Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-12-21; City Council; 7236; San Marcos County Water District Land Outfall - EIR 82-7 (Supplement).. z 0 § < ..J 0 z ::;) 0 (.) CITY \...r CARLSBAD ....... AGENDA :..~LL A.Efir· 7Z-3t:;,~ -- MTG.l2/21/82 DEPT. PLN TITLE:SAN MARCOS CQUNTY WATER DISTRICT LAND OUTFALL DEPT. HD. !V\\:r\-\ EIR 82-7 (SUPPLEMENT} CITY ATTY __ _ CITY MGR.c-9 1_. The Planning Commission and the staff are recommending that the City Council, by minute motion, certify the supplement to EIR 82-7. STATEMENT OF THE MATTER In 1979, the San Marcos County Water District (SMCWD) certified an EIR for a 27 inch diameter sewer line which runs along the Palomar Airport Road right-of-way. Following certification of the_ EIR, .J:be City of -~_ct:r;-lsbad_ and several other agencies decided to participate with San Marcos County Water District in building and using this line. This created a need for larger line £apacity. The project was redesigned to utilize up to ~'54 inch line in some areas. A supplement to ~he EIR (attached) was needed to address this increase in line size. ::-,~ "~~ .,.;..,.: .. r.;:_. .. ./ .... -~::~,_.-_,...;. _-,:_ .. ..,.__ .. -:.=.. -"-. "''~ .. :-::.....:.:::.. _, -·-~ '-"• "-'~ .. /~~-,.,.~·'0\:_."~Jf-:~~-.P:--~··""-~L,,• ••""'"'"""•••IF : .. :::'>•:\,. ~ 0 ~" c.J',''";!. The ~upplement to the EIR addresses possible impacts on g~q~th inducement and concludes that ·fne·r·~·are i1':Ji1C>, ···--··The:··iZ''t~f~cr-3:;·il-'a'1~,,~t;;;IR is also attached as required by state lav1.. fi~ ;fee1:s .. ~·hat :the supplemental EIR was prepared. in. accqr.<tar:ce.,.w.:ith, state law ar~d addresses the possible impacts cr?ated p~ the change in project. v • ~ ~ _·' ---: -,·.. ..._ ' ' ' ..., •• FISCAL IMPACTS The supplement was prepareq by Carlsbad-staff arid.·, the cost of preparation is being ih~red by the participating agencies. EXHIBITS 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2052 2. Staff Report dated, November 24, 1982 3. Original San Marcos County Water District EIR (previously distributed; 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. 2052 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFOR:t:!IA, RECOHMENDING CERTIFICATION OF SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR 82-7) FOR A PROJECT GENERALLY INCLUDING A CHANGE IN PROJECT FOR THE SAN HARCOS COUN'rY WATER DISTRIC'r LAND OUTFALT ... LOCATED ALONG THE EXIS'riNG PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD RIGqT-OF-WAY BETWEEN EL CAMINO REAL AND THE ENCINA TREATMENT PLANT. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD CASE NO: EIR 82-7 - . WHEREAS, on November 24, 1982, the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad held a p0blic hearing on EIR 82-7 pursuant to the provisions of Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the comments and documents of all those persons testifying at the publi hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has ~eviewed the original EIR certified by the San Marcos CouDtY watei District in 1979; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commissi'on has received supplemental EIR 82-7 according to the requirements of Title 19 of the Carlsbad Hunicipal Code; N0\-\1, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: 1. 2. 3. That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. That supplemental Environmental Impact Report EIR 82-7 will be amerided to include the comments and documents of those testi- fyi~g at the public hearing and responses thereto hereby found to be in good faith and reason by incorporating a copy of the minutes of said public hearings into the·report. That the Planning Commission finds and determines that supple- mental Environmental Impact Report EIR 82-7 has been completed in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the state guidelines implementing said Act, and the provisions of Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and that the Plannin~ Commission has reviewed, considered and evaluated the informa- tion contained in the report. • 1 4. That supplemental Environmental Impact Report EIR 82-7 as so amended and evaluated is recommended for acceptance and certifi cation as a portion of the final Environmental Impact Report an that the final Environmental Impact Report as recommended is adequate and provides reasonable information on the project and all reasonable and feasible alternatives thereto, including no project. 2 3 4 5 5. That each and every significant environmental impact identified in the Environmental Impact Report would be overruled or counterbalanced by changes or alteration in the project which would mitigate against said adverse impacts or, in certain circumstances, that mitigation of such adverse impacts would no be feasible under the circumstances and, under the economic and social needs objectives and concerns in providing the improve- ments, if the project were to be approved, would be included as conditions of approval of the project. 6 7 8 9 10 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the 11 Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on th 12 24th day of November, 1982, by the following vote, to wit: 13 14 15! 16: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ATTEST: AYES: Vice-Chairman Schlehuber, Commissioners Marcus, Rombotis, Jose and Rawlins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Farrow and Friestedt. ABSTAIN: None. . 11~ (;, t. \,")-l ~ -L• CLARENCE SCHLEHUBER, Vice-Chairman CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION PC RESO NO. 2052 .2 ·--------·~-·--;:·• STAFF REPORT DA'rE: November 24, 1982 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Land Use Planning Office SUBJECT: EIR 82-7 (SUPPLEMENT) -SAN MARCOS WATER DISTRICT OUTFALL, EIR I. RECOMMENDATION Staff feels that EIR 82-7 was prepared in compliance with CEQA and the City's Environmental Prot~ction Ordinance. Therefore, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 2052 recommending to the City Council CERTIFICATION of EIR 82-7 (supplement). II. BACKGROUND The San Marcos County Water District (SMCWD) certified an environmental impact report in 1979 for a project which consisted of the proposed construction of a 27-inch diameter outfall along Palomar Airport Road running approximately from Yarrow Drive, west along Palomar Airport Road to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility located just west of Interstate 5. Since the time this EIR was drafted, the Buena Sanitation District; the Vista Sanitation District and the City of Carlsbad have decided that they would like to participate with SHCWD in the construc- tion of the outfall line. The line diameter would be increased to the maximum size of 54 inches (graduated line) to assure adequate future capacity for all four participating agencies. The proposed graduated line (54-inch maximum) will be constructed _ in the same route analyzed by the environmental impact report for the 27-inch ·line, with the exception of an extension through the Palomar Airport Busines~ Park. This branch would be made on an existing line route. Because the new line will run along existing routes, impacts have already be~n analyzed and miti- gated. There will be no ne~ physical environmental impacts associated with the increased size of the line. The only possible impact from the change in line size was the possibility of an impact on growth. Because of this potential impact, a supplemental EIR was done by the City of Carlsbad. The original SMCWD EIR is attached for informational purposes as =equired by City Ordinance. Two copies of the supplement are also attached. The original which went out to public review and the revised which had changes based on conversation Hith SHCWD. ·' III. IMPACTS No significant impacts will exist from the proposed project change as it is the conclusion of thi~ report that the increase in diameter of the outfall line from 27 to 54 inches maximum will have no significant impacts on growth. The increase in size will expand the capacity of the line but not the capacity limits. The limits of capacity are controlled by two factors; the ultimate treatment capac~lities of the Encina Treatment Plant (including ocean outfall line) and the agreed upon limits contained in the Encina Joint Powers Regional Sewerage Agency. ATTACHI•1EN'rS 1. PC Resolution No. 2052 2. Supplemental EIR 82-7 3. SMCWD EIR 1979 CDG:kb 11/18/82 -2- rc:~ rl:~ !Mll ~ f9 ~) I!) 7 ,~~ ~!:. m...-m . \Y ' SUPPLEMENTAL EIR TO THE SAN MARCOS LAND OUTFALL EIR CERTIFIED BY THE SAN MARCOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT IN DECE~1BER OF 1979 PLANt'JJ NG DEPARTMENT CITY OF CARLSBAD NOVEMBER 21-t, 1982 RESPONSE 'ID COMMENTS letter from SANDAG: August 26, 1982 COHMENT: Page 2, paragraph one, last line: "assuming completion of the Encina Phase III expansion." This should say "Phase IIIA expansion." All the figures which follow the list of agencies are those which appeared :in the Encina Phase IIIA Expansion Draft EIR: (on p.10) Phase III plus (on p.11} Phase IIIA additions, for a Phase IIIA total of 17.5 HSDCapacity lHlocation, not "Flow11 as shown in the supplement. 'Ihe next statement is correct for Phase IIIA: "These agencies account for a total of 17.5 mgd of the 22.5 mgd-capacity at Encina." It could be noted that the potential Encina Phase IV expansion "Y.7Quld result in a capacity of 30 mgd, which Si\.NDAG estimated would be required by the year 2000. RESPONSE: Correct. Page 2, paragraph one, should·say 11Phase IIIA Expansion." "Capacity Allocation" is probably a better term for this paragraph as op};X)sed to "flow." The EIR should reflect this change. SANDAG has estimated that a Phase IV expansion of 30 mgd would be needed by the year 2000. COtttMEN'I': The rot tom of page 2 refers to Phase II!A Encina Expansion, but the numrJ2rs do not relate to S~~AGts figures as indicated. The SA~IDAG needs analysis table is enclosed. Please note the explanation at the bottom of the table: "#2. Assumes that full share of Encina Plant will be used before small treatment plants are activated." The table shows no need for either the Calavera Hills Plant or a Palomar Airport Plant until after 1990. (Should Encina receive a waiver from the secondary treatment requirement, further expansion would be much less costly, and, therefore, more likely than any future small treatment plants.) RESPONSE: The figures for projected capacity (SANDAG) were taken from the ~ncina Phase IIIA Expansion EIR (p.52} and the source was listed as SANDAG. Since SAG.1DAG reviewed that document, the City of Carlsbad assumed that they are correct. The secOnd comment is correct. T11e supplemental EIR does state on the last_page that because of expense, the expansion of Encina will alleviate the need for any satellite facilities coming on line in the near future • . 0Jt1MENT: Page'3: Conclusions. The statement. which follows may be correct. However, the ultirnate treatment capacity of the Encina Plant was not indicated. If it is 45 mgd, some explanation of the need for a 54- inch outfall line (slope or whatever) would be helpful. RESPONSE: 'Ihe original line was 27 inches in diameter and was to be used only by San Marcos County Water District. 'Ine Vista, Buena and Carlsbad Districts will also need further capacity in this area. Rather than build separate lines, or expand this line in the future, it was more cost effective to put a lurg(~r. capucity in during the original construction of the San Harcos County Water District line. EDMUND G. BROWN JR. GOVERNOR Charles Grimm City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 ~tate of illal ifnruia GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO 9581 4 September 24, 1982 SUBJECT: SCH# 79080801 Supplement to San Marcos Outfall EIR Dear Mr. Grimm: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to se1ected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have comments. This letter certifies only that you have complied with the State Clear- inghouse review r~quirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (EIR Guidelines, Section 15161.5). Where applicable, this should not be const~ued as a waiver of any jurisdictional authority or title interests of the State of California. . . The project may still require approval from state agencies with permit authority or jurisdiction by law. If so, the state agencies will have to use the environ- mental document in their decision.-making. Please contact them immediately after the document is finalized wi~h a copy of the final document, the Notice of Determination, adopted mitigation measures, and any statements of overriding considerations. Once the document is adopted (negative declaration) or certified (final EIR) and if a decision is made to approve the project, a Notice of Determination must be filed with the County Clerk. If the project requires discretionary approval from any state agency, the Notice.of Determination must also be filed with the Secretary . for Resources (EIR Guidelines, Sections 15083 (f) and 15085 (h) ). · Sincerely, ·,/)~4.~ /_N'Charles E. Brandes ~;:.y [/ Deputy Director for &?eject Coordination .. SEP 27198& CITY OF CARLSBAD PlannL'rt \"l·'!Y'" ·'ment San Diego ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNIVIENTS Suite 524, Security Pacific Plaza 1200 Third Avem~e San Diego, California 92101 (714) 236-5300 · City of Cuelsbad -1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Attn: Charles Grimm August 26, 1982 AUG 3 ~ 198{} CITY OF CARLSBt\D Planning Dc;;3rtrnent Subject: Supplemental EIR -San Marcos CWD Land. Outfall EIR Dear Sirs: The information contained in the Supplement to the Final EIR for the San Marcos CWD Land Outfall has a number of errors. Until these are corrected,_ it will not be possible to assess the need or impact of a change from a 27-inch outfall to a 54-inch outfall with a 45 mgd capacity. (No explanation of the need was pre- sented in the supplement.) The following corrections are suggested: 1. Pe.ge 2, paragraph one, last line: nassuming completion of the Encina Phase III expansion.!! This should say "Phase IliA expansion." All the figures which follow the list of agencies are those which appeared in the Encina Phase IIIA Expansion Draft EIR: (on p.10) Phase III plus (on p.ll) Phase IliA additions, for a Phase IIIA total of 17.5 MGD Capacity Allocation, not !!Flow" as shown in the supplement. The next statement is conect for Phase IIIA: "These agencies account for a total of 17.5 mgd of the 22.5 mgcl capacity at Encina.11 It could be noted that the potential Encina Phase IV expansion would ·result in a capacity of 30 mgd, whicl1 SANDAG estimated would be required by the year 2000. · 2. The bottom of page 2 refers to Phase IliA Encina Expansion, but the numbers do not relate to SANDAG's figures as in€licated. The SANDAG needs analysis table is enclosed. Please note the explanation at the bottom of the table: "ti2. Assumes that full shnre of Encina Plant will be used before small treatment plants are activated." The table shows no need fot' either the Calavera Hills Plant or a Palomar Airport Plant until after 1990. (Should Encina receive a waiver from the secondat•y treatment requiremc>nt, further expansion would be much less costly, and therefore more likely than any future small treatment plants.) · 3. Page 3: CONCLUSIONS. The statement which follows may be correct. However, the ultimate treatment capacity of the Encina Plant was not incli- MLMil[ll;\GFNCIU): Citi"5 of Co~rhh:1d, Cl,ul:l Vht;1, Cnrorndo, Ot•l M:H, [I C.ljnn, ifnrwrial flt'iiCh, L~M··sn, Lnrnon Grnve, N,llinnill Citv. Oc:n:Jmidll, .-. •~ r-...• -· r-. ... It >I •.•• _.__ t, ... o..~ •.... 1 \/: .... ,-All\/l('f'lf)V f..Ar f..Af.H liC• r•.,!;f.,rl"'' f"l~>I\1>111Hlllt nl Tr:otH'r\nrt It:''" •ntll"iillliLJ/1-t.ti:l r.dil11r!\l:1 f\J11fiO "· i August 26, 1982 Page 2 ca:ted. If It is 45 mgd, some explanation of the need for a 54-inch outfall line (slope or whatever) would be helpful. Hopefully, these changes will clarify the draft supplemental EIR. ~d-~ ~ '--sT!lART R. SHAFFER # Director, Land Use & Public Facilities SRS/RP/ahm Enclosure ' I' ;.' NO .. ~E OF PUBLIC HEARING NariCE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Corrunission 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 \vednesday, November 24, 1982, to consider certification of a supplement to the San Marcos Outfall EIR on property generally located on an alignment running parallel to Palomar Airport Road between El Camino Real and the Encina Power Plant. 'Ihose persons wishing to sp2ak on this proposal-are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions please call the Land Use Planning Office at 438-5591. CASE FILE: APPLICAl\!T: PUBLISH: EIR 82-7 CITY OF CARLSBAD Nbverrber 13, 1982 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLll.NNING COVLMISSION ~ .. ' . I.cc~tioa ~llp FJR 82-7 City of Carlslxld : yr mo. 15, AE?UESTEO. FUND STI\Ar· 1~--·-- 15. FU~OS:OURATION.·· ____:jMonth.l. . .. I . 17; ESt· PROJECTSTAF>T 1!1. Est. rROJECT DURATION· yr rno. T3: . if.. 0 Other Scop• 01.-r)' 1-1. EX:STINGFED GRA; ~ 0 Cance-llation 19. APPLICANT TYPE Entl!tf""Lett~· ~ A. Stat... F. School Oistrle"t l!:::J .70. FEDERAL 6". lnAnut.,.. C .. Sub StateOiu 0. Coun~ E. Clty· G. Communlty Action AgonCJI zr. STArE H. Sponsor~ Orgomiratiort 12. LCCA.C.. I. Indian-23. OTHER· J .. Other iS~cify in Ramark:sJ 24. TOTAl. (:JC!. 21, 2:Z. 7.!1 ITEMS 32·38 TO BE COM?LET2::l aY CLEARINGHCUSE ( }$:_ ______ _ ·t ~~-----~----( }S. ____________ _ 1 Js ______ . }S. I 32.cj=ARlNGHousE 10 J ~-~c· fr MULTI LE ,o CLEARINGHOUSE ,. I 1 I I I f 33, a AC •ION 8A~ED ON ) ~EVIEW OF 1 33. b ACTION TAKEN a 0 With Comm~nt ~ 0 Without Comment , J! 0 Notlf•catJon ~ bDApplic:alon STAlEWIOE County/ City Pln9 Are<! i 35.CJ,.ARINGHOUSE r lf;IPACT CODE D Yes D No c Owaived d 0 Unfavorabld County/ City Ping ArT STATE APPLICATION 3-'· IDENTIFIER (SAl) cIA I I I I I l l ~..1-!C"-f--'--'---'--'--'--'-~-i State Number I Count;-/ City I County/ City County/ City Cou:->tYI C ?lng ArT I Ping Ar] Ping ArT Pirog ArT ~ 36. STtTE PLAN REQUIRED 37. RECEIVING OATE cav 38. a SIGNATURE OF Crt OFFICIAL j I I I ATCLEARINGHOl.JSE 19 38. FINAL CH ACTIO~N:-::DccA'-:T::-E::-·--"'..:,.::r:=:-rn::.:::o=..:d=a=v=-J '\, 1 : 19 __ -----------------------_/ ~--~.----------------------~~---------------~------------------------~ ,....!--~'--·-----=::--IT_E:-:M-S_3_9_·_4_2-,T::-O-B7E_c_o_M-,P_L-,ETEO BY APPLICANT eE:::.:JRE SE;'\IOING FOrt.\1 10 i=EOEMAL AG_E_N_C •• Y----·-·-·---- OY•• DNo ) 3St .. cE1:rrtFJCP .. TJO~ ...:._The-a,opiiC3'rrt".c9<0fiP::t.tha-t to tho-be!ir ot hi,.kno..;,~c~gc ~nd bc·Haf th~abcve dau are ttu~ and •Check box if· dez.ringhouse· j ·• .. : .· , . . • t;=c.rro·-;-t and.fillng.otthrs.form h.Js. bO<Cn dul)o• authonze-d by tho-s:ovcrnmg body of tht:r"appilcanr. •re'5}:0n'e-is attached. L-! l-4-:cO:-.-,..-,,~:ii-:-,~-:M:-E:=-;(P:;-r-,in_t_o_r_T::-YP<>-:)c-.. -. -------.-. -.;:--,r:b-.::::T:::.~:=-. ;-~.:;:-~--:.-.. ~-· -.. -.. -.-.: . ......cc.._ __ lrc-S-IG::-N-A-T"'U,-::R-F.::-o-f.-A.-u_t_h_o_r;-,-..,-R-o-p-r-o·-..,-n-t_a_u.-v,.-.--'r~"Cd-:T:oE::-.:-L::E::P-:-N,-:0:-N:-c::e;-ci:-<-:-U:-M-:-8:-:; i 41. Ot\TF. MAILED TO FEDERALIS1"ATE ACiENCY · yr mo. d•Y' 142.. NAME OF FEDERAL / STATE AGENCY . : :-. · , : ·:> , . ' .. ~ . 1g.._:..::..::_:_· ._·. _ .:..::..:_ TO W~ICH THrs· A?Pt.ICATION SU8MITTEO ·I 43. CifjANT APPLICATION 10 :<Anign•d by Fad•rt~l Agoncy) I : . j 'A. G~ANT~R AGENCY p : . ~ : ~ 45, 01GANIZATIONAL UNIT r : l 46, A'?MINISTEHING O~FICE : ! . 41. A~Oftl:.SS-5trl'!f:C Of' P. 0. Bo• : 52« Application Aec'd. yr mo d>Y 19 R ~ Amim-do-Q ..;ppl.c. E Re-ceived v I s I 0 N s mo CUY 19 _____ _ 19 ______ _ 19 ___ _ 48. CITY 4 ; tTFMS S~ 65 TOOt; C0.\-1~.:-E TED BY THE FEOF il..'\ L_ =:: •LC ~PPROVI'IG TH': G>l~\N7 .l.PP'LICA TION ---- J 1 FlfiALACfl0'4 HNAL.UAT~!i vr mo d<~v IF'J:.'OSAf'PfiOVEDtForCIIJm;t!:;ShowOnlyA,nr.ollnc.{~"JotU.•c./·1 .• r i r.s. o'J p Awud .. d b 0 RIIICGT•d c !JWHhdt'J..ovn. 19 -------60. FED£ HAL A,'.,tQUNT fF Y __ fundJ} ( Is ______ _ ~\ l5i.'FI;IN05 AV·\ILAOLE 19---__ !51. STATt~ SHARE I J$, ______ _ ·~!57, Et<DlNG D•\Tt 19--__ --]61 !.OCAL SIIAFIE ( IS ________ _ ~ f!:a. FroE~Gii:i'Nr 10 I5J. OTHER I JS lj 11· ! f6-I .• TOTAL/6~61~62,6J/ ~~--~=== :' ~~. f~O~H#o\L t UNO At-:COUN r N•.; .. tth: ~ J f .. _;;). •.tlJt.. i lr'Le i"~+OGFtM......,-LIN~ . ·---4-----.-....---·---·--·-..... ·-·---------~·------------------~-~----------~---------·---·.,.·--...... ·-~l/'-·-· I I I I NOTICE OF CQ~T~ION OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENT I~~ACT REPORT (SUPPLEMENT) NOTICE IS HE~SBY GIVEN THAT the city of Carlsbad has prepared a draft envir9runental impact report in accordance with the Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1980 (Ord. 9557) regarding---------- AN ENLARGEMENT OF THE 27 INCH SAN MARCOS LAND OUTFALL PIPELINE The project is generally located NEAR THE EXISTING ALIGNJ\1ENT OF PALOW\R AIRPORT ROAD BETWEEN EL CAMINO REAL AND THE ENCINA TREATMENT PLANT '.Ihe original draft EIR for the PROJECT IS "1 bl ·-------------~~ ava1 a _.e. for public review from __ A_U_G_u_s_T_23 _____ . to ___ sE_P_T_E_M_B_ER_2_3_,_19_8_2 __ The original draft EIR is on file with the City of Carlsbad Planning Department and Carlsbad Public Library and will be available for public review and corrunent until SEPTEMBER 23, 1982 • All corrrrnents shall be subrnitted to the Planning Director in writing. . . CASE FILE: EIR 82-7 APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLISH Dl-i.TE: 8/21/82 Form Planning Department M~ch 1982 · SAN MARCOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT PROJECT C-06-1571-010 MAILING LIS'l' . · \vl\S'I'E\'JATER FACILITIES PLAN City of Snn Marcos 105 Richmar Ave. San Marcos, CA 92069 City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 . Vista Sanitation District. P. 0. Box 188 Vista, CA 92083 ~ Buena Sanitation District 5555 Overland Ave. ... County of San Diego, Dept. of Public Health 1600 Pacific Highway San Diego, CA 92100 County of San Diego, Elood Control & Sanitation County-Operations Center 5555 Overland. Avenue San Diego{ CA 92123 County of San Diego De-partment of Transportation 5555 Overland Avenue San Diego, CA 92123 Dist. .•:_ . ,, .· San Diego County Air Pollution San ·Diego, CA 92123 . , .. ·. Control District · ·--·.9150 Chesapeake Drive San Diego, CA 92123 Leucadia County Water District P. ·o. nox 2397 Leucadia, CA 92023 Encinitas Sanitary District 40 Encinitas Blvd. E~cinitas, CA 92024 Encina Joint Powers Regional Smverc:tge Agency 6200 Avenida En6inas Carlsbc:ld1 CA 92008 . . ... . Comprehensive Planning brganizntion of San Diego Region Suite 52~, Security Pacific Plaza 1200 'l'hin1 Jl.venuc San Diego, CA 92101 State Water Resources Control Board Divisiqn of Water Quality P. 0. Box 100 Sacramento 1 CA 95801 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region 6154 Mission Gorge Road 1 Suite 205 Sa.,n Diego, CA 92120 ... -. . .. . . . .. · ..... ' ~ 1,, '• . . · . · ..... California Coastal Commission 6154 Mission Gorge Road San Diego, CA 92120 RICK ENGINEERING 3088 Pio Pica Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 . \ :. ~ DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES 0 Assistant City Manager (714) 438-5596 0 Building Department (714) 438-5525 0 Engineering Department (714) 438-5541 0 Housing & RedevelopmenfDepartment 3096 Harding St. (714) 438-5611 0 Planning Department . (714) 438-5591 August 16, 1982 TO: REVIE'\\IING AGENCIES FROM: CITY OF CARLSBAD ---'-'--·· .-.:..... ... 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Pursuant to Section 15067.5 of the State EIR guidelines, the City of Carlsbad has prepared a supplemental EIR to the 1979 San Marcos County Water District Land Outfall EIR. The supplement was necessitated by a minor change in the project which implemented a larger pipe size into the project design. It was felt that the increase pipeline size might affect the growth inducement section of the original EIR. This section has. been updated and is attached for your review. Please address any comments you have on this supplement to Charles Grimm, Land Use Planning Office, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008. Comments should be received by October 1, 1982. If you have any questions, please feel free to call either Bob Wojcik (714) 438-5541 or Charles Grimm (714) 438-5591. Attachment: SUpplemental EIR CG: jp BACKGROUND SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAC'l' REPORT FOR THE SAN M.Z\RCOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT LAND OUTFALL REVISED 11-2-82 In the fall of 1979~ the San Marcos County Water District ( S\1CWD) certified an environmental impact report for a project which consisted of the proposed construction of a 27-inch diameter outfall along Palomar Airport Road running approximately from Yarrow Drive, west along -Palomar Airport Road to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility located just west of Interstate 5. The project was intended to replace capacity purchased by Sl',1Cvm {n the Buena Sanitation District Outfall. Since the time this EIR was drafted, the Buena Sanitation District, the Vista Sanitation District and the City of Carlsbad have decided that they would like to participate with EMCVJD in the construction of the outfall line. 'lbe line diameter would be increased to 54 inches to assure adequate future capacity for all four participating agencies. The proposed graduated line (54-inch maximum) will be constructed in the same route analyzed by the environmental impact report for the 27-inch line, with the exception of an ex-tention through the Palomar Airpor-t Business Park. This branch would be made on an existing line route. Because the new line will run along existing routes, impacts have already been analyzed and mitigated. There will be no new physical environmental impacts associated with the increased size of the line. Concern could exist, however, with possible growth inducement impacts associate with the project. No growth inducement was anticipated from the 27-inch line. The 54-inch line will increase the capacity of the outfall and the possible growth inducement impacts from t.his increased line capacity is the subject of this supplement. II. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS Growth generally occurs as a result of jurisdictional general plan and zoning policies in conjunction with developable land and various permit or discretionary approvals by the individual agencies. Despite this fact, the need for adequate public facilities is sometimes linked with the potential for inducing growth. Such potential impacts, and their mitigation, are probably better addressed on a project by project basis by the responsible land use planning agency. To adequately address growth inducement relative to waste water treatment this report will discuss outfall flow, Encina capacity and population projections. - CaJ2acity The capacity of the 27-inch line is approximately 26.6 mgd at peak wet weather flow. The capacity of the proposed graduated line (27 inches to 54 inches) is approximately 45.0 mgd at peak wet weather flow (maximum at end of line), an increase in capacity of the outfall line of 18.4 mgd (end of line increase). This increased capacity could definitely service a greater amount of development than the original proposal. The limiting factor on development is not the line capacity, however, but lies in the limitations of flow provided in the Encina Joint Powers Regional Sewerage Agency (EJPRSA) agreement. Listed below are the agencies which would be using the proposed outfall and the proposed limits of average flow: Agency Buena Sanitation-District City of Carlsbad , San I-1arcos County ~vater District Vista Sanitation District Average Flow (MGD) 1.087 8.14 9.0 1.406 These agencies account for a total of 19.6 mgd (average flow) which is the average capacity of this line. Using this figure and average flow figured for the other lines (approximately 8.77 mgd north, approximately 2.0 mgd south), a total average line flO\v of 30.37 can be projected at Encina. From these figures it can be determined that the average flow capacity of the three lines (30.37) exceeds the average flow capacity of the Encina Plan. The limiting factors on flow, then, would be the ultimate capacity of Encina and the flow_ allocation permitted by the EJPRSA agreement. Capa~ity Projection~ 'l"he flow allocations and ultimate capacity of the Encina Plant are the limiting factors on possible growth impacts. Since the oversizing of the outfall line is not a direct growth factor it may be beneficial to discuss the growth impacts of the entire \'lastewater treatment system which is centered around the recent expansion of the Encina Plant. Much of the following mat.erial is contained in the ~IR for the Phase III A expansion of the Encina Treatment Facility but is appropriate in this t.ext because the subject San Marcos outfall line is a: cont.ributor to the Encina Plant. In assessing the growth impacts created by the Encina Treatment Plant the anticipated amount of growth should be compared with the anticipated abi 1 i ty to serve (~;Jastewater treatment) the expected growth. Arguments could be made relative to growth impacts if the treatment capabilities at Encina far exceed projected growth. The chart on the ne'xt page compares the available capacity (follov!ing the Phase III A Encina Expansion) with the SANDAG capacity rights projections for 1985 for each of the jurisdictions utilizing the San Marcos outfall line. Buena Sanitation Distict City of Carlsbad San rv1arcos County ~'later District Vista Sanitation District Available Capacity {MGD) 2.Q3 5.72 6.0 6.75 Projected Capacity 1985 2.00* 10.05* 5.90* 6.60 * Assumes satellite built treatment plants will be on line. SANDAG 1 s data assumes that both Phase III and III A of the Encina expansion will be completed by 1985. As·can be seen by the above table, the capacity that will be available to the member agencies by 1985 generally conforms with SANDAG 1 s projected capacity. The exception is for the City of Carlsbad. At the time the projec- tions were made SAJ.'\fDAG assumed that the Calavera and Palomar Treatment plants (privately funded) would be on line. It is doubtful that this will be the case because it is much less expensive to treat wastevlater at the regional facility. It now .has to be assumed that each agency wLll use its capacity at Encina before activating satellfte facilities. Thus, if the capacity of the two satellite facilities were excluded from the above tables, ·treatment capacity available to Carlsbad would closely match the SANDAG projections. In summary, the expansion of Encina falls well within SANDAG 1 s capacity rights projections and will not induce gro..;,.Jth beyond the anticipated regional growth projected by SANDAG. III. CONCLUSIONS It is the conclusion of this report that the increase in diameter of the outfall line from 27 to 54 inches maximum will have no significant impacts on growth. The increase in size wi.ll expand the capacity of the line but not the capacity limits. The limits of capacity are controlled by two factors; the ultimate treatment .capabilities of the Encina Treatment Plant (including ocean outfall line) and the agreed upon limits·contained in the Encina Joint Powers Regional Sewerage Agency_ agreement. The report further concludes that even the increased capacity of the entire sewerage system, including the expansion of Encina, is not growth inducing because capacity is consistent with the anticipated regional g~owth of this area as projected by SANDAG. .~ SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVI RON11ENTAL I. BACKGROUND IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SAN MARCOS COUNTY WATER DISTRICT LAND OUTFALL .: ... ' In the fall of 1979, the San Marcos County Water District ( EMCVV'D) certified.an environmental impact report for a project which consisted of the proposed construction of a 27-inch diameter outfall along Palomar Airport Road running approximately from El Camino Real, west along Palomar Airport Road to the Encina \-'later Pollution Control Facility located.just west of Interstate 5. The project was intended to replace capacity purchased by SMCWD in the Buena Sanitation District Outfall. Since the time this EIR was drafted, the Buena Sanitation District, the Vista Sanitation District and the City of Carlsbad have decided that they would like to participate with SMCvm in the construct ion of the outfall line. The line diameter would be increased to 54 inches to assure adequa·l.:e future Capacity for all four participating agencies. The proposed 54-inch line will be constructed in the same route analyzed by the environmental impact report for the 27-inch line, v1ith the exception of an extention through the Palomar Airport Business Park. This extension would be made on an existing line route. Because the new line will run along existing routes, impacts have already been analyzed and mitigated. There will be no new physical environmental impacts associated with the increased size of the line. Concern could exist, however, with possible growth inducement impacts associate with the project. No grovlth inducement was anticipated from the 27-inch line. The 54-inch line will increase the capacity of the outfall and the possible growth inducement impacts from this increased line capacity is the subject of this supplement. II. GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS Growth generally occurs as a result of jurisdictional general plan and zoning policies. in conjunction with developable land and various permit or discretionary approvals by the individual agencies. Despite this fact, the need for adequate public facilities is sometimes linked witJl the potential for inducing growth. SUch potential impac·ts, and their mitigat.ion, are probably better addressed on a project by project basis by the responsible land use planning agency. To adequately address growth inducement r~lative to waste water treatment this report will discuss outfall flow, Encina capacity and population projections. Capacity The capacity of the 27-inch line is approximately 26.6 mgd at peak wet weather flow. The capacity of the proposed 54-inch line is approximately 45.0 mgd at peak wet weather flow, an increase in.capacity of the outfall line of ~8.4 mgd. This increas~d capacity could definitely service a greater amount of development than the original proposal. The limiting factor on development is not the line capacit.y, however, but lies in the limitations of flow provided in the Encina Joint Powers Regional Sewerage Agency (EJPRSA) agreement. Listed below are the agencies which would be using the proposed outfall and the limits on flow provided for in the EJPRSA agreement assuming comple-tion of the En~ina Plant Phase III expansion. Agency Buena Sanitation District City of Carlsbad San Marcos County Water District Vista Sanitat.ion District Flow (I-1GD) 1.034 5.716 4.0 6.75 These agencies account for a total of 19.6 mgd. of the 22.5 mgd capacity at Encina. (The other 5 mgd are utilized by Leucadia and Encinitas Districts.) From these figures it can be determined that the flow capacity of ~he 27-inch outfall line exceeds the entire capacity at Encina and that the limiting factor on flow, and growth, would be the ultimate capacity at the Encina Treatment Plant and the amount of flow allocated to each district through the EJPRSA agreement. Capacity Projections The flmv allocations. and ultimate capacity of the Encina Plant are the limiting factors on possible growth impacts. Since the oversizing of the outfall line is not a direct growth factor it may be beneficial to discuss the growth impacts of the entire wastewater treatment system which is centered around the recent expansion of the Encina Plant. Much of the following material is contained in the EIR for the Phase III expansion of the Encina Treatment Facility but is appropriate in this text because the subject San I-1arcos outfall line is the rna in flow contributor to the Encina Plant. In assessing the growth-impacts created by the Encina Treatment Plant the anticipated amoun·t of growth should be compared with the anticipated ability to serve (wastewater treatment) the expected growth. Arguments -could be made relative to growt.h impacts if the treatment capabilities at Encina far exceed projected g~owth. The chart on the next page compares the available capacity (following the Phase IIIA Encina Expansion) with the SANDAG capacity rights projections for 1985 for each of the jurisdictions utilizing the San Marcos Outfall line. Buena Sanitation Distict City of Carlsbad San Marcos County Water District Vista Sanitation District Available Capacity \MGD) 2.03 5.72 6.0 6.75 Projected Capacity 1985 2.00 10.05* 5.90* 6. 60 * Assumes priw tely built treatment plants will be on line. SANDAG's data assumes that both Phase III and III A of the Encina expansion will be completed by 1985. As can be seen by the above table, the capacity that will be available to the member agencies by 1985 generally conforms with SANDAG's projected capacity. The exception is for the City of Carlsbad. At the time the projec- tions were made SANDAG assumed that the Calavera and Palomar Treatment plants (privately funded) would be on line. It is doubtful that this will be the case because it is much less expensive to treat waste\vater at the regional facility. It now has to be assumed that each agency w~ll use its capacity at Encina before activating satellite facilities. Thus, if the capacity of the two satellite facilities were excluded from the above tables, treatment capacity available to Carlsbad would closely match the SANDAG projections. In summary, the expansion of Er1eina falls well within SANDAG' s capacity rights projections and will not induce growth beyond the anticipated regional growth projected by SANDAG. III. CONCLUSIONS It is the conclusion of this report that t.he increase in diameter of the outfall line from 27 to 54 inches will have no signifi- cant impacts on growth. The increase in size will expand the capacity of the line but not the capacity limits. The limits of capacity are controlled by two factors; the ultimate treatment capabilities of the Encina Treatment Plant and the agreed upon limits contained in the_ Encina Joint Powers Regional Sewerage Agency agreement. The report further concludes that. even the incre~sed capacity of the entire sewerage system, including the expansion of Encina, is not growth inducing because capacity is consistent with the anticipated re"gional grO\vth of this area as projected by SANDAG.