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.