaluated using the following criteria: (See Map 2)
1) Land Use - A prime site would already belong to the County and
have been disturbed by some previous activity. For a project such as
this, isolation from private residences and compatability with surrounding
land uses would be preferred.
2) Location - A centralized location was necessary to minimize
driving distances. A site must have access roads with sufficient
capacity and structural capability to accomodate anticipated traffic
increases.
3) Utilities - The site should also have full sewer, electricity,
and water services with a reasonable distance.
None of the alternative sites evaluated could meet as many of the
required criteria as the Palomar site. The only other possible location
for the shredder which meets the above criteria is the San Marcos Landfill.
This proposed landfill, located seven miles to the southeast of the current f
site, is in various stages of governmental approval. As part of the Environ-
mental Impact Report which was written for this project, the possibility
of locating the shredder there was discussed. Thus, if the Palomar
location for the shredder is not approved, the shredder will be located
at the San Marcos Landfill site.
VII. Short-term vs. Long-term Impacts
Short-term impacts vJill include construction impacts associated
with the project. Dust, if not properly controlled, and noise and traffic
from construction equipment will last during the construction phase of
the operation.
19
ALTERNATE SITES
c Alternate Sites Considered for Resource
Recovery Plant. These 'sites all had
EIRs and were submitted to the appro-
priate cities:
1 Escondido-traffic problems
2 San Marcos-traffic problems
3 San Marcos-traffic problems
4 Encinitas-large development,
citizen pressure against site
5 Lake Hodges-traffic problems
6 Imperial Beach-trailer court
nearbyj is not secluded
7 Site of El Cajon Resource
Recovery Plant
Site for Transfer Station
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMEN
COASTAL ZONE
B Sanitary Fii!
9 Resource Recovery Plant
£Xv!-i Resource Recovery
»--'^^ Service Area
Colors Fill Service Area
MAP 2
Long-term impacts will be the permanent land re-configuration which
will include grading, paving and construction on the site for buildings (
and access roads. Increased traffic and noise are potential img-term
impacts associated with the operation of the transfer site.
VIII. Irreversible Environmental Impacts
The project, if implemented, will take about 10 acres of vacant land
and commit it to use for a County transfer station. All plants on the
site and all animals that cannot escape before grading will be lost.
The site will be landscaped upon completion of construction and birds and
rodents characteristic' of disturbed areas might move back onto the site.
IX. Growth Inducing Impacts
This project is a replacement for tvo landfills. Design capacity
of 800 tons/day will provide for projected solid waste tonnages.through
1982. The utilities sewer, water, telephone, electricity are already ^
available and will not require any new services brought into the area.
While the existence of a solid waste transfer station should not induce
businesses or residents to move into the area, certain businesses that
produce large quantities of solid wastes may find the availability of
the transfer station desirable in their location deliberations.
For these reasons, the project should not be considering growth
inducing. * •
X. Agencies, Organizations and Individuals Consulted
Agencies
Comprehensive Planning Organization
Community Services Agency Advisory Board
Cities of Carlsbad, San Marcos, Vista, Oceanside, Escondido .
Regional Water Quality Control Board
County of San Diego ^
Air Pollution Control District
Department of Transportation
Land Use and Environmental Regulation
20
Organizations
San Diego County Disposal Association
(Commanity Groups - Carlsbad)
Individuals
Clarence Kaufman ' Solid Waste Management Task Force
Jim Barrett Solid Waste Management Task Force
Dave Anderson Solid Waste Management Task Force
21
\ • j'<. /
TV u -fij ' ^I'. <( >. J-^
^- _$ -^^a^- \? \:£F$=*'- :
'///-/; ----
Evaris Point . • - ]
1 • .- Or% \--"': tC'-'i I
PROJECT LOCATION
MAP 3 : Project location.
No Scale. USGS San Luis Key.
7.5 Minute Qund.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO-
INTER-DEP,ArJT,-''-£NTAL. CORRESPOND£NCG
0, 1977
TO:Department of Transportation 0340
FFOM: Environmental Analysis Division O17.r>
SUBJECT: Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact Report for Palo:r;ar Solid
Waste Transfer Station; EAD Log No. 77-7-34
The Envi.ronir.ental Analysis Division has completed its review; of the pre-
liminary draft-EIR for the above proposed project. Please provide th-a
following information so that we can 'complete processing of this project.
1. Provide an archaeological survey report written by the
archaeologist and include the following information omitted in the
original survey report :
A. Evaluate the significance/contribution value of the sites. Indicate
the approximate size of -these sites, potential for subsurface
remains and the resources' place in a cultural historical scheme.
B. Provide a discussion of project impact upon these sites. Discuss
the possibility of a project redesign to avoid impact.'
C. Indicate v/hether testing would reveal unknown buried remains. Discuss
any definite proof that nothing remains under the surface.
D. Include in mitigation measure #3 the following requirements for
feature measurements, surface collection, analysis interpretation^
theoretical contribution, testing and report for EAD acceptance.'
*
E. Provide a j>lot plan with the proposed improvements with all sites
superimposed.
2. Expand the Biological Appendices to include a discussion of:
A. Direct or indirect impacts on the Dawson-I.os Mono:; Ecologic-.al
Reserve of the U. C. system which borders the property to the
north.
B. Present biological conditions of adjacent areas.
C. Present utilization of the area and adjacent arena by raptors.
(
/
-2-
DeparCment of Transportation June 16, .1977
3. I'-afinc: solid waste which this project will recycle for the public.
4i Include the onsitc and surrounding existing zoning and General Plan
designations (both San Diego County and Carlsbad).
5. Discuss within th-? noise impact section the noise impacts if tha
area is developed to allowable densities.
6. Discuss potential odor impacts within the Air Quality section.
7. Discuss the alternate site at the proposed San. Marcos landfill. This
discussion should include an analysis of the economics (i.e. transpor-
tation) mileage, air quality and need for additional services at the
San Marcos site in contrast to the Palorr_ar site.
8. Indicate what pollutants if any, will be generated by the direct
operation of the plant itself. Indicate the anticipated number of
days in which the Federal Standards of Air Quality will be exceeded
at the Paloinar site if the project is approved.
9. Indicate the distance of the shredding operation. fro:.i the county property
line.
10. Provide a more thorough discussion of the erosion characteristics of
the soils on site. Indicate what measure^ are planned to prevent a
potential landslide extending from the southeastern wall of large canyon
east of the site.
This information may be provided as additional information. Provide a total
of 40 copies of the additional information and 10 copies of all techriical
reports (biology, archaeology, geology, etc.
Also, in case you have not already done so, clearly indicate in the additional
information discretionary permits that have been or will be requested for
this project, and which of these (or all) you desire to be covered by this
draft-EIR.
<•>
If you have any questions, please call 565-5763.
Respectfully,
BRADFORD K-/ WILLIAMS
Environmcmtal Impact Report Coordinator
Environmental Analysis Division
BKW:JRG:acn
11
The numbers and letters refer to the memo sent to us on June 16, 1977.
1. Department of Transportation archaeologist, Gary R. Fink, is a qualified
archaeologist as defined by the San Diego County Guidelines for Archaeology
(1974). Mr. Fink reviewed and signed the archaeology report before sub-
mission. Mr. Fink assumes all responsibility for the quality of the
survey done by Janet Hightower. Therefore, the survey report written by
her will remain as submitted.
A) Please refer to the Archaeology Appendix, page 8, Section VII. The
size of the sites are limited to the outline of the milling features and
the surface area which one artifact covers. No midden or cultural deposit
was present, hence no subsurface potential exists. Please refer to page 8,
Section VII, for cultural placement of the sites.
B) Site CE #123 (V-1202) will be destroyed as a result of project imple-
mentation. The single artifact associated with this site has been collected
and will be donated to the County Parks and Recreation Department for use
in their interpretive program. Loss- of the milling features is considering
a minor loss of. scientific information as outlined in the report. Project
redesign is totally unnecessary.
C) Please refer to Archaeology Appendix and answer A above for proof that
no subsurface remains exist.
D) The surface artifact was collected and catalogued (See answer B above).
*
The measurements of the milling features are as follows:
Site CE #123 (W-1202) • Site CE g!24 (W-1203)
Slick 1 5 x 3^ x V Slick 1 4^4 x 3 x VT
Slick 2 5 3/4 x 4 x \n
E) No plot plan is presently available upon which to superimpose the sites
discovered.
'2. A) The Dawson-Los Monos Ecological Reserve, consisting of '93 acres
(37.7 hectares), is located approximately 3/4 mile northeast of the proposed
project in Los Monos Canyon. This reserve is a part of the University of
California's Natural Land and Water Reserve System. It will not be impacted,
directly or indirectly, by the project.
B) The area from the project site west to El Camino Real has been disturbed
by past agricultural activities. North, east, and slightly south of the
project site is an inland sage/mixed chaparral community. (Refer to
attached vegetation map). The former plant type is on the western fringe
of the mixed chaparral and blends in with it. A steep sided canyon is
located approximately 500 feet east of the project site. An intermittent '
stream and a dirt road cuts through this canyon bottom. No water was
observed in the stream at the time of the survey, November 30, 1976.
The areas along the sides of the canyon were densely vegetated and virtually
undisturbed. However, the canyon crests have been moderately disturbed
by trails, and scattered refuse disposal. The canyon bottom has been very
disturbed by the dirt road and off-road vehicles which use this area.
Run-off from this canyon and adjacent areas drains northerly into Agua
Hedionda Creek located about 2,000 feet north of the project site. The
construction of the transfer site and associated roads may slightly increase
• surface run-off into the previously mentioned canyon which borders the
project on the east.
A complete discussion of characteristic plants observed in the vicinity of
the project can be found in the Biology Appendix.
The majority of the land immediately surrounding the project site on all
sides, except to the south, is vacant land. Two light manufacturing
businesses are located 800 feet northwest of the project site. The nearest
r Map 1: Project boundaries and location^
Vegetation was classified
according to R.F. Thorne, 1976,
The Vascular Plant Communities
of California, CNPS pub.
y/r; ^ ^ ^^(^••••"tgZ^V', ~-j UiT^fc^c^^y_-,> ,-:rcri <'^ ~ ('• - A~ /-?-:.(-,^-4.<7§ V, ^ Ui]^. - / - , - r>/t?---—>———r-1
r^'Evafis' PorfitiT/crSSr^.J'-jy^;--^:
KEY
=. Disturbed
Area Mixed chaparral/Inland
Sage Scrub
San Luis Rey Quadrangle
USGS Topographical Map
7.5 Minute Series
No Scale
residence is 1,900 feet west. The Carlsbad Municipal Water District is
adjacent and south of the site. Agricultural fields are about 2,000 feet
to the east.
C) Four species of raptors were observed flying in the.project area and
nearby vicinity. They were the turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), white-tailed
kite (Elanus leucur'us), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and American
kestrel (Falco sparverius). During the biological survey ori November 30,
1976 (9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.) these species were presumed to be utilizing
the disturbed, open areas. These raptors cannot easily, penetrate the
densely vegetated chaparral areas. The red-tailed hawk and American kestrel
are very common throughout San Diego County and can exist adjacent to
urban areas. The turkey vulture and white-tailed kite are also conmon
• in the County, but are usually observed in the more rural areas.
Although these were the only raptors observed during survey, it is
expected that other species, such as the great horned owl. (Bubo virginianus)
could utilize this area.
3. There are three general categories of solid waste as defined by the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control:
Class I; These include certain industrial wastes, petroleum products, paint
products, insecticides, pesticides, strippers, chemicals, and other hazardous
and toxic materials. Only one Class I landfill is operative in San Diego*
County (Otay). No Class I materials will'be processed at the Palomar Shredder
site.
Class II: Household rubbish, small dead animals, paper, wood, rubber,
plastics, and similar relatively non-toxic materials are contained in this
class. This is the solid waste that will be processed at the shredder site.
Class III: These include dirt, rock, used paving materials, rubble,
abandoned automobiles, and other similar bulky wastes. No Glass III
materials will be process at the shredder site.
As outlined in the draft EIR, magnetic separation and recovery of ferrous
materials will be done at the shredder site. This is discussed on pages
1 through 3 of the draft EIR. .;
4. The General Plan zoning in the area of the proposed Palomar Airport Solid
Waste Transfer site is as follows and as shown on the attached Map 2.
1. Site - Open Space (OS)
2. West of the site and Palomar Airport - Industrial M & M2
3. Carlsbad Municipal Water District Property - Residential R-l(lO)
4. Northerly and Easterly -of site - Planned Industrial PM
5. Southeast and Southwest corners of El Camino Real and Palomar
Airport Road - Commercial C & C-l
6. South of Palomar Airport Road - Agricultural A-3-(8)
5. Noise Impact - The Carlsbad Municipal Water District Office, workshop and
storage area is located on the R-l(lO) zoning. The L^n of the R-l(lO) is
62 dB(A). The noise reaching the office buildings would be attenuated
28 dB(A) due to distance and would not adversely affect the building
occupants.
The rest of the area surrounding the project site is zoned Industrial
(M & M-2), Planned Industrial (PM), Commercial (C & C-l) and Agricultural
(A-3(8) . The noise generated by the shredder operation would be compatible
with the development of the area.
6". Odor impacts associated with the proposed transfer station will be controlled
by the rapid processing of incoming trash and by confining any remaining
trash in a totally enclosed building.
Incoming trash is dumped from the packers and immediately pushed onto a
conveyor belt which, feeds it into the shredder. The shredding process has
a tendency to reduce odors by thoroughly mixing the paper products with
any damp materials. This mixing process assists the paper wastes in absorbing
and retaining moisture, which results in less evaporation and fewer odors.
i •
Normal plant operating procedures include not leaving trash in the building
overnight. All incoming material will be processed and transported to the
landfill site the same day. In the event of a severe equipment breakdown,
there is capacity at the transfer site for 24-hour storage of trash. The
storage bins are totally enclosed, and therefore present minimal escape
potential for odor. If the equipment malfunction cannot be quickly
repaired, the trash trucks will be sent directly to the landfill until
the problem can be corrected.
The Resource Recovery Plant, a similar operation in the El Cajon area,
has been in operation since December 1976. According to plant personnel
and the Air Pollution Control District, no odor related complaints have
been received.
•*
7. The proposed shredding operation can be successfully located either at
the San Marcos Landfill or the Palomar area, but several considerations
make the Palomar site the superior choice.
TRANS FORTATION - Existing transportation access corridors have more
unused capacity at the Palomar site. El Camino Real and Palomar Airport
Road both have capacities well beyond their existing. ADT's. Access roads
to the San Marcos site, Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road, are entirely
adequate, but do not contain the extra lanes and the higher average speeds
of the Palomar access routes.
CENTRALIZATION - Having the shredder operation at the San Marcos
Landfill would eliminate the need for prime movers to haul the shredded
trash for ultimate disposal. Even taking into account the energy, time,
cost, and air pollution saved by having the shredder on the landfill site,
the Palomar location will be a better choice. Being 4.5 air miles north
and west of the San Marcos location, the Palomar site is closer to the
beach and northwest populations such as Vista and Carlsbad. The reduced
driving distance for the public will save more vehicle miles than the
elimination of the prime mover mileage. Although the Palomar site is a
couple of miles further from downtown Escondido, the travel time is less
because of the well developed road systems. State Highway 78 and Palomar
Airport Road to the Palomar site will be a quicker route for Escondido
people, than Harmony Grove Road and Questhaven Road will be to the San
Marcos Landfill.
UTILITIES - All major utility services (electricity, water and
sewer) are within easier reach at the Palomar site than at the San Marcos
site.
»
AIR QUALITY - Air quality impacts associated with the actual oper-
ation of the shredder and metal separator will have minimal impacts on
either site since the majority of the operation is electrically operated.
Transportation-related air quality impacts will be less severe with the
transfer and shredder located at the Palomar site. The reduced driving
distances for the general public to reach this site more than compensates
for the elimination of the prime movers with the shredder located at the
San Marcos site.
8. The operation of the Palomar Transfer Station will have an insignificant
effect on local air quality. The majority of the plant is electrical,
with internal combustion engines being used only in two small trash movers.
Engines for these movers are smaller than those found in the average auto-
mobile. Dust is a potential problem, but a minor one. Trash contains
moisture which discourages dust. Dumping, moving, shredding, and ferrous
metal separation will all take -place in an enclosed building, thereby
minimizing particulate pollution.' In the event dust becomes a problem,
it can be easily controlled with standard watering techniques.
Anticipating the number of days in which Federal standards of air quality
will be exceeded at the site is not possible at this time, because of
uncontrollable variables such as inversion heights, temperatures, and
wind conditions. There should, however, be no change from the present
circumstances.
9. The shredding operation is 1,500 feet from the nearest County property line.
10. There are three soil types on the project site. The majority of the
*project area consists of Las Flores loamy fine sand (LeC2) with erosion
potential slight to moderate. The second most common soil type is Huerhuero
loam (HrC2) with slight to moderate erosion potential. The last soil type
is Cieneba coarse sandy loam, located in the canyon to the east of this
project. Run-off in Cieneba soils is rapid to very rapid. Run-off potential
in Cieneba soils is high.
Refer to the Geology Appendix for a discussion of the landslide east of
the project area. It states, "The portion of the project, site underlain
by the Del Mar Formation should not be susceptible to sliding." Further,
the project will be located on a higher elevation and far enough away from
the landslide area so as not to impact it at all.
Agencies that will issue discretionary permits for this project and which
will be covered by this draft EIR include the following:
City of Carlsbad
Carlsbad Municipal, Water District
Comprehensive Planning Organization Land Use Commission
Air Pollution Control District
State Solid Waste Management Board
County Health Department
7. (contd)
WASTE DISPOSAL
Approximately 20 employees will generate about 40 gallons of
wastewater each per day, or 800 gallons total per day. Wastewater
is also generated from periodic wash down of equipment. Wash down
will be kept to a minimum by designing a system mostly cleaned by
sweepers and vacuums. It is expected that 500-1000 gallons per
week of wastewater would be generated at the site.
There is a moratorium on new sewer connections in Carlsbad until
t
new capacity is available, probably at least two years away. An
interim sewage disposal system will be the use of a septic tank and
leach field. Although no percolation tests have been made at the site,
soil maps of the Soil Conservation Service indicate that percolation
is possible but the soil types have severe limitations for sewage dis-
posal. (See Map - Sheet 22 and Soil Survey Part III, pages 58 and 134.)
The County Health Department has indicated that a septic tank and
leach field system is possible with sufficient sized leach fields.
Extensive soils tests will be performed and the appropriate length of
leach lines provided according to Department of Public Health requirements,
In the event that*a septic tank and leach field system is not
possible, chemical toilets will be provided uptil public sewers are
available. The plant will be designed so that no wash down water is
used. All clean up would be sweepers and vacuums. Mi at little water
that might be used for cleaning equipment would be settled in a .sump
and the water recycled for dust control within the shredder. The plant
would be operated without discharge of any water.
PROJECT LOCATION
MAP 2: Zoning Map. See question 4.
• T—'rl-^. •>3J.-.c:>'/vl-i-
•ypj®--x\ j).-^.'.^y ?r~c<i * >>,fter-i^^j>±-te-^ \ *( r?^rf.
MAPS : Legations of the Dawson-Los Monos Ecological Reserve and
the proposed project.
"U.S.TJ.S."Topographical~Map7 Sah~Luis~Rey"Quadrangle
7.5 minute series W SCALE
PROJECT LOCATION - PALOMAP SOLID WASTE TRANSFER' STATION
i-'CL -
f.iir'
tlX -^r 'San Francisco'
VA
«f
"V.
,; ^: v \Coxey '
Hill - : j
D••" 'i (* 0 D.-"' A /
U.S.G.S. SAN LUIS REY 7.5" Quadrangle