HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-01-10; City Council; 12980 Part II; Palomar Tranfer Station1
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
t£8
35)
36)
37)
38)
39)
40)
41)
42)
Prior to the opening of the recycling center, the underground
storage tanks shall be inspected by the Building and Fire
Departments for compliance with all applicable City and State
Fire and Building Codes. Opening of the recycling center
shall not be permitted prior to compliance with applicable
sectons of the Fire and Building Codes.
The applicant shall prepare a detailed landscape and
irrigation plan which. shall be submitted to and approved bythe Pl.-nning Director prior to the issuance of building
permits.
This conditional use permit shall expire and all uses pursuant
to it shall cease seven years after the date of issuance.
This permit may be extended for a reasonable period of time
not to exceed . » ,%if •aE'jp^ajfc. »pon written application of the
permittee filed with the* Planning Commission not later than 90
days prior to the date of termination. In granting such
extension, the Planning Commission shall find that no
substantial adverse affect on surrounding land uses is found,
the extension shall be considered as an original application
for a conditional use permit. There is no limit to the number
.of extensions the Planning Commission may grant. The Planning
Director shall conduct an investigation of the uses under this
permit prior to November 18, 1982 and shall report the results
of this investigation to the Planning Commission. The report
shall include a list of complaints made concerning the use.This, permit may be revoked at any time after a public hearing
if it is found that the use has a significant detrimental
effect on surrounding land uses or the conditions imposed
herein have not been met.
All parking lot trees shall be a minimum of IS gallons in
size.
Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high
masonry wail with gates pursuant to city standards. Location
of said receptacles shall be approved by the Planning
Director.
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be
architecturally integrated and shielded from view and the
sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets to the
satisfaction of the Planning Department and Building Director.
Storag«^of;oil shall conform to the requirements of the
UniforkjFire Code. A permit must be received prior to the
opening: of the recycling center.
< ••*»;."•• \ „ .
.Storage of newspapers, both loo.se and in bales, shall conform
to the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code. A permit must
be received prior to the opening of the recycling center.
-6-
PASSEDWAPPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the city of Carlsbad, California, held on the
24th*day of February, 1982, by the following vote, to wit:
AYBS:
NOES:
ABSENT: None\
ABSTAIN:
Chairman Farrow, Commissioners Marcus, Rombotis,
Schlehuber, Jose, Friestedt and L'Heureux.
None. .
VERNON J. FARROW, JR.^>Chairman
CARLSBAD_PpANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
=T>^^rf!^!C-^^,.
JAMES C. HAGA; 1 AH, Secretacy
CARLSBAD PLANKING COMMISSION
I
-Y-:
STAFF REPORT
DATE: February 24, 1982
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Department
SUBJECT: CUP-140(B), COONTY OP SAN DIEGO - Request for an amend-
. Bent to a Conditional Use Permit for the Palomar Solid
Waste Transfer Station located near the northeast corner
of El Camino Real and palomar Airport Road in the M-Q
zone.
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The County of San Diego is requesting approval of an amendment to
the Conditional Ose Permit for the Palomar Solid Waste Transfer
Station located as described above. The amendment entails the
deletion of street improvement requirements along Palomar Airport
Road and El Camino Real'and, also, the deletion of the require-
ment for an equestrian trail.
These deletions are the result of negotiations conducted in
December, 1981 between the city of Carlsbad and the county for
,.,.„.,.,,the, city's purchase of a 27 acre parcel adjacent to the».Tr_ansf er..,
Station. A summary of the purchase and the conditions of this
purchase are attached for your review.
II. ANALYSIS
The cost of improving El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road
along the frontage of, the Transfer Station property would be.-borne by;the city, using public facility fees;^The cost.of .
improvements was figured into the purchase price of the property
and has been determined to be equitable to both the county and
city. Attached Exhibit'"A"' shows the location of the
improvements* •.- f-f^.'^i,- • •'
'*i**"i*^' 'wA^fK-w^ww^-^—si •J—*aaA; cpnce rriloflstafflslstreetfimprovement'sYsiiiceTth'eTcounty would no ^longer! be ; requireajp^to ins?alMKB«SMSrtc^«uP[K6ll Industrial project is developing
alonc^fie^WsMllidgo'flBiyCamiho Real across, from this 'property r,
stafffwTfllge'co^mUndlgoTt'fie'rcity OOuncil the^appropriation^of^^
. fund¥ff?AtHWcohs|!ructTo'n£ofijthese improvements: soonJafterithe*:devefo^effligo^^eiyirsWbrrsecond phase of Roll's development.
Thelflrfatfd7c7siSnfwoTri^|Bef«ade by the City Council and would be
f:
^Himing of ithe, installment oT these
"^ Vtfcounty would "noTlongeri be?requir
With respect to the equestrian trail, staff has no objections to
its.deletion since it would not tie into any Master equestrian
trail system in the area. Staff, therefore, is recommending ap-
proval of, COPr140(B).
III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that adequate environmentalreview has taken place on this project and, therefore, has issueda Notice of Prior Environmental Compliance, dated February 8,1982. V£
IV. RECOMMENDATION
***-
It is recommended that the Planning Commission APPROVE the Notice
of Prior Environmental Compliance issued by the Planning Director
and ADOPT Resolution No. 1920, APPROVING COP-MO(B) based on the
findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
ATTACHMENTS *'
1. Resolution No. 1920
2. Location Map
3. Exhibit "A"
4. Background Data Sheet
5. County of San Diego Agenda Bill
6. Disclosure Form
7. Environmental Documents
BH:ar
2/16/82
*j*'W. - •
_•?&-•.'J---
i
ft*
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
'-.«
r28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1851
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OP CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMBND-
HEHX-TO A CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT TO OPERATE A
RECYCLING CENTER ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PALOMAR TRANSFER STATION
IN THE M-Q ZONE
. APPLICANT: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CASE-NO; CUP" 140(A). ....
WHEREAS, a verified application 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, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal code,
the Planning Commission did, on the 18th day of November, 1981,
hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider said application
on property described as:
Portions of Lots A and B at Rahcho Aqua Redionda in the city
of Carlsbad according to Map thereof No. 823 filed in the
Office of the Council Recorder of San Diego on November 16,
1896.
WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be
heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to CUP-
140<A).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commis-
fcity of Carlsbad as follows:_ifc(A)-JTh'atUtneiforegoing recitations are true and correct.
on the evidence presented at the public hearing,
ission APPROVES CUP-140(A), based on the following
subject to the following conditions:
proposed use is necessary and desirable for the develop-
' " the community, is essentially in harmony with the
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
.-i''25
26
s
27
28
the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, and
is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically
permitted in this zone for the reasons stated in the staffreport.
2) The subject property is adequate in size and shape to accom-
modate the proposed use for the reasons stated in the staff
report.
3) All of the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping and
other features necessary to adjust the requested use to ex-
isting and permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be
provided and maintained for the reasons stated in the staff
report.
4) The street system serving the subject property is adequate to
properly handle all traffic generated by the proposed use for
the reasons stated in the staff report.
5) The project will not cause any significant environmental im-
pacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued by the Plan-
• ning Director on August 10, 1981 and approved by the Planning
Commission on November 18, 1981.
Cond i t ions•o f•Approval
General:
1) Approval is granted for CUP-140(A), as shown on Exhibit "A",
dated August 26, 1981, incorporated by reference and on file
in the Planning Department. Development shall occur sub-
stantially as shown unless otherwise noted in these condi-
tions.
2) Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all
sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable
city ordinances in effect at time of building permit issu-
ance.
Planning•Department;
3)
4)Any signs proposed for this development shall be designed in
conformance with the city's Sign Ordinance and shall require
review and approval of the Planning Department prior to in-
stallation of such signs.
5) This approval shall become null and void unless the use is
commenced not later than one year after the start of
construction and diligently pursued thereafter.
RESO 11851 -2-
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
6)
7) Prior to the issuance of a building permit or grading permit,
whichever occurs first, all conditions of COP- 140 (A) shall be
complied with in their entirety unless otherwise statedherein.
8) Prior to the opening of the recycling center, the underground
storage tanks shall be inspected by the Building and FireDepartments for compliance with all applicable City and State
Fire and Building Codes. Opening of the recycling center
shall not ba permitted prior to compliance with applicable
sections of the Fire and Building Codes.
9) The applicant shall prepare a detailed landscape and irriga-tion plan which shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits.
10)This conditional use permit shall expire and all uses pur-
suant to' it shall ceaseVnMVCMEmwmWHBm^j^ate of issu-
ance. , This permit may be extended for a reasonable period oftime not to exceed seven years upon written application of
the permittee filed with the Planning Commission not later
^han,i9£<jdayjLr prior,, to the date of termination. In granting
such extension, the Planning Commission shall find that no
substantial adverse affect on surrounding land uses is found,
the extension shall be considered as an original application
for a conditional use permit. There is no limit to the num-
ber of extensions the Planning Commission may grant. The
Planning Director shall conduct an investigation of the uses
under this permit prior to November 18, 1982 and shall report
the results of his investigation to the Planning Commission.
The report shall include a list of complaints made concerning
the use. This permit may be revoked at any time after a pub-
lic hearing if it is found that the use has a significant
detrimental effect on surrounding land uses or the conditions
imposed herein have not been met.
11) All parking lot trees shall be a minimum of 15 gallons in
size.
13)All roofAppurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be
.architecturally integrated and shielded from view and the£s6undjbuffered from adjacent properties and streets to the"-* of the pianning Department and Building Direc-
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
IS
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Engineering Department:
14) The applicant shall complete all the conditions of the ori-
ginal CUP except that the previous condition No. 10 shall be
modified to read as follows:
"The applicant shall improve Bl Camino Real and Palomar
Airport Road on the basis of a center line to curb face
width of S3 feet. The Bl Camino Real improvements shall
include a full width median island complete with left turn
pocket, median landscaping and irrigation in conformance
with city of Carlsbad Standards. The applicant shall
further reconstruct the existing paved median area within
the proposed median break and left turn pocket areas to
bring the structural section into conformance with the
city of Carlsbad Standards.
Prior to the issuance of building permits for the site,the
applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city
whereby the applicant will agree to design and construct
the above referenced improvements within a one year period
prior to issuance of building permits for the site.
The City Engineer may delay the requirement for the
median island, landscaping and irrigation if, in his
opinion, the construction would be premature and a
hazard, in this event, the median island sha.ll.be ..... ...
— constructed at such later time as the City Engineer may
direct."
Fire•Department;
15) Storage of oil shall conform to the requirements of the Uni-
form Fire Code. A permit must be received prior to the open-
ing of the recycling center.
16) Storage of newspapers, both loose and in bales, shall conform
to the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code. A permit must
be received prior to the opening of the recycling center.
////
PC RESO 11851 -4-
'ggjBRrass^frX-, :. :.;>*,: .•«a«a®fef~I «* U—'_ J_!L _• - _ _ ..» 1981, by tha
-^v^ijpP^:-s;A^Mt:'6
.,v'.'r"- i^., ^:>1||i^^]|S^:-*13?***
''-:^|.-:: '^%|^%^SSnii- »ona:-•• •: - ,.. SB**1 '-.<::-^y^'- >.:- .:>. -:- -'' ^ |^;; v-»'.^.'"''';-' "•""•"•.-•
««» " . regular .eating of th.
, hcld on
vot., to witr
Frieatadt and
101^: ';:•.•T---?^-'-
llflATTBisT:
.-17
18
&*•-?:
M^-~ ->*..V'i .- 5'.^V5j';
- ^.^
v V^*
STAFF REPORT
November IS, 1981
Commission
-Planning Department
"-•;-•
SUBJECT!: CUP 140 (A) - County of San Diego - Request for an
'
y
i>i amendment'^to an existing conditional use permit to construct a
recycling^ center adjacent to the Palomar Transfer Station located
^ near- the 'northeast corner of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino
: "Real" in the M-Q zone.
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
.The proposed project is the construction of a multi-item recy-
cling center on 10,500 square feet of land immediately south of
the Palomar Transfer Station. The, proposed center will buy back
glass,:newspaper, metal and oil from local residents and then
process the items for recycling. The facility will be leased by
the County to a private operator under a lease/royalty agree-
ment.
Reinforced concrete pads will be supplj^d^^or.^the-drag-on con—-"-
taicers (dimpsy-dumpsters) for all materials except oil. The oil
will be stored underground in 1500 gallon reinforced fiberglass
tanks sealed in aspalt.
The recycling center will be operated Monday - Saturday StOO am
to StOO pm, identical with the hours of operation for the trans-
fer station.: The maximum number of employees will be three.
11^ ANALYSIS"
V ^Planning Issues
- <&^u$*?$m*&,4 ectfraeet the required findings for a condi-
•titt-, V-^iL-
. H j-0£J
ix '«*([ UU
fpoject is consistent with the General
'""***?M" -zone through a conditional use
'aesjrabletfor the development of the comraun-""[rSoovery and to encourage conservation.
"shape to accommodate the pro-]h'aslbeenjipreviously;graded as has the area
""" -The^site is roughly.rectangular in
shape and contains 0.25 acres. The actual recycling center will
be 10,500 square feet. Staff believes the site is adequate in
size and shape to accommodate the proposed use.
As a condition of approval, the site will have to be fenced with
a view-obscuring, redwood slated, six foot chain link fence. The
fence, along with existing landscaping, when mature,'will be
adequate to screen the site from traffic along El Camino Real.
The proposed project is expected to generate approximately 200
trips per day. This will not cause a significant increase of
traffic on El Camino Real. The site was designed for vehicular
traffic to be on a drive-through basis with a minimum of delay.
Ingress to the recycling site would be off the entrance road to
the transfer station; egress from the recycling site would be off
the exit road from the transfer site.
Staff finds that the proposed project does meet the required
findings of a conditional use permit.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director h*s determined that this project will not
have a significant impact on the environment and, therefore, has
issued a Negative Declaration dated August 10, 1981.
V. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission APPROVE the Nega-
tive Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Resol-
ution No. 1851, APPROVING CUP 140 (A), based on the findings and
subject to the conditions contained therein.
ATTACHMENTS
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1851
Location Map
Background Data Sheet
Disclosure Form
Environmental Documents
JC:wl
8/13/81
1
2
4
5
6
7
8|j
9
0
10
11
12
§ 13
»3l 14
»
.ffj O i
I 8 o- 16i^<
° 3 - 17t- ec J-*< <
6 ° 18
11-1-77
20
_21
* *™
I 22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 52' '_
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING
AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
DECISION AND APPROVING A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT (CUP-140) FOR CONSTRUCTION
OF A SOLID WASTE SHREDDER AND TRANSFER
STATION ON PROPERTY. GENERALLY LOCATED
ON THE EAST SIDE OF EL CAiMINO REAL
NORTH OF PALOMAR-AIRPORT ROAD.
APPLICANT: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO^
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad
did on September 28, 1977 hold a duly noticed public hearing
to consider the application of the County of San Diego for a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP-140) to allow construction of a
• .
Sol±d Waste Shredder and Transfer Station on property generally
. * * • *
located on the east side of El Camino Real north of Palomar
• ^ '
Airport Road, more particularly described as: -
•
— Those portions of Lots' A and B of Rancho Agua Hedionda
in the City of CarlsbadT^County of San Diego, State
of California according to Map thereof No. 823, filed
in the office of the County of San Diego County,
November 16, 1896;
and
WHEREAS, the County- of San Diego, as the lead agency, j
has prepared and certified an EIR, which the City Council has
considered and found the project to be in compliance with the
City of Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1972; am
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of said hearings, the Planning
Commission, after making certain finding's recommended denial of*
• 'f •" - . - -
the permit; and . •
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the
City Council on October 18, 1977 to consider the matter at whict
time all persons interested in or opposed to the proposed CUP
So2 <
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
•
9
10
12
i 13
14
15
iL6
2-17s
18
19•
20
21
I 22
23
24
•" 25
' 26
27
28
were heard and he decision of the PlaS. r>g Cormission consider
NOW, THEREFORE, 'BE-^T RESOLVED by the City Council of th-
City of Carlsbad, California, as follows:
A. Tha't the above recitations are true and correct.
B. That the findings of the City Council are the finding
recommended in the Planning Department Staff report to the
Planning Commission dated September 28, 1977, on file in the
» • .
Planning Department and incorporated by reference herein.
C. That the appeal by the County of San Diego of the
Planning Commission's decision to deny the Conditional Use Perm
* .
is hereby granted. . . . -•* • .» -. '.-•'•.•-.'••
D. That the City Council hereby approves the Conditional
Use Permit (CUP-140) for the construction by the County of San
• .••"•'
Diego of a Solid Waste Shredder and Transfer Station on the
* • •
above—described property subject to the ^satisfaction by the ^^
County of San Diego of the following conditions of approval:.."''.•'.•
. . 1. This Conditional Use Permit vill become effectiv
: only upon approval of GPA-49, which designates the
property as "G" (Governmental Facility) and the
effective date of the Ordinance approving ZC-197 to .
. rezone the property from OS to M. " . J
2. Approval is granted for the land described in th
application and attachments thereto, and on the site
plan,. Exhibit A, dated 9/1/77, on file in the Plannin
Department and incorporated by reference herein. All
• buildings" and other facilities shall be located subst
tially as shown on the site plan except as indicated"
otherwise herein. • . xx . '.
* • .
3. Construction of the shredder building shall util
materials and design which will- insure that noise lev
produced by the project and related activities do not
exceed 60 dB(A) at the boundary of the 21 acre site.
4. Prior to the start of construction/ the City
Council shall review and approve final site plan,
scape' and irrigation plans and building elevations
for the 21 acre site to insure that the buildings wil
be compatible with the natural terrain, vegetation
. - 2.
ft3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
| i 13ee CM
o ££%_>o•I
o
u
*L <.. «u O ,
| 80 16
4^ C*( ^f *o: - m
t 3 17L ec •"-«
18
19
20
21
23
"24
25
26
27
28
and 1C; surrounding area. Er: t~>n control landscapin
shall be used on the site and screen type landscaping
will be placed along the side of the buildings. The
boundary of the site, with the Beckman property shall
be landscaped.
5.' All electric lines shall be undergrounded as per
City Ordinance to prevent above ground level electric
arcing (common to above ground level transmission,
lines) in the vicinity of•the solar wind antenna
system such that electrical interference is minimized
6. In consideration of the need of the University o
California for a radio-quiet environment ip the -
vicinity of the project, the applicant shall consult
with the University during project design, and shall
work with the University to mitigate any radio
interference resulting from the project.-
• ^
7. Improvement of the access roads on the site shal
be accomplished and maintained in specific conforraanc
with those specifications represented on the subroitte
grading plan (page 5) on file with the City Engineer.
8. The perimeter of the operating area shall be
surrounded with a chain link fence a minimum of six
feet in height to stop' trash from being wind blown
off site. . •• -
9. Pedestrian/eqtles'trian trails as deemed necessary
by the Parks and Recreation Director shall be provide
by easement or other form and -improved to his satis-
faction prior.to final occupancy. Trails are subject
to approval by the Federal Aviation Administration.
10. A.ddi tional'right-of-way shall be dedicated on th
basis of 126 foot right-of-way, and app'licant shall
enter into an improvement agreement guaranteeing that
applicant will construct full one-rhalf improvements
along- El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road frdntag
when the City Council determines it to be required.
11. The applicant shall enter into an agreement
obligating applicant to provide one-fourth of the cos
of a traffic signal at the intersection of Palomar .--.
Airport Road and El Camino Real.
*
12. In order to provide for reasonable fire protecti
during the construction period, the applicant shall
maintain passable vehicular access -to all buildings
and adequate fire hydrants,with required fire flows,
shall be installed as recommended by the Fire Departm
13. All land and/or easements required by this
conditional use permit shall be granted to the City
of Carlsbad without cost to the City and free of all
liens with encumbrances. . .
3.
1si
2 <ca
cc
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
'9
10
11*
12
Sp 16
17
18
19
.20
21
[""22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ik. pplicant- shall be resf. ible for the relocatio*
of the compressor station for i_ne Encina sewer outfal
v/hich shall -be made a part of applicant's obligations'
under the improvement agreement. '
•
15. The applicant shall agree to dedicate an
for a future sewer improvement as shown on the
Carlsbad's Master Sewer "Plan.
16. The applicant shall dedicate the necessary ease™
for the fire hydrant. as approved by the Fire Chief .
" . •
17. • The proposed paving of the center median, area on
El Camino Real shall include temporary left turn. pock<
and is subject to the City Engineer's approval.
18. This permit is approved upon the express conditi*
that building permits will not be issued for developm
on the subject property unless the City Engineer
determines that sewer facilities are available at the
time of application for such permit and will continue
to be available until time of occupancy. If the City
Engineer determines that sewer facilities are not
available, building permits will not be issued until
arrangements, satisfactory to the City Council, can b
made to guarantee that all .necessary sewer facilities
will be available, prior to occupancy.
19. . The required ornamental street light at the
intersection of El~~Camino Real and the proposed
road shall be Mission Bell type (20,000 lumen).
shall be located to meet the ultimate design of
El Camino Real. • ' . . .
It
20. All constructed slopes shall, be a maximum of 2:1
unless approved by the City Engineer.
; *
21. The applicant shall agree to dedicate an easemen
for a future road as shown on the General Plan.
22. Odor emitting from the operation shall not be
detectable outside the boundaries of the 21 acre site
Methods to- prevent this odor shall be submitted to
the Planning Director -prior to issuance of building -
permits. . • \v ~m
23. A report shall be prepared determining if the pr
posed use will cause vermin, insect and .pest problems
and, if so, what methods will be instituted to elimin
the problems. This report shall be reviewed by the
County Department of Health and Federal Drug Admin is t
tion and methods proposed by this -report shall be
installed in the operation prior to occupancy.
24. Dust emitting from the shredding shall not be
• 4. ' - «
O
1-I-
O
CO •_l
or
*• i permit'' '. outside the shredding. ( ucture. Proper
dust-c electing equipment shall e installed and kept
2 functioning to'.ensure, this requirement is met.
3 25. Measures shall be taken to reduce the visibility
of"the shredder building and operation area from the
4. residential areas to the east. The operational site
shall either be lowered a minimum of six feet or a
5 berm of at least six feet high along the easterly side
shall be constructed. A wall or screen landscaping or
6 a combination of both shall be required to further
screen the view of the operation from the east.
.7 • .26. At the end of one year and every year for five
3 • years thereafter the applicant shall submit a report
to the Planning Commission determining the performance
/9 of their operation regarding dust, odor, "litter, vermin
insects, pests and noise. The report shall include
. 10 a report from-an accoustical engineer determining
noise levels on site and surrounding property. If
11 • the performance is not satisfactory to the. Planning
Commission, the applicant shall submit methods to
12 correct the problem. The Planning Commission will
. . determine the "future review periods at the end of this
t| 13 review period. . • f ' - •'
S * - •
< 14 27. If after completion of initial construction,
I modification to the buildings, operations, or
~ _ operating grounds is. desired, such modifications
shall be submitted to,,the Planning Commission for. "
reviev/. . ".
• - •-
28. All mitigating measures listed under archaeology
in the EIR shall be met-
• • • '
29. Applicant will bfe responsible for policing all
trash in the area once weekly in the area of one mile
either direction on Paloraar Airport and one mile '
either direction on El Camino Real. '
• . "."'• '"••
30. Operation shall be limited to the hours between
7:00 A-It, and 9:00 P.M., seven days a. week. Emergency
or temporary changes may be'approved by the Planning
Director. * • -
,16
17
18
19
20
21
~22
23
"24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the• •
Jcity Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 1st day of
November f 1977, by the following vote, to wit:
5.
r
•
*
.
§at/>
rv*
<os"s
° z>.m
L
iic •*o
^£E3
•
hr
1
2
3
• .4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11•
12
1 13
€>•a»
1 I*c:
1-15
5 ,
o 16<
CO
3 17
5
18
19
.20
21
J~22
23
24
25
26
27
28
AYES: Councilmen Fr^
Councilv/or
NOES: Councilman Pa(
ABSENT: None
• B
9
ATTEST:•
^//l^.^^f/^ /%/*...« J
"MAR^AR-^T E. ADAMS, (City Clerk
\f . •
(SEAL)
" ~ ••
• •
*
.
i
-.-r-i - : - •*' -•" -' / • •':• .'"-. ' -:-^~ '."- '
1
1
• •
- - •
•: ' . - . • . •
_ * . • .
"*.•*•" *
• • .. • . •
•
* • .V-*•
•• «
• • . , , '
t . »
. * •
OBERT C. FRAZEE7
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
September 28, 1977
Planning CoMilsslon
Planning Department
CUP-140
County of San Diego
Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to Enable
Construction of a Solid Waste Shredder and
Transfer Station.
SECTION I; RECOMMENDATION
Staff recomends Approval of CUP-140 based on the following findings
and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. The.jrequested. use Is necessary and desirable for the development
of the co ••unity, is essentially 1n harmony with the various
elements and objectives of the General Plan, and Is not detri-
mental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted In the
zone In which the proposed use Is to be located because:
3.
a.The proposed use Is compatible with uses 1n the Palomar
Airport Influence area as designated on the General Plan.
• ';•'-.•" ~ ' "*-
b. Factors such as noise, traffic and aesthetic Impacts can be
mitigated by the condition* of approval.
The site for the: intended use 1s adequate In size and shape to
accommodate^ the ^u sj£Jfecau se : ~:-s24*~^.;,*y- '.,/.,• .•••taaismmsxa^^l^i- ... ; ' • " --" ~ •
111 occupy only 21 acres of a 230 acre site.a.
featur- .-^»-»>-*«—perma
malhta
""-^£i«^
ens ;%wal 1 s, fences,. 1 andscaplng, and other-to adjust the requested use to existing oruses'1n the neighborhood will be provided and
ecause:
be a 1arge canyon to buffer the use from the
^areas' to the north- and east;
ty fenc1ng w111 be Installed a round the building.
'
•^•T-tT^sr:
4. The street system serving the proposed use Is adequate to
properly handle all traffic generated by the proposed use
because:
a. Palonar Airport Road and El Camlno Real can easily
accommodate the vehicle trips generated by the use.
b. Transition lanes Mill be provided to assist merging traffic.
5. The subject application has compiled with the Carlsbad Environmental
Protection Ordinance of 1972 because:
a. An EIR has been prepared by the County and has been certifiedby the Board of Supervisors.
b. The Planning Commission has, as a Responsible Agency underCEQA, considered the certified EIR for the project.
6. The proposed Conditional Use Permit Is consistent with the
applicable City Public Facilities Policies and Ordinances because:
a. Although public sewer facilities are not available to servethe subject property, the County has Indicated that theproperty can be served by an evapo-transplratlon system.
b. Staff ~hfrs*-reeefved assurances from all other affected
agencies that public facilities will be available to serve
the project.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. This Conditional Use Permit will become effective only upon
approval of GPA-49, which designates the property as G
(Governmental Facility) and the effective date of the Ordinance
approving ZC-197.
2. Approval Is granted for the land described In the application
and attachments thereto, and on the site plan, Exhibit A, dated
9/1/77. All buildings and other facilities shall be located
substantially as shown on the site plan except as Indicated
otherwise:herein.",-.r.
****3. Construction of the shredder building shall utilize materials
and design which "111 Insure that noise levels produced by
project related ace: Itles do not exceed 60 dB(A) ft theboundary of the operational area. The shredder operation shallbe enclosed In cement and/or acoustical material to substantially
reduce noise.
-2-
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12
13
14
Prior to the start of construction, the Planning Commission shall
review and approve the building elevations f.o ensure that the
Gliding exteriors will be compatible with the natural terrain,
vegetation of the area and historic significance of El Camino Real.
All new electrical lines shall be undergrounded to prevent above-
ground level electrical arcing (common to above-ground level
transmission lines) in the vicinity of the solar Mind antenna
system such that electrical interference is minimized.
In consideration of the need of the University of California for a
radio-quiet environment in the vicinity of the project, the
applicant shall consult with the University during project design,
and shall work with the University to mitigate any radio Inter-
ference resulting frora the project.
Tha. per ima far, ofr, tk^aMrAt i no. *,r«4^sh*;U b«r»urp*«M»4«4
clu IV r liP fJHe^r •1li*«w o^f«**uf««t- la h*i*kt: ta *tfrwnblawr off *toj»,
Pedestrian/equest.ria.n jtrails as deemed necessary by the Parks and
Recreation Director shall be provided by easement or other form
and Improved to the Director's satisfaction prior to finaloccupancy.
Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated on the basis of 126
foot right-of-way, and the owner shall post a Future Improvement
Agreement for the full % improvements along El Camino Real and
Palomar Airport Road frontage.
The applicant shall execute an agreement to provide k of the cost
of a traffic signal at the intersection of Palomar Airport Road
and El Camino Real.
In order to provide for reasonable fire protection during the
with required fire flows shall be Installed as recommended by
the Fire Department.
All land and/or easements required by this ordinance shall be
granted to the City of Carlsbad without cost to the City and
free of all liens and encumbrances.
The relocation of the compressor station for the Encina sewer
outfall shall be included in the Future Improvement Agreement.
-3-
15.
16.
17
18
19.
•
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
The applicant shall agree to dedicate an easement for a future
sewer improvement as shown on the City of Carlsbad's Master
Sewer Plan.
The applicant shall dedicate the necessary easements for the fire
hydrant as approved by the Fire Chief.
The proposed paving of the center median area on El Camlno Real
shall Include temporary left turn pockets and Is subject to City
Engineer's approval.
This permit 1s approved upon the express condition that building
permits will not be Issued for development on the subject property
unless the City Engineer determines that sewer facilities are
available at the time of application for such permit and will
continue to be available until time of occupancy. If the City
Engineer determines that sewer facilities are not available,
building permits will not be issued until arrangements,
satisfactory to the City Council, can be made to guarantee that
all necessary sewer facilities will be available prior to
occupancy.
The required ornamental street light at the intersection of El
Camlno Real and the proposed access road shall be Mission Bell
type (20,000 Lumen). It shall be located to meet the ultimate
design of El Camino Real.
All constructed slopes shall be a maximum of 2:1 unless approved
by City Engine.er.v_.. _.._, ------- . -
The applicant shall agree to dedicate an easement for a future
road as shown on the General Plan.
tl» ffH»*t»r- of tfitf*fftti«* of tin- «
Odor emitting from the operation shall not be detectable outside
the boundaries of the operational area. Methods to prevent this
odor shall be submitted to the Planning Director prior to Issuance
of building permits.
A report shall be prepared determining If the proposed use will
cause a vermin problem and if so what methods will be Instituted
to eliminate the problem. This report shall be reviewed by the
County Department of Health . . . Methods proposed
by this report shall be Installed in the operation prior to
occupancy.
Oust emitting from the shredding shall not be permitted outside
the shredding structure. Proper dust collecting equipment shall
be installed and kept functioning to ensure this requirement 1s
met.
-4-
26. Measures shall be taken to reduce the visibility of the shredder
building and operational area fro* the residential areas to the
east. The site shall either be lower a minimum of 6 feet or
a bera of at least 6 ft. high along the easterly side shall be
constructed. A wall or screen landscaping or a combination of
both shall be required to further screen the view of the
operation from the east.
27. At the end of one year and every year from 5 years after the
the applicant shall submit a report to the Planning Commission
determining the performance of their operation regarding contrast
of dust, odor, litter and vermin. If the performance 1s not
satisfactory to the Planning Commission the applicant shall sub-
stitute methods to correct the problem.
28. Any modifications to the buildings, operation, or operating
grounds shall require a public hearing amendment to this
public hearing, unless the Planning Commission determines such
a modification will Improve the performance of the operation
and reduce detrimental impacts.
• 4(a)
SECTION II: BACKGROUND
Location and Description of Property;
The 21 acrt site for the shredder is part of a 230 acre lot that is
partially zoned 0-S (172 acres to the south) and 58 acres being rezoned
to H (ZC-197). The property is located on the northeast side of El
Camlno Real between Sunny Creek Road and Palomar Airport Road. The
majority of the 58 acre N zoned portion 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 EJR.
The Conditional Use Permit applies only to the southerly 21 acres.
The remaining 37 acres of N zone has not been specified for a particular
use, although the possibility of constructing a municipal corporation
yard on that site has been discussed. Any public use built on that
site in the future would be subject to a Conditional Use Permit.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project Involves the construction and operation of a solid waste
shredder, resource recovery and transfer station on a County-owned
site. The shredded waste can be more easily disposed at sanitary
landfill sites without using excessive cover material.
Initially the project will receive and process 166,000 tons of solid
waste per year, increasing to 220,000 tons by 1982. The facility
will shred the waste, separate ferrous (iron-derived) metals for
resale, and compact the waste into large tractor trailers for
efficient transfer to the San Marcos Landfill. All trash would be
transferred to the landfill on the same day which it arrives, thus
reducing the potential for odor.
The facility will consist of approximately three buildings (1. 6000
square feet and 35 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 35 feet.
Existing Zoning:
Subject Property:
North:
South:
East:
West:
OS (Existing), H (Proposed)
OS
R-1-10,000 and OS
OS
N
-5-
Existing General Plan;
Subject Property: OS (G 1n process)
North: OS
South: PI, G, and OS
East: OS
West: PI
Land Use:
Subject Property:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
CMMD District Office
VacantVacant and Beckman Instruments
Past History and Related Cases:
The Planning Commission approved a General Plan Amendment for the
project on August 24, 1977 and was approved by the City Council on
September 21, 1977. A companion item to this request for Conditional
Use Permit is Zone Change 197 to change from 0-S to M.
Environmental Impact"Information:
The County has prepared and certified an EIR for the project. 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 consider~the information
contained within the Lead Agency's EIR prior to taking any action on
the project. All mitigation measures which are Carlsbad's responsibility
have been recommended as conditions of approval to the Conditional UsePermit for the shredder.
General Plan Information:
At the time when the City approved the amended Land Use Element of theGeneral Plan (October 197*), the County had no Intended use for the
subject property. The site is, in fact, a portion of a larger 230 acre
parcel which was purchased by the County to provide an Instrument
landing system for Palomar Airport. Consequently, the City designated
the airport approach area (58 acres) as G (Governmental Facility) and
designated the remainder of the site (172 acres) as Open Space on the
Land Use Map; The Planning Commission is considering the request that58 acres of the open space area be designated G to allow for constructionof the solid waste shredder and transfer station and a possible municipal
corporation yard (central location for City police, water, utilities and
maintenance services.)
-6-
The oroperty Is within the Special Treatment designation for thePalomar Airport Influence area. This <pcda1 treatment designationindicates that. 1n addition to the underlying land use designation,
special consideration should be given to the property due to the noise
and safety Impacts of Palomar Airport. The proposed shredder Is
compatible with the airport Influence. According to the County, CPO
(acting as the Airport Land Use Commission) has reviewed the project
and has found that 1t conforms to the Palomar Airport Land Use Plan.
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 11nkage. This area Is proposed to remain In open space.
PUBLIC FACILITIES:
This application was accepted because the sewer moratorium ordinance
7048 provides for the acceptance of government facilities. However,
there are no assurances that public sewer facilities will be available
to serve any future uses proposed for the site. However, water and
other utilities are available to the site.
The County ordinarily proposed that sewage generated by the use (on
site restrooms only) was to be accommodated by a septic tank system.
Percolation tests conducted by the County have shown that a septic
system 1s not feasible, however.
The County has presented the alternative o.f,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 evapotransplratlon, that will avoid discharge of waste water.
MAJOR PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
Will the shredder cause excessive noise, odor, traffic or aesthetic
Impacts?
Will the transfer station cause excessive traffic and safety problems?
DISCUSSION
The County has proposed to fund the project with a Federal Economic
Development Act Grant. The contract for design, construction andoperation of the facility Is "turn key" (that Is, a private contractorwill design, construct and operate the facility to specifications set
by the County.) Consequently there are no building ereyatlons available
at this time. A condition requiring Planning Director review and
approval of building design has been Included.
-7-
Staff believes that design parameters set through the conditions of the
CUP and the grading plan provide adequate Information to allow the
Commission to approve the facility. Staff's primary concerns are with
the noise, traffic and aesthetic Impacts of the project. Mitigation
measures 1n the EIR (which are also conditions of approval for the CUP)
require that the buildings be constructed with materials which are
aesthetically compatible with the surrounding area and that noise be
limited to 60dB(A) at the operation boundaries. The noise restriction
1s within the standards contained 1n the City's Noise Element. In
addition, the City Engineer has supplied conditions of approval to
ensure that all traffic Impacts can be mitigated.
At the City Council hearing on the General Plan Amendment for this
site (GPA-49), many concerns were voiced on the Impacts of this
proposed refuse shredder. The City Council expressed a desire
that where possible these concerns be mitigated through conditions of
the Conditional Use Permit. Following is a synopsis of these concerns:
"Noise be reduced so there be no significant effect on the wildlife
reserve to the west." The condition requiring a maximum of 60dB(A)
at operation limits and enclosure of the shredding operation will meet
this concern.
"The shredded waste has an odor - it* is localized and cannot be
distinguished 20 yards away." A condition has been included that
requires methods to be instituted that prevent odors beyond the
operational boundaries.
"Will there be
explained that
similar operation
there are conditions
electrical and radio
system. This should
interference with radio communication?"* -The .a^p-1 leant*
there is no interference with radio communication at a
in El Cajon, which is also near an airport. Also
requiring method to be instituted to prohibit
interferences to the nearly solar wind antenna
prevent noise problems at the airport also.
"Beckman Instruments cannot use pesticides to check rodent population.
If the shredder causes an Increase in rodents, Beckman may have to
close because of the need for a clean health environment associated
with the Beckman operation." The applicant responded by indicating
that rodents cannot survive on the shredder waste. This has been
tested in previous studies. A condition has been added that requires
a report on the matter and any suggested mitigating method be Installed.
"The shredding operation Is dusty. There will be
equipment on the site as there 1s in the El Cajon
condition has been added to Insure that this dust
is installed and functions properly.
dust collecting
operations." A
reducing equipment
-8-
"There will be approximately 100 collection trucks and 40 transfer
trucks using the facility a day." Staff believes the road system
with the required participation In signals Is satisfactory to handle
this traffic.
"It will take about 4,000 gallons per day of sewer capacity—about
14-15 equivalent dwelling units.". The sewage will have to be
disposed of through on-s1te methods. Presently the applicant 1s
proposing an experimental system. The City Is very Interested 1n
monitoring this system because If 1t Is workable (and It appears it
will be), the system can then be used for private development. If
however It falls, the project can be hooked to existing lines that
serve Beckman Instruments. The sewer allocation system provides
capacity for government facilities such as this.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A, dated 9/1/77
Location Maps CUP-140
EIR Mitigation Measure
DHW:TH:BP:jp
9/22/77
-9-
CQUIMTY OF SAM DIEGO
DOARD OF SUPERVISORS • 1COO PACIFIC HIGHWAY
SAN OICCO. CALIFOHNIA 921O1 . (7141 236-Z2P3
URC R. TAYLOR
luPcnvtiONfirm DIITNICT •ILL PCoiNni>H
•AM Alt•»«•,,«£
KAXTH W. ANOCKX3-:
v.»T*o«r*ci
TtO MMI9KCCIV.I
October 17, 1977
Honorable Robert C. Frazce
Mayor, City of Carlsbad
1200 Kim Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Dear Mayor Frazee:
On your agenda tomorrow evening you will be considering the
approval of the Conditional Use Permit under appeal from the
Carlsbad City Planning Commission for the location of a solid waste
transfer facility with the County of San Diego as the applicant.
As you know, the County has experienced great difficulty in
locating a long tern solid waste disposal facility in the north
county area. Several attempts to locate sanitary landfills to serve
your community and the surrounding area have been unsuccessful.
The only landfill site the County has been able to obtain which
appears to reasonably meet our requirements is the San Marcos site
located near the intersection of Questhaven and Elfin Forest Roads.
This site, however, has a shortage of cover material which would
limit its life to approximately five years if we are forced to
operate it as a conventional landfill. For this reason, the County
applied for an EDA grant to construct a transfer/shredding facility
at the Palomar site in order that the San Marcos Landfill might
be operated as a shredded waste landfill where daily cover is not
required. An EDA grant in the amount of $4.1 million has been
awarded for this project and the only remaining obstacle is the
matter of the Conditional Use Permit from your City. Under the
conditions of this grant, the Palomar site is the only feasible
location if the station is to be built.
You are aware that the County voluntarily chose to follow the
City's normal development procedures in this project. Although we
are not required under the law to obtain a Conditional Use Permit
it was, and is, our desire to work cooperatively with Carlsbad in
constructing and operating a facility which will be a credit to
your community. It is in this spirit that I seek your assistance
in gaining your Council's approval.
VISTA OFFICC. 3X5 CO. MCL.ROSC DRIVE. CA 02083 • TCLEPHONC 724-0971
Honorable Robert C. France
Mayor, City of Carlsbad
October 17, 1977
Page Tvo
This proposed facility will be of substantial economic benefit
to the citizens of Carlsbad and other north county residents. The
consequence of our failure to acquire this facility will be a drastic
shortening of the life of the San Marcos Landfill and the Bonsall
Landfill as well. When these sites are finished it is likely that
solid wastes from the north county area will have to be transported
thirty miles or more for final disposal. We estimate the immediate
financial benefit of this site to the people of Carlsbad as compared
to direct hauling of wastes to the Bonsall Landfill to be approx-
imately $190,000 per year. In addition, the City will reaTize
substantial benefit from contributions to two major road improve-
ments, recreation facilities tnd a traffic signal.
Your Planning Commission developed a list of proposed conditions
in the event a Conditional Use Permit is granted by the City Council,
while it is the County's intent to operate this facility in a manr.cr
which will not degrade the environment, we find some of the conditions
proposed by your Commission to be unduly restrictive. I would
appreciate the opportunity for our staff to rceet with you or your
representative to discuss these conditions prior to the Council
meeting of October 18. I would like to count on your support in
gaining approval of this project from your City Council.
Very truly yours.
!>ee R. Taylor
Supervisor, Fifth District
LRT: BD: nw
cc: Vice-Mayor Claude A. Lewis
Councilwoman Mary easier
.Councilman Ronald C. Packard
ICouncilman Anthony Scotnicki
ICity I'anagcr Paul D. Bussey
J
Oi* raw won 613V2UyS>S2:» 4
City of Carlsbad
Office of the Mayor
July 21,1994
Board of Supervisors Chair Pam Slater
County Administration Center
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92101
Dear Supervisor Slater:
On behalf of the Carlsbad City Council, I would like to express the City of Carlsbad's objections
to a proposed transfer of the lease between Coast Waste Management and the San Diego
County for Palomar Transfer Station to the San Oiego Solid Waste Authority. As described in the
attached letter to the Federal Aviation Agency, the City of Carlsbad feels this transfer is not in the
interest of the County Airport Departments, the San Diego Solid Waste Authority, or non-member
cities. The current lease to Coast Waste Management provides needed revenue to the San
Diego County Airport Operation and provides an excellent location for Coast Waste
Managements operating center and transfer station. The new San Diego Solid Waste Authority
has no use for this property and certainly doesn't need another piece of property to manage at
this point in its start-up.
The City of Carlsbad hereby respectfully requests that the Board of Supervisors take no action
to transfer the PaJomar Transfer Station Lease to the San Diego Solid Waste Authority. The City
of Carlsbad further requests that the San Diego Board of Supervisors enter into a long-term lease
agreement with Coast Waste Management to ensure continued stable operation of its trash
collection services in North County. Not only will the continued leasing of the facility to Coast
Waste Management provide stability in solid waste services, but it will continue a significant
income flow to the County Airport Departments, which is extremely important in these
recessionary times.
Sincerely,
c: City Council
City Manager
San Diego County Supervisor John MacDonaid
City of Escondido Mayor Jerry Harmon
City of Oceanside Mayor Dick Lyon
San Diego Solid Waste Authority Chair
City of Carlsbad •
Office of the Mayor
July 22, 1994
Carl B. Schellenberg
Federal Aviation Administration
Office of the Regional Administrator
P.O. Box 92007
Worfdway Postal Center
Los Angeles, CA 90009
Dear Mr. Schellenberg:
On behalf of the City of Carlsbad, I would like to express our concern regarding a proposal being
considered by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. It is being proposed by the newly
created San Diego County Waste Management Authority to transfer a lease between San Diego
County and Coast Waste Management (the City of Carlsbad's trash hauler), to the San Diego
Solid Waste Management Authority. Coast Waste Management leases a piece of property from
the San Diego County Airport Department for the operation of the Solid Waste Transfer Station
and a fleet maintenance facility. The continued operation of Coast Waste Management in this
location is vital to ensure that adequate trash services will be provided to residents of Carlsbad
as well as other areas. The City of Carlsbad is also very concerned that the transfer of this lease
will adversely affect the county airport operation by depriving that operation of approximately
$16,000 per month in income. It is our understanding that the land being leased to Coast Waste
Management was acquired as part of a larger purchase, funded in large part by a Federal
Aviation Agency grant We think it is appropriate that any income derived from this lease should
continue to accrue to the benefit of the airport department
The Federal Aviation Agency should also be concerned about such a transfer, because such a
loss of revenue would adversely affect the San Diego County Airport Department's ability to serve
aviation, it should be noted that although this property in question is used for local solid waste
purposes, it is not part of the San Diego County Solid Waste Division Operation. The San Diego
County Solid Waste Division, in the past operated a transfer station on this site, but terminated
that use a number of years ago and was, in fact, planning to demolish the station. The City of
Carlsbad and its wastehauler, Coast Waste Management, were able to convince the County not
to demolish the facility and Coast Waste Management has productively been using the facility
ever since and the County has been realizing a significant income stream to benefit its airport
operation. The County of San Diego is in the process of transferring its solid waste assets,
obligations, and liabilities to the newly created San Diego Solid Waste Authority. The City of
Carlsbad has no disagreement with the proposal to transfer such items; however, the Palomar
Transfer Station Lease is not an asset or part of the San Diego County Solid Waste System and
it is inappropriate to transfer the lease to the new authority. The new authority is attempting to
convince non-member agencies (of which Carlsbad is one of ten cities that have not joined the
Agency), to join the Agency, or contract with the Agency for services. It is the City of Carlsbad's
view that the Solid Waste Authority is attempting to gain control of this leasehold to prevent
Cart B. Schellenberg
July 22.1994
Page 2
its use by the City ol Carlsbad as a transfer station. The cities of Carlsbad, Oceanside, and
Escondido are attempting to develop a disposal alternative to the county system, and the use
of the Palomar Transfer Station would be vital in implementing this alternative. It is our belief that
the San Diego Solid Waste Authority is attempting to prevent the transfer of trash by the
aforementioned cities in order to coerce their membership into the San Diego Authority.
On behalf of the Carlsbad City Council, I hereby respectfully request the Federal Aviation Agency
review this issue and take action to prevent the diversion of this income from the San Diego
County Airport Operation to the new Solid Waste Authority, it is not in the interest of
advancement of aviation to have this occur. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
CLAUDE A. -BUD" LEWIS
Mayor
ma
c: City Council
City Manager
City Attorney
City of Escondido Mayor Jerry Harmon
City of Oceanside Mayor Dick Lyon
San Diego County Supervisor John MacDonald
San Diego County Supervisor Pam Slater
San Diego Solid Waste Authority Chair
6-21-93
PHONE: (619) 753-9412
(619)452-9810
FAX: (619)931-0219
OAST 'WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
5960 EL CAMINO REAL. P.O. BOX 947. CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA 92018-0947
June 21, 1993
Ralph W. Anderson
Director of Utilities & Maintenance
RE: COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
TRANSFER STATION LEASE AND RELATED INFORMATION
Dear Ralph:
Enclosed is a copy of the option to renew and extend the lease
which was signed by Arie de Jong but, never approved by the Board
of Supervisors. The original lease is with Arie which is out of
town today. He will be back tomorrow and I will get a copy then
for the City's review.
Some additional information regarding the transfer station is as
follows:
The station was originally permitted in 1979 and opened
and operated as the Palomar Transfer Station. The Site
was opened in 1980 and operated into 1982. The site was
operated for the County by Browning Ferris Incorporated.
The site was built to operate with an average daily
volume of 800 tons per day with peak volumes of 1,600 per
day. The operating area had capacity to hold 1,600 tons
with 35 percent of the floor remaining for working area
and access.
Coast Waste Management, Inc. became the present lessee in
September 1984. This occurred after the County was
turned down by the City to demolish the building and
convert the site to an industrial park.
I will provide you with a copy of the original lease as soon as
Arie returns. If you have any other questions please give me a
call.
Sincerely,
Conrad B. Pawelski
Vice President/General Manager
nun
JANE F. HUSTON
DIRECTOR
16191 694-2527
an
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
5555 OVERLAND AVENUE. SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92123-1294
April 9, 1992
Arie De Jong
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
5960 El Camino Real
P.O. Box 947
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Certified Mail
Return Receipt Requested
P 996 867 798
MCCLELLAN-PALOMAR - COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT,' INC. - LEASE
TERMINATION FOR COUNTY CONTRACT NO. 70630-R
This is to remind you that in accordance with the Notice of Lease
Termination sent to you last year, the subject contract will
terminate on April 16, 1992. Please make all arrangements
necessary for relinquishment of your leasehold interest to the
County no later than April 16, 1992. Please be advised that,
subject to Clause 23 (DISPOSITION OF IMPROVEMENTS, FIXTURES AND
PERSONAL PROPERTY) of the lease, all improvements to the leasehold
premises belong to the County at the termination of the lease.
This same Clause 23 gives the County the option, upon termination
of the contract, to require you to remove any buildings,
structures, equipment and fixtures (but not trade fixtures) at your
own expense. The County will notify you regarding the buildings,
structures, equipment and fixtures you are to remove as soon as
possible after the termination of the contract. Until you are
notified regarding removal, do not remove any such buildings,
structures, equipment or fixtures.
The County of San Diego proposes not to enforce the aforementioned
termination date of April 16, 1992, subject to the following terms:
1. That Coast Waste Management, Inc. agrees to waive the one year
termination notice required in Clause 3 (TERM) of the subject
contract.
2. That Coast Management, Inc. agrees that the term of the
subject contract shall continue after April 16, 1992 on a
month-to-month basis.
3. That either the Cour * of San Diego or Coast Waste Management,
Inc. may terminate :he subject contract at any time after
April 16, 1992 by giving the other party at least 30-days
written notice. <
Coast Waste Management, Inc. -2- April 9, 1992
4. That, excepting the termination date and method of termination
contained in the subject contract, all other terms and
conditions of said contract shall continue in full force and
effect.
If you concur with the terms proposed in this letter, please sign •;"'
a copy of this letter and return it in the enclosed envelope. )
If you do not return a signed copy of this letter so that I receive
it prior to April 16, 1992, the subject contract w-ill terminate on
April 16, 1992.
If you have any questions regarding the above, please call Mr.
Jaime Fontes at (619) 596-3908.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
JANE F. HUSTON, Director
Department of General Services
ROBERT M. MAXWELL, Assistant Director
Department of General Services
RMM:dlg
cc: Department of Public Works, Attn: Roger F. Walsh (0332) ; Jack
Miller (S119); Airport Manager (N137)
50600190
CONCURRENCE
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
BY;/</^«^ tSf'Z^&f- rr/fP**^ DATE: T/* 77 ^^—-
TITLE
j. u • O 4 H u . u ij s> r . u .£
UNANIMOUS WRIT-TEN CONSENT OF THE
DIRECTORS WITHOUT A MEETING
OF COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC.,
A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION
APRIL 29, 1992
The undersigned, as the sole director of Coast Waste
Management Company, Inc., acting pursuant to Section 307 of the
California Corporations Code and the Bylaws of the corporation,
hereby adopts the following , recitals and resolutions. The
execution of this Consent is in lieu of holding a special meeting
of the Directors.
RESOLVED, that Conrad Pavel ski, Treasurer and Vice-President
of the Corporation, is authorized to execute any and oil documents
on the Corporation's behalf.
i
'rector— ~*
corp/210507qfia09ff
PHONE: 753-9412
or 452-9810
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
5960 EL CAM I NO REAL. P. O. BOX 947. CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
McDOUGAL SANITATION DEL MAR DISPOSAL CO.
CARLSBAD DISPOSAL CO. RANCHO SANTA FE DISPOSAL CO.
SOLANA BEACH DISPOSAL CO. SORRENTO VALLEY DISPOSAL CO.
May 13, 1991
Ms. Lari Sheehan
Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
County of San Diego
1600 Pacific Highway, Room 210
San Diego, CA 92101
Dear Ms. Sheehan:
You have asked for a proposal from Coast Waste Management, Inc. regarding the
continued leasing of the Palomar Transfer Station facility owned by the County
of San Diego. As of this date, we are in receipt of our termination notice
under the terms of the existing lease agreement. It is our understanding that
we have one year from receipt of the notice to vacate the premises. However,
you have asked for a lease proposal for continuing terms as well as potential
joint use of the site.
The following narrative contains an outline of proposed lease provisions for
continued use of the site by Coast Waste Management, Inc.
In order to capitalize the investment required to convert the facility to a
full-fledged solid waste transfer station and material recovery and recycling
facility (MRRF), we would request a lease term of twenty years.
In the first scenario with Coast Waste Management retaining the site as a sole
lessee and use, we would need an additional one-half (.5) acre for a household
hazardous waste program in addition to the existing 8.5 acres for a total of
nine (9) acres. The area would then serve as the corporation yard for Coast
Waste Management with fleet operations and maintenance being performed on site
with the addition of a transfer station and MRRF under our existing transfer
station permit for 400 tons per day. After our proposed expansion of the
facility takes place, we would be requesting an amended transfer station permit
to allow us to handle 1000 tons per day on the site.
In the second instance, with proposed joint use of the site, we would need all
the items requested above plus the following considerations:
A SATISFIED CUSTOMER IS OUR FIRST CONSIDERATION
PHONE: 753-9412
or 452-9810
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC
5960 EL CAMINO REAL. P. O. BOX 947. CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
McDOUGAL SANITATION DEL MAR DISPOSAL CO.
CARLSBAD DISPOSAL CO. RANCHO SANTA FE DISPOSAL CO.
SOLANA BEACH DISPOSAL CO. SORRENTO VALLEY DISPOSAL CO.
May 13, 1991
Ms. Lari Sheehan
Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
County of San Diego
(continued)
1. A limitation on public access in order to insure the security of
equipment owned by Coast Waste Management.
2. A scope of services on site proposed by the County of San Diego
for the joint use with Coast Waste Management.
Coast Waste Management would be able to operate a transfer station facility for
up to 1000 tons per day upon expansion of the facility and acquisition of an
amended permit. It is our opinion we could be in operation in approximately
six months following the approval of our necessary discretionary permits from
the City of Carlsbad.
Of course, in both cases, Coast Waste Management would design, construct, and
finance the improvements to the property. In a situation that would allow Coast
Waste Management to operate the facility, no capital costs would be incurred by
the County of San Diego.
We anxiously await your reply to this request.
Respectfully submitted,
Arie de Jong
President/Owner
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
AdJ/mb
cc: County Board of Supervisors
A SATISFIED CUSTOMER IS OUR FIRST CONSIDERATION
GRANVILLE M. BOWMAN
DIRECTOR
(619) 694-2212
(LOCATION COOE 75O)
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
5555 OVERLAND AVE. SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92123-1295
COUNTY ENGINEER
COUNTY AIRPORTS
COUNTY ROAD COMMISSIONER
TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS
COUNTY SURVEYOR
FLOOD CONTROL
LIQUID WASTE
SOLID WASTE
June 2, 1989
Mr. Conrad B. Pavelski, General Manager
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
P. 0. Box 947
Carlsbad, CA 92008
SUBJECT: McClellan-Palomar Airport - Second Amendment to Lease with Coast Waste
Management, Inc. - County Contract No. 70630-R
Enclosed are four copies of the subject lease amendment which will extend the
lease term, add the existing parking and bin storage areas to the Premises, and
provide Coast Waste with an option to lease an additional 1.07 acre parcel
adjacent to your current leasehold.
Please have three copies of the amendment signed by the appropriate parties
(enclosed is a listing of the corporate positions considered to be acceptable as
signatories) and returned to following address:
County of San Diego
Gillespie Field
1960 Joe Crosson Drive
El Cajon, CA 92020
Attention: Chuck Gaines
Please expedite the review of the lease amendment on your end so that we can
submit the item to the Board of Supervisors for their consideration as soon as
possible.
If you have any questions regarding the lease amendment, please direct them to
my assigned staff member, Mr. Chuck Gaines, at 448-3101.
A.' S. NEWMAN, Director
Airports
Enclosures
ASN:JCG:ny
cc: McClellan-Palomar Airport Manager (N137)
CORPORATE EXECUTION OF LEGAL DOCUMENTS
Agreements (such as a Lease, Lease Amendment, Consent To
Assignment, Consent To Encumbrance, Permit or Rental
Agreement) entered into between the County of San Diego and a
corporation must be executed by two officers of the
corporation.
ONE SIGNATURE must be by:
The chairperson of the Board,
OR
The corporate president,
OR
Any corporate vice president.
THE OTHER SIGNATURE must be by:
Tho corporate secretary,
OR
The corporate assistant secretary,
OR
The corporate chief financial officer,
OR
The corporate assistant treasurer.
IF the corporate by-laws or a resolution of the Board of
Directors authorizes other signatures to bind the corporation
in signing such agreements the corporation must provide the
County a complete copy of the by-law so authorizing such
signatures or a complete copy of the resolution of the Board
of Directors so authorizing such signatures.
jor7/5/88
(Eauntg af
JANE F HUSTON
DIRECTOR<6i9> 89*-2S27 DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
5555 OVERLAND AVENUE. SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92123-1294
NOTICE
May ?n, i
An'e de Jono
P.O. Rox 9*7
Carlsbad, C* °?onp
- NflTTCF OF TFQMIHATJPM OF LEASE - COAST WASTE
MA.MA«EMEMT, IMC. - COIIMTV CONTRACT NO. 70630-P
This letter is your one year notice of termination for the lease between the
County of San Pi ego and Coast Waste Management, Inc.
In conoliance with Clause 3 (TEPM) and Clause 9 (NOTICES) of the subject lease,
the County of San Diego hereby gives you notice that the County is exercising its
right to terminate the subject lease. The effective date of the termination of
the subject lease is June 30, 1989.
The County Department of Public Works has informed me that they are studying
possible locations for a new North County landfill, and several options for
locations of transfer stations. The site you occupy is a potential transfer
station location and, because final decisions have not yet been made on a
location, it is in the public interest to preserve the option of locating a
facility at that site.
I /
r,
neoartment of General Services
cc: Director of Airoorts (Sll0^
SECOND AMENDMENT TO INDUSTRIAL LEASE
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO INDUSTRIAL LEASE, made and entered into this
day of , 1989, by and between the COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGO, hereinafter called "County", and COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC., a
California corporation, hereinafter called "Lessee".
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, County and Lessee entered into an Industrial Lease on
September 11, 1984; said Industrial Lease also being known as County of
San Diego Contract No. 70630-R; and
WHEREAS, said Industrial Lease was amended on January 15, 1985;
and
WHEREAS, County and Lessee desire to again amend said Industrial
Lease to increase the size of the leasehold Premises, to increase the
lease term, to adjust the rental clause and to provide Lessee with the
Option to Lease Parcel No. 89-0118-A.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between County and Lessee as
follows:
1. The preamble of this Lease is hereby amended to read as
follows:
"That for and in consideration of the rentals received,
covenants, agreements and conditions as hereinafter set forth to be
faithfully paid, kept and performed by Lessee, County hereby leases and
lets and Lessee hereby takes possession of, hires, rents and accepts
-1-
that 5.848 acre, plus or minus, portion of McClellan-Palomar Airport
owned and operated by County and hereinafter referred to
por
^m
"Premises", all of said property being identified as Parcel Numbers
84-0127-A, 89-0118-B and 89-0118-C delineated on .the plats attached
hereto and marked Exhibits "A-l" and "A-2", and legally described in
Exhibits "B-l" and "B-2" attached hereto."
2. Subclause c of Clause 1 (DEFINITION OF TERMS) is hereby amended
to read as follows:
"c. "Premises" means the 5.848 plus or minus acres as
delineated on Exhibits "A-l" and "A-2", and legally described in
Exhibits "B-l" and "B-2", all of which are attached hereto."
3. Clause 3 (TERM) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"3. TERM. The term of this Lease shall be nine and one-half
years commencing on July 1, 1984 and ending on December 31, 19Ai.
Either party may terminate this Lease at any time after December 30,
1991, by providing the other party with written notice of such
termination at least one year in advance; provided, however, County
shall not terminate this Lease prior to December 31, 1993 unless County
has a need for use of the Premises".
4. Clause 7 (RENTAL) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"7. RENTAL.
a. Lessee, for consideration of the possession and use of
the Premises, shall pay rent to County during the term of this Lease,
each and every month in advance, on or before the first day of the
month, hereinafter called the "due date", in accordance with the
following schedule of procedures:
-2-
(1) For the one-year period of this Lease commencing
July 1, 1984 and ending June 30, 1985, Lessee shall pay as rent to
County the sum of §12,000 per month in advance; provided, however,
$9,000 of said §12,000 monthly rent shall be waived for the period
commencing July 1, 1984 and ending April 30, 1985. Notwithstanding the
above, such waiver shall terminate on the date Lessee first occupies or
in any way uses the Premises if such use occurs prior to May 1, 1985.
(2) Beginning with the 13th month of this Lease, and
for each succeeding 12-month period of this Lease through June 30,
1989, the monthly rental provided for above shall be adjusted (but in
no event to an amount less than §12,000 per month) to reflect any
increase or decrease in the purchasing power of the dollar following
the commencement of this Lease by use of the following formula:
R = §12,000( A )
299.1
WHEREIN,
R equals the adjusted monthly rental for each month of the
particular 12-month period for which the rent is being adjusted, not to
exceed a difference of 8% from the monthly rent for the preceding
12-month period;
A equals the Consumer Price Index, as hereinafter defined, for
the month of January immediately preceding the month in which the new
rent becomes effective. The Consumer Price Index, which shall be the
source for such index numbers, shall be that published by the U.S.
Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Consumer Price inde>
for All Urban Consumers" for the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area (1967 =
100). In the event such index is not published for the Los Angeles
-3-
t
Area, then another source of such information generally recognized^s
comparable and authoritative shall be substituted by agreement of ^he
parties. If the parties should not agree, such index or source of
information shall be determined by arbitration pursuant to the
provisions of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
(3) Beginning with the 61st month of this Lease, and
for each succeeding 12-month period of this Lease, or portion thereof,
the monthly rental provided for above shall be adjusted (but in no
event to an amount less than $12,809 per month) to reflect any increase
or decrease in the purchasing power of the dollar following the
commencement of this Lease by use of the following formula:
R = $12,809(_A__)
299.1
WHEREIN, ^
R equals the adjusted monthly rental for each month of the
particular 12-month period for which the rent is being adjusted.
Commencing with the 73rd month of this Lease, and for each succeeding
12-month period, or portion thereof, the adjusted monthly rental
determined by use of the above formula shall not exceed a difference of
8% from the monthly rent for the preceding 12-month period;
A equals the Consumer Price Index, as hereinafter defined, for
the month of January immediately preceding the month in which the new
rent becomes effective. The Consumer Price Index, which shall be the
source for such index numbers, shall be that published by the U.S.
Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Consumer Price Index
for All Urban Consumers" for the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area (1967 =
100). In the event such index is not published for the Los
-4-
Area, then another source of such information generally recognized as
comparable and authoritative shall be substituted by agreement of the
parties. If the parties should not agree, such index or source of
information shall be determined by arbitration pursuant to the
provisions of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
b. Rental payments as aforesaid shall be made payable to
the County of San Diego, Office of Auditor and Controller, and
delivered to:
Controller Branch Office - Cashier
5201 Ruffin Road, Suite H, MS 0654
San Diego, CA 92123"
5. Subclause e. Option to Lease is hereby added to Clause 42
(SPECIAL CONDITIONS):
"e. Option to Lease. County hereby grants to Lessee, subject
to the provisions of Subclause (3) (Conditions to be Met Prior to
Exercise of Option) below, the option to add the 1.07 plus or minus
acre portion of McClellan-Palomar Airport known as Parcel No.
89-0118-A, as identified on Exhibit "A-2" and legally described on
Exhibit "B-2", to the Premises during the sixth year of the term of
this Lease.
(1) Option Term. The term of this Option to Lease shall
be twelve (12) months, commencing on July 1, 1989 and ending June 30,
1990.
(2) Option Price. During the term of this Option to
Lease, Lessee shall pay to County, $370 per month, in advance, on or
before the first day of the month, hereinafter called the "due date".
Should Lessee fail to make the payments due under this clause on or
-5-
before the due date, this Option to Lease shall immediately terminat*
( 3) Conditions to be Met Prior to Exercise of
Prior to exercise of this Option to Lease, Lessee shall fulfill, at its
own expense, the following conditions precedent:
(a) Site Development Plan. Lessee shall submit to
County a site development plan that reflects all development proposed
by Lessee to be undertaken on Parcel No. 89-0118-A. Said site
development plan shall include a construction schedule, working
drawings and specifications, together with a plot plan showing
buildings, automobile parking, landscaped areas, signs and appurtenant
structures. Said working drawings shall be prepared by an architect
who is licensed in the State of California. Lessee shall first submit
said site development plan to the Airports Director for his approval
and recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. Upon approval by U»
Board, said site development plan shall become a part of this Lease.
(b) Governmental Land Use Requirements. Lessee, at
Lessee's own expense, shall comply with all land use and development
requirements which may be required by governmental agencies having
jurisdiction over the Premises. Said requirements may include, but are
not limited to:
1. Conditional Us.e Permit Amendment.
2 Environmental Study.
_3 General Plan Amendment.
Lessee recognizes that the City of Carlsbad and the County of San Diego
will require environmental information and review in accordance with
.the State of California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA).
Lessee agrees to supply any such information and pay any fees
-6-
connection with such review(s). Should the City of Carlsbad undertake
the lead role in the environmental review, Lessee agrees to provide
County with a copy of the "Notice of Determination" prepared by the
City in accordance with the CEQA guidelines.
(c) Construction Plans and Specifications. Lessee
shall submit construction and/or grading plans and specifications to
the appropriate governmental agencies and obtain all necessary
construction and/or grading permits. Lessee shall also obtain the
Airport Director's written approval of said construction/and or grading
plans.
(d) F.A.A. .Appro.val. In the event the F.A.A.
requires approval for the leasing and/or operations of the proposed
facility or any part thereof, Lessee shall obtain and provide to County
written verification of said approval(s).
(4) Exercise of Option to Lease. Upon completion of the
above conditions precedent, and prior to expiration of this Option to
Lease, Lessee shall provide written notice of Lessee's intention to
exercise this Option to Lease to:
Airports Director
County of San Diego
1960 Joe Crosson Drive
El Cajon, CA 92020
Upon verification by the Airports Director of the proper exercise of
this Option to Lease, the Airports Director shall cause an amendment to
this Lease adding Parcel No. 89-0118-A to the Premises to be prepared
and submitted to the County Board of Supervisors for their
consideration. The initial rent for Parcel No. 89-0118-A shall be
$1,478 per month, which shall be subject to annual rental adjustments
-7-
commencing July 1, 1990. Said annual rental adjustments shall be m^e
according to a formula similar to that contained in Clause 7 (RENTAL).
The addition of Parcel No. 89-0118-A to the leasehold Premises shall be
subject to approval by the Board."
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this SECOND
AMENDMENT TO INDUSTRIAL LEASE to be executed on the date first above
written.
LESSEE: COAST WASTE'MANAGEMENT, INC.
Date - ^_ f-^, r/
Title
^^-
Date By
Title
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
By
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
-8-
PALOMAR AIRPORT
F/P 74- OJ4 J90
SOLID WASTE TRANSFER^
LEASE SITE
B4-OI27A
48' RD. a UTILITY ESMT.
F/P 82-201566
R.O.S. 5533
NORTH
Scale: f = 200'
-1
?TMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
LITY AND REAL PROPERTY DIVISION
COUNTY Of SAN DIEGO
APMIOVID »T
DKAWK rr ' 3. £^~-a. -
• ATC A-[1-'&A.
• CALt ]'- "LdcJ
1 D A f All A D TDAMOerc-n r^-r-»-i-.~».
SHEET NO
OF
PARCEL HO.
•
:ITE
tASIS Ofn.o.s.tier
CJTY OF CARLSBAD
f/P B2-20J558
A N37el2'57"E 58.OO'
0=I6»37'3437.00'
C RS23.001
Osl23»39'24"
51.96'
N3le33'43"W 80.00
N57el2'3€"E 47.49'
N48e4€'04HE 34.74'
N43'27'26"W S2.OO
J J3953
PCL2
5583
N57°27158"E ZI9.80'
48 RD.B UTILITY
ESMT.
(F/P 82-201566)
89-01 18-A
1.07 AC.
89-0,,8-B ROS9J67
0.4 8 Ac.
jVIC CLELLAM
PALQjVJAH
IRPORT
89-OII8-C
0.24 Ac.
Exhibit "A-2"
PARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
FACILITY AND REAL PROPERTY DIVISION
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
AFPKOVtB IT
MAW rr PERRY
•ATI 5-8-89
• CALt l"=200'
III DAI nMAD AIPDOPT- COAST WASTE MANAGEMENTPALUMAK AIHPUK 1 - LEASE PARHFI s
SHEET NO
1 OF |
PARCEL NO.
89-0118
LI c': f A/ i'ALJJ-'-'AK ].-.-.\M jR STATION'
Authorized: Meyers Date. . 04-17-84 Leoals By: Engine. inqDated: 12-7-83
' S ' .. ~ ~~ "
Le/als Checked: Altona Dated: 4-17-84 Proofed by:
•rences": TE2379; 209-050-25, B003-07
Title Report #: \ Dated:_ Updated:
'arcel iT:'-' 84-0127-A ' jape: Code:
Parcel No. 84-0127-A (4-17-84) (ENG:JA:rlf)
That, portion of Palomar Airport, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego,
State of California described in deed to the County of San Diego, recorded
January 18, 1974, as File/Page No. 74-014190 in the Office of the County
Recorder of said County and described as follows:
Commencing at. the Southwesterly corner of land described in deed to the
City of Carlsbad, recorded June 30, 1982, as File/page No. 82-201566 in
the Office of said County Recorder; thence along an Easterly line of said
Palomar Airport, South 11017'56" West (South 10°46'15" West per deed),
534.62 feet; thence leaving said Easterly line North 57°27'38" East, 219.80
feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING hereafter referred to as Point "A"; thence
-continuing North 57027'38" East, 483.38 feet; thence South 55°54'00" East,
229.31 feet; thence South 32°47'24-" East, 196.82 feet; thence South 57°12'36"
We'sjt, 565.00 feet to a point hereafter referred to as" Point "B"; thence
North. 31°33'43" West, 123.23 feet; thence North 47°5T45" West, 42.48 feet;
thence North 32°47'03". West, 245.62 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
TOGETHER with an Easement for Road purposes, 50.00 foot wide, the sidelines
of said Easement -Vying 25.00 feet on each side of the following described .
center!ine:
BEGINNING at a point distant South 32°47'03" East, 36.50 feet from said •
:before described Point "A";-thence. South 57012'57" West, 58.00 feet to the -
beginning of a tangent 100.00 foot radius curve concave Northwesterly; thence
Southwesterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle o"f 44°04'59":
a distance of 76.94 feet; thence tangent-to said curve "North 78°42'04" West,
4.70 feet to a POINT OF TERMINUS in the Easterly line of an existing 48.00
foot Road Easement described in said deed to the City of Carlsbad.
ALSO TOGETHER with an Easement for Road purposes, 30.00 foot wide, the side-
lines of said Easement lying 15.00 feet on each side of the following described
.center!ine:
• ' o'"i - :
BEGINNING-'at a point distant North 31033'43" West, 22.00 feet from said before
described Point "B"; thence South 57°12'36" West, 47.49 feet to the beginning
of'a tangent 750.00 foot radius curve concave Southeasterly; thence South-
westerly, along.-.the arc of said curve through a central angle of 08C26'32" a
'•distance" of '110.51 feet; thence tangent to said curve South 48°46'04" West,
80.74 feet to a POINT OF TERMINUS in the Easterly line of said existing
48.00 foot Road Easement described in deed to the City of Carlsbad.
EXHIBIT B-i
Mo. 89-0118-C (Continued)
Commencing at the Southwesterly corner of land described in deed to the City of Carlsbad,
•recorded June 30, 1982. as File/Page No. 82-201566 in said Recorder's Office; thence alona
Westerly line of said County of San Diego land, South 11°17'56" West (South 10°46'15'
.ast per deed), 850.00 feet; thence South 73°17'52" East, 231.59 feet; thence South
38°12'32" East, 40.00 feet; thence North 51C03'28" East, 295.10 feet; thence North
31C33'43" West,
37.01 feet to the Northerly line of a 30 foot wide easement described in Parcel
No. 84-0127-A being also the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along the Northerly line of
said 30 foot wide easement, South 57°12'36" West, 47.49 feet; to the beginning of a
tangent 765.00 foot radius curve concave Southeasterly, thence Southwesterly along the arc
of said curve through a central angle of 8C26'32", a distance of 112.72 feet; thence
South 48°46'04" West. 34.74 feet; thence North 43°27'26" West, 32.00 feet; thence
North 40°09'04" East, 211.09 feet; thence South 31°33'43" East. 80.00 feet to the TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
Exhibit "B-2" sheet 2 of 2
FIRST AMENDMENT TO INDUSTRIAL LEASE
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO INDUSTRIAL LEASE, made and entered into
this day of , 19 , by and between the
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, hereinafter called "County", and COAST WASTE
MANAGEMENT, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION whose address is 7204 Ponto
Drive, P. 0. Box 947, Carlsbad, CA 92008, hereinafter called "Lessee".
W.ITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, County and Lessee entered into an Industrial Lease on
September 11, 1984 said Industrial Lease also being known as County
of San Diego Contract No. 70630-R; arid
WHEREAS, County and Lessee desire to amend said Industrial Lease
to provide for a waiver of rent for a four-month period commencing
January 1, 1985.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between County and Lessee
as follows:
1. Clause 7a(l)O) (RENTAL) is hereby amended to read as follows:
"7a(l)(a). RENTAL. (a) For the one-year period of this
Lease commencing July 1, 1984 and ending June 30, 1985, Lessee
shall pay to county the sum of $12,000 per month in advance;
provided, however, $9,000 of said $12,000 monthly rent shall
be waived for the period commencing July 1, 1984 and ending
April 30, 1985. Notwithstanding the above, such waiver shall
terminate on the date Lessee first occupies or in any way uses
the Premises if such use or occupancy occurs prior to May 1,
1985."
-2-
2. Except as hereinabove amended, said Industrial Lease shall
continue in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this FIRST
AMENDMENT TO INDUSTRIAL LEASE to be executed on the date first above
written.
LESSEE: COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION
DATED:BY:
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
BY:
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
COUHTY OF SAM 01EGO
INDUSTRIAL LEASE
MCCLELLAM - PALOMAR AIRPORT
LESSEE: COAST HASTE MANAGEMENT, IMC.
COU¥TY CONTRACT
IUMBER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CLAUSE NO. CLAUSE PAGE
1 DEFINITION OF TERMS 1
2 EXHIBITS TO LEASE 2
3 TERM - .- 2
4 USE — 2
5 CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS — 3
6 ADMINISTRATION 3
7 RENTAL — 3
8 LATE RENTAL PAYMENT - 9
9 NOTICES 10
10 LEASEHOLD MANAGEMENT - 10
11 MECHANICS LIENS 10
12 MAINTENANCE 11
13 INSURANCE 12
14 INDEMNIFICATION 15
15 TAXES, ASSESSMENTS AND FEES 15
16 UTILITIES — — 16
17 DAMAGE TO OR DESTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS - - 16
18 ASSIGNING, SUBLETTING AND ENCUMBERING 17
19 SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST 17
20 DEFAULT IN TERMS OF THE LEASE BY LESSEE:
COUNTY REMEDIES 17
21 TERMINATION BY LESSEE 18
22 QUITCLAIM OF LESSEE'S INTEREST UPON TERMINATION 19
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
CLAUSE NO. CLAUSE PAGE
23 DISPOSITION OF IMPROVEMENTS, FIXTURES AND PERSONAL
PROPERTY — 19
24 EMINENT DOMAIN - 20
25 QUIET POSSESSION - 22
26 RESERVATIONS TO COUNTY --- 22
27 EFFECT OF SURRENDER — - 23
28 LEASE SUBORDINATE TO CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS -- 23
29 UNLAWFUL USE 24
30 ABANDONMENT 24
31 HOLDING OVER 24
32 AMENDMENTS - 25
33 LEASE ORGANIZATION 25
34 FORCE HAJEURE 25
35 PARTIAL INVALIDITY 25
36 WAIVER OF RIGHTS 25
37 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION REQUIREMENTS 26
38 COUNTY'S RIGHT TO RE-ENTER 30
39 TIME 31
40 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM 31
41 NOMDISCRIMITATION 31
42 SPECIAL CONDITIONS 32
M
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
INDUSTRIAL LEASE
MCCLELLAN-PALOMAR AIRPORT
tf
THIS LEASE, made and entered into this // day of
1984, by and between the County of San Diego, hereinafter called "County",
and Coast Waste Management, Inc., whose address is 7204 Ponto Drive, P.O. Box
947, Carlsbad, CA 92008; hereinafter called "Lessee".
UITNESSETH:
That for and in consideration of the rentals received, covenants, agree-
ments and conditions as hereinafter set forth to be faithfully paid, kept and
performed by Lessee, County hereby leases and lets and Lessee hereby takes j
possession of, hires, rents and accepts that 5.128 acre, plus or minus, por-
tion of McClellan-Palomar Airport owned and operated by County and
hereinafter referred to as the "Premises", all of said property being
delineated on that plat attached hereto and marked Exhibit "A", -and legally
described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto.
It is understood and agreed by the parties hereto as follows, to wit:
1. DEFINITION OF TERMS. The following words in this Lease shall have
the significance attached to them in this clause unless otherwise apparent
from their context:
a. "Lease" means this Industrial Lease.
b. "Airport" means McClellan-Palcmar Airport, Carlsbad,
California.
-1-
c. "Premises" means the 5.123 plus or minus acres as delineated on
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and legally described in Exhibit "B" attached
hereto.
d. "Board" means Board of Supervisors of the County of San Diego.
e. "Lease Administrator" means the Director, Department of General
Services, County of San Diego, or upon written notice to Lessee, such other
person as shall be designated Lease Administrator from time to time by the
Board.
f. "Airports Director" means the Airports Director, County of San
Diego, or upon written notice to Lessee, such other person as shall be desig-
nated Airports Director from time to time by the Board.
g. "F.A.A." means Federal Aviation Administration.
2. EXHIBITS TO LEASE. This Lease includes the following exhibits which
are attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof: .
ra. Exhibit "A": Premises Plat.
b. Exhibit "B": Premises Description.
3. TERM. The term of this Lease shall be five (5) years commencing on
July 1, 1984 and ending on June 30, 19S9, provided either party gives the
other party notice prior to. July 1, 1988 that it intends to terminate the
Lease on June 30, 1989. If notice is not given by either party prior to July
1, 1988, Lessee shall continue in possession of the Premises after June 30,
1989, as a holdover tenant subject to all of the terms and conditions of this
Lease. Either party may terminate this Lease at any time after July 1, 1989,
by giving the other party notice at least one year prior to such termination.
Said notices shall be given in accordance with Clause 9 (NOTICES).
4. USE. The County leases to Lessee and Lessee takes possession of,
hires, rents and accepts the Premises for uses as a repair and storage yard
for waste collection trucks and as a recycling facility. Failure of Lessee
to exercise control of an unauthorized activity or use on the Premises shall
constitute a material breach of this Lease and such shall be grounds for
termination.
-2-
5. CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS. Lessee shall not alter or remota any
improvements on the Premises without the prior written approval c? the
Airports Director. Lessee shall not construct additional improvements :n the
Premises without the prior written approval of the Airports Director. Such
approval for constructing additional improvements shall- not be unreasonably
withheld. Within sixty (60) days following completion of any improvement on
the Premises, Lessee or Lessee's Engineer or Architect shall furnisn the
Airports Director a complete set of "As-Built" plans of such improvement.
6. ADMINISTRATION. This Lease shall be administered on behalf of
County by the Lease Administrator and on behalf of Lessee by Arie de J:ng or
such other person as shall be designated in writing from time to tirne by
Lessee.
7. RENTAL.
a. Lessee, for consideration of the possession and use cf the
Premises, shall pay rent to County for each and every month in advance, on or
before the first day of each and every month, hereinafter called "due date",
in accordance with the following schedule of procedures:
(1) For that five-year period of this Lease commencing Jaly 1,
1984 and ending June 30, 1989 and in the event of a holding over beyord June
30, 1989, for the four-year period, or any portion thereof, ending June 30,
1993, Lessee shall pay rent as follows:
(a) For the one-year period of this Lease commencing July
1, 1984 and ending June 30, 1985, Lessee shall pay to County the sum of
$12,000 per month in advance; provided, however, $9,000 of said $12,000
monthly rent shall be waived for the period commencing July 1, 19E4- and
-3-
ending December 31, 1984. Notwithstanding the above, such waiver shall
terminate on the date Lessee first occupies or in any way uses the Premises
if such use or occupancy occurs prior to January 1, 1985.
(b) Beginning with the 13th month of- the term of this
Lease, and for each succeeding 12-month period, the monthly rental provided
for above shall be adjusted (but in no event to an amount less than $12,000
per month) to reflect any increase or decrease in the purchasing power of the
dollar following the commencement of this Lease by use of the following
formula:
A
R = $12,000 ( )
299.1
WHEREIN,
R equals the adjusted monthly rental for each month of the parti-
cular 12-month period for which the rent is being adjusted, not to exceed a
difference of Q% from the monthly rent for the preceding 12-nionth period;
A equals the Consumer Price Index, as hereinafter defined, for the
i.ionth of January immediately preceding the month in which the new rent
becomes effective. The Consumer Price Index, which shall be used as the
source for such index numbers, shall be that published by the U.S. Department
of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Consu;,ier Price Index for All Urban
-4-
Consumers" for the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area (1967=100). In the event
such index is not published for the Los Angeles Area, then another index or
source of such information generally recognized as comparable and authorita-
tive shall ba substituted by agreement of the parties. If the parties should
not agree, such index or source of information shall be determined by arbi-
tration pursuant to the provisions of the California Code of Civil
Procedure.
(2) For any portion of the nine-year period commencing July 1,
1993 and ending June 30, 2002 that Lessee is on hold over, Lessee shall pay
rent as follows:
(a) For the one-year period commencing July 1, 1993 and
ending June 30, 1994, Lessee shall pay rent to County as proposed in writing
»•
by County. The parties hereto shall set forth their agreement by amendment
to this Lease as to the monthly rental rate to be applied for said one-year
period.
(b) For the twelve-month period beginning July 1, 1994
and for each succeeding 12- — nth period, the monthly rental provided for in
subclause (2)(a) above shall be adjusted (but in no event to an amount less
than the amount in subclause (2)(a) above) to reflect any increase or
decrease in the purchasing power of the dollar following the commencement of
the second nine-year period of this Lease by use of the following formula:
R = A (B/C)
VIHEREIN,
R equals the adjusted monthly rental for each month of the parti-
cular 12-month period for which the rent is being adjusted, not to exceed a
difference of 8% from the monthly rent for the preceding 12-month period;
-5-
' A equals the monthly rent for the first year of the second nir.e-year
period of this Lease;
B equals the Consumer Price Index, as hereinabove defined, for the
month of January immediately preceding the month in which the ne* rent
becomes effective.
C equals the Consumer Price Index, as hereinabove defined, for the
month of January 1993.
(3) For any portion of the seven-year period commencing July 1,
2002 and ending June 30, 2009 that Lessee is on hold over, Lessee shall pay
rent as follows:
(a) For the one-year period commencing July 1, 2002 and
ending June 30, 2003, Lessee shall pay rent to County as proposed in writing
«•
by County. The parties hereto shall set forth their agreement by amendment
to this Lease as to the monthly rental rate to be applied for said one-year
period.
(b) For the twelve-month period beginning July 1, 2003
and for each succeeding 12-month period, the monthly rental provided for in
subclause (3)(a) above shall be adjusted (but in no event to an amount less
than the amount in subclause (3)(a) above) to reflect any increase or
decrease in the purchasing power of the dollar following the commencement of
the 18th year of this Lease by use of the following formula:
R = A (B/C)
WHEREIN,
R equals the adjusted monthly rental for each month of the parti-
cular 12-month period for which the rent is being adjusted, not to exceed a
difference of 8% from the monthly rent for the preceding 12-month period;
-6-
A equals the monthly rent for the first year of said seven-year
period of this Lease;
B equals the Consumer Price Index, as hereinbefore defined, for the
month of January immediately preceding the month in which the new rent
becomes effective; and
C equals the Consumer Price Index, as hereinbefore defined, for the
month of January 2002.
b. In the event Lessee does not agree to the monthly rental, rate
proposed by County in a.(2)(a) and a.(3)(a) above, at least 120 days prior to
the effective date of said proposed monthly rental rate, County and Lessee
shall commence arbitration in accordance with the following procedure:
County shall, at least ninety (90) days prior to the beginning^v
of the effective date of the monthly rental rate proposed by County in
a.(2)(a) and a.(3)(a) above (hereinafter referred to in this subclause as
"effective date"), select and appoint one representative who shall be a
recognized real estate appraiser and a member of th.e American Institute of
Real Estate Appraisers. Lessee shall, at least ninety (90) days prior to the
effective date, select and appoint one representative who shall be a recog-
nized real estate appraiser and a member of the American Institute of Real
Estate Appraisers. Both parties shall give written notice each to the other
of selection and appointment of their respective representatives.
Upon appointment and notice of appointment of said representa-
tive, said representatives shall, at least eighty (80) days prior to the
effective date, meet and confer for the purpose of appointing a third person
of like professional qualificar on and shall, at least seventy (70) days
prior to the effective date, appoint said third person who shall act as a
-7-
neutral arbitrator of any disagreeuents which may arise in the course of
rental renegotiations. The said representatives and neutral arbitrator shall
promptly meet and determine the monthly rental rate which shall be applied
for the twelve-month period under arbitration. At least thirty (30) days
prior to the beginning of said effective date, said neutral arbitrator and
concurring representatives shall render a written decision in which they
shall specify the monthly rental rate to be paid by Lessee to County for and
during the twelve-month period under arbitration. It is understood and
agreed that the determinations made pursuant to this arbitration agreement
shall be binding on both the County and Lessee and shall apply to rent due
and payable to County for the full twelve-month rental period under arbitra-
tion. Refusal to acquiesce in said deteriiiination by either party shall con- j
stitute a breach of this Lease.
In the event that either party shall fail to appoint a represen-
tative, or the representatives should fail to appoint a neutral arbitrator,
either or both parties may apply to the Superior Court in and for the County
of San Diego for relief of an appropriate nature pursuant to the arbitration
provisions of the California Code of Civil Procedure which are found at
Section 1280 and following.
County shall bear all of the expense of its appointed represen-
tative and Lessee shall bear all of the expense of its appointed representa-
tive and County and Lessee shall equally share the fee and expense of the
neutral arbitrator and the incidental expenses of the arbitration not attri-
butable solely to either party's representative.
The new monthly rental rate determined by the representatives
and the neutral arbitrator shall be the fair market or "economic rent" for
-8-
the Premises for the twelve month period under consideration, said rate being
the monthly amount which said Premises could be expected to return to County
if offered for lease on the open market under normal circumstances, giving
due consideration to location, desirability and utility of said Premises and
siuilar relevant matters which are traditionally considered by professional
appraisers in estimating changes in the rental rate return which would could
be expected from similar property. Improvements placed upon the property by
the Lessee during the term of this Lease shall not be considered in arriving
at the said new rental rate.
c. Rental payments as aforesaid shall be made payable to the County
of San Diego, Office of Auditor and Controller, and delivered to:
iController Branch Office — Cashier
5201 Ruffin Road, Suite H, MS 0654
San Diego, CA 92123
or to such other department or address as n:ay be specified by County in
writing from time to time.
8- LATE RENTAL PAYMENT. In the event Lessee fails to remit to County,
in cash or legal tender, the monthly rent due v/ithin fifteen (15) days after
the due date, Lessee shall be deemed delinquent in payment of rent and shall
become liable for and shall pay to County the r.iontlily rent due together with
an additional five percent (5%) for the expenses resulting from such
-9-
delinquency, and shall pay an additional five percent (52) for each fifteen
(15) days or fraction thereof, that said delinquency thereafter continues.
However, the Lease Administrator shall have the right to waive, for good
cause, delinquency payments so accruing upon written application of Lessee
for waiver of any such accrued delinquency. In the event of a dispute
between the parties as to the correct amount of rent due, County shall accept
the sum tendered by Lessee without prejudice, and if a deficiency is subse-
quently determined, said five percent (52) shall apply only to the amount of
the actual determined deficiency.
9. NOTICES. Notices given or to be given by County or Lessee to the
other, shall be yiven in writing and shall be addressed as follows, or as
County or Lessee may hereafter designate by written notice:
»•
TO:--COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TO: LESSEE
Director of General Services Arie de Jong
5555 Overland Avenue, Bldg. 2 P.O. Box 947
San Diego, CA 92123 Carlsbad, CA 92008
10. LEASEHOLD MANAGEMENT. It is expressly understood that Lessee is
solely responsible to County for management and control of all activities on
the leasehold. A leasehold manager will be designated in writing by Lessee
to County and will have full operational responsibility for compliance with
terms and conditions of this Lease.
n- MECHANICS LIENS. Lessee shall at all times indemnify and save
County harmless from all claims for labor or materials in connection with
construction, repair, alteration or installation of structures, improvements,
-10-
equipment or facilities within the Premises, and from the cost of defending
against such claims, including attorneys' fees. In the event a lien is
imposed upon the Premises as a result of such construction, repair, altera-
tion or installation, Lessee shall procure and record a bond in accordance
with Section 3143, California Civil Code, which frees the- Premises from the
claim of the lien and from any action brought to foreclose the lien. Should
Lessee fail to procure and record said bond within thirty (30) days after
filing of such a lien, this Lease shall be in default and shall be subject to
immediate termination by County.
12. MAINTENANCE. County shall not be required to maintain, repair or
replace improvements constructed within the Premises; provided, however,
County may, at its sole option, do any filling, grading, slope protection,
retaining wall construction, or replace or repair any County-constructed
facilities within or without the Premises in order to protect the Premises or
any part of the Airport.
Lessee shall, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Airports
Oirector, keep and maintain the Premises and all improvements of any kind or
character which are now or may be erected, constructed, installed or made
thereon in good condition and in substantial repair. Lessee shall take all
steps necessary or appropriate so as to maintain such a standard of good
condition and repair. Lessee further expressly agrees to maintain the
Premises in a safe, clean and sanitary condition to the complete satisfaction
of the Airports Director and in compliance with all applicable rules, regula-
tions, ordinances or laws. In this connection, Lessee shall provide proper
containers for trash, garbage and waste of all kind and character and shall
keep the Premises free and clear of rubbish and litter to the satisfaction of
-11-
the Airports Director. Lessee shall maintain both sets of truck weighing
scales on the Premises in an accurate and operable condition throughout the
term of this Lease. County reserves the right for its agents or employees to
enter upon and inspect the Premises at any and all reasonable times to ascer-
tain the above-described standards are maintained.
In the event Lessee fails to make repairs or replacements to any
improvements as required by County, then County may notify Lessee in writing
of said failure specifying in said notice the nature and extent of defects.
In the event Lessee fails to ir.ake said required repairs or replacements with-
in thirty (30) days after such notice County may make such repairs or
replacement and Lessee shall pay the cost thereof, (including, but not
limited to, the cost of labor, material and equipment) within ten (10) days .v
of receipt of statement of such costs from County.
13. INSURANCE.
a. Lessee shall maintain insurance, in form acceptable to County,
in full force and effect throughout the term of this Lease. The policy or
policies of said insurnce shall name County as an "Additional Insured" except
for Workers' Compensation and shall, as a mininum, provide the following
forms of coverage in the amounts specified:
(1) Comprehensive General Liability Minimums
(a) $1,000,000 bodily injury, each person;
(b) 52,000,000 bodily injury, each occurence; and
(c) $1,000,000 property damage;
OR
$2,000,000 combined single limit in lieu of coverages
(a), (b), and (c) above.
-12-
(2) Fire and extended coverage, including water damage as an
indirect result of fire and debris cleanup provision, in an amount not less
than ninety percent (90%) of the full replacement value of all improvements
within the Premises.
(3) Workers' Compensation to statutory limits, if Workers'
Compensation is required by the State of California.
b. The public liability insurance shall be in force from the first
day of the term of this Lease. The fire ; >rance shall be in force from the
date of commencement of construction or installation of each major insurable
improvement by Lessee and/or the effective date of this Lease if any insur-
able improvement exists at such time.
c. Each policy of insurance except Workers' Compensation shall?
contain the following clauses:
(1) "It is agreed that this policy shall not be cancelled nor
the coverage reduced until thirty (30) -days after the Lease Administrator of
the County of San Uiego shall have received written notice of such cancella-
tion or reduction. The notice shall be sent by certified or registered mail,
and shall be deemed effective the date delivered to said Lease Administrator,
as evidenced by properly validated return receipt".
(2) "The insurer waives any right of subrogation against the
County which might arise by reason of any payment under this policy, only as
it relates to the terms and conditions of the contract or lease".
(3) "This is considered primary coverage for the County as an
additional insured, except for sole negligence on the part of County or
County employees".
-13-
d. Lessee agrees to deposit with County, on or before the effective
date of this Lease, one Certificate of insurance for each of the policy or
policies necessary to satisfy the insurance provisions of this Lease and to
keep such insurance in effect during the entire term of this Lease. Said
Certificate of Insurance shall be submitted to the Lease Administrator on a
San Diego County form entitled "Certificate of Insurance for Lease of County-
owned Property", or on an insurance company policy certificate with appropri-
ate endorsements containing the above mentioned clauses c. (1) through c.
(3). Failure to so insure shall be grounds for immediate termination by
notification by Lease Administrator.
e. County shall retain the right at any time to review the cover-
age, form and amount of the insurance required hereby. If, in the opinion of .
»•
the Lease Administrator, the insurance provisions in this Lease do not pro-
vide adequate protection for County and for members of the public using the
Premises, County may require Lessee to obtain insurance sufficient in cover-
age, form and amount to provide adequate protection from and against the kind
and extent of risks which exist or are foreseeable at the time a change in
insurance is required. County's requirements shall be reasonable, but shall
be designed to assure protection from and against the kind and extent of
risks which exist at the tire a change in insurance is required.
f. The Lease Adninistrator shall notify Lessee in writing of
changes in the insurance requirements and, if Lessee does not deposit with
County within sixty (60) days of receipt of such notice, a new Certificate of
Insurance for each policy or policies of insurance incorporating such
changes, this Lease shall be deemed in default without further notice to
Lessee and may be forthwith terminated by the Lease Administrator.
-14-
g. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance
shall not be construed to limit Lessee's liability hereunder nor to fulfill
the indemnification provisions and requirements of this Lease. Notwith-
standing said policy or policies of insurance, Lessee shall be obligated for
tne full and total amount of any damage, injury or loss attributable to any
act or omission of it or its agents, customers or guests in connection with
this Lease or with use or occupancy of the Premises.
14. INDEMNIFICATION. Lessee shall indemnify and save harmless County,
its officers, agents and employees from and against any and all claims,
demands, liabilities or loss of any kind or nature which County, its
officers, agents or employees, may sustain or incur or which may be imposed
upon them or any of then for injury to or death of persons, or damage to .t-
property as a result of, arising out of, or in any manner connected with this
Lease or with occupancy and use of the Premises by Lessee, its officers,
agents, employees, subtenants, licensees, patrons or visitors, except as
attributable to an act or omission of County. Lessee further agrees to pay
any and all costs and expenses, including, but not limited to, court costs
and reasonable attorneys' fees, incurred by County on account of any such
claims, demands or liabilities.
15. TAXES, ASSESSMENTS-AND-FEES. The terms of this Lease may result in
the creation of a possessory interest. If such a possessory interest is
vested in a private party to this Lease, the private party may be subjected
to payment of personal property taxes levied on such interest. Lessee shall
be responsible for the payment of, and shall pay before they become
delinquent, all taxes, assessments and fees assessed or levied upon Lessee or
the Premises or any interest therein, including, but not limited to,
-15-
buildings, structures, fixtures, equipment or other property installed or
constructed thereon. Lessee further agrees not to allow such taxes, assess-
ments or fees to become delinquent and as such to become a lien against the
Premises or any improvement thereto. Nothing herein contained shall be
deemed to prevent or prohibit the Lessee from contesting the validity or
amount of any such tax assessment or fee in the manner authorized by law.
16. UTILITIES. Except for such utilities that County herein expressly
agrees to provide, Lessee shall order, obtain and pay for all utilities
necessary to its use and enjoyment of the Premises and shall pay all services
and installation charges in connection therewith, including sewer connection
and service charges.
County shall have the right, without cost to County, to connect to
water, sewer, power, gas and communication lines as are now or hereafter may
be installed upon the Premises and shall have the right of access to con-*
struct and maintain such connections. Lessee, however, will not be liable
for any additional service fees or charges as a result of such connection.
17. DAMAGE TO OR DESTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS. The damage or destruction
of improvements on the Premises shall not terminate this Lease. In the event
of damage to or destruction of Lessee-constructed improvements located within
the Premises or in the event Lessee-constructed improvements located within
the Premises are declared unsafe or unfit for use or occupancy by a public
entity with the authority to make and enforce such declaration, Lessee shall,
within a reasonable time and at its sole expense, commence and diligently
pursue to completion the repair, replacement, or reconstruction of improve-
ments necessary to permit full use and occupancy of the Premises for the
purposes permitted by this Lease. Repair, replacement or reconstruction of
improvements within the Premises shall be accomplished in a manner and
according to plans approved by County.
-16-
Notwithstanding any provision of this Clause to the contrary, the
foregoing provisions relating to the commencement and completion of repair,
replacement or reconstruction of improvements shall be subject to the provi-
sions relating to the limitations on County's right to terminate this Lease
set forth in Clause 18 (ASSIGNING, SUBLETTING AND ENCUMBERING) hereinafter.
18. ASSIGNING, SUBLETTING AND ENCUMBERING.
Lessee shall not mortgage, pledge, hypothecate, encumber, transfer
or sublease (hereinafter in tnis Lease referred to collectively as "Encum-
brance") any part or portion of Lessee's interest in the Premises. Lessee
shall not assign this Lease except that with the prior written approval of
County, Lessee may assign this Lease to the party that acquires that portion
of Lessee's corporate assets that has the contract to act as the City of
Carlsbad's municipal trash collector. A nonrefundable fee of $500 shall be
paid by Lessee to County for processing a prior consent to assign. Occupancy
of the Premises by a prospective Encumbrancer shall constitute a breach of
this Lease. Failure of Lessee to exercise control of an unauthorized activ-
ity shall constitute a material breach of this Lease and such shall be
grounds for termination.
19. SUCCESSORS IN -INTEREST. Unless otherwise provided in this Lease,
the terms, covenants and conditions contained herein shall apply to and bind
the heirs, successors, executors and administrators of all the parties nere-
to, all of whom shall be jointly and severally liable hereunder.
20. DEFAULT IN TERMS OF THE LEASE bY LESSEE: CUUNTY REMEDIES.
a. Should Lessee default in the performance of any covenant, condi-
tion or agreement contained herein, and such default is not corrected within
sixty (60) days after Lessee receives written notice from County of said
default, the Lease Administrator may declare this Lease to be terminated.
All rights of Lessee and those who claim under Lessee, stemming from this
Lease, shall expire and be of no further force and effect at the time of such
termination. In the event the Lease is so terminated, the damages County rr.ay
-17-
recover from Lessee pursuant to Civil Code Section 1951.2 include the worth
at the time of award of the amount by which the unpaid rent for the balance
of the term after the award exceeds the amount of such rental loss for the
same period that Lessee proves could be reasonably avoided.
b. Pursuant to Civil Code Section 1951.4, as an alternative to
declaring this Lease terminated as above, even if Lessee"breaches this Lease
and abandons the Premises, County may allow this Lease to continue in effect
and enforce all its rights and remedies hereunder, including the right to
recover the rent as it becomes due.
c. In the event legal action is brought to enforce or declare a
breach or default of this Lease, the successful party shall be entitled to
recover costs if sustaining such action, including reasonable attorneys'
fees, from the unsuccessful party.
21. TERMINATION BY LESSEE. Lessee may terminate this Lease at any time"
prior to January 1, 1985 by giving County 30 days prior written notice. In
the event the City of Carlsbad replaces Lessee as the City's contractor to
pick up the general public's trash within the City, Lessee may terminate this
Lease by giving County 30 days prior written notice of said termination.
Lessee's right to terminate by reason of said replacement shall expire 60
days following Lessee's last day as City's trash collection contractor.
In the event that during the term of this Lease any ordinance or law
should become effective, the terms of which so restrict the uses to which the
Premises may be put that Lessee is unable to continue the use and occupation
of the Premises substantially in the manner as allowed by this Lease, Lessee
may apply in writing to County for a mutual termination of this Lease.
Consent to said mutual termination will not be unreasonably withheld by
County. Upon such mutual termination, Lessee shall be entitled to no payment
for any remaining value of its interest.
-18-
22. QUITCLAIM OF LESSEE'S INTEREST UPON TERMINATION. Upon termination
of this Lease for any reason, including, but not limited to, termination
because of default by Lessee, Lessee shall execute, acknowledge,-and deliver
to County within thirty (30) days after receipt of written demand therefor, a
good and sufficient deed whereby all right, title, and interest of Lessee in
the Premises is quitclaimed to County. Should Lessee fail or refuse to
deliver the required deed to County, County may prepare and record a notice
reciting the failure of Lessee to execute, acknowledge and deliver such deed
and said no ; shall be conclus:",e evidence of the termination of this Lease
and of all r ,nt of Lessee or those claiming under Lessee in and to the
Premises.
23. DISPOSITION OF IMPROVEMENTS, -FIXTURES AND PERSONAL PROPERTY. All
buildings, structures, equipment, and fixtures installed by Lessee in accor-
dance with the provisions of this Lease, and not being a replacement or-1"
repair of or for any improvement or improvements now existing and belonging
to County, or subsequently installed by County, shall be and remain the prop-
erty of Lessee during the term of this Lease. It is agreed that any
building, equipment, and fixtures so installed Lessee shall be, and the
same are hereby made, security for the faithful performance of each and all
the terms, conditions and covenants of this Lease, including but not limited
to the payment of rent. Upon the termination of this Lease for any cause,
all such buildings, structures, equipment and fixtures (but not trade fix-
tures) shall become the property of County. County and Lessee agree, that
upon expiration of the full term of this Lease as shown in Clause 3 (TERM)
above, or upon any earlier termination of tin's Lease, County may require
Lessee and Lessee hereby ayrees to remove any s^ch buildings, structures,
equipment and fixtures at Lessee's own expense; provided, that the Premises
shall be left in as good order and condition as when Lessee took possession
thereof. In the event County requires Lessee to remove said buildings,
structures, equipment and fixtures, County shall giva reasonable notice to
-19-
Lessee requiring such renoval and Lessee shall commence such removal as soon
as possible following said expiration or termination and shall diligently
pursue said removal to completion. In the event Lessee does not so remove
any of such buildings, structures, equipment or fixtures as aforesaid, County
may remove, or sell, or destroy the same at the expense of Lessee, and Lessee
shall pay to County the reasonable cost of repair of damages to County's
property or improvements or to the Premises resulting from such removal, sale
or destruction. It is further agreed that any personal property not removed
from the Premises within sixty (60) days following termination of this Lease
may, at County's option, be deemed abandoned, whereupon County nay dispose of
the property as provided in Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 1980), Title
5, Part 4, Division 3 of the Civil Code of California.
24. EMINENT-DOMAIN. In the event the whole or any part of the Premises^
is condemned by a public entity other than County in the lawful exercise of
the power of eminent do.r.ain, this Lease shall terminate as to the part con-
demned on the date possession of that part is taken by said public entity.
If only a part is condemned and the taking of that part does not substantial-
ly impair the capacity of the remainder to be used for the purposes allowed
by this Lease in the opinion of the Lease Administrator, Lessee shall con-
tinue to be bound by the terms, covenants and conditions of this Lease,
except, the monthly rental shall be reduced in proportion to tr.e relationship
that the compensation paid by the public entity for the portion of the
Premises condemned bears to the value of the whole of the Prenises as of the
date possession of the part is taken by the public entity. If only a part is
condemned and the taking of the part does substantially impair the capacity
-20-
of the remainder to be used for the purposes allowed by this Lease, in the
opinion of the Lease Administrator, Lessee shall have the option to:
a. Terminate this Lease and be absolved of all obligations here-
under which have not accrued at the date possession is taken by the public
entity; or
b. Continue to occupy the remainder of the Premises and remain
bound by the terms, covenants and conditions of this Lease. If Lessee elects
to continue to occupy the remainder, the monthly rental shall be reduced in
proportion to the relationship that the compensation paid by the public
entity for the portion of the Premises condemned bears to the value of the
whole of the Premises as of the date possession of the part is taken Dy the
public entity.
Lessee shall give notice in writing of its choice of remedies -""
hereunder within thirty (30) days of the date possession of the part is taken
by the public entity. Should a portion of the Premises be condemned and the
monthly rental be reduced as provided above, the monthly rental shall con-
tinue to be subject to periodic revision in accordance with Clause 7 (RENTAL)
above.
County shall be entitled to receive and shall receive all com-
pensation for the condemnation of all or any portion of the Premises by exer-
cise of eminent domain except that Lessee shall be entitled to that portion
of said compensation which is the value of the loss of use of Lessee-con-
structed improvements for the remainder of the Lease term. The amount to
which Lessee shall be entitled hereunder shall not exceed the actual cost of
improvements constructed by Lessee, reduced in proportion to the relationship
that the expired Lease term bears to the original Lease term.
-21-
c. In the event Lessee does not concur with the opinion of the
Lease Administrator regarding capacity of remainder to be used for purposes
allowed by the Lease, Lessee may request a final determination by the Board
of Supervisors.
25. QUIET -POSSESSION. Lessee, by paying the rent and performing the
covenants and agreements as herein required, may at all times during the said
term peaceably and quietly have, hold and enjoy the Premises for the term
aforesaid. If County for any reason whatsoever cannot deliver possession of
the said Premises to Lessee at the commencement of the term herein before
specified, or if Lessee is dispossessed through action of a title superior to
County's, then in neither of such events shall County be liable to Lessee for
any loss or damage resulting therefrom, but rather there shall be determined
and stated in writing by the Board, a proportionate reduction of the rent-
covering the period or periods during which Lessee is prevented from having
the quiet possession of the Premises.
26. RESERVATIONS TO COUNTY. The Premises are accepted by Lessee subject
to any and all existing easements and encumbrances. County reserves the
right to all gas, oil, water and minerals on or beneath the Premises and
right to install, lay, construct, maintain, repair and operate such sanitary
sewers, drains, storm sewers, pipelines, manholes and connections; water, oil
and gas pipelines; telephone and teleghraph power lines; and the appliances
and appurtenances necessary or convenient in connection therewith, in, over,
upon, through, across and along the Premises or any part thereof, and to
enter the Premises for any and all such purposes. County reserves the right
to grant franchises, easements, rights of way and permits in, over, upon,
-22-
through, across and along and all portions of the Premises. No right
reserved by County in this Clause shall be so exercised as to interfere
unreasonably with Lessee's operations hereunder.
County agrees that rights granted to third parties by reason of this
Clause shall contain provisions that the surface of the land shall be
restored as nearly as practicable to its original condition upon the comple-
tion of any construction. County further agrees that should the exercise of
these rights temporarily interfere with the use of any or all of the Premises
by Lessee, the rental shall be reduced in proportion to the interference with
Lessee's use of the Premises.
27. EFFECT OF SURRENDER. The voluntary or involuntary surrender of this
Lease by Lessee shall not work a merger. Such surrender, or the termination
of this Lease by mutual agreement, shall at the option of County terminate'"
any or all existing permits, subleases or subtenancies granted by Lessee or
may, at the option of County, operate as an assignment to it of Lessee's
rights and/or of any and/or all of such permits, subleases or subtenancies.
28. LEASE-SUBORDINATE-TO CONDITIONS-AND RESTRICTIONS. This Lease shall
be subordinate to and subject to the terms, conditions, restrictions and
other provisions of any existing or future permit, lease and/or agreement
between County and the United States of America and/or any other local, State
or Federal agency, relative to the control, operation or maintenance of the
Airport, the execution of which has been or will be required as a condition
precedent to the operation or control of, or to the expenditure of Federal
-23-
funds for, the Airport. Lessee agrees to be bound by such terms, conditions,
restrictions and provisions and, whenever the County may so demand, to
execute, acknowledge or consent formally to such terms, conditions, restric-
tions or provisions.
29. UNLAWFUL USE. Lessee warrants that no improvements shall oe
erected, placed upon, operated nor maintained within the Premises, nor any
business or other activity conducted or carried on therein or therefrom, in
violation of the terms of this Lease, or of any regulation, order of law,
statute, by-law, or ordinance of a governmental agency having jurisdiction
and any breach of said warranty shall constitute a breach of this Lease.
30. ABANDONMENT. If Lessee abandons the Premises or is dispossessed by
process of law or otherwise, any personal property belonging to Lessee and
left on the Premises sixty (60) days after such abandonment or dispossession -1"
shall be deemed to have been tranferred to County. County shall have the
right to remove and to dispose of such property without liability therefore
to Lessee or to any person claiming under Lessee and shall have no need to
account therefor.
31. HOLDING OVER. In the event Lessee shall hold over after the term
herein granted, such holding shall be deemed to be a tenancy from year to
year; provided, however, either party may terminate this Lease at any time
during said holding over by giving the other party at least one year's prior
written notice. Such notice shall be given in accordance with Clause 9
(NOTICES). Such tenancy shall be governed by the terms, conditions and
covenants contained in this Lease.
-24-
32. AMENDMENTS. This Lease sets forth all of the agreements and under-
standings of the parties and any iiiondification hereof must be written.
33. LEASE -ORGANIZATION. The various headings and numbers herein, the
grouping of provisions of this Lease into separate clauses and paragraphs,
and the organization hereof, are for the purpose of convenience only and
shall not be considered otherwise.
34. FORCE MAJEURE. If either party hereto shall be delayed or prevented
from the performance of any act required hereunder by reason of acts of God,
restrictive governmental laws or regulations, or other cause without fault
and beyond the control of the party obligated (financial inability excepted),
performance of such act shall be excused for the period of the delay; and the
period for the performance of any such act shall be extended for a period
equivalent to the period of such delay. However, nothing in this Clause^
shall excuse Lessee from the prompt payment of any rental or other charge
required of Lessee, except as may be expressly provided elsewhere in this
Lease.
35. PARTIAL -INVALIDITY. If any term, covenant, condition or provision
of this Lease is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid,
void or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions hereof shall remain in
full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalid-
ated thereby.
36. HAIVER -OF -RIGHTS. The failure of County or Lessee to insist upon
strict performance of any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this Lease
shall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy that County or Lessee may
have, and shall not be deosned a waiver of rights to require strict perfor-
mance of all the terms, covenants and conditions of the Lease thereafter nor
-25-
a waiver of any remedy for the subsequent breach or default of any term,
covenant or condition of the Lease.
37. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION REQUIREMENTS. In the event there is
any conflict between the provisions in this Clause and the other provisions
in this Lease, the provisions in this Clause shall take precedence.
a. Lessee, for itself, its heirs, personal representatives, succes-
sors in interest and assigns, as a part of the consideration hereof, does
hereby covenant and agree as a covenant running with the land that in the
event facilities are constructed, maintained or otherwise operated on the
said property described in this Lease for a purpose for which a DOT program
or activity is extended or for another purpose involving the provision of
similar services or benefits, Lessee shall maintain and operate such facili-
ties and services in compliance with all other requirements imposed by or-1"
pursuant to Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, DOT, Subtitle A, Office of
the Secretary, Part 21, Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs of
the Department of Transportation-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, and as said Regulations may be amended.
b. Lessee, for itself, its personal representatives, successors in
interest and assigns, as a part of the consideration hereof, does hereby
covenant and agree as a covenant running with the land that: (1) no person
on the grounds of race, color or national origin shall be excluded from
participation in, denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to dis-
crimination in the use of said facilities, (2) that in the construction of
any improvements on, over or under such land and the furnishing of services
thereon, no person on the grounds of race, color or national origin shall be
-26-
excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or otherwise be sub-
ject to discrimination, (3) that Lessee shall use the Premises in compliance
with all other requirements imposed by or pursuant to Title 49, Code of
Federal Regulations, Department of Transportation, Subtitle A, Office of the
Secretary, Part 21, Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs of the
Department of Transportation-Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964, and as said Regulations may be amended.
c. That in the event of breach of any of the above nondiscrimina-
tion covenants, County shall have the right to terminate this Lease and to
reenter and repossess said land and the facilities thereon, and hold the same
as if said Lease had never been made or issued. This provision does not
become effective until the procedures of 49 CFR Part 21 are followed and
completed including expiration of appeal rights.
d. Lessee shall furnish its accommodations and/or services on a
fair, equal and not unjustly discriminatory basis to all users thereof and it
shall charge fair, reasonable and not unjustly discriminatory prices for each
unit or service; PROVIDED, THAT Lessee may be allowed to make reasonable and
nondiscriminatory discounts, rebates or other similar type of price reduc-
tions to volume purchasers.
e. Non-compliance with Provision d. above shall constitute a
material breach thereof and in the event of such non-compliance County shall
have the right to terminate this Lease and the estate hereby created without
liability therefore, or at the election of County or the United States either
or both said Governments shall have the right to judicially enforce said
Provisions.
-27-
f. Lessee agrees that it shall insert the above five (5) Provisions
in any sublease by which said Lessee grants a riyht or privilege to any
person, firm or corporation to render accommodations and/or services to the
public on the Premises herein leased.
g. Lessee assures that it will undertake an affirmative action
program as required by 14 CFR Part 152, Subpart E, to insure that no person
shall on the grounds of race, creed, color, national origin or sex be
excluded from participating in any employment activities covered in 14 CFR
Part 152, Subpart E. Lessee assures that no person shall be excluded on
these grounds from participating in or receiving the services or benefits of
any program or activity covered by this subpart. Lessee assures that it will
require that its covered suborganizations provide assurances to Lessee that
they similarly will undertake affirmative action programs and that they will •*"
require assurances from their suborganizations, as required by 14 CFR Part
152, Subpart E, to the same effect.
h. County reserves the right to further develop or improve the
landing area of the Airport as it sees fit, regardless of the desires or view
of Lessee, and without interference or hindrance.
i. County reserves the right, but shall not be obligated to Lessee,
to maintain and keep in repair the landing area of the Airport and all
publicly-owned facilities of the Airport, together with the right to direct
and control all activities of Lessee in this regard.
j. This Lease shall be subordinate to the provisions and require-
ments of any existing or future agreement between County and United States,
relative to the development, operation or maintenance of the Airport.
-28-
k. Lessee agrees to comply with the notification and review
requirei.ients covered in Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Regulations in the
event any future structure or building is planned for the leased Premises, or
in the event of any planned modification or alteration of any present or
future building or structure situated on the leased Premises.
1. It is understood and agreed that nothing herein contained shall
be construed to grant or authorize the granting of an exclusive right within
the meaning of Section 303 of the Federal Aviation Act.
m. There is hereby reserved to County, its successors and assigns,
for the use and benefit of the public, a right of flight for the passage of
aircraft in the airspace above the surface of the Premises herein leased.
This public right of flight shall include the right to cause in said airspace
any noise inherent in the operation of any aircraft used for navigation orr
flight through the said airspace or landing at, taking off from or operation
on the Airport.
n. Lessee by accepting this expressly agrees for itself, its suc-
cessors and assigns that it will not erect nor permit the erection of any
structure or object nor permit the growth of any tree on the land leased
hereunder to a height greater than 35 feet above the existing grade. In the
event the aforesaid covenants are breached, County reserves the right to
enter upon the land leased hereunder and to remove the offending structure or
object and cut the offending tree, all of which shall be at the expense of
Lessee.
o. Lessee by accepting this Lease agrees for itself, its successors
and assigns that it will not make use of the leased Premises in any manner
-29-
which might interfere with the landing and taking off of aircraft from the
Airport or otherwise constitute a hazard. In the event the aforesaid cove-
nant is breached, County reserves the right to enter upon the Premises hereby
leased and cause the abatement of such interference at the expense of
Lessee.
p. This Lease and all the provisions hereof shall be subject to
whatever right the United States Government now has or in the future may have
or acquire, affecting the control, operation, regulation and taking over of
said Airport or the exclusive or non-exclusive use of the Airport by the
United States during the time of war or national emergency.
33. COUNTY'S-RIGHT TO-RE-ENTER. Lessee agrees to yield and peaceably
deliver possession of the Premises to County on the date of termination of
this Lease, whatever the reason for such termination.
Upon giving written notice of termination to Lessee or upon expira-
tion of the term of this Lease, County shall have the right to re-enter and
take possession of the Premises on the date such termination becomes effec-
tive without further notice of any kind and without institution of summary or
regular legal proceedings. Termination of the Lease and re-entry of the
Premises by County shall in no way alter or diminish any obligation of Lessee
accrued or accruing under the Lease terms and shall not constitute an accep-
tance or surrender.
Lessee waives any and all rights of redemption under any existing or
future law or statute in the event of eviction from or dispossession of the
Premises for any reason or in the event County re-enters and takes possession
of the Premises in a lawful manner.
-30-
Lessee agrees that should the wanner or method employed by County in
re-entering or taking possession of the Premises give Lessee a cause of
action for damages or in forcible entry and detainer, the total amount of
damages to which Lessee shall be entitled in any such action shall be one
dollar ($1.00). Lessee agrees that this Clause may be filed in any such
action, and that when filed it shall constitute a stipulation of Lessee
fixing the total damages to which Lessee is entitled in such an action.
39. TIME. Time is of the essence of this Lease.
40. AFFIRMATIVE-ACTION -PROGRAM. Lessee shall comply with the Affirma-
tive Action Program for Vendors as set forth in Article IIIK (commencing at
Section 84) of the San Diego County Administrative Code, which program is
incorporated herein by reference. A copy of the Affirmative Action Program
for Vendors will be furnished upon request. -*"
41. NQNDISCRIMINATION. Lessee herein covenants by and for itself, its
successors and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through it, and
this Lease is made and accepted upon and subject to the condition that there
shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of
persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status,
national origin or ancestry in the leasing, subleasing, transferring, use,
occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the leased premises nor shall the Lessee
itself, or any person claiming under or through it, establish or permit any
such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to
the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, sub-
lessees, subtenants or vendees in the leased premises.
-31-
• I
42. SPECIAL CONDITIONS.
a. Removal of County-Property. County reserves the right to remove
or cause to be removed within one year from the commencement date of this
Lease any or all of the equipment and appurtenances on the Premises formerly
used by the County to shred, separate, sort and compact refuse. County also
reserves the right to remove portions of the buildings having said equipment
and appurtenances during the removal process. Lessee agrees to cooperate
with County in regard to access and use of the Premises during the process of
appraising, auctioning and removing said equipment and appurtenances.
b. Restricted Use -of - Improvements. Lessee shall not occupy or use
those portions of the improvements used to house the equipment formerly used
to shred, sort and compact refuse. After County has caused said equipment to
be removed, Lessee may occupy and use the area formerly having said equipment-*"
after Lessee, at Lessee's expense, makes said area safe for occupancy and
use.
c. Road -Improvements. Lessee acknowledges that a portion of the
road near the easterly portion of the Premises is not on the Premises.
Lessee may use and maintain said portion of the road off the Premises until
County develops said area and or relocates the chain link fence now located
easterly of said road to the approximate Premises boundary. Upon prior writ-
ten approval of the Airports Director, Lessee may develop a road on the
Premises to replace said portion off the Premises.
In the event Lessee's access between the Premises and El Camino
Real is restricted by a governmental agency and such restriction requires
Lessee to access the Premises by use of the proposed road (now tentatively
named Faraday Road) north of the Premises, County agrees to permit Lessee to
-32-
extend the access road now existing between El Camino Real and the Premises
to Faraday Road. Such extension shall be built on an alignment and in accor-
dance with 'plans and specifications previously approved in writing by the
Airports Director. County shall not be responsible for any of the costs or
expenses in planning, constructing or maintaining said extension, except
that, in the event Lessee constructs said extension at Lessee's expense,
Lessee may, during the first 60 months of this Lease, deduct 1/120 of
Lessee's actual cost in constructing said extension or $583.33, whichever is
least, from the- monthly rental due County. For each month this Lease
continues in effect beyond the 60th month of this Lease, Lessee shall repay
to County the same amount deducted monthly by Lessee during the first 60
months of this Lease. Said monthly repayments shall continue until the total
amount repaid to County equals the amount deducted during the first 60 months -
of thi's Lease or until this Lease is terminated, whichever occurs first.
Said payments to be made by Lessee to County shall be subject to the same
delinquent penalties 'imposed on late rental payments in Clause 8 (LATE RENTAL
PAYMENT}. Lessee's use of said access road and extension shall be non-exclu-
sive. Upon completion of said access road extension, Lessee shall provide
County with an itemized statement of the costs of construction of said exten-
sion and said statement shall be sworn to be true by Lessee under penalty of
perjury.
d. Permit. This Lease shall terminate December 31, 1984 if Lessee
has- not obtained a permit from the City of Carlsbad to operate a storage and
repair facility for waste collection trucks and recycling facility on the
.Premises. Until Lessee provides proof of having been granted the necessary
-33-
environmental, land use and waste facility permit by the appropriate regula-
tory agencies, no municipal, residential, agricultural, demolition, construc-
tion, industrial, institutional, infectious or commercial or hazardous wastes
are to be processed or stored on the leasehold site for any period of time
pursuant to Natural Resources Code, Title 14, Chapter 5, Article 3.
The occupancy and operation of the Premises by Lessee shall be subject
to the terms, conditions, restrictions and other provisions of any existing
or future permit, lease and/or agreement between County and the United States
of America and/or any other local, State or Federal agency relative to the
control, operation or maintenance of a solid waste collection, transfer,
recycling and/or disposal facility.
IN WITNESS nhEREUF, the parties hereto have executed this Lease the day :
i-
and year first above written.
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
LESSEE: a Califorttiax^Srporation
Dated ~7~ ^- %</ By G^'^>£/c*tffl ^^^^
Dated By
COUNTY/UF SAN DJEGO
By '
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Approved and/or authorized by the
Board of Supervisors of the
Of <?pr. rM~~n
SEP 1 i 1984
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
-34-
PALOMAR AJHPORT
F/P 74- OJ4J90
\48' RD. 8 UTILITY ESMT.
F/P 82-201566
R.O.S. 5533
NORTH
Scale: f* 200*
EXHIBIT A
•T"SITE
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
FACILITY AND REAL PROPERTY DIVISION
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
IT
T-
SHEET NO
OF
PARCEL NO.
I I I I I O A I SNKJ A B
R.S. No.: .Project Title: PA/PALQMAR TRANSFER STA1IQ'
«L Authorijzed: Meyers Dated: 04-17-84 Leqals By: EngineeringDated: 12-7-83
-^als Checked; Altona Dated: 4-17-84 Proofed by:
References: TE2379; 209-050-25. B003-07
Title Report #: Dated: Updated:_
Parcel F: - 84-0127-A jape: Code:
1
•
2 Parcel No. 84-0127-A (4-17-84) (ENG:JA:rlf)
3 That, portion of Palomar Airport, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego,
State of California described in deed to the County of San Diego, recorded
4 January 18, 1974, as File/Page No. 74-014190 in the Office of the County
Recorder of said County and described as follows:
5 Commencing at the Southwesterly corner of land described in deed to the
6 City of Carlsbad, recorded June 30, 1982, as File/page No. 82-201566 in
the Office of said County Recorder; thence along an Easterly line of said
7 Palomar Airport, South 11°17'56" West (South 10°46'15" West per deed),
534.62 feet; thence leaving said Easterly line North 57027'38" East, 219.8Q
8 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING hereafter referred to as Point "A"; thence
continuing North 57°27'38" East, 483.38 feet; thence South 55°54'00" East,
229.31 feet; thence South 32°47'24" East, 196.82 feet; thence South 57°12'36"
** West, 565.00 feet to a point hereafter referred to as Point "B"; thence
in North 31°33'43" West, 123.23 feet; thence North 47°5T45" West, 42.48 feet;IU thence North 32°47'03" West, 245.62 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
' TOGETHER with an Easement for Road purposes, 50.00 foot wide, the sidelines
of said Easement lying 25.00 feet on each side of the following described
|Z center!ine:
13 BEGINNING at a point distant South 32°47'03" East, 36.50 feet from said
before described Point "A"; thence South 57°12'57" West, 58.00 feet to the
14 beginning of a tangent 100.00 foot radius curve concave Northwesterly; thence
Southwesterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 44°04'59"
15 a distance of 76.94 feet; thence tangent to said curve North 78°42'04" West,
4.70 feet to a POINT OF TERMINUS in the Easterly line of an existing 48.00
16 foot Road Easement described in said deed to the City of Carlsbad.
17 ALSO TOGETHER with an Easement for Road purposes, 30.00 foot wide, the side-
lines of said Easement lying 15.00 feet on each side of the following described
18 ' centerline:
19 BEGINNING at a point distant North 31033'43" West, 22.00 feet from said before
described Point "B"; thence South 57°12'36" West, 47.49 feet to the beginning
20 of a tangent 750.00 foot radius curve concave Southeasterly; thence South-
westerly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 08°26'32" a
distance of 110.51 feet; thence tangent to said curve South 48°46'04" West,
80.74 feet to a POINT OF TERMINUS in the Easterly line of said existing
22 48.00 foot Road Easement described in deed to the City of Carlsbad.
23 FXHIBIT B
R J Massman
Director
GILLESPIE FIELD
MCCLELLAN-PALOMAR AIRPORT __ __ 1960 JOE CROSSONI CR
RAMONAAIRPORT A K PC ) K TS III VI SIC )N EL CAjQN. CA 92020BORREGO AIRPORT / \ I IX I **-S \\ I *J L^/ I V I *J I ^^f I >l PHOVS (619) 448-3101
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
AIRPORTS DIVISION
September 17,1984
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
7204 Ponto Drive
P.O. Box 947
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Attention: Arie de Jong
Subject: McClelland-Palomar Airport - Palomar Transfer Station
Lease - County Contract No. 70630R
Enclosed for your records is a fully executed copy of the subject lease?
approved by the County Board of Supervisors on September 11, 1984.
The term of this lease is for five (5) years commencing July 1, 1984. The
Rent is $12,000 per month beginning July 1, 1981 with $9,000 per month waived
from July 1, 1984 through December 31, 1984 unless sooner occupied or used
by your corporation, in which case, the full rent will become due on the date
of occupancy. The rent will be adjusted beginning with the 13th month based
on the "Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers" and every year
thereafter.
Please remit rent due of $3,000 per month for the months of July, Au
and September 1984 to:
Controller Branch Office - Cashier
5201 Ruffin Road, Suite H, MS-0654
San Diego, CA 92123
If there are any questions please do not hesitate to call me at 448-3101.
J. F. MEYER*, Jr.
Real Property Agent
JFM:aj
Enclosures
CC: Auditor (A5); Assessor (A4); Controller Branch Office, ATTN: Darlene
Clancy (0306); McClellan Palomar Airport (N137); Real Property Manage-
ment, ATTN: Betty Burt (0200)
R. J. MASSMAN, Director
Offices of:
County Engineer
County Road Commissioner
County Surveyor
'County Airports
Flood Control*Liquid Waste
Solid Wast*
Transportation Operations
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING 2 5555 OVERLAND AVENUE
SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92123
TELEPHONE: (619) 565-5177
July IS, 1983
Mr. Arie deJong, Jr.
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
P. 0. Box 947
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Arie:
Subject: Lease Negotiations - Palomar Transfer Station
Your letter of July 8, 1983 relative to the record of our meeting
on July 7, 1983 does not reflect the position I took on a temporary
lease of the Palomar Transfer Station to Coast Waste Management.
The Department of Public Works believes it is impossible to allow
Coast Waste Management to occupy the Palomar Transfer Station on
a temporary basis.
As agreed at the meeting we are moving forward as rapidly as possible
to complete the planning and engineering for the industrial park
in which you stated you would like to be a tenant. We will meet
the deadline of August 1, 1983 for submittal of the General Plan
Amendment application to the City of Carlsbad. We can not work
with the City of Carlsbad on a General Plan' Amendment while at
the same time we are negotiating with Coast Waste Management for
a non-conforming use in the heart of the development area. The
Special Use Permit that the County had with the City of Carlsbad
has expired and the original conditions were never satisfied. The
County can not apply for a Special Use Permit for one type of use
and at the same time be applying for a General Plan Amendment and
"Rezone" that is contrary to the Special Use Permit.
The County agreed to improve El Camino Real under the terms of the
Special Use Permit for the Trash Transfer Station. When the facility
was abandoned the County agreed to improve El Camino Real as part of
the industrial park development. Your offer of $75,000 a year to
rent the facility would make it impossible for the County to fulfill
its commitment to the City of Carlsbad.
Arie deJong, Jr.
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
Palomar Transfer Station -2- July 15, 1983
I also explained at the meeting that the removal of the Trash Transfer
facilities and the concrete was essential before grading could be
done. It will take about one year to sell the equipment, remove
the buildings and dispose of the concrete. Each step requires
administrative red tape and contractors do not always complete
their assignments on time. We have already been delayed about
60 days in this process while you are trying to make a case for
temporary occupancy.
»
Since the grading for the industrial site can not take place until
the structures and concrete are removed and the environmental con-
straints restrict grading to the summer months, we are looking at
May-June 1985 as a start date. This leaves about ten months for
your temporary occupancy. Negotiations for a fair market value
rent with Coast Waste Management could take several months. The
difference between fair market rent and your offer of $75,000 is
substantial. Assuming a fair market value rent could be negotiated
there would be time for you to move in and then move out, leaving
six months or less for you to occupy the facility. This is not a
practical solution to your problem.
Finding another temporary site presents an even greater problem.
Any new temporary site requires a road, electric, water, sewer -
probably with pumping stations - and gas service. We have no sites
on airport property with these facilities that Coast Waste Management
can move to.
I also explained that we could not work our grading around an
occupied Trash Transfer Station because the new site will have
different grade elevations.
The Trash Transfer Station is located at the property boundary and
where the major circulation road (Faraday Road) crosses our property.
This road must be built in conjunction with the City of Carlsbad's
Public Works' Facility development. The road is an essential element
of our development plan because the industrial lots must front on the
road. We can not build the road and develop the lots fronting on
the road if the Trash Transfer Station remains.
A review of these facts leads to four conclusions if Coast Waste
Management were given temporary occupancy of the building.
1. The industrial park project could not proceed.
2. The temporary move to this site would eventually become
permanent.
3. Faraday Road would not be built with County funds.
4. Improvements to El Camino Real would have to be
renegotiated with the City of Carlsbad.
Arie deJong, Jr.
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
Palomar Transfer Station -3- July 15, 1983
Your letter of July 8, 1983 also speaks of making 10 acres of the
least desirable land available to Coast Waste Management and having
Municipal Engineers become acquainted with your operation.
We have given Municipal Engineers this assignment in addition to
developing standards that will make your operation compatible with
the future tenants.
In regard to the value of land that will be available for your future
use you must realize that it will have a value commensurate with the
cost of developing Faraday Road, undergrounding utilities and
providing sewer pumping stations. Consideration for lower rent
would be based primarily on the large size parcel you desire.t
I hope this clarifies our position and I look forward to meeting
you on July 20th for futher discussions.
Very truly yours,
A.C. Wafdman, Deputy Director
sportation - Avioticn
R. J. MASSMAN, Director
n Department of Public Works
I/
RJM:ACW:nc
cc: Supervisor Eckert, Attention: Lance Vollmer (A500); John Burke [0383);
Sales S Lease Committee - Supervisor Fordem (A500); Supervisor
Hamilton (A500); Rich Robinson (A6); Dennis Carroll (A6J; Frank
Aleshire, City of Carlsbad
PHONE: 753-9412
or 452-9810
7204 PONTO DRIVE. P.O. BOX 947. CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA 92008
McDOUGAL SANITATION
CARLSBAD DISPOSAL CO.
SOLANA BEACH DISPOSAL CO.
DEL MAR DISPOSAL CO.
RANCHO SANTA FE DISPOSAL CO.
SORRENTO VALLEY DISPOSAL CO.
November 2, 1982
Mr. Ben G. Clay, Project Manager
C.A.C. Development Project
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92101
Dear Mr. Clay:
I appreciated the opportunity to meet with you on October 4, 1982,
regarding our proposal to lease the Palomar Transfer Station. I
shall respond to each of the questions in your letter dated October
7, 1982, so that our proposal can be evaluated by your Sale and Lease
Committee and the Board of Supervisors. For the sake of convenience,
I have numbered your questions.
In this response, I shall use the words, "Palomar Facility" rather
than Palomar Transfer Station because I want to avoid the implication
that Coast Waste Management intends to use the Facility solely as a
transfer station. We are interested in leasing the property and
buildings which were used as a transfer station prior to July 1, 1982.
Question #1: Statement of operations of the Facility
The operation of the Facility will be in conformity with the City
of Carlsbad, C.U.P. 140 B. The activities to be carried on at
the Facility will be the operation of Coast Waste Management as
it now occurs at 7204 Ponto Drive, Carlsbad. The types of waste
that we haul is municipal solid waste. We are licensed hazardous
waste haulers. I believe that the answers to Question #2 describe
further the activities for which we intend to use the Facility.
Question f2: Allocation of space
A breakdown of the allocation of space for the facility will be
as follows:
a. General offices 3,000 - 4,000 sq. feet
b. Vehicle repair facility 12,000 + sq. feet
c. Truck parking 2 acres
d. Storage area for roll-off
boxes 1 acre
e. Bin storage, repair and
welding area .5 acre
f. Employee parking .75 acre
g. Underground fuel storage
h. Recycling, recovery, buy-back
center 5 acres
i. Dumping area for public use
and transfer to the landfill
(indoor floor area) 20,000 sq. feet
At this time we estimate expenditures of approximately $500,000 to
build new vehicle repair facility, modifications to existing buildings
to accommodate public use dumping and transfer capability, modifi-
cation of present office space to fit our needs, construction of a
recycling and buy-back center., and a central receiving location for
our satelite centers. We also anticipate having to do extensive
grading to enable us to make better use of the property.
Question 13: Current operations of Coast Waste Management
Coast Waste Management, Inc., is a North San Diego County Municipal
Solid Waste Disposal Company. The Company currently operates out of
five (5) locations. Our main location, including general offices, is
located at 7204 Ponto Drive, Carlsbad, California (aporoximately 2.5
acres).
The second location is 627 E. Mission Road, San Marcos, California
92069. This location serves primarily as a truck body and paint shop
and engine repair (approximately 1 acre).
»
The third location is 622 E. Mission Road, San Marcos, California
92069 which is used as storage for spare trucks and parts (approxi-
mately 1.5 acres).
The fourth location (Dawson property in Vista) is used for roll-off
box and bin storage (approximately 2 acres).
The fifth location is the Del Mar Recycling Center located at 2265
Jimmy Durante Blvd., Del M.ar, California 92014 (approximately 1.5
acres).
The Company serves Carlsbad/La Costa, Del Mar, Sol ana Beach, Rancho
Santa Fe, portions of Leucadia, Cardiff, and Encinitas, plus major
accounts in the City of San Diego to the south, and the San Onofre
plant in the north.
We are licensed general contractors (license #8291338). The Company
is not currently engaged in any construction projects.
The Company has continuously been in business since 1969. The
Company has been owned and managed as Coast Waste Management, Inc.,
since 1977. Prior to the formation of Coast Waste Management, the
Company operated under the following O.B.A.'s:
McDougal Sanitation
Carlsbad Disposal Company
Sol ana Beach Disposal Company
Del Mar Disposal Company
Rancho Santa Fe Disposal Company
Sorrento Valley Disposal Company
North County Disposal
Question #4: Financial statements as prepared by a C.P.A.
See attached as Exhibit A.
Question #5: Officers of the Company
President and Chief Executive- Officer
Mr. Arie De Jong, Jr.
622 East Mission Road
San Marcos, California 92069
Business phone: (714)753-9412
Residence phone: (714)744-3221
Mr. De Jong is a 33-year resident of North San Diego County in the
Escondido and San Marcos area. He is a naturalized citizen of the
United States having immigrated from the Netherlands with his family
in 1949. Mr. De Jong attended local schools. He is one of the
founding principals of Hollandia Dairies of San Marcos. After serving
in the U. S. Army for two years, he worked in all phases of the family
business, including sales and marketing, herd management, and operations.
He is active in community service and is past-president of the Escondido
Kiwanis Club and a past director of the San Marcos Chamber of Commerce.
In March 1977, he purchased the Company now know as Coast Waste Manage-
ment.
Executive Vice-President
Mr. Edward Boersma
4818 Neblina Drive
Carlsbad, California 92008
Residence phone: (714)434-4930
Mr. Boersma is a 35-year resident of Southern California. He is a
naturalized citizen of the United States having immigrated from the
Netherlands with his family in 1947. His family background is dairying.
He is a graduate of California State University at Long Beach. He served
ten (10) years in the field of secondary education and ten (10) years in
the construction of mobile home parks as a licensed general contractor.
He is currently the owner/operator of a company called Dairy Pest
Guard Systems. He joined Coast Waste Management in July 1981. He is
active in community affairs and has served as past-president and directory
of the Chino Valley Chamber of Commerce and is a current member and
director of the Carlsbad Hi-Noon Rotary Club.
Vice-President and Operations Manager *,..
Mr. William Walls
1743 Redwing Street
San Marcos, California 92069
Residence phone: (714)744-1382
Mr. Walls is a long-time resident of North San Diego County. He attended
local schools and served in the U. S. Army. He served Golden Arrow
Dairies of San Diego many years as an independent distributor and sales
manager. In 1968 he joined Holland!a Dairy as Sales Manager. He joined
Coast Waste Management in 1979 as Manager of Operations.
Secretary/Treasurer/Controller
Mr. Michael Dybka
1626 David Drive
Escondido, California 92025
Residence phone: (714)745-3845
Mr. Dybka is the former controller of Golf Craft, Inc., of Escondido.
Golf Craft, Inc., is a wholly owned subsidiary of Acushnet, Inc., of
New Bedford, Mass. Mr. Dybka joined the predecessor of Coast Waste
Management, McDougal Sanitation, as controller in 1976. In 1977, Mr.
Dybka became the controller of Coast Waste Management, the position he
holds today.
Question #6: A statement related to the need for a North County Transfer
Station ,
It is difficult, at this time, to make a definitive statement related
to the need for a North County Transfer Station. The disposal industry
appears to be changing rapidly, especially in North County. We do not
know how the proposed trash to energy plant at the San Marcos Landfill
will affect us, the other haulers, and the cities we presently serve.
The closure of the Palomar Facility is costing us money because of the
increased haul distance and extra wear and tear on the trucks. There-
fore, if it is economically feasible, Coast Waste Management proposes
to retain transfer station capability for future use if there is a demon-
strated need. The questions of landfill siting, landfill lifespan,
distances to new landfills, demographics, trash to energy plants, cannot
be answered at this time. It obviously follows that I am unable to
provide quantified market data demonstrating the need for a transfer
station. Our proposals as set forth in Questions One and Two continue
to remain our primary reason for wishing to lease the Facility.
Question 17: Company organization chart
See Exhibit B.
Question #8: Project financing information
It is our belief that the management of Coast Waste Management has a
proven track record to which this proposal relates. We have met all of
our past obligations in a timely manner and fully intend to do so in the
future. With the concurring advice from our legal and financial counsel,
we fully anticipate meeting our lease payments to the County out of current
and future cash flow. Rent payments, or lease payments, or mortgage pay-
ments are considered a normal cost of doing business whether our location
is 7204 Ponto Drive or the Palomar Facility. Therefore, we expect to meet
our payments to the County from operating revenues. '
Question #9: Cash flow
We do not anticipate a reduced cash flow as may be suggested in the
question. In fact, we expect our business to expand because the growth
projections for North San Diego County.indicate significant growth for
the next ten (10) years resulting in an increased cash flow.
Question #10: Credit references from First Interstate Bank
See Exhibit C.
Question #11: Statement regarding bonds
Since Coast Waste Management is a 100% wholly owned private corporation,
the Company does not issue corporate bonds. Any reference to bonds in
our original proposal simply attempted to show that Coast Waste Manage-
ment has always been able to post adequate performance bonds whenever
requested to do so. The Company is not a public entity. Any bonds that
we have posted have been provided by the Fireman's Insurance Fund.
Statement regarding Lease Proposal
Coast Waste Management proposes the following:
•
1. Coast Waste Management proposes to lease from the County of
San Diego the Palomar Facility on a long-term basis.
2. The Facility consists of 21.8 gross acres of which approximately
11.8 acres are usable.
3. Coast Waste Management wishes to lease the entire parcel including
all present buildings and structures.
4. Coast Waste Management proposes to pay rent in the amount of
$8,500.00 per month or $102,000.00 per year.
5. A rent adjustment is to be made for the capital improvements
Coast Waste Management intends to make at the Facility as
discussed in Question #2.
6. Coast Waste Management is also interested in an option to
purchase the Facility at a pre-agreed price.
In conclusion I wish to summarize this letter by emphasizing to the County
that Coast Waste Management is a quasi public utility which exists to serve
the public interest. .Since all levels of government, including the County
of San Diego, serve in the public interest, it seems to me that an equitable
agreement can be reached concerning the Palomar Facility.
We look forward to meeting with you and your staff soon. If you have any
questions, meanwhile, please call. Attached to this letter are:
1. Financial data
2. Company organization chart
3. Statement from First Interstate Bank
4. Statement from the City of Carlsbad
Very truly yours,
fl - '*
Edward Boersma
EB/mb
cc: Supervisor Paul Eckert
Supervisor Paul Fordem
Supervisor Roger Hedgecock
Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
Mr. Al Waldman, Department of Airports
Mr. Frank Alshire, Carlsbad City Manager
Mayor Mary Casler, City of Carlsbad
CUASfMA&Ti. MANACtMtNT
INC
7204 PONTU OH BOA 947
CARLSBAD CA V200d
EXHIBIT A
19 MO
2001
20U4
2005
2006
2007
200V
?0wy
2490
?499
2500
2690
2699
2700
2710
2712
2700
2V 75
2*00
1000 CURRENT ASSETS
toio CASH - PETTY
1019 CASH
1040 1ST SANK. BUSINESS SVUS
10*5 MOLLAND(A DAIRY EM/BE2
10SO CASH 1ST INTERSTATE
1052 1ST INTERSTATE PAYHOLL
1039 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
1302 PREPAID TAXES
1303 PREPAID EXPENSE-OTHEH
I 3 JO TOTAL. CURRENT ASSETS
BALANCE SHEET
JUNt 30.
ASSETS
» I. 000. 00
t. 690. 09
3.433.23
43L.fo7.9l-,
•02.045.27
9,340.03
9.039.96
% 364.o44.dfi
1400 PROPERTY 6 EQUIPMENT * 2.302.402.bJ
1510 ACCUM. DEPRECIATION 1.466.025.00-
1590 NET PROPERTY C CQUIP.
1600 UTHCR ASSETS
1601 OTHER ASSETS
IdVO TOTAL OTHER ASSCTS
V 119.777.5O
11V.777.50
TOTAL ASSETS 1.340.au0.2i
LlAdlLlTlES C EQUITY
CUHHENT LlADiLlIlti
CUHft PORT NUTES PAY.
ACCOUNTS PAYAOLE
t-MP UNION ttELKAfcE CO NT
UNION DUES *
EMPLOYEE SAVlNtiS
(JONUSES PAYABLE
UTMEH CUHRCNT L.IAU.
TOTAL CuHHENf L1AU.
LONG TERM DEBT
NOTES PAYABLE
TOTAL LUMC TERM DEBT
TOTAL LIABILITIES
EQUITY
COMMON STOCK
ADDITIONAL PAID-IN CAP
HETAINliO LAKNINCb
NET INCUMt:
TOTAL EQUITY
* 170. 439. 67-
196. 229. 60-
103.04-
50.00-
15.000.00-
% 335,002.66-
» 46*.295.12-
» 335.002.06-
» 600.297.9«-
• AOO.OO-
76.I01.67-
231.372.03-
2J2.94fl.3J-
540.582.23-
PREPAftED WITHOUT AUDIT
CJAt>T BASIL
INC
72J4 PONTU OR SOX 947
CAHL&tlAO CA 9200*
•UU.ANCE SHEET CONTINUED
JUN£ JJ»
2940 TOTAL LIAU. i. EQUITY S I • 3*0, ddO.21-
PWEPAREU WITHOUT AUOIT
COASTttASTE MANAOtHdNT
INC
7204 PQNTO OR BOX 947
CAHLSBAU CA 92000
3000
3010
3011
3050
3055
3090
3049
3990
5000
SOOI
5002
6010
5012
5014
so is
5016
5020
6024
5030
5040
5042
50*3
5045
50 aO
5060
50o2
5070
S1O1
MJ3
51 OS
51 1U
5120
5140
5150
5155
5160
51 65
1.170
5176
5202
5205
5210
5220
5225
INCOME STAJEMENT'
JULY l.lVttl Tu JUNE J0«19b2
I MONTH PERIOD
RATIO AMOUNT
REVENUE
OI5POSM. FEES RES1D.
DISPOSAL FEES-COMML
OTHER INCOME
SALE OF ALUM CASN tt/M
INTEREST INCOME
REFUND CUSTOMER ACCTS
TOTAL REVENUE
EXPENSES
OFFICE C AOMIN MACES
DFFICEHS SALARIES
SALARIES C bAGES
MECHANICS SHOP «Ai.£S
CONTAINER REPAIR MACES
OUTRIDE SEU vices
YARli C BLOC MA INT.
PAYROLL TAXES
CROUP INSUHANCE
LICENSES (, FEES
EQUIPMENT RENTAL
RENTAL - OTHEH
LEASED PROPERTY-OTHER
SMALL SHOP TllOLS
33.76 * 97.163.44-
184.970.93-
1.253.78-
2*545.02-
64.27
.44
.88
• O6
100.00 * 287.820.83-
JtPRcCIATlON
BAD JEdT EXPENSL
PARTS
TKUCK
MISC. HEPAIMS
GENEHAL REPAIRS
LUBRICANTS
TIKE & TUOfcS
DUMP FtES
LAUNURV
PURCHASE ALUM CAN* ETC
INSURANCE
WORKMEN'S CUMP INS
MISCELLANEOUS
MEDICAL EXAMS EMPLOYE!:
AOVEHI IS ING
eMPLUYF-E UtNCMTS
TNAVtiL C ENTERTAINMENT
LEGAL & ACCOUNTING
MANAGEMENT StHVICC FEL
YEAR
RATIO
TO DATE
AMOUNT
34.66 *
63.66
.89
.09
.01
100.00 S
I .070.655*3!
1 .967.307.1!
3.20
.12
8.97
3.11
4.4V
1.34
.19
• 90
1.92
.59
3.36
.51
9.23
6.7d
.49
1.80
5. 10
.51
.23
.55
3.1V
17.87
.36
.46
.87
I.8J
.06
• Ol
.20
.07
.43
1.03
* 9.217.01
340.00-
25.812.22
8.956.79
12.929.10
3 .84d.83
539.88
2.768.07
5. 520. 95
1.704.00
V. 683. 00
1.458.21
26.565.26
19.500.00
l.«15.00
5.18J.45
14.83d. 71
1 .471 .7o
648.88
1.570.13
9*195.76
51.443.04
1 .027.54
1*337.07
2.500.00
5*297.48
160.56
37.00
' 572.28
190.67
1.235.12
2.978.73
2.67
2.0J
12.3V
3.40
3.42
I .56
• 65
1.90
1.20
1.32
. 3.75
.64
1.40
5.46
7.57
• 6O
2.66
4.76
.21
• lo
.59
l.3o
17.95
.45
.56
I.Jl
2.34
.20
.01
• 04
• 0V
.67
.73
.03
27.444.0.
2.810.9<
273. 6<
3. 09O.341.lt
d2.430«d«
62.790.7J
382.97J.2J
104.968.21
105. 699. S*:
I6.986.2b
60.569. Jo
37. 212. J.
40.762.91
1 15.916.0 J
10.743. 9t«
43.25U.OU
234. 000. UO
15.J42.00
147.692. do
4.991.JU
ld.304.lt,
41.966.10
554.648.70
13.78J.7J
17.3VI.i7
40. 497. />>
72. J19.<*V
6.1 O6.t»v
211. JO
I . Io7.cc
2.S26.2/
20.722.16
22.6S6.dt
827.00
PREPARED WITHOUT AUDIT
COASTbASTE MANAGEMENT
INC
7204 PON Til OR BUX 947
CARLSBAD CA 92008
INCOME STATEMENT CONTINUED
JULY I»l«8l TU JUNE 30t
1 MUNTH PERIOD YEAR
RATIO AMOUNT RATIO
TO DATE
AMOUNT
5230 DUES t SUBSCRIPTIONS .24
5235 CREDIT t COLLECTIONS .02
5240 CONTRIBUTIONS 1.74
5250 INTEREST .*»*>
5252 .01
5255 POSTAGE S, METER .64
5260 OFFICE SUPPLIES .55
5262 CONTAINED MAINTENANCE 1.98
5265 MAINTENANCE OFF EQUIP 1.59
5270 TELEPHONE .55
5280 UTILITIES " .J*
5290 FUEL USE TAX .25
5295 FRANCHISE TAX-CALIF
5300 TAXES-OTHER .14
5302 FRANCHISE FEE -OELMAH |.08
5310 PROPERTY TAX .18
5320 riE-LOCATING ExP .99
5980 TOTAL EXPENSES 90.15 *
5990 NET OPERATING INCOME 9.8!
695.82
52.00
5*020*OO
723*lo
30*00
1•572*04
5*700*72
4*576.00
2*457.70
978*55
719*45
414*00
3*114*14
510.00-
• 29
• US
.19
• B2
.72
1*23
.73
.70
• 39
.07
8.999.14
1*426.5;
5.719.UC
25*231./I
60.0V
9*721.1:
22*297.0.
38. 100.5*.
22*491.9J
23*581*51
11.965.oC
9*ol8.51
259*463*99
.16
1.4V
92*56 » 2*860*39
2*060.It
o*9fr3.id
4*879*4U
• 2B*3S6*B4-7*44 » 229*947
6000
6020
69 00
69VO
OTHER INCOML' CEXPENSES
INCOME TAX EXPENSE 1*04 * 3*001*00-
TOTAL OTHER INC. CfcXP. 1.04 * 3*001.03-
.10 * 3*001.00
.10 * 4*001.UU
NET INCOME 10.419 t 31 *3S7.a4-7.54 232.94a.tiJ
PRCPAMED .ITHOUT AUDIT
COMPANY ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
OF
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
PRESIDENT, OWNER
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT
ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER
1
OPERATIONS
1
OFFICE
PERSONNEL]
ROUTING
1
SALES
DRIVERS
I
MECHANICAL
SHOPS
1
WELDINGREPAIRS
PUBLICRELATIONS
NORTH COUNTY DISPOSAL
SPECIAL
PROJECTS
RESOURCE SALVAGE
OPERATIONS
RECYCLING
OPERATIONS
SATELLITE
CENTERS
EXHIBIT B
o First Interstate Bank
of California
BOX 177B
Escondido, CA 92025 Tom Rueeell
71* 746-4600 Assistant Manager
October 28, 1982
Ben G. Clay, Project Manager
C.A.C. Development Project
County of San Diego
Chief Administrative Office
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92101
Dear Mr. Clay:
First Interstate Bank has been the primary bank for Coast
Waste Management, Inc. since January 1979. During this
period we have made loan commitments, both secured and un-
secured, to a medium six figures. Currently Coast Waste
has a medium six figure unsecured credit line available for
which there is presently no outstanding balance. All credit
arrangements have been paid as agreed or have exceeded the
performance requirement.
Coast Waste has both business checking and savings accounts
with our office, maintaining all accounts in a satisfactory
manner with a five figure average balance in both DDA and
IDA accounts.
t
Coast Waste Management, Inc. is a valued customer of First
Interstate Bank, whose principals are held in high regard.
Based on our past relationship and present management, we are
ready to entertain any reasonable and economically feasable
request for credit by Coast Waste Management, Inc.
Tom Russell
Assistant Manager
TR/dp
cc: Arie DeJong
EXHIBIT C
3 J. MASSMAN, Director
O'f.ces of:
County Engineer
County Road Commissioner
County Surveyor
County Airports
? ood Control
L'sutd Waste
So: id waste
Trinsoortation Operations
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING 2 5555 OVERLAND AVENUE
SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92123
TELEPHONE: (714) 565-5177
May 18, 1982
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
TOM HAMILTON
First District
PAUL W. FORDEMSecond District
ROGER HEDGECOCK
Third District
JIM BATESFourth District
PAUL ECKERTFifth District
t"*s3rMr. John Hagerty \£ DEPARTS**"
Executive Officer
State Solid Waste Management Board
1020 Ninth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Palomar Transfer Station (Permit 37-AA-101)
Dear Mr. Hagerty:
On March 16, 1982 (26) the San Diego County Board of Supervisors
directed that the existing contract for operation of the Palomar
Transfer Station be cancelled effective July 1, 1982. The Board of
Supervisors also directed that a lease for the existing facility be
prepared. This will appear on the Board of Supervisors' Agenda of
June 8, 1982.
The lease offers the private sector an opportunity for access to the
property and the improvements thereon. We anticipate bid opening on
any lease of this facility on or before July 6, 1982. The lease
of this facility is not limited to use for solid waste transfer or
other solid waste processes.
It is the County's intent to cease County solid waste operations at
the Palomar Transfer Station at 5:00 PM on June 30, 1982. This facility
operates under the terms and conditions of Solid Waste Facility Permit
37-AA-101.
If you have any questions, please contact J. S. Burke at
(714) 565-5363. .
Sincerely,
J.^MASSMAN, Director
Department of Public Works
RJM:SJR:ck
cc: Supervisor Tom Hamilton, Member, SSWMB
CA(5
DCAO
Dept. Health Services
throw
. mild, with many neither reamng-u....
"You've got to remember that of the"10,OUU siuu—
here, at least 9,700 are only interested in getting an edu-
cation so they can have their three cars, 1.2 children and a
home on Mount La Jolla. They are not remotely involved
in, nor do they care about, all this kind of stuff," said
Randon E: Woodard, a senior student affairs officer who
has spent years advising and working with the student
body governmesl
"the vast majority of students are apolitical, involved
in neither the left nor the right. It is a relative handful,
and the same fcandful, that give these issues substance
every time," he said.
THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO IS
ACCEPTING BID PROPOSALS
TO LEASE
THE PALOMAR AIRPORT TRASH TRANSFER STATION
SITE: 21.7 acres of real property.
LOCATION: Palomar Airport in the City of Carlsbad.
IMPROVEMENTS: Approximately 21,800 square
feet of building used as solid waste transfer station.
ZONING: MQ (City of Carlsbad).
MINIMUM RENT BID: $224,000 per year.
LENGTH OF LEASE: 55 years.
BID CLOSING DATE: July 6, 1982
SEND REQUEST FOR BID PACKAGE TO:
Jim Kastorff
Department of General Services
Buildtng 2, Room 110
County Operations Building
5555 Overland Avenue
' San Diego, CA 92123
fa further information telephone 565-5228.
Oi
rai
op
un
wh
avi
M<K
Sale
FASK
SHOT
Site Data - Palomar Transfer Station
Project Description:
Renewal of existing Palomar transfer station permit located at 5960 El Camino
Real, northeast of the intersection of El Camino Real on the east side of El
Camino Real, approximately 1,500 feet north of Palomar Airport Road. More
particularly described as:
A portion of lots "A" and "B" of Rancho Agua Hedionda according to map
823.
Access to the station is from Faraday Road and from a private drive accessible
from El Camino Real. Primary routes of delivery include El Camino Real and
Palomar Airport Road.
Applicant:
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
5960 El Camino Real
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Conrad B. Pawelski - General Manager
(619) 753-9412
Owner:
County of San Diego
Department of Public Works
5555 Overland Ave.
San Diego, CA 92123
(619) 694-2212
Sewer District:
City of Carlsbad
Water District:
Carlsbad Municipal Water District
School District:
Carlsbad School District
Site Address:
5960 El Camino Real
Carlsbad, CA 92008
APN: 209-050-25
Site Area: 5.5 Acreas
Zoning: Transfer station (CUP #260), MQ Zone
Traffic Generation: Approximately 400 ADT's
Environmental Compliance: Environmental Impacts have been considered
resulting in Negative Declaration dated December 1, 1984.
1I.I
After weighing-in,
vehicles back-in &
dump loads.
RREN7LY "~~
Vehicles exit,
weigh-out, and return
to routes
Trash Dumped;
and loaded'
Transfer Trucks Exit
ratuiiilUiiMiii .mm m
Exhibit 3A
D , ^ . ^ Waste Flow Diagram
Palomar Transfer Station-Operate* By Coast Waste Management
H
73
is.
CO
Tlm
CO
Tl
OOu
g
>
O
O>
CO
>
CO
m
>Qm
X
APRIL 9, 1993
• Civil Engineering• Lond Planning• Structurol
• Surveying
1 OP
HYDROLOGY STUDY
FOR
COAST WASTE FACILITIES
DESCRJPTIQNI
COAST V?ASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES
5960 EL CAMINO HEAL
CARLSBAD/ CA 92008
QKHE.RJ.
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
5960 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSABD, CA 92008
619-753-9412
ENGINEER;
LOGAN ENGINEERING
120 BIRMINGHAM DRIVE,^STE 110
CARDIFF, CA 92007
619-942-8474
tfC.E. 39721
EXP. DATE 12-31-93
• I
120 Birmingham Dr., Suite 110 • Cordiff-by-the-Sea CA 92007 • 619-942-8474
2 of 2
I. Design Criteria
• San Diego County "Design & Procedures Manual*
• Rational Formula: Q=CIA
• Land Use: Industrial (use c=0.90)
• Design Storm Frequency = 100 year
II. Hydrology
A= 5.5 Acres ^ H=309.5-283.6=:25.9I
Tc=5.0 min. L=42o' So=0.06
1=6.85 in/hr
Qioo=0.90 (6.85)(5.5)
Qioo=33.9 CFS
Exhibit 4
Hydrology Study
Palomar Transfer Station-Operated By Coast Waste Management
SOLID WASTE FACILITY PERMIT
1. Facility/Permit Number:
37-AH-0001
2. Name and Street Address of Facility:
Coast Waste Management
Transfer Station
5960 EL Camino Real
Carlsbad, CA 92003
3. Name and Hailing Address
of Operator:
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
P.O. Box 947
Carlsbad, CA 92018-0947
4. Name and Mailing Address of Owner:
County of San Oiego
Oeoartment of Airports
i960 Joe Crosson Drive
El Cajon, CA 92020
5. Specifications:
a. Permitted Operations:O Composting Facility
(mixed wastes)
U Composting Facility
(yard waste)
Q Landfill Disposal Site
l~l Material Recovery
Facility
n Processing Facility
B Transfer Station
n Transformation Facility
D Other:
b. Permitted Hours of Operation:
c. Permitted Tons per Operating Day»
Non-Hazardous - General
Non-Hazardous - Sludge
Non-Hazardous - Separated or comingled recyclables
Non-Hazardous - Other (See Section 14 of Permit)-*
Designated (See Section U Of •tmft)*
(See Section U of Permit*
5:30an to 8:00pm Monday through Sa t u rda y
Total:4QQ
28i
120
d. Permitted Traffic Volume:.
Incoming waste materials
Outgoing waste materials (for disposal).
Outgoing materials from material recovery operation*
Total:140
120
10
10
Tons/Day
Tons/Day
Tons/Day
Tons/Day
Tons/Day
Tons/Day
Vehicles/Day
Vehicles/Day
Vehicles/Day
Vehicles/Day
e. Key Design Parameters (Detailed parameters are shown on site plans bearing LEA and CIWMB validations):
Permitted Area (in acres)
Design Capacity
Max. elevation <Ft. MSL)
Max. Depth (Ft. 8GS)
Estimated Closure Date
••••••••••••^^^•^^^••••••••••^•^^MBMMVI^^^—^^^B^^^^^^^BM^^^^^^HB
This permit if or»rtt«*iWW^*l»1»ejWBt||»tor naned above, and is nM transferable. Upon • change of operator, this permit
is no longer il ill 9fm iinj_ jipaa • iLgnitfrt— change in design or operation from that described herein, this permit -'s
subject to revocMftaaWK^HnajMRJ1 The attached permit findings and conditions are integral parts of this permit and
supersede the conditions of any previously issued solid waste facility permits.
6. Approva
Xpprovthg Officer Signature
NamVTitl*/r*f
7. Local Enforcement Agency Name and Address:
San Oiego County
Department of Health Services
Environmental Health Services
P.O. Box 85261
San Diego, CA 92186-5261
8. Received by CIUMB:
6 1994
9. CIWMB Concurrence Date:
AUG 0 5 1994
10. Permit Review Due Date:11. Permit Issued Date:
AUG 0 2 IW4
SOLID WASTE FACILITY PERMIT
1?. Legal Description •< Facility (attach a* with MI):
Parcel NuaMr 84-0127 A of Rancho Ague Hedlonde, Tl2f, R4U of M MM
Asseaaora Parcel Nuator 760-166-84
'•e'lltx/Penelt Nutter:
37-AH-0001
TTTFindings:"
Thii pemit 1» conetstfnt with the County Solid waste
$0000.Plan, dated 1986. Public Resources Cede, Seetic
b. This permit la consistent with standards adopted by the California Integrated Wotte Manaaoaant leard <CttM)»Publ le Resources Code, Section U010.
c. rht design and operation of the facility I* In compliance ultti the state NiniiMi Stardtord* for lolld UMt*
Htndllog and Oltpoul M d*t*m<ntd by the LEA. (napMtcd Roy 24, 199*.
d. The following local flro protection dUtriet h«o dtttrwlntd ttwt tho facility U in conforMnec with
applleablt flrt •tandort* as rcqwlrad In Public looourco* Codo, JoetIon 44111.
Nano of Flro OUtrlct: City of CarlBbad
e. An tnvfronMtntal dotomlnatlon (I.*.. Motlco of Ootonafnatfon) la filod with tht Stato ClNrinaDeuM for ait
facilities which ara not exnpt fro* CCQA and decuaanta purauant to "ublle taaourcaa Coda, faction 210*1.6.
MO tfgnlflcont chongo, CIQA oddroa*od ulth Noavtivo Declaration dated Hoioabif 19, 19*4.
f. A County-Mlda intnratod Uoatc Naneve*ant rian haa/hn not been approved by the California Integrated West*
Menetment loard.
9. The follOMinf authoritod ttent haa Mde a determination that the facility la cornf§tent Mitti, and deaignatod
<n. the applfcabla »onor». plan: SHY flf ttr'tt~t • Public teaoureaa Code, (action $0000.S(a).
h. The following local governing body haa Mde a writ ton rinding that eurroundfne land uae la conpatfbla tilththe facility operation, aa required in Public laaourcea Coda, tectIon $0000.5(b). City of Cart<
U. Pronlbltlona:
The peniittee ia prohibited fro* accepting any liquid waata aludga, non-haurdoui waate requiring apacialhandling, dealgnatad «aata, or hatardou* weate unleca aueh waata Is apaclficelly Uttad below, and unlaaa theacceptance of euch Maate ia authorised toy all applicable penalta.
No other aatorlata »caot Meat re (al and r»la1antl«t Maatea can be occootad at tltia facility. .
The porHlttee la additionally prohibited fro* the following ltaa»<Oiipoial of hatardoua waate. oondtfy weata. lloulda. «luda««. hlohaj lid
eentalnlno tart
IS. The following doeujaanta also describe end/or roatrlet the operation of thla facility (Insert ctocuasnt date in
spaces):
Date:
Report of facility InfematfonRSI
Land use Perorfta and Conditional
Uae Peril fa CUT 260
Air Pollution Parartta and Variances
Negative DecIoratton
CD Loaae Agreea»nta - owner and operator
Mont: Konth te aonth rental of property
Preliminary Cloeu-e/Poat Cloaure Plan
Dote:
10/W L_J Contract Agraeaianta • operator and
contract12/12/14
10/Bt/iJ C3 Uaato olackarge lequlraaama
Local ft County Ordlnaneee
Final Cloaure 8 Post Cloaure Kalnt.
Plan
a/A
M/A
M/A to «fl
Other (Hat):
CD Cloaure Financial Responsibility Oocuatnt N/A 6/92
SOLID WASTE FACILITY PERMIT
Facility/Permit Number:
37-AH-0001
16. Self-Monitoring:
a. Results of ill self-monitoring programs as described in the Report of Facility Information, will be
reported as follows:
Program
1. Total daily waste tonnages
2. Total volume or weight of material
(by type) recycled per week.
3. Weight or volume of nonrecyclable
residue disposed of per day and name
and location of the disposal site
receiving the waste.
4 Number and type of vehicles using
the facility daily.
5. Types and quantities of hazardous,
infectious, radioactive, orprohibited waste and the disposition
of these wastes.
6. Log of special occurrences.
7. Log of complaints received.
Reporting Frequency
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Agency Reported To:
Available to LEA at facility upon
request.
Available to LEA at facility upon
request.
Available to LEA at facility upon
request.
Available to LEA at facility upon
request.
Available to LEA at facility upon
request. .
Available to LEA at facility upon
request.
Available to LEA at facility uponrequest.
swfp3.xis 6/92
SOLID WASTE FACILITY PERMIT
Facility/Permit Member:
37-AH-0001 917. LEA Conditions:
1. The design and operation of this facility must comply with the State Minimun Standards for Solid Waste Handling and
Disposal.
2. The design and operation of this facility must comply with all Federal, State and local requirements and enactments.
3. Any change which would cause the design or operation of the facility to not conform t the terms and conditions of the
permit would be considered a significant change and require a permit revision. If the operator proposes a significant
change, an application for permit revision shall be submitted to the LEA 120 days prior to the change.
4. A change in the operator of this facility would require an application for a new permit.
5. This permit is a modification of the SWFP originally issued October 20, 1988. The changes are as follows: the hours
of operation have changed to 5:30 am to 8:00 pm Monday through Saturday.6. The permit is subject to review by the LEA and may be modified, suspended or revoked for sufficient cause after a
hearing.
7. The operator shall maintain a copy of the permit and the State Minimum Standards for Transfer/Processing Stations at
the site at all times.
8. There shall be no scavenging.
9. The Operator shall control dust and airborne particulates by appropriate means to prevent a health hazard or a
nuisance.
10. The Operator shall remove litter and solid waste along the access road to and including the intersection with El
Camino Real, in the City right-of-way southbound on El Camino Real from the access road to and including intersection
af Palcwar Airport »oad, in the City right-of-way eastbound on Palomar Airport Road to the easterly City boundary,
and from land contiguous with the facility whenever the need exists and at least once per week.
11. All recyclables shall be removed from the facility within thirty (30) days from the accumulation date unless written
approval to exceed this time limit is obtained from the LEA.
12. Additional information regarding the design and operation of this facility must be provided to the LEA upon request.
f
swfp^.xis 6/92
UPVSWFP
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT TRANSFER STATION
5960 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
Operated by:
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
619-929-9400
Contact person:
CONRAD B. PAWELSXI
VICE PRESIDENT/ GENERAL MANAGER
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
I. FACILITY OVERVIEW
A. Introduction 6
B. Site Location 6
C. Site Plan Description 7
D. Nature and Quantity of Wastes to be Accepted 7
1. Waste Types
a. General
b. High Liquid Content Wastes
c. Designated Wastes
d. Hazardous Wastes
e. Other Wastes Requiring Special Handling
2. Waste Quantities
a. Design Capacity
b. Average Daily Throughput
c. Unusual Peak Loadings
d. Average Load Capacity Next Five Years
E. Types and Numbers of Vehicles Anticipated 12
to Enter the Station
II. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
A. Permits and Approvals 12
B. Design Requirements 13
C. Operational Requirements 13
III. OPERATIONS PLAN
A. Facility Design 13
1. Design Plans
a. Detailed Site Plan
(1) Tipping Areas
(2) Storage Areas
(3) Parking Areas
(4) Access
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
SECTION
III. OPERATIONS PLAN (Continued)
b. Building Floor Plans (including equip, layout)
C. Traffic Flow Plan
d. Waste Flow Diagram
e. Surface Drainage and Runoff Control Plan
f. Utilities Plan
2. Design Calculations
a. Station Capacity
b. Traffic Loading
c. Drainage System Capacities
B. Station Improvements 16
1. Identification Signs
2. Entry Signs
3. Station Security
4. Roads
5. Visual Screening
C. Operations 17
1. Hours of Operation
2. Station Personnel
a. Availability
b. Training
c. Emergency Contact List
d. Operator
3. Station Equipment
a. Type, Capacity and Number of Units
b. Equipment Maintenance
4. Materials Handling Activities
a. Materials Receiving
(1) Materials Check-In and Weighing
(2) Hazardous Waste Screening Program
(3) Unloading
(4) Incoming Materials Storage
(5) Hazardous Materials Storage
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
SECTION
III. OPERATIONS PLAN (Continued)
b. Salvaging and Materials Recovery
(1) Materials Separation and Sorting
(2) Storage of Salvaged or Recyclable Materials
(3) Storage of Non-recoverable Residuals
Destined for Disposal
c. Materials Processing and Volume Reduction
(1) Size Reduction
(2) Transformation
(3) Compaction and/or Baling
d. Materials Removal
(1) Load out of Recyclable Material
(2) Removal of Non-recoverable Residues
(3) Removal of Hazardous Materials
5. Station Maintenance
a. General
b. Cleaning
(1) Loose Materials and Litter Cleanup
(2) Container Cleaning
(3) Housekeeping
6. Health and Safety Program
a. Sanitary Facilities
b. Water Supply
c. Communications Facilities
d. Lighting
e. Fire Fighting Equipment
f. Protection of Users
g. Safety Equipment
h. Power Failure
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
SECTION
III. OPERATIONS PLAN (Continued)
D. Station Controls
E.
26
1. Nuisance Control
2. Dust Control
3. Vector and Bird Control
4. Drainage Control
5. Litter Control
6. Noise Control
7. Odor Control
8. Traffic Control
Station Records and Reporting Procedures
1. Weight Volume Records
2. Special Occurrences
3. Inspection of Records
27
EXHIBITS
1. SITE LOCATION MAP
2. VICINITY MAP
3. SITE PLAN (detailed), including circulation map
4. SURFACE DRAINAGE RUNOFF CALCULATIONS
5. STATION SIGNAGE IDENTIFICATION
6. HAZARDOUS WASTE SCREEN PLAN
7. CONTINGENCY PLAN
8. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #260, CITY OF CARLSBAD
9. STORM WATER DISCHARGE PERMIT
10. ENCINA WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
11. SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT PERMIT
12. SAN DIEGO COUNTY COLLECTORS AND TRANSPORTERS PERMIT
13. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO HEALTH PERMIT
14. SAFETY TRAINING MANUAL
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
I. FACILITY OVERVIEW
A. introduction
This report of station information describes the design and
operation of the Coast Waste Management Transfer Station which is
operated by Coast Waste Managenent, Inc., located on land owned by
the County of San Diego, Department of Airports.
B. Sita Location
Exhibit l. Attached is a site location map. The facility is
located in the City of Carlsbad at 5960 El Camino Real. Legal
description of property is as follows:
Assessors Parcel # 760-166-84 of Rancho Agua Hedionda,
Township 12 South, Range 4 West, Commencing at the
Southwesterly corner of land described in deed to the
City of Carlsbad, recorded June 30, 1982, as file/page
No. 82-201566 in the office of said County Recorder;
thence along an easterly line of said Palomar Airport
Road, South 11 degrees 17' 56" West (south 10 degrees 46'
15" West per deed), 534.62 feet; thence leaving said
Easterly line North 57 degrees 27' 38" East, 219.80 feet
to the true point of beginning hereafter referred to as
Point "A"; thence continuing North 57 degrees 27' 38"
East, 483.38 feet; thence South 55 degrees 54' 00" East,
229.31 feet; thence South 32 degrees 47' 24" East, 196.82
feet; thence South 57 degrees 12' 36" West, 565.00 feet
to a point hereafter referred to as Point "B"; thence
North 31 degrees 33'43" West, 123.23 feet; thence North
47 degrees 51'45" West, 42.48 feet; thence North 32
degrees 47'03" West, 245.62 feet to the .TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
Area serviced can be further found on Vicinity Map, Exhibit 2.
Access to the Station is made via El Camino Real or Faraday Avenue.
All material transported to and from the site is transported via El
Camino Real or Palomar Airport Road. These roads connect to
Federal Interstate 5 and to State Route 78. The landfill closest
to the transfer station, at present is the San Marcos County
landfill located off of Rancho Santa Fe and Questhaven Roads which
is accessed from the transfer station from Palomar Airport Road.
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
The areas or communities serviced by the facility are:
Communities Served Bv Coast Waste
Carlsbad
Solana Beach
Del Mar
Rancho Santa Fe
County areas
(San Marcos & Vista)
Communites That could Potentially be served
Vista
San Marcos
Oceanside
Encinitas
Escondido
C. Site Plan Description
See attached Exhibit 3.
D. Nature and Quantity of Wastes to be Accepted
1. Waste Types
The materials to be accepted on site are commercial and residential
generated waste. No hazardous, liquid or special wastes are
accepted. These wastes from the point of contact (collection
vehicles) are screened to avoid processing of non-acceptable
materials. A copy of this plan is contained in Exhibit 6. This
transfer station is operated as a non-public transfer station
reducing the probability of accepting non-acceptable materials.
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
a. General
The Coast Waste Management Transfer Station only accepts commercial
and residential wastes which require no special handling.
These wastes are generally described as follows:
Food and food preparation waste
Paper and paper products
Plastics
Green materials and trash from yard clean-up
Glass and bottles
Metals
Home appliances
Small dead animals
From the list indicated above recycling of the following materials
is conducted:
Recycled Residential Wastes
Newspaper
Food and beverage container glass
Tin and bi-metal cans
Aluminum cans
Plastics
PET
Natural HOPE
Colored HOPE
Green material
8
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
Recycled Commercial Wastes
Office paper
Cardboard
Newspaper
Food and beverage container glass
Tin and bi-metal cans
Aluminum cans
Plastics
PET
Natural HOPE
Colored HDPE
b. High Liquid Content Wastes
Liquid wastes containing more than 50% water are not accepted.
c. Designated Wastes
No designated wastes have been accepted.
d. Hazardous Wastes
All hazardous wastes are excluded from entry to the transfer
station. Asbestos material is not accepted in the transfer
station.
a. Other Wastes Requiring Special Handling
No special wastes are accepted, including but not limited to
powders, liquids, sludges, medical waste and industrial wastes.
2. Waste Quantities
a. Design Capacity
This station was originally designed for handling 1600 tons per day
and was permitted for such in 1979. The station under its building
design was originally designed as a site for handling 1600 tons
based on drive lane space, access roads, truck stacking and
temporary floor storage area.
Coast Waste Management is requesting renewal of its permit for the
handling of 400 tons as in our permit issued in 1988. Under our
use the original floor which is designed for 1,600 tons was
modified with a partitioned floor reducing the floor from 25,000 to
11,000 square feet. (Site plan depicts usage under 400 ton use.)
Present permitting of the site is for use by Coast Waste
Management, Inc. equipment which operates 55 collection trucks
(refuse 45, recycling 10) Monday through Friday with 15-18 refuse
trucks operating on Saturday.
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
c. Unusual Peak Loadings
Based on the floor capacity of 204 tons excluding material loaded
in trucks, this volume is half of the daily tonnage collected by
our vehicles. With the collection trucks using the station over a
13.5 hour day we anticipate that no more than 30% of the daily
tonnage would ever be on the floor at any given time (120 tons) .
d. Average Load Capacity Next Five Years
Based on the County of San Diego Public Works tonnage estimates,
the tonnage will increase gradually (12%) over the next five years
with no growth in tonnage the next year ('93-'94). With our
collection of material staying within this growth range, the
station at the end of the next five year period should be close to
the daily limit. Trucks will either have to be diverted to the
nearest landfill or a revision to the permit will need to submitted
for increased daily volume.
E. Types and Numbers of Vehicles Anticipated
to Enter the Station
Vehicles using the station are limited to Coast Waste Management
vehicles. We operate only 45 refuse collection vehicles and 10
recycling vehicles totaling 55 collection trucks. Traffic count
data for site is shown on Exhibit 3a.
II. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
A. Permits and Approvals
The station is primarily controlled in its use through the
Conditional Use Permit issued by the City of Carlsbad. This Permit
reviews the use of the station based on traffic, noise, and
cleanliness of the operation and roadway.
Additionally, the transfer station has the following permits for
the facility:
City of Carlsbad, CUP #260 (Exhibit 8)
Storm Water Discharge Permit (Exhibit 9)
Encina Waste Discharge Permit (Exhibit 10)
Sa*h Diego County Air Pollution Control District Permit
(Exhibit 11)
San Diego County Haulers and Transporters Permit (Exhibit 12)
County of San Diego Health Permit (Exhibit 13)
12
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
B. Design Requirements
The Building was originally designed by the County of San Diego in
1979. Since our operation of the site (1988) we have made only
changes to update regulatory requirements from the above agencies.
Coast Waste Management added storm water run off berm to control
water from entering building (lower storage area), installed a
drain for mechanics' cleanup sink, and repaved all surfaces in
1991. All other modifications were installed upon time of
occupancy in 1985 and approved by the City of Carlsbad.
C. Operational Requirements
Operationally, the station is required by the sites City of
Carlsbad Conditional Use Permit 260. Included in Exhibit 8 is a
copy of the permit and the five year renewal permit. In this
permit, we are required to store solid waste no more than 72 hours
before disposal, provide cleanup along Palomar Airport Road from
the Transfer Station to the City limits, have a vector control
program in place, and not store recyclable materials for market
more than 30 days. We operate the station with the waste removed
in a shorter time frame than indicated in our permit. We have the
waste stored on site for no more than 36 hours, Saturday afternoon
to Monday Morning.
III. OPERATIONS PLAN
Attached is Exhibit 3 which is a detailed site plan. This site
plan has been updated to show all current conditions and methods of
use, (ie.. traffic flows, surface drainage runoff calculations).
A. Facility Design
l. Design Plans
a. Detailed site Plan
(1) Tipping Areas
The tipping floor is used only by Coast Waste Management vehicles
and is not an open public transfer station. The Site is controlled
by the Conditional Use Permit to allow only our company vehicles to
tip as authorized from the City of Carlsbad.
13
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
(2) Storage Areas
Salvaged materials (recyclables) which are segregated from the
refuse are placed into 40 cubic yard roll off containers and are
removed within 48 hours form the station to a material recovery
facility located in San Marcos. Materials segregated and stored
are plastics, cardboard, paper, steel, aluminum, wood and glass.
Identified on the plan is the maintenance area for servicing all
equipment and storage of parts and supplies.
All incoming materials are left on board collection trucks until
material is tipped onto the tipping floor.
(3) Parking Areas
Coast Waste Management transfer vehicles are parked in the loading
area on the central drive lane area of the building. The trailer
parking area is indicated on the site plan with scale vehicles
depicted on the plan.
All of the collection-vehicles are parked in the entire northerly
portion of the facility. See site plan for further definition of
the area in use for collection vehicle parking.
(4) Access
Access to the transfer station is made from southern point of the
three way intersection of Faraday Avenue and Orion Way.
b. Building Floor Plans (including equip, layout)
The station design requires that no equipment is necessary for the
loading of transfer trucks other than a front end loader. For our
station operation we utilize a Catapillar IT28 front end loader.
c. Traffic Flow Plan
The station traffic flow allows vehicles to enter the site from the
northwesterly most portion of the site. Upon entering the site the
collection vehicles weigh in at the scales and are directed to
proceed to the tipping floor. Upon finishing dumping the materials
the trucks then leave through the same access gate as they entered.
Exhibit 3a shows the traffic flow with flow indication arrows
throughout the site drive lanes.
14
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
d. Waste Flow Diagram
The waste collection vehicles enter into the station from the
easterly entry door of the tipping floor area and turn left. At
this point they then back up to the approximate middle of the floor
where the refuse is unloaded. Refuse is then picked up with the
front end loader and dumped into the open top transfer vehicles
parked in the lower level loading area below the southeast corner
of the transfer floor are. After loading the trucks are tarped
with the hydraulic tarping mechanisms prior to departing from the
station. See Exhibit 3a.
e. Surface Drainage and Runoff Control Plan
The surface area of the site form the Northern half centerline of
the building roof drains along with all drive lanes and parking
ares to the northerly edge of the property. Drainage then
traverses threw a brow ditch on the northern edge of the site west
into a storm drain which diverts the drainage south to a retention
basin located in the most westerly central portion of the site.
Anything beyond what can be contained in the basin where it exits
and then goes into the storm drain and removed from the site, the
southern portion of the property drains into the dirt areas with
runoff proceeding into he storm drain area off site (see Exhibit 4)
at the south central boundary.
f. Utilities Plan
The station is serviced by San Diego Gas and Electric (electricity
only) Pacific Telephone, Carlsbad Municipal Water and Encina Waste
Water District. Access for these are indicated on the site map.
All of the utilities are brought in the site underground.
15
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
2. Design Calculations
a. Station Capacity
Palomar Transfer Station was designed and has a capacity for
handling daily 1600 tons of municipal solid waste. Under the
revised permit issued in 1988 we operate the station to handle 400
tons per day and have based the site parameter for the 400 tons in
the following parameters:
Facility operating hours 5:30AM - 8:00PM - 14.5 hour day
(Hours which personnel are on site and gates are
unlocked)
Station hours are from 5:30AM - 7:00PM— 13.5 hour day
(Hours which transfer station portion is in use)
Unloading of trucks is based on 15 minutes per vehicle with up to
3 trucks dumping in the station at one time. This time requirement
would total 54 dumps if all trucks were tipping 7.5 tons per load
requiring 810 minutes per day or 13.5 hours. Actual truck types
using the station would be trucks with loads ranging from 7.5 to 11
ton loads. With the minimum of 3 trucks dumping at once, 4.5 hours
of on floor use would be needed.
Sorting & Processing waste shipped through the transfer station is
moved directly to the transfer trucks via front end loaders, (ie:
CAT IT28) . The transfer trailers are of the top loading type
requiring no additional equipment. Recyclables collected are pre-
sorted and processed at another location.
On floor storage is based on a 20' x 60' x 10' storage area which
has a holding capacity of 89 tons based on a 500 Ibs per cubic yard
average weight since all trash comes from packer trucks (temporary
storage of 12, 9.25 ton truck loads). This storage area is on
floor and does not include storage on board transfer trucks.
Transfer station access on site is 400 feet of stacking distance
from the front of the property to the station's access doors. The
station, although being located off El Camino Real, has 1,600 feet
of 24 foot wide private access road to handle stacking of vehicles.
The on-site width of the access area to the transfer floor is 120
feet wide providing adequate turning and flow through traffic.
16
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
b. Traffic Loading
The station average daily traffic count is attached to the detailed
site plan and is as follows:
NON WASTE RELATED TRAFFIC
75 Employees 2x = 150 trips
20 Guests x 2 = 40 trips
40 Buy back center x 2 = 80 trips
10 Recycling vehicles x 2 - 20 trips
(Trucks are based at CWM, material processed elsewhere)
45 Refuse Collection vehicles x 2 = 90 trips
5 Recyclable Transfer loads x 2 = 10 trips
INCOMING WASTE
20 Refuse collection vehicles X 2 = 40 trips
OUTGOING WASTE
5 Transfer loads x 2 = 10 trips
TOTAL 440 ADT's 440 ADT'S
This sum is less than the total number of trips originally
generated under use by the County of San Diego when all collection
trucks and the public were utilizing the facility.
c. Drainage System Capacities
All storm water runoff is contained on site through a siltation
basin located in the front portion of the site between the employee
parking area and the container storage area. See Exhibit 4 for the
drainage calculations and civil engineer's certification.
B. Station Improvements
1. Identification Signs
See Exhibit 5 depicting the station signage.
2. Entry Signs
The stattion. is not a public transfer station and is only utilized
by company collection vehicles.
17
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
3. Station Security
The perimeter of the site is fenced with 6 foot chain link fence
with the three access points gated and locked after hours. Access
to unlock the site is limited to management personnel. The
building office area is alarmed to the City Police Station. The
site also has 6 surveillance cameras with recorder for additional
security.
4. Roads
Roadways and parking areas were resurfaced in 1991 and are composed
of asphalt with 3/4 rock to make a stronger road bed. All areas of
the roadway were built based on County of San Diego roadbed
standards. All roads are cleaned weekly of debris.
5. Visual Screening
The entire site is screened with 25 foot landscaping with trees and
shrubbery up to 12 foot in height. The Easterly portion of the
property along with the screening has a 20 foot bank to provide
additional screening.
C. Operations
The site is a sub parcel of a 237 acre master parcel owned by the
County of San Diego. The site and the neighboring users are all
industrial and are public utilities. The closest building to the
site is approximately 350 feet away which is the City of Carlsbad
Fire Station #5. See Exhibit 3.
1. Hours of Operation
Transfer portion of the facility is used from 5:30Am to 7:OOPm
Monday through Saturday. The facility is closed for Christmas, New
Years and Thanksgiving holidays. There are no dwelling units with
1.5 miles of facility. In the prior report the nearest residence
was located .3 miles from the station. This home was an old farm
house located in the middle of commercial/industrial and was torn
down in 1991.
2. Station Personnel
The transfer station portion of the business is managed with the
personnel:
1 Operations Manager
1 Spotter
1"Loader Operator
1 Transfer Driver
1 Weigh master
1 bookkeeping person
1 Relief Driver
7 TOTAL STAFF
Shop personnel is utilized part time for maintenance.
18
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
a. Availability
Supervision is on site throughout the day for supervising all
operations of the station. Morning operations are managed by
starting supervisor until operations manager is on site. All
trucks entering the facility must log into the scale attendant and
verify volumes of all loaded vehicles. All station personnel are
constantly trained through the course of the year through safety
meetings held every 30-45 days.
All materials are tipped only on the transfer. The tipping floor
has phone and speakers to communicate with all personnel on site.
Safety equipment for personnel and containment equipment is located
in safety storage area on the floor. The entire building is
sprinklered and monitored by the fire department in case of
activation of the sprinkler system or alarm.
b. Training
Management personnel are trained in hazardous material
identification and procedures. Attached is a copy of our training
manual in Exhibit 13."
Emergency Contact List
STATION EMERGENCY
CONTACT LIST
Conrad Pawelski
General Manager
2288 Eastbrook Rd.
Vista CA 92083
619-727-5825
Warren Van Dam
1008 Hooper Dr.
San Marcos, CA 92069
619-417-9770
Eric de Jong
19371 Fourth Place, #B
Escondido, CA 92025
619-738-0346
Margaret Bierd
312 Camelot Dr.
Oceanside, CA 92054
619-757-2529
AGENCIES
City of Carlsbad
Fire Department
2560 Orion Way
Carlsbad, Ca 92008
619-931-2141
County Department of Public
Heath
Department of Health Services
Environment Health Services
1255 Imperial Avenue
San Diego, Ca 92138
619-338-2222
City of Carlsbad
Utility & Maintenance Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
619-438-7753
19
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
d. Operator
The operator of the station is Coast Waste Management, Inc. which
has operated a commercial trash collection and removal business in
the County of San Diego since 1977.
Operator's Address;
Coast Waste Management, Inc.
5960 El Camino Real
P. O. Box 947
Carlsbad, CA 92018
619-929-9400
The property on which the facility is located is owned by the
County of San Diego, Department of Airports. The site was
originally a transfer station operated by the County and ceased
operations in 1982. Site was subsequently leased to Coast Waste
Management and is leased on a month to month basis.
Owner/s Address:
County of San Diego
Department of Public Works
Airports Division
1960 Joe Crosson Drive
El Cajon, CA 92020
619-596-3911
3. Station Equipment
The station utilizes two transfer trucks for movement of waste to
the County landfill system and has one front end loader to load
material into trucks. The station has a split level floor from
which material is top loaded with the transfer trailers using a
hydraulically operated covering system to assure load is contained
in the trailer.
a. Type/ capacity and Number of units
Two - 1978 Ace Refuse Transfer Trailers 48 feet long with a
carrying capacity of a 22 tons payload are utilized. Trailers are
aluminum sided with steel floors. Trailer ejection system is a
live floor hydraulically operated 4 rack drag chain. Load covering
system is a hydraulically operated sided mesh screen top with 1/8
inch netting.
20
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
b. Equipment Maintenance
All equipment is maintained on site with daily, weekly and
triweekly preventative maintenance. We have initiated three of
levels review done to assure for the review of different items or
conditions depending on there usage.
Daily Maintenance Checklist Reviews:
Fluid levels: engine oil, water, hydraulic oil
Air pressure check
Wiper blades
Lights
Turn signals
Frame
Hydraulic cylinders for leakage
Tires: Inflation, cuts & blisters
Windshields for cracks
Weekly and triweekly servicing is for brakes and drive train based
on engine hours. All equipment service records are available for
review in our shop office.
c. Standby Equipment
On site is a spare tractor for transporting the trailers to the
landfill and located within a quarter mile are two equipment yards
which have loaders for rent should a breakdown occur.
Companies used for emergency equipment are:
Hawthorne Equipment Rental El Camino Equipment Rental
2065 Camino Vida Roble 5701 El Camino Real
Carlsbad, CA 92009 Carlsbad, CA 92008
4. Materials Handling Activities
a. Materials Receiving
(1) Materials Check-In and Weighing
All incoming collection trucks enter from the northwestern most
gate to the facility. Upon entry they first weight in at the
scales just inside the gate. All vehicles have a written weigh
slip made to record the weigh. Upon weighing they are then
directed by the weighmaster to proceed to the transfer station.
Once into the unloading area the drivers are then directed as the
location they are to unload their material on the floor for
transfer.
21
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
(2) Hazardous Waste Screening Program
See Exhibit 6 Hazardous Material Screen Plan and Exhibit 7 the
Contingency Plan.
(3) Unloading
All loads are checked by the station loader operator upon entry to
station floor. Drivers enter into the station from the westerly
most door and turn left, then backing up onto the mid portion of
the floor for dumping their material. The loader operator and
operator visually observer the load as it is dumped to make one
last pass over the materials to check for load contaminants. The
loader operator then loads the material into the transfer trailer
waiting below. If material is laden with recyclable or material
which potentially contains divertable materials the driver unloads
the material near the northeastern corner of the station floor for
later sorting in the late afternoon after incoming loads have been
completed. A detailed floor map is included in Exhibit 3 following
the site plan map.
(4) Incoming Materials storage
All materials are off loaded in the station floor's just back of
center in the station. The material is dumped onto the floor where
it is reviewed for the final time by the driver and the loader
operator prior to transferring it into the transfer trailers.
The materials collected are not left on the floor any longer than
one and a half hours or the time for one loaded transfer trailer to
leave and return to the landfill with only one transfer truck
operating.
(5) Hazardous Materials storage
Should any hazardous material be received; all personnel are
removed from the area and the station manager is immediately
contacted. Fire and County Health Services (HAZMAT) are contacted
to assure safe containment and disposal. Any hazardous materials
which come into the station are then blocked off. If any
containment of a liquid is required we have safety absorbent to
puddle up the material and avoid it draining into other materials.
We have the personnel safety suits, rubber gloving and respirators
available to handle preliminary containment prior to the proper
personnel arriving from a hazardous materials company. The company
which we utilize is Greenfield Environmental.
22
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
b. Salvaging and Materials Recovery
(1) Materials Separation and Sorting
Materials separated for salvage are separated by the loader
operator when no vehicles are in on the tipping floor. When the
materials are placed into a separate pile they are then hand sorted
in the morning prior to incoming morning loads or after the last
truck dumps materials at approximately 4:30PM. Before sorting
personnel is allowed on the floor the station attendant is notified
that no vehicles are to enter the floor area.
(2) storage of Salvaged or Recyclable Materials
Materials stored onsite are stored in 40 cubic yard rolloff
containers prior to removal.
(3) Storage of Non-recoverable Residuals
Destined for Disposal
Materials are collected in separate containment bunkers located
outside the station. Recovered paper and corrugated boxes are
place in roll off containers and shipped within 48 hours a material
recovery facility for final processing.
c. Materials Processing and Volume Reduction
(1) Size Reduction
Size reduction does not occur at the station.
(2) Transformation
There is no transformation process at the station.
(3) Compaction and/or Baling
This site only takes in refuse collection vehicles. Material
received is not recompacted but loaded into open top trailers. The
station does not shred the waste entering the site nor does it use
transformation (burning) as a method of volume reduction.
d. Materials Removal
(1) Loading of Recyclable Material
Refuse coming into the station is presorted as to the County of San
Diego recycling ordinances. Recyclable are loaded by the same
front end loader operator into containers on the floor.
(2) Removal of Non-recoverable Residues
There are no non recoverable residues from the operations.
23
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
(3) Removal of Hazardous Materials
All hazardous materials are collected, contained and removed by a
Licensed Hazardous waste removal company. The only items which
have been removed from the site have not come from the transfer
operations.
5. Station Maintenance
To maintain the station we have a complement of 5 maintenance
personnel. There predominent task is the daily cleanup of the site
for litter and the cleanup of restroom facilities and disposing of
trash form the various on site trash barrels.
The structure is a metal building which has the tipping floor
washed down annually to rid the walls of dust which has collected
during the year. All stairwells , hand rails and drive lanes are
painted every six months unless needed prior to the scheduled
painting.
a. General
The shop and maintenance foreman is responsible for the site's
storage of materials and supplies. All barrels are stored in on of
two areas of fenced and locked storage inside the metal building on
the shop and maintenance area.
b. Cleaning
To maintain the station we have a complement of 5 maintenance
personnel. There predominent task is the daily cleanup of the site
for litter, restroom cleaning, topping office floors and disposing
of trash from the various on site trash barrels.
(1) Loose Materials and Litter Cleanup
Litter is policed daily from the parimeter fencing, access roads
and the confines of the station site. The station floor is swept
daily and removed with the refuse in the transfer trucks.
(2) Container Cleaning
All collection containers trash bins (2,3,4,5, cubic yard and roll
off containers) are cleaned in the truck wash bay when they are
returned to the yard for repairs and maintenance.
(3) Housekeeping
The station is maintained by on site personnel with weekly review
of maintenance by the Shop and maintenance foreman to keep facility
is safe working order. General servicing of restropms and and
common areas are cleaned daily by maintenance.
24
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
6. Health and Safety Program
All staff must attend monthly safety meetings held by their
respective department heads. During the meetings safety subjects
change monthly and included are discussion of accidents which have
occurred recently to prevent future occurrences.
a. Sanitary Facilities
This facility is served with sewer by the Encina Water Pollution
Control District. The site has five rest room facilities located
on site three men rest rooms and two women rest rooms. All
restrooms are located within access to employees and visitors while
the station is open.
b. Water Supply
Water is supplied by the City of Carlsbad Water District. There is
no use of recycled or gray water on site.
c. Communications Facilities
The site is wired throughout with load speakers and fire alarms.
The tipping floor has a phone.
d. Lighting
Station is lighted and lights are used throughout the day. The
station floor has 12 - 400 lumen low sodium lights with 12 outside
parimeter lights to light the parking and access areas.
e. Fire Fighting Equipment
The entire building is sprinklered and alarmed directly to the City
of Carlsbad Fire Department. On site also are four fire hydrants
all equipped with hoses which are checked annually to assure they
are in proper working order. The perimeter of the building has
fire extinguishers within 50 feet of each other for easy access by
all personnel. Refer to page four in Exhibit 7 of the Contingency
Plan.
f. Protection of Users
All stair wells and truck paths are painted in yellow to alert
personnel of the need to either utilize them or be aware of
traffic. The location of fire extinguishers and hydrants are well
marked so employees can readily identify their location.
25
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
g. Safety Equipment
Since the station is a closed station only Coast Waste personnel
can utilize the site. All employees are uniformed with orange
shirts for visibility, along with goggles, dust protectors, noise
suppressors and safety glasses and safety approved vests.
h. Power Failure
If transport of material was needed to be made during a power
outage all equipment including the loader is equipped with lights
to continue operations. All of the operating equipment have power
backup on site.
D. Station Controls
1. Nuisance control
The station is located over 350 feet to the closest building and is
located over 1.5 miles from the nearest residential unit. The
neighboring businesses are utility businesses (ie, Cablevision,
Water District, City Fire, Police and City Fleet Maintenance
Department)
2. Dust control
Tipping floor is contained within a building and material is
screened prior to collection to avoid dusty or powdery materials.
3. Vector and Bird control
To overall control all vectors the incoming materials placed on the
tipping floor are removed from site daily. Material collected and
transported to the station are dry which reduce the probability for
insects to have a breading area. Site has never had any bird
problems since it is in a contained building. For mammal (rodent)
control we have under contract a pest control company.
4. Drainage Control
All vehicles are washed down by a certified and approved commercial
truck washing facility which is connected to the public sewer.
Storm run off is contained in a retention basin located on site.
The retention basin is used to collect the runoff for the first
rain.
The drainage system has little chance of collecting trash or debris
since the tipping area is in a contained building. Our company
maintenance, staff has as part of their daily tasks litter
collection around the parameter and throughout the facility grounds
disallowing material to run off in the drainage system.
26
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
,5. Litter Control
All area of facility and approach roads are policed for litter
weekly the facilities parameter and onsite areas are policed daily
for litter. The City of Carlsbad monitors the access roads and the
truck haul roads where if increased clean up is needed we are
notified. To the present we have not had any requests for
additional clean from the City up since the station has been under
our operation.
6. Noise Control
All equipment used is mufflered to reduce noise pollution.
Employees are provided with noise suppression equipment ( muffles
and ear plugs). We have never had any calls regarding noise levels
of our operations from offsite.
7. Odor Control
All material is removed daily with the floor swept nightly.
8. Traffic Control
Vehicles entering the site whether to use the transfer station or
otherwise enter the property from El Camino Real. If the vehicular
traffic enters the station's approach road from the south, El
Camino Real has a decell ramp area prior to entering the access
road. This road also has a wide excel area for entering El Camino
Real to the north. Traffic cannot exit across traffic from this
access road heading south. Traffic entering the station from the
northern approach enter the station from El Camino Real and Faraday
Avenue. This intersection is signalized with left turn signals and
turn lanes. Access to the station is prohibited by locked gates
clearly visible from the access road. Gate entrance area is over
50 feet wide asphalt area so vehicles can turn back onto the access
road without hindering traffic.
E. Station Records and Reporting Procedures
The station records are kept by the station operations manager and
the dispatcher daily. Which are compiled into quarterly reports.
These quarterly reports compile the daily weekly and monthly
volumes in a cubic yard basis and convert them to tons. We have
used the estimate of 500 Ibs per cubic yard as our conversion
factor historically.
27
COAST WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.
REPORT OF STATION INFORMATION, 10/93
1. Weight Volume Records
The volume information has been recorded up to recent on a volume
basis with the trucks indicating the approximately load 1/4, 1/2 ,
3/4 or full. The trucks are all registered with the County of San
Diego under our transporters permit which has the capacity
designated. We then record the volume based on the cubic yard
capacity of the vehicle. The cubic yards are converted to tons
using 500 pounds to a cubic yard.
Once the material is transported via transfer trailers to the
landfill we then record all outgoing loads with a County or other
certified weigh ticket.
2. Special Occurrences
All occurrences are recorded on the daily transfer station log.
The special occurrence is the then written up on a special
occurrence form and submitted to the County with our quarterly
records.
We have had only two special occurrences since the station has been
under our operation. These were for a water base latex paint spill
and for an acid drum. The later of these events was handled by
Greenfield Environmental for proper disposal of contaminants. All
incidents are recorded and submitted to the Health Department
inspector after their occurrence and are included in our quarterly
report.
3. Inspection of Records
All records are located on site and are available for review Monday
through Friday from 8:00AM - 5:00PM. Information regarding the
operating tonnages are recorded daily and submitted to regulatory
agencies semi-annually.
28
Site Plan Legend.....*.. .* ........ ...» •.. .^ (j
Palomar Transfer Station
1000'Radius
Lease Boundary
Parcel Line
Easement
High Pressure Gas Line
\v Water Line
F High Pressure Fuel Line
s Sewer Line
• Overhead Utility Pole
x Chain Link Fence
Fire Hydrant
Street Light
e Flood Light
o Sewer Manhole
D Catch Basin
Manufactured Slope
Contours of Equal Elevation
Exhibit
Site Location Map
Palomar Transfer Station-Operated By Coast Waste Management
h y H (3< ~r
Communmes Served
by Coast Waste
Management-Typical/ -4^\ ",-< ^j. ', <, \j, ?•,
** *. — %. > ' *•
Cw1»b«d
' A^ ' ^ «^ '"
Exhibit
Regional Location & Service Area
Palomar Transfer Station-Operflfed By Coast Waste Management
PALOMAR AIRPORT
SITE
City of Ctrlsfaad
PALOMAR TRANSFER STATION ACQUISITION PCD/GPC 94-04
PCD/GPC 94-04 - PALOMAR TRANSFER STATION ACQUISITION
DECEMBER 21, 1994
PAGE 3
The proposed property acquisition is consistent with, and will help implement, this goal by
allowing the City to stabilize the City's disposal plans. This, in turn, will contribute to the
economic health of the City by keeping disposal costs down.
Growth Management and Public Facilities Objectives C.9.. C.10.. and C.ll. - These three
objectives address the need to cooperate with other jurisdictions to ensure the timely
provision of waste disposal capacity, to site and operate landfill and recycling facilities, and
to manage the disposal requirements of the City. The proposed property acquisition will
contribute to the fulfillment of each of these objectives by allowing the City to better
manage its waste disposal needs.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed acquisition involves property with an existing use which has been operating
continuously since 1984. No changes to the site or the operations of the facility are being
proposed. Therefore, the Planning Director has determined that the proposed acquisition
is exempt from further environmental review in accordance with Section 15301 of the
California Environmental Quality Act.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3733
2. Location Map
3. Exhibit "A", dated December 21, 1994.
ERvddh
November 21.199*
PCD/GPC 94-04 - PALOMAR TRANSFER STATION ACQUISITION
DECEMBER 21, 1994
PAGE 2
Land uses adjacent to the subject property include the City's Safety Center (to the North),
the Municipal Water District Offices and a graded industrial pad (to the West), and natural
areas (to the South and East).
III. ANALYSIS
The General Plan Consistency Determination for the property under consideration is subject
to the following regulations:
A, GENERAL PLAN - Land Use Element, and
B. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW - California Environmental Quality Act.
A. GENERAL PLAN
The Land Use Element of the General Plan contains several goals and objectives applicable
to the proposed acquisition of the subject property for public purposes. The proposed
acquisition is consistent with the following goals and objectives of the Land Use Element:
Overall Land Use Pattern Goal A.2. - "A City which provides for an orderly balance of
both public and private land uses within convenient and compatible locations throughout the
community and ensures that all such uses, type, amount, design, and arrangement serve to
protect and enhance the environment, character and image of the City."
Acquisition of the property for public purposes (including a waste transfer station) is
consistent with this goal. The existing use on the subject property is consistent with the
General Plan designation and is compatible with surrounding existing and anticipated uses.
The existing use has an approved Conditional Use Permit (CUP 260x2) and State Waste
Facility Operating Permit and was fully reviewed under applicable California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Regulations (EAD 77-7-34).
Overall Land Use Pattern Objective B.3. - 'To provide for the social and economic needs
of the community in conjunction with permitted land uses."
Acquisition of the subject property is consistent with this objective. City acquisition of the
site with the existing transfer station will provide for the social and economic good of the
community by allowing the City to stabilize long-term plans for disposal of the City's solid
waste. Such stabilization will result in economic benefits to the City through disposal cost
savings.
Growth Management and Public Facilities Goal A.3. - "A City that responsibly deals with
the disposal of solid and liquid waste."
APPLICATION COMPLETE DATE:
NOVEMBER 9. 1994
STAFF PLANNER: ELAINE BLACKBURN
STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1994
TO; PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: PCD/GPC 94-04 - PALOMAR TRANSFER STATION ACQUISITION -
Request for approval of a Planning Commission Determination of General
Plan Consistency for the acquisition of a 17.2 acre site owned by the County
of San Diego Airports Division and located on the east side of El Camino
Real approximately 1500 feet north of Palomar Airport Road.
I.RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3733
APPROVING PCD/GPC 94-04, based upon the findings contained therein.
II.PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Section 65402 of the California Government Code requires that no real property shall be
acquired for public purposes until a General Plan Consistency determination has been made.
The City Manager's Office has requested that a General Plan Consistency Determination
be made for the acquisition of approximately 17.2 acres owned by the County of San Diego
Airports Division and located on the east side of El Camino Real approximately 1500 feet
north of Palomar Airport Road for the purpose of stabilizing Carlsbad's long-term solid
waste management program. (The goal of the City's overall program is to secure the most
cost-effective environmentally sound means of disposing of solid waste.) The existing waste
transfer station on the site would continue to operate as it currently operates.
The property proposed for acquisition is designated on the General Plan Land Use Map for
PI (Planned Industrial) land uses. Surrounding properties to the North, West, and East are
also designated PI. The property to the South is designated G (Governmental Facilities).
(This property runs along the North side of Palomar Airport Road and is used by the
Airport as a location for airport landing lights.) The area to be acquired would, of necessity,
also include areas contiguous to the existing transfer station (e.g., the current City Hiring
Center). This is due to the fact that acquisition of the transfer station site alone would
leave uneconomic remainder parcels.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1.1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning j
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 21st day of December, 1994, by the I
following vote, to wit: |
AYES: Chairperson Savary; Commissioners Welshons, Noble, Erwin,
Compas, Nielsen, and Monroy.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PEGGVSXTORY, ChalrpersonV^
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
PC RESO NO. 3733 -3-
1 Findings:
2 1. Acquisition of the subject property for public purposes, including the continued i
operation of the existing waste transfer station, is consistent with Overall Land Use !
3 Pattern Goal A.2. of the General Plan Land Use Element
2. Acquisition of the subject property for public purposes, including the continued j
5 operation of the existing waste transfer station, is consistent with Overall Land Use !
Pattern Objective B3. of the General Plan Land Use Element
6
3. Acquisition of the subject property for public purposes, including the continued
7 operation of the existing waste transfer station, is consistent with Growth
Management and Public Facilities Goal A3. of the General Plan Land Use Element8
g 4. Acquisition of the subject property for public purposes, including the continued
operation of the existing waste transfer station, is consistent with Growth
10 Management and Public Facilities Objectives C.9., C.10., and C.ll. of the General
Plan Land Use Element11
12 5. Continued operation of a waste transfer station on the subject site is consistent with
the existing General Plan designation as implemented through the Zoning Ordinance
13 (Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code).m
6. Acquisition of the subject property is exempt from further environmental review in
accordance with Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PC RESO NO. 3733 -2-
1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3733
2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
3 PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION OF GENERAL
PLAN CONSISTENCY ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
4 LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF EL CAMINO REAL
5 APPROXIMATELY 1500 FEET NORTH OF PALOMAR
AIRPORT ROAD.
6 CASE NAME: PALOMAR TRANSFER STATION
ACQUISITION
7 CASE NO: _ PCD/GPC 94-04 _
0
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property to wit:
9 II A 17.196 acres more or less portion of lot B of Rancho Agua
10 Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, California
according to Map 823 recorded in the Office of the County
Recorder of said County on May 5, 1915, (as shown on
12 I Attachment "A" hereto); and,
13 I has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; and
1 4 WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as provided by Title 21
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
16
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 21st day of December, 1994,
17
consider said request; and
II
19 WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
20 arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
21 relating to the Planning Commission Determination; and
22 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
23
as follows:
24
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct
26 B) Tha* based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Commission
APPROVES PCD 94-04, Planning Commission Determination/General Plan
27 Consistency based on the following findings:
28
EXHIBIT "A"
County of San Diego
TO
The City of Carlsbad, a Municipal Corporation
A PORTION OF APN 209 - 050 - 25
A parcel of land located within portion of lot "B" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City
of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, California according to Map 823 recorded in the
Office of the County Recorder of said County on May 5, 1915 being more particularly
described as follows:
BEGINNING at Point number 14 of lot "B" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, according to Map
823 recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of said County on May 5, 1915;
thence S 54°15'33" W 326.48 feet; thence S 50°55'35" W 1788.65 feet; thence
S 1 °28'24" W 787.30 feet to the north westerly comer of the property deeded to the
City of Carlsbad per deed recorded on June 30,1982 as official record F/P 82-201566;
thence along the westerly line of said City property, according to the deed thereto,
S 10°46'15" W 2185.42 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, said point also
being the south westerly corner of said City property; thence along the southerly line of
said City property, according to the deed thereto, S 79°13'45" E 703.35 feet to the
south easterly comer of said City property; thence departing from the boundary of said
City property S 38°38'25" E 403.00 feet; thence S 57°12'36" W 859.32 feet to a point in
a non-tangent curve concave to the west having a radius of 400.00 feet, a radial of said
curve through said point bearing N 50°37'41" W; thence southerly along said curve
through an angle of 77°44'14" a distance of 540.40 feet to the end of said curve, a
radial line through said end bears S 51 °38'05" E; thence N 38°2r55" E 451.13 feet to
the easterly right-of-way line of El Camino Real; thence along the easterly right-of-way
line of El Camino Real N 38°12'32" W 176.72 feet to a point of intersection of the
easterly right-of-way line of El Camino Real and the westerly line of the property
deeded to the County of San Diego per deed recorded on January 18, 1982 as official
record F/P 74-014190; thence along the westerly line of said County property,
according to the deed thereto, N 51 °47'28" E 421.62 feet to a point in a tangent curve
concave to the west having a radius of 326.00 feet, a radial of said curve through said
point bears S 55°53'15" E; thence along said curve and continuing along the westerly
line of said County property, according to the deed thereto, through an angle of
52°51'52" a distance of 300.79 feet; thence continuing along the westerly line of said
County property, according to the deed thereto, N 38°12'32" W 239.95 feet; thence
continuing along the westerly line of said County property, according to the deed
thereto, N 73° 17'52" W 231.59 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Said parcel contains 17.196 acres more or less.
NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY
TRANSFER STATION SITING
STUDY
DRAFT
December 14, 1989
Submitted to
County of San Diego
Department of Pubic Works
5555 Overland Avenue
San Diego, CA 92123
Submitted by
BROWN, VENCE & ASSOCIATES
120 Montgomery Street, Suite 680
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415) 434-0900
&
CH2MHU1
6425 Christie Avenue, Suite 500
Emeryville, CA 94608
POLICY STATEMENT
Brown, Vence, and Associates encourages the use of recycled paper and double sided
copying. We also practice reduction, reuse, and recycling of materials used as part of
our daily business activities.
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY
TRANSFER STATION SITING STUDY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Title/Content Page
Table of Contents , i
List of Tables iii
List of Figures iv
List of Appendices v
Executive Summary vi
1.0 PURPOSE OF STUDY 1-1
1.1 Study Objectives 1-1
1.2 Context 1-1
1.3 Summary of Approach 1-5
2.0 TRANSFER STATION SYSTEM 2-1
2.1 Introduction 2-1
2.1.1 Relationship to the Proposed NCRRA
Waste-to-Energy Facility 2-3
2.2 Quantities of Waste in North County
Study Area by Collection Area 2-3
2.3 Process for Development of Transfer Station Scenarios 2-5
2.4 Transfer Station Scenarios 2-6
2.4.1 Scenarios Developed Under This Study 2-6
2.4.2 SCS Scenarios 2-9
2.5 Evaluation Criteria and Selection Process 2-18
2.5.1 Criteria Development and Weighting Process 2-18
2.5.2 Economic Analysis of Scenarios 2-21
2.5.3 Scenario Scoring and Selection Process 2-23
2.5.4 Perf erred Scenario 2-31
JOB:89001-TOCa 12/07/89
NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY
TRANSFER STATION SITING STUDY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Title/Content Page
3.0 SITING OF TRANSFER STATIONS 3-1
3.1 Introduction 3-1
3.2 General Areas for Siting of Facilities 3-6
3.2.1 First-Level Exclusionary Criteria 3-6
3.2.2 General Areas Identified 3-8
3.3 Potentially Suitable Sites 3-9
3.4 Evaluation of Potentially Suitable Sites 3-10
3.4.1 Cultural Resources ' 3-11
3.4.2 Biological Resources 3-13
3.4.3 Results of Evaluation 3-16
4.0 DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED TRANSFER STATION SCENARIO 4-1
4.1 Introduction 4-1
4.2 Operational Characteristics 4-1
4.2.1 Overview 4-1
4.2.2 Operations 4-2
4.3 Traffic Analysis 4-5
4.3.1 Introduction 4-5
4.3.2 Method 4-6
4.3.3 Site-by-Site Findings 4-7
4.3.4 Travel Distance Comparisons 4-34
4.4 Recycling 4-37
4.4.1 Introduction 4-37
4.4.2 Description of Materials Recovery Options 4-37
4.5 Household Hazardous Waste 4-40
4.5.1 Introduction: Hazardous
Waste in Municipal Solid Waste 4-40
4.5.2 Waste Acceptance Control 4-41
4.5.3 Providing Alternative Disposal Option
for Household Hazardous Wastes 4-48
4.6 Permit Requirements 4-50
4.6.1 Permits Required for Solid Waste Transfer Facilities 4-50
4.6.2 Order of Permitting Process 4-53
4.6.3 Permitting for Household Hazardous Waste Collection 4-54
JOB: 89001-TO Ca 12/07/89 ii
NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY
TRANSFER STATION SITING STUDY
LET OF TABLES
Table
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
3-1
3-2
3-3
4-1
4-2
4-3
4-4
4-5
4-6
4-7
Title/ Content
Quantities by Collection Area
Evaluation Criteria
Weighting of Evaluation Criteria
by Cities and County
Transfer Station System Costs (Blue Canyon Landfill)
Transfer Station System Costs (Aspen Road Landfill)
Transfer Station System Costs (Gregory Canyon Landfill)
Final Scenario Rankings
Evaluation Results
First- Level Exclusionary Criteria * . . .
Second- Level Exclusionary Criteria
Final Evaluation Siting Criteria
Transfer Station Vehicle Count (1992)
Transfer Station Vehicle Count (2000)
Transfer Station Vehicle Count (2010)
Levels of Service for Roadways
Transfer Station Site Access Road Traffic
Condition Summary ,
Commercial Collection Haul Costs
Estimated Miles from Waste Centroids to
Potential Transfer Station Sites ,
Page
2-4
2-19
2-20
2-25
2-26
2-27
2-32
2-33
3-3
3-4
3-5
4-8
4-9
4-10
.. 4-11
4-12
4-35
4-36
JOB:89001-TOCa 12/07/89 iii
NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY
TRANSFER STATION SITING STUDY
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Title/ Content Page
1-1 North County Study Area 1-2
1-2 Potential Landfill Sites 1-4
1 -3 Study Approach 1-6
2-1 Collection Areas 2-2
2-2 Scenario 1 2-11
2-3 Scenario 2 2-12
2-4 Scenario 3 2-13
2-5 Scenario 4 2-14
2-6 Scenario 5 2-15
2-7 Scenario 6 2-16
2-8 Scenario 7 2-17
2-9 Components of Economic Analysis 2-24
3-1 Siting Process , 3-2
3-2 Preliminary Sites Fallbrook Area 3-17
3-3 Preliminary Sites City of Escondido 3-18
3-4 Preliminary Sites City of San Marcos 3-19
3-5 Preliminary Sites City of Vista 3-20
3-6A Preliminary Sites City of Carlsbad 3-21
3-6B Preliminary Sites City of Carlsbad 3-22
3-7 Preliminary Sites City Of Oceanside 3-23
3-8 Preliminary Sites Beach Communities 3-24
4-1 Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, Fallbrook 4-21
4-2 Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, Fallbrook 4-22
4-3 Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, Escondido 4-23
4-4 Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, Escondido 4-24
JOB:89001-TOCa 12/07/89 iv
NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY
TRANSFER STATION SITING STUDY
LET OF FIGURES Continued
Figure
4-5
4-6
4-7
4-8
4-9
4-10
4-11
4-12
4-13
Title/ Content
Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, San Marcos
Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, San Marcos
Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, Vista
Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, Carlsbad
Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, Carlsbad
Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, Oceanside
Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes, Oceanside
Collection and Transfer Vehicle Routes. Beach Communities
Page
.... 4-25
.... 4-26
4-27
4-28
4-29
4-30
4-31
4-32
4-33
NORTH SAN DIEGO COUNTY
TRANSFER STATION SITING STUDY
LET OF APPENDICES
Appendix Title/Content
Appendix A Haul Routes and Times
Appendix B Transfer Station Personnel Estimates
Appendix C Economic Analysis
Appendix D Community Responses to Evaluation Criteria
Appendix E Scoring of Scenarios
Appendix F List of Potentially Suitable Sites - Field Notes
JOB:89001-TOCa 12/07/89
NORTH SAN-DIEGO COUNTY TRANSFER STATION SITING STUDY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This study identifies the most desirable transfer station system that would serve the
North San Diego County region and the new North County Landfill. It selects the
optimum number of transfer stations and identifies potential sites for those facilities.
Two committees were instrumental in the guidance and completion of this study: a
policy committee comprised of representative council members from the eight north
county cities and a technical committee composed of staff members from the eight
cities and representatives from the Fallbrook and Bonsall Planning Groups.
PREFERRED TRANSFER STATION SCENARIO
The optimum number of transfer stations was determined to be seven, with sites in
Oceanside, Vista, Carlsbad, San Marcos, Escondido, the Fallbrook area and one in the Del
Mar/Solana Beach/Encinitas area. This configuration resulted from analyzing both
economic and noneconomic factors.
Economics
The economic analysis consisted of computing the estimated costs to haul trash to a
transfer station and transport it to the new landfills. Eight scenarios (different
combinations of number, size and generalized location of stations) along with three
possible landfill locations were analyzed.
The economic analysis showed that the north county system costs will be similar no
matter how many transfer stations are built. The reduced capital costs resulting from
building one large station to serve the entire region is off-set by higher transportation
costs for the haulers and private citizens to drive to that one location. On the other
extreme, the increased capital investment necessary to build seven transfer stations is
off-set by the cost saving from reduced driving distances for haulers and the public.
JOB:89001-ES2 12/07/89 - vi
Since the economic analysis indicates that there is no overwhelming economic advantage
in selecting a specificrnumber of transfer stations to be built, the "noneconomic" portions
of the study became even more important.
Noneconomic Factors
A list of noneconomic factors (convenience, land use compatibility, local control, traffic
impacts, etc.) were created in conjunction with the technical committee and then ranked
in order of importance by the cities. Through their rankings of these noneconomic
factors, the cities have indicated that they preferred the control and reduced
environmental impacts associated with smaller, more numerous transfer stations.
Multiple transfer stations result in fewer traffic related impacts, are more convenient to
trash haulers and private citizens, and provide convenient centers for recycling efforts
and household hazardous waste management.
MOST SUITABLE TRANSFER STATION SITES
While the process of selecting the number and general location of transfer stations was
proceeding, suitable sites for these facilities were also being identified.
In order to find acceptable sites, a series of criteria (distance from waste centroid,
zoning and general plan designations, distances from major transportation corridors, etc.)
were developed and applied to the study area. The goal was to find potential sites that
are technically feasible, environmentally suitable, and acceptable to the local
community.
Seventeen suitable sites were found that meet the criteria; these sites are identified in
Figures 3-2 to 3-8 beginning on page 3-17.
A preliminary environmental review indicated that any environmental impacts associated
with these 17 based on the preferred alternative sites could be mitigated. Potential
traffic impacts associated with each site are discussed beginning on page 4-5. Detailed
site assessments will be done on final selected sites during the next phase which will
include the preparation of the EIR.
JOB:89001-ES2 12/07/89 - vii
SECTION 1.0
PURPOSE OF STUDY
SECTION 1.0
PURPOSE OF STUDY
1.1 STUDY OBJECTIVE
This study identifies a transfer station system and specific sites for transfer station
facilities to service the North San Diego County (North County) study area (see Figure 1-
1.) With the San Marcos landfill expected to reach its permitted capacity by mid 1991,
North San Diego County must develop alternatives that can receive more than a million
tons per year of trash.
A new landfill soon will be selected from among three proposed in the north-central part
of San Diego County (County). The County made a decision to close the new landfill to
direct haul and public vehicles in order to reduce the environmental impacts of the
landfill. The longer haul distances associated with the proposed landfill sites, however,
add to the expense of running collection operations. Fuel costs increase because the
trucks must travel longer distances. Collection productivity decreases, because crews
spend more time traveling to the landfill site, rather than performing their primary
function — collecting refuse. In order to minimize the expense and traffic impacts
associated with longer haul distances to the landfill a transfer station system is being
planned to service the study area.
Transfer stations will receive refuse from commercial collection vehicles as well as
commercial and public self-haul vehicles, and consolidate it into large volume trailers for
more efficient and economical transfer to the landfill. Savings accrue from the ability
to haul large amounts (up to 25 tons) in a single vehicle, freeing collection crews to
return to their routes. A well designed and planned transfer station system can help
minimize expected future cost increases, conserve energy, reduce truck trips, and
provide opportunities for recovering materials from the waste stream.
1.2 CONTEXT
Realizing the need for an effective solid waste management system to service the future
needs of the area, the County of San Diego has been working toward the development of
such a system for a number of years.
JOB:89001-la 12/07/89 1 - i
North County Study Area
JOB:89001-la 12/07/89 1 -2
In response to the pending closure of the San Marcos Landfill, the County of San Diego
issued an RFP in August 1987 to identify and evaluate potential landfill sites in the
northwest quadrant of the county. This study was an extension of a similar study
conducted in 198G. At the time this transfer station study was underway, four landfill
sites were identified and were undergoing environmental review; one site, Trujillo
Canyon, has since been dropped from further consideration (see Figure 1-2). A decision
on the final site is expected to be made by mid-1990.
In addition to securing long term landfill capacity, the County has also aggressively
pursued other waste management options. Among these options are the further
development and expansion of recycling arid composting activities throughout the County
and the development of a waste-to-energy facility at the San Marcos landfill site. The
development of waste-to-energy project for the County has been in the works for some
time. The County is negotiating with a vendor to construct the facility.
Since the County established a policy of no direct haul and general public vehicles to the
potential landfill site, the County realized it needed to develop an efficient transfer
station system and enlisted the services of Brown, Vence & Associates in early 1989. The
development of this system is based on the assumption that the transfer stations will be
sized to receive all waste from the study area (minus 20 percent of the waste source-
separated or recycled). Although the waste-to-energy facility could be on-line as early
as 1993, there are planned periods of down-time for the facility, and the transfer stations
will need to accommodate all of the trash normally going to the facility during these
scheduled, and any unscheduled, periods of down-time. Therefore, the transfer stations
are being sized as though the waste-to-energy facility did not exist.
Since this study began in Spring of 1989, the California legislature passed the Integrated
Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939). Aggressive goals for local recycling mandated
in this law heighten the importance of city and county source reduction and recycling
programs. Transfer stations can play an important part in harboring recycling, materials
recovery, and composting activities in the future.
JOB:89001-la 12/07/89 1 - 3
.TORrRQnm-1 a io/n7/QQ
1.3 SUMMARY OF APPROACH
The approach used in developing the transfer station system involved two concurrent
major tasks: the development of the preferred transfer station scenario; and the
identification of most suitable sites (Figure 1-3).
The study area could be served by a single, large, centralized transfer station or by two
or more smaller dispersed stations. To evaluate these possibilities, seven transfer station
scenarios (i.e., various combinations of number, size, and general location of transfer
stations) were developed. These scenarios were then analyzed both from an economic
and noneconomic standpoint. Each scenario was rated according to how well it satisfied
the economic and noneconomic evaluation criteria. This process determined a preferred
transfer station system which most effectively satisfied the criteria. The process and
results are contained in Section 2.0 of this report.
While this process was proceeding, suitable sites (i.e. specific locations) were also
identified. This process involved the development of exclusionary criteria (i.e., criteria
which must be met in order to qualify for further consideration) and preferential siting
criteria (i.e., criteria which were applied to those sites which satisfied the exclusionary
criteria in order to provide further evaluation). Areas which met the exclusionary
criteria were identified and subjected to further review based on the preferential
criteria. A list of 41 candidate sites was developed and a detailed evaluation was
conducted. The result of this process was the identification of 17 potentially suitable
sites for the transfer stations.'
These two products, the preferred scenario and the most suitable sites, were then
combined to yield a picture of the most acceptable scenario (i.e., number, size and
specific location of the transfer stations).
Throughout this study, the County and consultant team have met regularly with city staff
representatives, city council representatives and local haulers to receive their input and
comments on work in progress.
JOB:89001-la 12/07/89 1 - 5
'
^
t
4 rth County Transfer 35S2ESstigation — Overview IlKS?^Figure 1-3O Q)
Jc o•^~ • ^«O *zica ™2co
Q.o
<
™
0)o
CO
Co
03
CO
"wc
2H
•o
0)
0)
0)
n
O
Q.o
O
Q
i !
"S .2 u u n _, ct re ^<5 g 25| § e|| | g|
£*£<:*« 33
J^i — i
It J
C g OS1
og 2 obi< a-
^r3"
« c §$3 § T:C 3 ca
.*-* — j u I Determination of Most Acceptable I1 Tror»of*%r OtotSstr* O «*«%.»* ***>!«». 13co
S>
1<iianoici vjiauuii oueiidiiu•Number of Transfer Stations• Sizest
sio *i s "aSW ,_
(00)
2
3
CO
o
co
Identified3
ij
3
C
WJ
1
1 «
o
1
(T3
H-S
2 o
*S5 ^ ^
Q.
4
GeneralLocationsIdentlfled^:luslonary:nteriaa
j ,
O 0 C
•** §«s 112-5W JJ.S
co w.3
*
JOB:89001-la 12/07/89 1 -6
SECTION 2.0
TRANSFER STATION SYSTEM
SECTION 2.0
TRANSFER STATION SYSTEM
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this section is to evaluate alternative transfer station scenarios for the
North San Diego County study area. A "scenario" is an analysis tool with a set of
associated assumptions. Initially, five transfer station scenarios were developed
representing various configurations of number, size, and location of transfer stations.
These scenarios were then presented to each of the cities within the study area for their
review. Based on this review, two new transfer station scenarios were added, bringing
the total number of scenarios to seven.
A scenario is based on amounts of waste from seven collection areas. Section 2.2
presents these waste quantities. Section 2.3 describes in more detail the process for
identifying a scenario. In Section 2.4, a description of the seven scenarios developed for
this study is provided and a brief comparison with three scenarios developed by SCS
Engineers in the Landfill Siting Study is presented. In Section 2.5, these seven scenarios
are evaluated to determine their impact, both economic and noneconomic, on
participating communities. In Section 2.6, the preferred scenario is presented in terms
of number, size, and location of transfer stations.
Seven waste sheds (or areas of waste generation) were identified in the study area
(Figure 2-1). These are represented by the collection areas for: San Marcos; Vista;
Oceanside; Carlsbad; Fallbrook; the Escondido collection area, which for the purpose of
this study includes Valley Center and Pauma Valley; and the San Dieguito collection area
which includes Encinitas, Solana Beach, and the City of Del Mar. Various combinations
of transfer stations were then developed to service these waste sheds. For purposes of
maximizing hauling efficiency, the geographic centers or "centroids" of waste generation
were determined for each collection area or combination of collection areas according to
the various scenarios. This was done by approximating the central point of population for
the year 2000, the appropriate midpoint of the planning time frame, using San Diego
Association of Governments (SanDAG) Series 7 population estimates.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2 - 1
FIGURE 2-1Collection Areas
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-2
2.1.1 Relationship to the Proposed NC R R A Waste-to-Energy Facility
The scenarios assume that final disposal of the solid waste will be at a landfill in a
remote location. (A new landfill will be selected by the County from among three
proposed in the north-central part of the County.) The transfer stations will be sized to
receive all waste from the study area (minus 20 percent waste recycled at the source). A
waste-to-energy facility proposed by NCRRA could be on-line as early as 1993 and would
receive approximately 550,000 tons of trash every year. Because there are planned
periods of down-time for the NCRRA plant, the transfer stations will need to be able to
accommodate all of the trash normally going to the NCRRA plant during those periods of
time. Therefore, the transfer station facilities will be sized as though the NCRRA plant
did not exist. In addition, the transfer stations are designed to handle the projected
waste generated in the year 2010, more than twice the current amount, and to
accommodate aggressive material recovery. In this regard, the design capacities of the
facilities are very conservative.
2.2 QUANTITIES OF WASTE IN NORTH COUNTY STUDY AREA BY COLLECTION
AREA
Waste quantity estimates for the study area are based on the total amount of trash taken
to the San Marcos Landfill during the County's fiscal year 1988/1989, escalated at a 5
percent annual combined growth rate for population increases and per capita refuse
production. The initial analysis year was 1992, the planned start date for transfer station
operation. Waste quantities for each of seven identified collection areas within the study
area were then determined based on the assumption that waste generation was directly
proportional to population. SanDAG Series 7 population forecasts for each collection
area were used as the basis for this determination. Waste quantity projections for the
year 2010 were used as the basis for facility design. Table 2-1 provides a breakdown of
waste quantities by collection area. For purposes of this study, the City of Del Mar was
combined with the San Dieguito collection area, and the Pauma Valley and Valley Center
collection areas were included in the Escondido collection area.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-3
*_^1:CT1ON ARE/11 LUrsi _juj -1
JO& U
^ s^_
u
P
Pz
O
j
£ **9 f *-* « 5•r L. •-
5H 3
1<d
T: — S3•* r££o
52^ o« S
IsQ. >-
vAaa.
***V i->
"a £ mS
1,2*
1
ill
Z o
'— oj; r»i
S. g
g >•
vOe* H
** '
11 k.
« "(d "5
S^ SO O ™H r- i/>
|g *
2 •» I Sx
H £ <J -
fs.00
OOO
ftf
Ps,IN
8O
J_^
-3-
r*.rx.
O
s
1
o"00
1
rsi<N
_
rsi
ON"
OO
8o
o~
1
00
~~
^s.
re
— •
Q
° BO
af
C C7
1
8o
^r>v
so
(S^— •
o
ir
IN
5
8ooors!
ooo
o"
00
^rsT0
vO
o8.
8o
2
~"Carlsbadrs.
O
8
G°>rst•*
0oo
vO
£00
OvO
O
00
ooo
IN
rsi
0o
IN
00
^
S"
•"
O
o8.
oo"
OO
o8
to
r>i
Oceanside•sT 00
OO ^^
o o0 0O 0
~T •?•O ININ IN
0 O0 O0 0
Ps. O-< 00
r*\ oo
— o
S S
-a- O*O -if
s §0 0
O vOPS. IN
1 1^\ OO
r»j -^
o oor-v (N
oo \o
CO fNrs. o\
o o
§ 8
2 S
§ IO 0
oo tfs
•^ ^v
~
«/>8
rt •*
I I> i/5
o
00
8o
.^
<o
oo0
^— •
00o
iT
rsi
o
^^
o
8
""
3
m
ir\
r€— «
S
8O
(N
|
ON
CM
>so
> -^
ll- ££ U
00 **
o ~ ^•o -c «111U s^ (Cu3
•0 00
8 8
°. °."•C o"sT P^— fN
rvT
8 8o o^— «" psT
OO 00
f\T
00 tO^ r*\
sr PsT
00
iT Ps.Ps, 00(N f\^
^
8 80 O
VO* ON*oo vo
8 8o. o_psT —io — •— Ps.
— ONoo si00 (N
3 oPs.
ON —
O Q
8 8
"^ Kv\
8 8o o
S K~-PallbrookTOTAL^^
k.oQ.UK
Ps.
V)
<U
Ji
<
Q
J
J
1
n
urt
•o
to
"«
o
"o
c
VQ.
id
§
v>
in
(5
§
u
^u
>>
V
IX)
I
o1
ISu_o
<
*
.
.2
iL.
|
vo00
2
BO
IS
Ouu
•DV
1"id
Q.H
ps,
voON
r\T1OON
4)
1
|O
*«c§u
•£
oZ
oo
Ps.
oo
ON
"^s1
*»
tr
•^
2
ll
^ *-flj (0
% V
4) tnJT C
C ***ft)
1 ^
*fl ^^
-"Sc 5:V «Ju >nO4 w
f^2-g
J3 <0
— <U
* 5*?s ^o. ".2 *
*D V«;£
* f ._ ca v« u
O k.
BflO
>>^:
s §
s -.2 «•
2 3
8" **
v ~u "k. C
o _jj^» f*
5 5
IIo i*^ ts« k.*; vi~
•J!
**
(#v09
torsi
ON1
o
id3H
O
09
&On
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-4
2.3 PROCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF TRANSFER STATION SCENARIOS
Technically, the million-plus tons per year of waste currently generated in the study area
could be handled in a single large facility or the wastes could be diverted to two or more
smaller facilities. However, the chosen transfer station system serving eight cities and
the unincorporated County must satisfy local waste disposal objectives.
In order to test different combinations of number, size, and location of transfer stations,
five initial transfer-station "scenarios" were developed. These scenarios reflect two
extreme "policy" alternatives; i.e., a single centralized transfer station to serve the
entire study area; and a decentralized transfer station system with a facility in each of
the seven identified collection areas. The other scenarios fall between these two
extremes (see Section 2.4). These scenarios were presented to each of the cities within
the study area for their review. Based on this review, two additional scenarios were
developed, bringing the total number of transfer station scenarios to seven.
For all scenarios, we have defined the collection areas served by the transfer station(s)
and identified the corresponding waste centroid or geographic center of waste
generation. There are two types of waste centroids used in this study:
1) Collection area waste centroid — The approximate point of highest density of
solid waste production in a collection area. It is used in this study as a
convenient point from which to measure the direct haul distance to a transfer
station.
2) Transfer station waste centroid — The approximate center point of waste
generation for the areas serviced by a transfer station. The transfer station
waste centroid can be an existing collection area or a combination of
collection areas. In cases where it represents a combination of collection
areas, the centroid is derived by calculating the weighted average distance
from each collection area waste centroid, proportional to the amount of waste
generated. In this study, transfer station waste centroids are used to find the
approximate location for each transfer station in a scenario and are used to
measure transfer haul distance to the landfill.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-5
For each scenario, transfer station locations are assumed to be within three miles of the
transfer station waste- centroid, as defined in Section 3.0. Waste centroids were
identified using population data and maps. SanDAG Series 7 census data was recorded
for each of the census tracts within the various collection permit areas of the study
area. Population forecasts for the year 2000 (the approximate midpoint of facility
operations) were then used, along with appropriate local mapping, to determine the
location of the waste centroid for each collection area. For this analysis, waste
generation is assumed to be proportional to population for any area under consideration.
For each scenario which involved consolidating two or more collection permit areas, a
new waste centroid was determined. This was based upon a proportional weighting
analysis conducted on each of its components. In all cases, each collection area was
considered as a whole.
2.4 TRANSFER STATION SCENARIOS
For all of the scenarios, the sizing of the facilities is based on projected waste quantities
for the year 2010, and assumes that a waste-to-energy facility will not be operating. The
facilities have also been designed to accommodate aggressive material recovery. The
facility(s) are intended to be open to receiving and transporting waste seven days per
week. The majority of the waste, however, will be received Monday through Saturday.
The transfer stations' capacities have therefore been designed based on a six-day-per-
week operating schedule in order to more effectively accommodate the typical
distribution of waste throughout the week.
This section will describe the scenarios analyzed in this study and will also compare them
to those developed by SCS Engineers.
2.4.1 Scenarios Developed Under This Study
Scenario 1
This scenario assumes that all of the waste generated in the study area that is not
recovered will be delivered to a single, centrally located transfer station.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-6
Collection Areas Serviced Size (TPDg)
Escondido/San Marcos/Vista
San DieguitoACarlsbad/Oceanside/Fallbrook 7,148
This scenario is shown in Figure 2-2.
Scenario 2
Scenario 2 involves siting two transfer stations servicing the following collection areas:
Collection Areas Serviced Size (TPDg)
Escondido/San Marcos/Vista/San Dieguito
Carlsbad/Oceanside 6,683
Fallbrook 465
This scenario is shown in Figure 2-3.
Scenario 3
Scenario 3 involves siting three transfer stations servicing the following collection areas:
Collection Areas Serviced Size (TPDg)
Escondido/Vista/San Marcos 3,362
Carlsbad/Oceanside/San Dieguito 3,321
Fallbrook 465
This scenario is shown in Figure 2-4.
Scenario 4
Scenario 4 involves siting four transfer stations which would service the following
collection areas:
Collection Areas Serviced Size (TPDg)
Vista/Oceanside/Carlsbad 3,260
San Marcos/Escondido 2,548
San Dieguito 875
Fallbrook 465
This scenario is shown in Figure 2-5.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-7
Scenarios
Scenario 5 involves siting seven transfer stations located within three miles of the waste
centroid of each of the following collection areas:
Collection Areas Serviced Size (TPDg)
Escondido 1,830
Oceanside 1,375
Carlsbad 1,071
San Dieguito 875
Vista 814
San Marcos 718
Fallbrook 465
This scenario is shown in Figure 2-6.
These five initial scenarios were provided to each of the cities within the study area for
their review. Based on this review, two additional scenarios were developed:
Scenario 6:
This scenario involves siting three transfer stations servicing the following collection
areas:
Collection Areas Serviced Size (TPDg)
Escondido/San Marcos/Vista
San Dieguito/Carlsbad 5,308
Oceanside 1,375
Fallbrook 465
This scenario is shown in Figure 2-7.
Scenario 7
This scenario involves siting six transfer stations servicing the following collection areas:
Collection Areas Serviced Size (TPDg)
Escondido 1,830
San Marcos/San Dieguito 1,593
Oceanside 1,375
Carlsbad 1,071
Vista 814
Fallbrook 465
This scenario is shown in Figure 2-8.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2 - 8
Fifteen different sizes of transfer stations resulted from the seven scenarios which were
developed. For the purposes of analysis, these transfer stations were organized into six
groups, which are listed below. The economic and noneconomic analysis of the seven
transfer station scenarios is provided in Section 2.5. As has been discussed, the
development of the transfer station system capacity is very conservative in that sizing is
based on waste generation figures for the year 2010, and assumes that the NCRRA
waste-to-energy facility will not be operating. In addition, transfer stations can often
accommodate waste quantities beyond their design capacity, if needed, by altering the
operational characteristics of the facility (e.g., extended hours, increased staffing).
Therefore, although the analysis sizes chosen for the transfer stations are in some cases
less than the scenario sizes which are presented, they are deemed more than adequate to
handle the projected waste quantities.
Transfer Station Transfer Station
Scenario Sizes (TPDg) Analysis Size (TPDg)
465/718 600
814/875/1,071 1,000
1375/1593 1,500
1,830 2,000
2548/3260/3321/3362 3,000
5308/6683/7148 6,000
2.4.2 SCS Scenarios
SCS Engineers developed three transfer station scenarios as part of their work on the
North County landfill siting study. The SCS scenarios do not identify specific transfer
station sites, but rather define areas within various population centers in the North
County area. The three transfer station scenarios developed by SCS are as follows:
I. • Three transfer stations located in the following areas:
Carlsbad/Oceanside
San Marcos/Escondido
Fallbrook
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-9
II. • Four transfer stations located in the following areas:
Oceanside
San Marcos
Encinitas
Fallbrook
III. • Eight transfer stations located in the following areas:
Carlsbad
Oceanside
San Marcos
Escondido
Encinitas
Fallbrook
Solana Beach
Vista
The relationship of the SCS scenarios to the transfer station scenarios which were
developed as part of this study is discussed below.
SCS Scenario I is similar to BVA's Scenario 3 and 6 in that each scenario proposes the
siting of three transfer stations within the study area. The general locations of the
transfer stations for the SCS scenario and the BVA scenarios are also similar.
SCS Scenario II is similar to BVA's Scenarios 4 in that both scenarios propose siting four
transfer stations within the study area. The general locations of the transfer stations for
both the SCS and BVA scenarios are also similar.
SCS Scenario III is closest to BVA's Scenarios 5 and 7. Waste from Encinitas, Solana
Beach, and Del Mar are combined with San Marcos in Scenario 5, resulting in six transfer
stations serving the study area, rather than the eight proposed by SCS. Scenario 5
includes seven transfer stations, the only difference being one facility serving the three
small coastal communities rather than one each in Encinitas and Solana Beach.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2 - 10
FIGURE 2-2
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-11
FIGURE 2-3 Scenario 2
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-12
rr~' V^'v i
Scenario 3FIGURE 2-4
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-13
FIGURE 2-5 Scenario 4
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-14
^ffinfcQi'• -—Sh'^^£m^^~±^^^$&-^-^'•'•^ -;<=t'y^?^10^
Scenario 5FIGURE 2-6
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-15
FIGURE 2-7 Scenario 6
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2- 16
Scenario 7FIGURE 2-8
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-17
2.5 EVALUATION CRITERIA AND SELECTION PROCESS
There are important social, environmental, political, and economic considerations in
establishing a transfer station system. The process described in this section uses both
the economic results and noneconomic factors as evaluation criteria. Since some factors
are more important in the minds of the communities and the County, they are given more
significance through weighting factors.
This section summarizes the evaluation and selection process for the transfer station
scenarios. This process involved the development of evaluation criteria and the analysis
of the seven transfer station scenarios with respect to these criteria. Scores were then
weighted based on the average degree of importance assigned to each criterion by the
cities participating in the study. A final score was calculated for each scenario and a
most acceptable scenario was determined, based on the final scoring. The economic
evaluation involved complex modeling of the costs associated with the future transfer
station system to result in a total cost figure for each scenario. This analysis is
described briefly in Section 2.5.2 and in more detail in Appendix C.
2.5.1 Criteria Development and Weighting Process
The selection process for the most acceptable transfer station system for North San
Diego County began by developing the evaluation criteria. Various technical,
environmental, economic, and institutional criteria were developed, then reviewed and
revised by the City/County Advisory Committee to reflect community concerns and
priorities. The resulting 12 evaluation criteria are described in Table 2-2.
Next, city staff and council representatives were asked to decide how important a
criterion was for their jurisdictions by assigning a weighting factor. Representatives
were asked to distribute a total of 100 points among the 12 criteria, based on their
degree of importance. The averaged results of the assignments were taken to be the
weighting factors for each criterion. Table 2-3 shows the averaged results of the
weighting process; Appendix D contains the individual community responses and further
detail on the weighting and ranking process. According to the results, the communities
(as a whole) place high emphasis on a transfer station configuration that maximizes local
control, is compatible with local land uses, and minimizes overall costs. Minimization of
traffic impacts was also an emphasized issue.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-18
Table 2-2
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Technical:
Convenience
Flexibility
Direct Haul Pattern
Disruption
Technical Risk
Environmental:
Air Quality
Traffic Impact
Degree of accessibility of the transfer stations to area residents for
drop-off of self-haul wastes, recyclables, household hazardous wastes.
Ability of the transfer station system to accommodate future solid
waste management facilities or activities (e.g., increased materials
recovery, composting, waste-to-energy).
Degree to which the system maintains current direct haul patterns.
Degree to which components of the system are proven to be technically
feasible.
Degree to which the transfer station system minimizes air quality
impacts.
Degree to which the transfer station system minimizes traffic impacts.
Roadways
Other Environ-
mental Issues
Degree to which the transfer station system minimizes roadway
degradation.
Degree to which the system minimizes other environmental impacts.
Institutional:
Local Land Use
Compatibility
Level of
Participation
Local Control
Economics
Cost
Degree to which the system minimizes siting problems due to local
citizens' "NIMBY" reaction.
Degree of compatibility with community's preferred level of
involvement in solid waste management.
Degree of local control over a transfer station in terms of operating
characteristics, facility design and appearance.
Degree to which the system minimizes overall cost.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 ! ;
2-19
Table 2-3
WEIGHTING OF EVALUATION CRITERIA
BY CITIES AND COUNTY
Criteria
Local Control
Local Land Use Compatibility
Economics
Traffic Impact
Level of Participation
Roadways '
Convenience
Other Environmental Issues
Air Quality
Direct Haul Pattern Disruption
Technical Risk
Flexibility
Averaged
Weighting
Factor
15.4
14.5
13.0
9.8
8.0
7.5
7.2
5.5
5.4
5.0
4.5
4.0
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2 - 20
2.5.2 Economic Analysis of Scenarios
Total cost of building-and operating a particular transfer station system was used as one
of the evaluation criteria. Communities in the North County study area will want to
know how a transfer station system will affect the cost of solid waste management.
These scenarios can be compared with each other and with a no-project alternative, i.e.,
hauling the waste directly to the selected landfill. A series of assumptions were made
affecting cost and were analyzed over a 20 year period. Comparative results on cost per
ton, total cost of a system, and cost to each community were produced. (See Appendix
C.)
This section summarizes the results of the analysis of costs for the seven transfer station
scenarios and the base case (i.e., direct haul to landfill). At the time this analysis was
performed, four landfills were still under consideration by the County. Although Trujillo
Canyon has since been dropped, it was included in the analysis and appears in Appendix
C. Since three future landfill sites are under consideration by the County, the analysis
looks at the difference in cost to transport waste to each. The analysis results in a total
of 32 different cases or combinations of transfer stations and landfills.
The economic analysis of a transfer station system consists of four major components:
1) Cost to haul waste from point of collection to transfer station.
2) Costs of constructing, owning, and operating a transfer station.
3) Costs of transporting the waste from the transfer station to the landfill.
4) Cost of disposal at the landfill.
Figure 2-9 is a schematic of these components of the economic analysis.
The purpose of the analysis is to compare the costs of each alternative. Important
outputs of the analysis are the net annual costs, costs per ton of waste, and net present
value of the costs for each of the seven collection areas for each alternative. These
costs are also further divided into those accrued by the commercial collectors in each
area and those incurred by self-haulers.
All important model results are expressed as a "present value" of a cost. Present value is
used to provide a benchmark for comparing projects with differing cash flows over an
extended period of time. It measures what future cash flow is worth in terms of the first
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-21
year value. Present value, net costs in the model is the sum of the discounted value (in
first year dollars) of each year's total costs.
Each of the seven scenarios and the direct haul base case was evaluated assuming
ultimate disposal at each of the three landfill locations. The most economically
attractive option depends upon the ultimate landfill location. Tables 2-4 through 2-6
illustrate the total cost for each scenario and direct haul under the differing landfill
choices. Results of the analyses indicate that:
With respect to all transfer station systems analyzed, Gregory Canyon landfill is
the least costly alternative because it is closest to the collection area
centroids. Aspen Road and Blue Canyon are, in increasing order, more expensive
alternatives.
If the landfill is located at Blue Canyon, the transfer station scenarios become
less costly than direct haul on a net present value basis. If the landfill is located
at Aspen Road or Gregory Canyon, then direct haul is less costly.
Scenario 1 (one transfer station) is the least costly transfer station scenario
followed by -- in order of increasing cost — scenario 6 (three transfer stations);
scenario 4 (four transfer stations); scenario 3 (three transfer stations); scenario 2
(two transfer stations); scenario 5 (seven transfer stations); and scenario 7 (six
transfer stations). An anomaly occurs with the Gregory Canyon location where
scenario 3 becomes the least costly but the remaining order stays the same.
On a per ton basis, costs in the transfer station options increase at a slower rate
than the direct haul options. This is because the annualized capital costs remain
fixed, but the haul and disposal costs avoided by having the transfer station(s)
continue to escalate. If the transfer station(s) operates for longer than 20 years,
the incrementally lower costs in the ensuing years would tend to make each of
the transfer station scenarios even less costly relative to direct haul.
A breakdown of the costs associated with the transfer station scenarios on a net
present value of costs basis is presented in Table 2-4 through Table 2-6. The
transfer station capital and O&M costs can be a significant portion of the overall
waste disposal costs when multiple transfer stations are involved such as in
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-22
. Scenarios 5 (seven transfer stations) and 7 (six transfer stations). If the transfer
stations are operated for longer than 20 years, the scenarios with more transfer
stations become relatively more favorable.
If the waste growth assumptions are too low, then the transfer station(s)
scenarios become proportionally less costly. Conversely, if the assumptions are
too high, then the transfer stations become more costly.
Costs by collection area and hence for the individual waste haulers vary
considerably among and between scenarios. Communities nearest the larger
transfer stations generally have relatively lower overall disposal costs.
• The ranking of scenarios is different for some collection areas than for the North
County Area as a whole. This is due to factors such as transfer station capital
costs, direct haul distances to transfer stations, and tonnages.
2.5.3 Scenario Scoring and Selection Process
Following the development of the evaluation criteria and weighing factors, the process of
scoring the scenarios was undertaken. Each of the seven scenarios was assigned an initial
score for each criterion, based on the degree of compatibility with that criterion (e.g.,
seven transfer stations are more convenient for more people than one centralized
transfer station). In those cases in which a given scenario represented a worst case
situation for a given collection area (e.g., the least convenient possible option or the
most detrimental to air quality), it was assigned a score of 0. If a scenario satisfied a
criteria completely (e.g., the most convenient possible situation or the greatest
minimization of other environmental impacts) it received a perfect score. All other
scenarios falling between these extremes were scored proportionally. A scale of 0 to 3
was used to determine final scoring. For ease of analysis, certain criterion were scored
on a scale of 0 to 100; these scores were then normalized based on a scale of 0 to 3.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2 - 23
Figure 2-9
Components of Economic Analysis
Landfill!
Collection Area C
Transfer Haul XI
Transfer Station X
Collection Area B
Direct Haul A
Collection Area A
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-24
Transfer Station System Cost Components For All §Ssis§5
Collection Areas* -^Sz-Z^
Disposal at Blue Canyon Landfill
(Net Present Value in 1989 $OOOs)
Scenario
12345
(ITS) (2 TSs) (3 TSs) (4TSs) (7 TSs)
6 7 No
(3 TSs) (6 TSs) Transfer
Station
Development Costs
Constr.
Equip.
Land
Subtotal
19.716 28.105 39.851 48.240 74.037
3.766 5.631 8,563 11.196 18.531
8.460 12.060 17.100 20.700 31.770
31.942 45.796 65.514 80.136 124.338
40.270 67.326 0
8.754 16.941 0
17.280 28.890 0
66.304 113.157 0
20 Year Operating Costs
Direct "1
Haul to I
Transfer |
Station J
Transfer ^
Station >
O&M J
Transfer "1
Haul to V
Landfill J
Direct ^
Haul to V
Landfill J
Landfill 1
Disposal >
Cost J
Subtotal
TOTAL
Operating costs
year period.
180,274 167.581 133,188 105,710 72.413
47.907 54.749 66.367 77.270 99.559
183,667 188,055 192.043 189,360 195,393
00000
146.882 146.882 146.882 146.882 146,882
558.73O 557.267 538.480 519.222 514.247
590.672 603.068 603.994 599.358 638.585
deflated from 1992 to 1989 at 5%. Costs calculated on Net
130.292 99.874 0
64.591 93.016 0
187,273 196.031 0
0 0 502.789
146.882 146.882 167,865
529.038 535.803 670,654
595,342 648,960 670.654
Present Value basis for 20
89001 Scwwk»3:1
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-25
Table 2-5
Transfer Station'System Cost Componen
Collection Areas*
Disposal at Aspen Road Landfill
(Net Present Value in 1989 $OOOs)
l**-"^^*
ts For All SJz
•^~^-
Scenario
1 2 3
(ITS) (2 TSs) (3 TSs)
4
(4TSs)
567
(7 TSs) (3 TSs) (6 TSs)
No
Transfer
Station
Developing Costs
Constr.
Equip.
Land
Subtotal
19,716 28.105 39,851
3.766 5.631 8.563
8.460 12.060 17.100
31.942 45.796 65,514
48.240
11.196
20,700
80.136
74.037 40.270 67.326
18.531 8.754 16.941
31.770 17.280 28.890
124.338 66.304 113.157
0
0
0
0
20 Year Operating Costs
Direct "|
Haul to 1
Transfer |
Station J
Transfer 1
Station >
O&M J
Transfer ~|
Haul to >
Landfill J
Direct "1
Haul to >
Landfill J
Landfill 1
Disposal >
Cost J
Subtotal
TOTAL
Operating costsyear period.
180,274 167.581 133,188
47,907 54.749 66.367
126,271 129.714 130.629
000
146.882 146.882 146.882
501.334 498.926 477.066
533,276 544.722 542.580
deflated from 1992 to 1989 at 5%.
105,710
77,270
126,630
0
146,882
456,492
536,628
72.413 130.292 99.874
99.559 64.591 93.016
134.515 127.395 127.810
000
146.882 146.882 146.882
453.369 469.160 467.582
577.707 535.464 580.739
Costs calculated on Net Present Value basis
0
0
0
323.576
167.865
491.441
491.441
for 20
69001 Sc*nartos32
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-26
Table 2-6
Transfer Statio'n System Cost Components For All
Collection Areas*
Disposal at Gregory Canyon Landfill
(Net Present Value in 1989 $OQOs)
mi^-^*J~^vm^^-m
|§^1|
Scenario
1 2
(ITS) (2 TSs)
3
(3 TSs)
4
(4TSs)
5
(7 TSs)
6
(3 TSs)
7
(6 TSs)
No
Transfer.
Station
Development Costs
Constr.
Equip.
Land
Subtotal
19.716 28.105
3,766 5.631
8,460 12,060
31,942 45,796
39.851
8.563
17,100
65.514
48,240
11.196
20,700
80.136
74.037
18.531
31,770
124.338
40.270
8.754
17.280
66.304
67,326
16.941
28.890
113.157
0
0
0
0
20 Year Operating Costs
Direct "1
Haul to I
Transfer |
Station J
Transfer ^
Station >
O&M J
Transfer "1
Haul to >
Landfill J
Direct "1
Haul to >
Landfill J
Landfill 1
Disposal f
Cost J
Subtotal
TOTAL
Operating costs
year period.
180.274 167.581
47.907 54.749
104.953 111.911
0 0
146.882 146.882
480.016 481.123
511.958 526,919
deflated from 1992 to
133.188
66,367
113,601
0
146.882
460.038
525,552
1989 at 5%.
105,710
77.270
110.143
0
146.882
440.005
520.141
72,413
99.559
118.174
0
146.882
437,028
561,366
Costs calculated on Net
130.292
64,591
111.129
0
146.882
452.894
519.198
99,874
93.016
118.889
0
146.882
458.661
571,818
Present Value basis
0
0
0
275.470
167.865
443.335
443.335
for 20
89001
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-27
Scoring the scenarios, based on a quantitative analysis of the criteria, was applied to the
criteria for convenience, direct haul pattern-disruption, air quality, traffic impact,
roadways, and other environmental issues.
Scoring for convenience was based on the distance from each collection area to the
corresponding transfer station for each scenario. As an example, for the San Dieguito
collection area, the distance from the collection area to the transfer station for the
various scenarios ranged from 16 miles (scenario 2) to 0 miles (scenarios 4 and 5).
Scenario 2, therefore, is the least convenient options and received a score of 0 while
scenarios 4 and 5 are the most convenient possible option and therefore received a score
of 100. Each of the remaining scenarios were scored proportionally. For example, the
distance from the San Dieguito collection area to the transfer station for Scenario 7 is 10
miles. This is 38 percent more convenient (i.e., closer to the most convenient possible
option) than the least convenient scenario; it therefore received a score of 38.
The scores for each collection area, per each scenario, were multiplied by the percent of
the total study area population living in the collection area in order to weight these
scores by percent of the population affected. This process resulted in an overall score
for each collection area, per each scenario. The cumulative scores for the collection
areas represented the total score for the scenario. This general process was followed for
all criteria.
Scoring for direct haul pattern disruption was based on the absolute difference between
the miles currently driven from each collection area to the San Marcos Landfill and the
miles which would be driven from each collection area to the corresponding transfer
station for each scenario.
Scoring for air quality was based on the miles driven from the collection area to the
transfer station for commercial collection and self-haul vehicles, and the miles driven
from the transfer station to a common point for the transfer vehicles for each scenario.
Total vehicle miles driven was assumed to be directly proportional to the impact on air
quality; i.e, the more miles driven, the greater the adverse impact on air quality.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-28
The scoring process for traffic impact was identical to that for air quality. The total
vehicle miles driven was determined for each collection area per each scenario and
assumed to be directly proportional to the impact on traffic; the more miles driven, the
greater the adverse impact on traffic.
Scoring for roadways was also based on vehicle miles driven from each collection area to
the corresponding transfer station, and from the transfer station to a common point per
each scenario. Commercial collection, commercial self-haul, and transfer trailer vehicle
miles were considered in this analysis. The contribution of public self-haul vehicles to
roadway degradation was not considered significant in comparison to the other vehicle
types and was therefore not considered in this analysis.
Scoring for other environmental factors was based on the distance from the collection
area to the transfer station. If a transfer station was sited within a collection area for a
given scenario, it was assumed that this would result in the least minimization of other
environmental factors, with respect to that collection area. That scenario therefore
received a score of 0 for that particular collection area. In those cases in which a
scenario involved siting a transfer station the furthest away from a given collection area,
it was assumed that that would minimize the other environmental impacts on that
collection area. That scenario therefore received a score of 100 for that particular
collection area.
For each scenario, the criterion score for each collection area was multiplied by the
percent of the total study area population residing in that collection area to determine a
final score. The combined scores for each of the collection areas provided the overall
score for each scenario, with respect to the various criteria.
The criteria of flexibility, technical risk, local land-use compatibility, level of
participation, and local control were not easily quantified and were scored more
qualitatively.
Scoring for the flexibility criterion was based on the size of the facility. A facility under
500 TPD was considered inflexible and received a score of 1; a facility between 500 TPD
and 1,500 TPD was considered moderately flexible and received a score of 2. All
facilities over 1,500 TPD were considered very flexible and received a score of 3.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-29
Scoring for technical risk was also based on the size of the facility. Facilities under
4,000 TPD are considered to be adequately demonstrated and therefore technically
feasible and received a_score of 3. Facilities over 4,000 TPD are not common, and they
were therefore assumed to be technically risky and received a score of 1.
Scoring for local land use compatibility assumed that it is better to have fewer facilities
in terms of minimizing siting problems due to local citizenry objections. If a given
scenario involved siting a facility in a collection area, it was assumed that there would
be local objections. The collection area therefore received a score of 0. If, on the other
hand, a scenario did not involve siting a facility in a collection area, it was assumed that
there would be no objections and that collection area received a score of 3. If for a
given scenario a particular facility could be sited in two or more collection areas, based
on the location of the transfer station centroid, it was assumed that each area had an
equal chance of having the facility sited, and scoring was based accordingly. For
example, if the facility could be sited in any of 3 areas, then each area had a 67 percent
chance of not having the facility, and therefore not having citizenry objections. Each
area therefore received a score of 67. This approach was also used in scoring the criteria
of local control and level of participation.
Scoring for local control assumed that if a facility was sited in a collection area for a
given scenario, that collection area had local control and was therefore given a score of
3. If, on the other hand, a facility was not sited in a collection area, then that collection
area had no local control and received a score of 0.
Scoring for level of participation was based on the degree to which the scenarios
satisfied each of the collection areas (communities) preferred level of involvement. If a
scenario satisfied a given collection areas preferred level of involvement it received a
score of 3 if it failed to satisfy the areas preferred level of involvement it received a
score of 0.
The economics for each scenario were also scored and included, along with the
noneconomic criteria in the selection process. The least expensive scenario receiving a
score of 100 and the remaining scenarios were scored inversely proportional to their
percent additional cost. The results for each criterion/scenario, the scoring
methodology, and assumptions are presented in Appendix E.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-30
The last step of the process involved determining a final score and ranking for each of
the scenarios. The score of each scenario per each criterion was multiplied times the
weighting factor associated with that criterion. The sum total of the weighted scores
was then taken to be the final score for that scenario. The scenario with the highest
final score was taken as the most acceptable scenario for the County. The results of this
process are presented in Table 2-7.
According to the results of this evaluation process, the number one ranked transfer
station configuration is Scenario 5, which involved siting seven transfer stations in the
following areas: Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad, San Dieguito, Vista, San Marcos, and
Fallbrook.
This scenario scored the highest in terms of convenience, local control, traffic impacts,
air quality, and roadways, and also received the highest score for technical risk, along
with several of the other scenarios. The second highest scoring was scenario 7 which
involved siting six transfer stations.
In all cases the greater the number of transfer stations for a scenario, the more
favorable overall score that scenario received. Scenarios 1 and 2, which involved siting
one and two facilities, respectively scored the lowest.
2.5.4 Preferred Scenario
Tables 2-7 and 2-8 present the final scenario ranking and a brief explanation of the
evaluation results. Based on the selection process, Scenario 5, with seven transfer
stations, is the preferred scenario for North San Diego County. This scenario is the
decentralized approach, resulting in smaller transfer stations and shorter direct haul
distances than the other scenarios. Section 4.0 describes more of the operating
characteristics of this selected system.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-31
Table 2-7
FINAL SCENARIO RANKINGS
Ranking Scenario
1 5
2 7
3 4
4 3
5 6
6 2
7 1
Number of Stations
7 Transfer Stations
6 Transfer Stations
4 Transfer Stations
3 Transfer Stations
3 Transfer Stations
2 Transfer Stations
1 Transfer Station
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-32
Table 2-8
EVALUATION RESULTS
Convenience ~ Rating the scenarios for convenience was based on the distance of the
transfer station from the collection areas served. The more transfer stations sited, the
less driving would be required by the majority of the population and, therefore, the
overall convenience would be greater. Scenario 5, which involves siting seven transfer
stations, was the most convenient, followed by scenarios 7, 4, 3, 6, 2, and 1.
Flexibility -- Rating the scenarios for flexibility was based on the sizes of the transfer
station. The larger the facility, the more flexible it is considered to be in terms of
accommodating future solid waste management systems. Therefore, those scenarios
which involved siting larger facilities received the highest scores. Scenario 1 received
the highest rating, followed by scenarios 2 and 3 (tie) 4, 6, 7, and 5.
Direct Haul Pattern Disruption — Rating the scenarios with respect to direct haul
pattern disruption was based on the absolute difference between miles driven to the San
Marcos landfill and miles driven to the transfer station. Those scenarios which
minimized disruption of the current direct haul patterns received the highest scores.
Scenario 1 received the highest rating followed by scenarios 2, 3, 6, 4, 7, and 5.
Land Use Compatibility — Rating scenarios for land use compatibility assumed that the
fewer the number of facilities, the less public opposition, therefore those scenarios which
had fewer facilities scored highest. Scenario 1 received the highest score, followed by
scenarios 2, 6, 3, 4, 7, and 5.
Level of Participation — Rating scenarios for level of participation gave the highest
scores to those scenarios which were compatible with the preferred level of involvement
expressed by the communities. Scenario 7 scored the highest, followed by scenarios 1, 2
and 6 (tie), 5, 3, and 4.
Local Control — Rating for local control was based on whether or not a community had a
facility sited in their city. In general, those scenarios which involved siting more
facilities provided more local control and therefore received higher scores. Scenario 5
scored the highest, followed by scenarios 7, 3, 4, 6, 2, and 1.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-33
Table 2-8 (cent.)
EVALUATION RESULTS
Traffic Impact —• Rating the scenarios for traffic impact was based on analysis of miles
driven per vehicle type (e.g., collection/transfer vehicles). In general, the greater the
number of transfer stations per scenario, the less overall traffic impact and, therefore,
the higher the score. Scenario 5 scored the highest, followed by Scenarios 7, 4, 6, 3, 2,
and 1.
Air Quality — Rating the scenarios for air quality was also based on analysis of miles
driven per vehicle type. Those scenarios which involved siting more facilities resulted in
less miles driven overall and, therefore, less adverse impact on air quality. Scenario 5
scored the highest, followed by scenarios 7, 4, 6, 3, 2, and 1.
Other Environmental Factors — Rating the scenarios for other environmental factors
assumed that the further away a facility was from the collection areas it served, the less
potential for adverse environmental impact to those areas. In general, the fewer the
number of facilities per scenario, the greater the minimization of adverse environmental
impact and therefore the higher the score. Scenario 1 received the highest rating,
followed by scenarios 2, 6, 3, 4, 7, and 5.
Roadways — Rating the scenarios for roadways considered overall miles driven. Those
scenarios which minimized the number of miles driven received the highest scores.
Scenario 5 scored highest, followed by scenarios 7, 4, 6, 3, 2, and 1.
Technical Risk — Rating the scenarios for technical risk assumed that facilities under
4,000 TPD were technically proven, while facilities larger than this have yet to be
adequately demonstrated. Those scenarios therefore which involved siting facilities
under 4,000 TPD received higher scores. Scenarios 3, 4, 5 and 7 received the highest,
score (tie) followed by scenarios 6, 2, and 1.
Economics — Rating the scenarios for economics gave the least expensive scenario the
highest score with the other scenarios rated inversely proportional to their added expense
as compared to the least expensive option. Scenario 1 was the least expensive followed
by scenarios 6, 4, 3, 2, 5 and 7.
JOB:89001-2 12/12/89 2-34
SECTION 3.0
SITING OF TRANSFER STATIONS
SECTION 3.0
SITING OF TRANSFER STATIONS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
While an appropriate transfer station system was being selected (Section 2.0), a search
for suitable sites was conducted. This section describes the process used to identify, for
further evaluation, these potential transfer station sites in the North County area. The
process has consisted of developing and applying a series of exclusionary and preferential
criteria to the study area. These criteria include a combination of engineering,
economic, and environmental considerations. The goal is to identify potential sites that
are technically feasible, environmentally suitable, and acceptable to the local
community. A major objective of the site selection process is to minimize adverse
environmental effects associated with transfer stations in northern San Diego County.
The siting was a four-step process (see Figure 3-1). Step 1 consisted of applying the
first-level exclusionary criteria to the entire North County area, retaining general areas
which would be considered in Step 2 (Table 3-1). Step 2 consisted of applying the second-
level criteria (Table 3-2) to these general areas, narrowing down the general areas to
identify 35 to 40 potentially suitable preliminary sites. In Step 3, aerial photography was
reviewed and field visits conducted to refine the rough site boundaries identified in the
previous stage. This resulted in the identification of 17 potential transfer station sites.
In Step 4, these 17 sites were evaluated against a limited set of criteria (Table 3-3) to
provide a final assessment of each site and a refinement of the site boundaries.
The final outcome of the site evaluation is a set of 17 sites distributed among seven
communities, as shown in Figures 3-2 through 3-8.
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3 - 1
Figure 3-1
Transfer Station Siting Process
for North San Diego County
Step Process Mapping Outcome
Apply Broad
Exclusionary Criteria
to Study Area
Apply Second Level Criteria
to
Each General Area
Select 15-18 Sites
Based on
Preferential Criteria
Do Analysis of 17 Sites
Using Selected Factors
and Prepare
Final Description
• Composite Map Showing
General Locations
Maps Showing Potentially
Suitable Sites (35-40 Sites)
17 Potentially Suitable
Sites for Further
Evaluation
Maps Showing Sites
I SiteB4
I MI
45th Stteel
Ave
1
• Final Evaluation of Sites
and Final Countywlde
Map of Transfer Station
System
89001 Sit Process 9.28.89
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-2
Table 3-1
Exclusionary Siting Criteria
First Level
1. Distance from Waste Centroid
2. Zoning and General Plan
Designations
3. Distance from Major
Transportation Corridors
4. Public-use Lands
4
89001/N SD Tr Stat/3.28.89
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-3
Table 3-2
Exclusionary Siting Criteria
Second Level
1. Compatibility with Adjacent Land Use
2. Land Use Compatibility /Access Roads
3. Land Use Compatibility/ Visual
4. Slope
5. Natural Habitat j§
6. 100-Year Flood Plain
7. Active Fault Zones
8. Riparian Habitat
9. Cultural Resources
10. Availability
11. Size
89001/N SD Tr Stat/3.28.89
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3 - 4
Table 3-3
Final Evaluation Siting Criteria
1. Biological Resources
2. Cultural Resources
3. Traffic Impacts
89001/N SD Tr Stat/3.28.89
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3.5
3.2 GENERAL AREAS FOR SITING OF FACILITIES
Step 1 began in March with the development of exclusionary criteria, in association with
staff from the County and the eight cities. These exclusionary criteria, proposed by the
consultant, were discussed and refined at a joint meeting with City and County staff.
The final exclusionary criteria are shown in Table 3-1 and include engineering, economic,
and environmental issues. Positive criteria, such as industrial general plan designations,
and negative criteria, such as minimum distance from the nearest freeway or 4-lane
major road, were mapped for the entire North County area. General areas were
retained, corresponding closely to the industrial land use general plan designations for
each city and for the County.
Information was assembled from a number of different sources, including: city land-use
maps, SanDAG maps, County maps, and census tract data. Because each land-use map
uses slightly different land-use designations, it was necessary to make a decision as to
which categories to include under each criteria. Following is a list of the four first-level
exclusionary criteria and a description of the data sources and approaches used to map
each criterion.
3.2.1 First-Level Exclusionary Criteria
1. Distance from Waste Centroid
Criterion; The transfer station must be located within a convenient direct haul
distance from the major collection areas. This distance will be measured from a
defined "waste centroid" or center point of a waste shed. The transfer station shall
be no more than three miles from the waste centroid.
Sources: Series 7 census tract data provided by SanDAG.
Mapping approach: Transfer station centroids were identified for each scenario
through the method described in Section 2.0. Circles of three-mile radii were then
drawn around each centroid to indicate areas that are an acceptable distance from
the centroids. These circles are shown in Figures 2-2 through 2-8.
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-6
2. Zoning and General Plan Designations
Criterion: A transfer station should be located in an area suitable for an industrial
type facility with considerable daily vehicle usage. Facilities will be sited only in
areas designated on General Plan maps for heavy or light industrial use, for
agriculture, and for other uses deemed appropriate by the local jurisdiction.
Sources:
Industrial Lands and Agricultural Lands
Map of Major Industrial Areas, SanDAG, May 1, 1988.
Escondido Planning Area General Plan Program (Map), 1979
Vista Land Use and Circulation Elements (Map), City of Vista, January 14, 1986
Solana Beach Land Use Plan (Map), November 12, 1988
Encinitas General Plan Program (Map), May 1988
San Marcos General Plan (Map), March 1988
Carlsbad General Plan Map, (no date)
Oceanside Land Use Map, November 12, 1986
City of Del Mar Zoning Map, January 18, 1984
Bonsall Community Plan (Map), June 1, 1988
Fallbrook Community Plan (Map), June 1, 1988
Mapping approach: The following assumptions were used for each category:
Industrials lands: The SanDAG map was the primary source used to map land
designated as industrial. In some cases, the larger scale land-use maps for the
individual cities were cross-referenced to clarify the boundaries of an industrial
zone. The SanDAG map shows existing and future industrial areas.
Agricultural lands; Land designated as intensively agricultural (in the case of San
Marcos and Bonsall), as agricultural (Oceanside and Solana Beach) and as undeveloped
rangeland (Escondido) was mapped as agricultural land on the constraint map. "Rural
development areas," a term used on the County land-use map of unincorporated
areas, was not considered an agricultural use.
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-7
3. Distance from Major Transportation Corridors
Criterion: A transfer station needs to be close to reliable major transportation
routes. A transfer station will be sited no more than one mile from an existing
limited access freeway or from a major four-lane arterial.
Sources: County of San Diego Public Owned Lands (Map), Department of Public
Works, January 1982.
Mapping approach: The County public lands map was used because freeways and
"major arterials" were clearly designated. It was assumed that the major arterials on
that map are four-lane. Areas further than one mile from any of these roadways
were blocked out as unsuitable for a transfer station.
4. Public-Use Lands
Criterion: Federal, state, and locally owned lands used for recreation, watershed,
and military purposes are excluded from consideration as potential transfer station
sites.
Sources: County of San Diego Public Owned Lands (Map), Department of Public
Works, January 1982.
Mapping approach: Areas mapped as public lands included: State parks, County
parks, Indian reservations, military reservations, Bureau of Land Management (BLM),
Public domain lands, the Cleveland National Forest, and water districts.
3.2.2 General Areas Identified
Areas that meet the second, third, and fourth criteria are shown on the composite map.
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-8
3.3 POTENTIALLY SUITABLE SITES
The search for potentially suitable sites within the general areas identified in Step 1 was
then further focused in two ways. First, the second level exclusionary criteria were
applied to these retained areas, in order to identify potentially suitable sites. Secondly,
some cities also had particular sites that they requested the County evaluate further.
These were reviewed for the first level criteria, and were included in Step 2 for the
mapping of the second level criteria (faulting, steep slopes, riparian habitat, critical
habitat, and access through residential areas). The second level exclusionary criteria
were mapped, narrowing down the general areas further to 35 to 40 preliminary sites.
In August, these preliminary sites were reviewed in Step 3, using recent aerial
photographs, field visits, and maps. The field visits were conducted by a team consisting
of an environmental analyst, a project engineer, and a county staff member. A series of
preferential criteria were applied to screen the preliminary sites and select a final group
of potential transfer station sites for further evaluation in Step 4. These preferential
criteria include site size, shape and topography, existing land use (built-up versus
vacant), compatibility with adjacent land uses, proximity to residential areas, and
environmental concerns such as presence of riparian vegetation and evidence of
flooding. At the end of Stage 3, 17 sites were retained for further evaluation in the next
stage.
In most of the seven potential service areas identified in the transfer station scenarios,
sites could be identified using these criteria. In two cases, no potential sites were
identified that would meet all of these criteria. A summary of the retained sites for
each city is presented below. Maps of the sites are included as Figure 3-2 through 3-8.
A complete list of sites reviewed and field notes is included in Appendix F.
Fallbrook. In Fallbrook, no sites meet the access criteria of being within one mile of a
freeway or 4-lane major arterial, and all industrial areas are built up, so that no area of
sufficient size could be identified. As an alternative, an industrial area in the
unincorporated portion of the County near 1-15, which is just outside the distance criteria
established in Step 1, was retained (Sites F-l and F-2). (Figure 3-2.)
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-9
Escondido. In Escondido, all industrial areas are also built up. Two alternative sites
were identified; one thai the City had asked the County to evaluate, and another nearby
that is vacant except for railroad spurs, but for which access is marginal (Sites ES-1 and
ES-2). (Figure 3-3.)
San Marcos. A site meeting the criteria was identified between San Marcos Boulevard
and Grand Avenue. Two other sites in proximity to the existing landfill and to the
proposed waste-to-energy plant were retained for evaluation at the city's request (Sites
SMI, SM2 and SMS). (Figure 3-4.)
Vista. Two sites were identified in Vista; one in the vicinity of an existing gravel mining
operation, the other in a nearby developing light industrial park (Sites VI and V2).
(Figure 3-5.)
Carlsbad. Five sites were retained in Carlsbad along or near Palomar Airport Road. Two
of these are located immediately east of 1-5 along this road, one of which is currently in
agricultural production. The three remaining sites include the present recycling center,
Bressi Ranch, and a parcel south of the Carlsbad Raceway. This last parcel is close to
the Vista sites (Sites Cl, C2, C3, C4, and C5). (Figures 3-6A and 3-6B.)
Oceanside. Two sites were identified in Oceanside. The northernmost site is located east
of the airport in an agricultural field. The second is located on an undeveloped site off
Oceanside Boulevard near a gravel mine. (Sites O-l and O-2). (Figure 3-7.)
Beach Communities. Only one potential site was retained in the beach communities — an
undeveloped site at the corner of El Camino Real and Olivenhain. (Site E-l). (Figure 3-
8.)
3.4 EVALUATION OF POTENTIALLY SUITABLE SITES
The final step in the site selection and evaluation process was to assess the retained
potential sites according to a limited set of issues. Three factors were applied to further
refine site location or screen out any sites with unacceptable conditions. The factors
were: biological resources, cultural resources, and traffic impacts. The remainder of
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-10
this section discusses these findings on biological and cultural resources for all 17 sites.
Section 4.3 contains a-more detailed discussion of the traffic impacts.
3.4.1 Cultural Resources
Cultural resource records were checked at both the San Diego Museum of Man and the
South Coastal Information Center (San Diego State University) to determine if there are
recorded cultural resources on any of the 17 transfer station sites that would make
mitigation for a transfer station impossible or impractical. It is not intended that these
record checks take the place of an EIR-level cultural resource field survey and report.
The results of the checks follow.
Fallbrook
F-l There is no record of any historic or archaeological resources on this site.
F-l There is no record of any historic or archaeological resources on this site.
Escondido
ES-1 There is no record of any historic or archaeological resources on this site.
ES-2 There is no record of any historic or archaeological resources on this site.
San Marcos
SM-1 The redrawn configuration of SM-1 has no record of any historic or
archaeological resources on it.
SM-2 There is no record of any historic or archaeological resources on this site.
SM-3 There is no record of any historic or archaeological resources on this site.
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-11
Vista 41
V-l There is no record of any historic or archaeological resources on this site.
V-2 Portions of this site have archaeological resources that appear from the
record checks to be mitigatable.
Carlsbad
C-l Portions of this site have archaeological resources that appear from the
record checks to be mitigatable.
C-2 Portions of this site have archaeological resources that appear from the
record checks to be mitigatable.
C-3 Portions of this site have archaeological resources that appear from the
record checks to be mitigatable.
C-4 There is no record of any historic or archaeological resources on this site.
C-5 Portions of this site have archaeological resources that appear from the
record checks to be mitigatable.
Oceanside
O-l There is no record of any historic or archaeological resources on this site.
O-2 There is no record of any historic or archaeological resources on this site.
Encinitas
E-l Portions of this site have archaeological resources that appear from the
records checks to be mitigatable.
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-12
3.4.2 Biological Resource
On November 29, 1989, Tim Cass, Biologist with the Department of Public Works'
Environmental Services Unit, conducted a brief field check of the 17 North County
transfer station sites.
This biological survey was undertaken to determine if there are potential biological
impacts on any of these sites that would make mitigation of the impacts of a project
impossible or impractical. This survey is not intended to take the place of an EIR-level,
spring biology survey. That will be necessary for all sites presently undeveloped or
adjacent to sensitive habitats.
Several of the site boundaries in the earlier site identification have been modified as a
result of this survey to eliminate potentially significant biological impacts.
Fallbrook
F-l This site is currently farmland, but is bordered on the west by southern
riparian woodland, which, in this area, makes it a potential Least Bells Vireo
habitat. If a transfer station were to be built on this site, the riparian habitat
would not be disturbed, but special design considerations may have to be taken
to minimize the noise impacts to this adjacent habitat.
F-2 This site is primarily covered by disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub and does not
appear to have any sensitive biological resources.
Escondido
ES-1 This site is disturbed ruderal (weeds) except for a small drainage swale
running east to west on the northern portion of the site. The California
Department of Fish and Game may have some concerns about this drainage
and its associated wetland habitat. If this small wetland area were to be
developed, mitigation would be possible and practical.
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-13
ES-2 This area is completely developed and, as a result, there are not sensitive
biological resources.
San Marcos
SM-1 This land is disturbed coastal sage scrub, perennial native grassland with
intermittent streams and associated wetlands and eucalyptus trees. The
coastal sage scrub portion might be habitat for the Black-tailed Gnatcatcher,
but this is typically mitigatable.
SM-2 This site is disturbed coastal sage scrub, perennial native grassland with
intermittent streams. The coastal sage scrub portion could be habitat for the
Black-tailed Gnatcatcher, but this is typically mitigatable.
SM-3 This site is disturbed with small patches of native perennial grassland with an
intermittent stream running from north to south. There appears to be enough
land within this site, with no potential sensitive biological resources, to
support a transfer station operation.
Vista
V-l This is currently part of an existing borrow pit operation and is extremely
disturbed. There is an intermittent stream running through the property with
willow trees and a very minor riparian woodland habitat. There is enough land
within this site with no sensitive biological resources to support a transfer
station operation.
V-2 This site is disturbed ruderal (weeds) with the exception of the disturbed
coastal sage scrub and riparian habitat in the canyon bottoms. There is
enough land within this site with no potential sensitive biological resources to
support a transfer station operation.
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-14
Carlsbad
C-l South of Palomar Airport Road, this site has been disturbed in the recent past
for agriculture purposes and does not appear to have any sensitive biological
resources.
C-2 This site is currently being used for agriculture purposes and does not appear
to have any sensitive biological resources.
C-3 With the exception of the existing development, all of this land is fallow
agriculture fields and does not appear to have any sensitive biological
resources.
C-4 This site is currently being used for agriculture purposes on the upper, flatter
portions, with disturbed coastal sage scrub found in some of the canyon
bottoms. There is enough land within this site with no potential sensitive
biological resources to support a transfer station operation.
C-5 This site is annual grasslands with small inclusions of chaparral and does not
appear to have any sensitive biological resources.
Oceanside
O-l This site has been used in the recent past for agriculture purposes. There are
not sensitive biological resources on this site. However, immediately north of
the site is potential Least Bells Vireo habitat. If a transfer station were to be
built on this site, the riparian habitat would not be disturbed, but special
design considerations may have to be taken to minimize the noise impacts to
this adjacent habitat.
O-2 North of Oceanside Boulevard, this site is primarily previously disturbed
annual grassland/ruderal. There is a wetland area that should be avoided in
the southern portion of the site and has been deleted as a portion of the
potential site. Excluding the wetland areas, there is very little potential for
significant biological resources on this site.
JOB:89001-3 12/07/89 3-15
E-l The western portion of this site is ruderal and does not have much potential
for significant biological resources. The eastern portion of the site contains
riparian woodland and fresh water marsh, both of which should be avoided.
3.4.3 Results of Evaluation
Figures 3-2 through 3-8 show the final locations of the potentially suitable sites. These
sites have not been evaluated against each other, but rather are presented as sites that
are acceptable for more detailed site-specific investigation, including looking at
geotechnical; concerns, geohydrology, visual impact, and land use.
JOB.-89001-3 12/07/89 3-16
LAO27601.A1.00
PRELIMINARY SITES
FALLBROOK AREA
NORTH COUNTY TRANSFER STATICS
SITING PROGRAM
CKMHIIL-
3-17
PRELIMINARY SITES
CITY OF ESCONDIDO
\ NORTH COUNTY TRANSFER STATION
SITING PROGRAM&*;z^_
LAO27601.A1.00 3-18 CKMHILL-
•(22 ;r\ i
<* i <• ••
^>VV
AN MARCOS;V\/vN
-N-
v_^
X 1
./""'
•• V N
/»^_ P-N^ (^.
--•' x /J / /
^/""7 ^-?V '
\1
^
l\
FIGURE 3-4
PRELIMINARY SITES
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
NORTH COUNTY TRANSFER STATION
SITING PROGRAM
LAO27601.A1.00 •CXMHILL-
3-19
PRELIMINARY SITES
CITY OF VISTA
sw
FIGURE 3-5 A
HD/ ' NORTH COUNTY TRANSFER STATION
SITING PROGRAM
LAO27601 A1 00 CKMHILL-
CARLSBAQ
South Carlsbad Beach State Park
FIGURE 3-6A
PRELIMINARY SITES
CITY OF CARLSBAD
NORTH COUNTY TRANSFER STATION
SITING PROGRAM
LAO27601.A1.00
3-21 -CKMHIU.'
•^PHTM!.--• t^t*fix:
y
PRELIMINARY SITES!
CITY OF CARLSBAD
NORTH COUNTY TRANSFER STATION
SITING PROGRAM
LAO27601.A1.00
CHMHIIL-
3-22
3-23
PRELIMINARY SITES
BEACH COMMUNITIES
NORTH COUNTY TRANSFER STATION
SITING PROGRAM
LAO27601.A1.00 a - 24 CHMHILL-
SECTION 4.0
DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED
TRANSFER STATION SCENARIO
SECTION 4.0
DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED
TRANSFER STATION SCENARIO
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Section 2.0 concluded that a system of seven transfer stations dispersed through the
North County Study Area would best meet a series of technical, economic, and policy
objectives. Section 3.0, in parallel to this selection of the most acceptable transfer
station system, used siting criteria to find potentially suitable locations for the actual
facilities. A set of 17 sites was identified. This section will merge information from
these two concurrent efforts to look at probable and typical levels of waste management
activities associated with each specific site. Typical operating characteristics are
summarized (Section 4.2). Traffic, as a particular local concern, is treated in more
detail (Section 4.3). Types of recycling activities that may occur at these transfer
stations, and their relationship to local recycling programs, are identified (Section 4.4).
Since toxics in the solid waste stream are of increasing concern, programs to remove
toxics at the transfer station and to collect household hazardous waste are described
(Section 4.5). Finally, the types of permits needed to construct and operate a typical
transfer station are briefly summarized (Section 4.6).
4.2 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
4.2.1 Overview
Based on the findings of this study, the preferred transfer station scenario for the North
County Study Area (Scenario 5) involves siting seven transfer stations serving the
following areas:
Collection Areas Serviced Size (TPDg) for Year 2010
Escondido 1,830
Oceanside 1,375
Carlsbad 1,071
San Dieguito 875
Vista 814
San Marcos 718
Fallbrook 465
JOB:89001-4 12/12/89 4 - 1
The transfer stations will be designed to accomplish several major functions. The
primary function is the transfer of waste from commercial collection and commercial
and public self-haul vehicles to larger transfer trailers for transport to the landfill. As
part of the transfer station operations, an aggressive materials recovery operation is also
expected to be undertaken at each site to meet County recycling objectives. Targeted
materials could include cardboard, mixed paper, newsprint, wood, and ferrous and
nonferrous metals. These materials would be diverted from the disposal operations and
recycled. Processing (baling) capability for cardboard and other fiber products, as well
as nonferrous metals, is expected to be available on-site. The transfer station could also
serve as the consolidation point for materials collected through local curbside recycling
programs. Design of the facility is expected to allow for flexibility and modification of
operations, as necessary, to accommodate such activities. Section 4.4 contains more
discussion of possible transfer station recycling activities.
4.2.2 Operations
Although the transfer station network incorporates a wide range of facility sizes, they
will all have similar operational characteristics. As envisioned, the transfer stations will
be designed to accommodate the following activities:
Initial receipt of waste from collection vehicles
Recovery/processing of 10 percent or more of the waste stream
• Short-term storage of recovered materials
Loading of transfer vehicles.
All vehicles using the transfer station(s) will check in at a scale house, where they will be
inspected, weighed, and directed to an appropriate area of the facility for unloading.
The basic design of the facilities will incorporate a flat tipping floor, onto which the
collection vehicles will discharge their loads. Unloading operations will be designed to
clearly separate self-haul traffic from commercial collection vehicles for safety.
Management of vehicle traffic within the building will be the responsibility of traffic
controller(s) positioned on the tipping floor.
Following unloading of material onto the tipping floor, two-wheel loaders will begin the
transfer/recovery operations. Those loads which contain target recoverable materials
will be transferred from the dump pile to a working pile, where recovery of materials
will take place. Nonrecoverable material from the dump pile, and that remainir after
recovery of material from the working pile, will be directed to the transfer operat on. It
JOB:89001-4 12/12/89 4-2
is expect that the facilities will use industrial compaction units located below the tipping
floor to densify the waste prior to transfer. Waste will be fed into the compaction units
through loading slots on the tipping floor. The waste will then be compacted and
extruded into the back of the transfer trailers.
The transfer stations are expected to operate seven days a week. A corporation yard,
household hazardous waste facility and truck wash are also expected to be located on-
site.
It is expected that all the facilities will initially operate one full shift Monday through
Saturday, with a reduced shift on Sunday. Availability of personnel may be staggered to
accommodate early morning collection vehicles. As an example, receiving of
commercial collection vehicles may begin at 5 a.m. and continue to 5 p.m., with the
general public provided access from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. It is expected that accommodations
would also be made to handle any commercial collection vehicles needing to gain access
to the facility outside of normal operating hours (e.g., nighttime commercial collection
vehicles).
Transfer operating hours would be scheduled to correspond to the landfill operating hours
and to take advantage of favorable traffic conditions when possible.
As waste generation increases and the facilities begin to handle more waste, additional
personnel would be added accordingly. Some of the larger facilities may switch to a two-
shift operation toward the end of their operating span.
4.2.2.1 Material Recovery Operations
Wheel loaders operating on the floor will transfer material from the dump pile to a
working pile near the middle of the transfer station floor. It is from this working pile
that recovery of target materials will occur. The wheel loader operators will transfer
only those loads which contain target materials to the working pile; nonrecoverable loads
will be directed from the dump pile to the transfer trailer load out.
How successful the recovery of recyclable materials is will depend to a large degree upon
identification of loads containing targeted material prior to dumping. To the extent
possible, these loads should be directed to areas of the tipping floor which will minimize
mingling with nonrecoverable loads. At the same time, loads which do not contain target
materials should be tipped in areas where they can be transferred to the compactors.
JOB:89001-4 12/12/89 4-3
These loads will be identified and directed using a number of means. First, initial
assessment of load quatity by the scale house operation will enable initial identification
of target loads. Second, a traffic controller on the tipping floor will also be responsible
for identifying and directing targeted loads.
An electronic communication system between the scale house operator, traffic
controller, and the wheel loader operators could increase the efficiency of recovery
operations. This system will enable close monitoring and rapid recovery of target loads.
Finally, commercial loads from collection routes which consistently have high levels of
recoverable materials (select commercial loads) should be identified and repeatedly
targeted for recovery. The transfer station should be designed to give these select
commercial loads direct access to the working pile.
Recovery of materials from the working pile would be expected to occur by an LD 50
prime mover, and a crew of hand sorters. As items and materials are recovered from the
working pile, they will be processed and/or stored in bins or trailers located at the
facility. When a sufficient quantity of material has been recovered, it will be
transported to market.
4.2.2.2 Curbside Material Handling
In addition to the transfer operations and possible material recovery operations, the
facility could also serve as the consolidation point for material collected by the Curbside
Recycling Programs. In this case, curbside vehicles will check-in at the scale house and
proceed directly to staging area, where they would unload their material into appropriate
storage bins. The cities may wish to allow for some curbside materials processing on-
site. This may include baling cans and paper and crushing glass.
4.2.2.3 Processing
Processing cardboard and paper would involve baling the material. The material would
be fed into the baler by a belt conveyor. Corrugated cardboard and paper would be fed
onto the infeed conveyor by a Caterpillar LD50 Prime Mover, which will operate in the
materials recovery/processing areas. Bales will be discharged from the baler charge
hopper onto a baler discharge conveyor, and then removed by forklif t.
Processing recovered metals will consist largely of segregating various metals and grades
of each metal. Metals will be stored in bins prior to sale. Metal could also be baled,
JOB:89001-4 12/12/89 4-4
depending upon manpower and market conditions. The wheel loaders will assist in the
metals recovery and the various other recovery operations.
Recovered wood is expected to be processed by breaking up bulky items to provide for
efficient storage of the material. This will be done by the sorting crew, with the aid of
the wheel loaders if necessary. Further processing of the wood could possibly occur on-
site, or at a separate location.
Curbside recyclables would be processed by consolidating materials in appropriate bins.
Certain items, for which additional processing capabilities e^ist, such as paper products,
could be processed with similar materials recovered from the transfer station. At some
point, the cities may wish to provide additional processing on-site for curbside materials;
however, this will be dictated by space, manpower, and economic considerations.
4.3 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
4.3.1 Introduction
By its very nature, a solid waste transfer station generates considerable daily vehicle
traffic, including collection trucks and private vehicles with incoming loads, and transfer
vehicles on their way to the landfill. The seven stations in the preferred scenario are
estimated to produce about 60 to 265 vehicle round trips per day in their early years of
operations and 300 to 1,200 vehicle round trips per day at full capacity in the year 2010.
Under the current waste management system, residential and commercial collection
vehicles and private haulers. already have established hauling routes from North County
communities to the San Marcos Landfill. With the proposed system of seven transfer
stations, the collection vehicle traffic will be dispersed among the localized destinations
rather than all going to the San Marcos disposal site. However, transfer trucks will be
added to local roadways as they service the individual transfer facilities. Vehicles
associated with collecting recyclables and carrying recyclables to markets may also be
added to the traffic load, depending on the materials recovery at the transfer stations.
Detailed traffic impact assessment would be needed in an EIR prepared for the transfer
station. This section takes a first look at an order-of-magnitude traffic impact resulting
from these proposed facilities. This analysis, based on available traffic data from local
traffic engineering departments, summarizes how each facility may affect local
roadways and freeway access. A separate EIR, under preparation for the landfill siting
JOB:89001-4 12/12/89 4-5
project in North San Diego County, considers the effect of the transfer vehicles on major
roadways, beginning on Highway 15, traveling north and east to the three proposed
landfill sites.
4.3.2 Method
In this section the probable increase in traffic associated with a transfer station at each
of the potential sites is addressed. The analysis assesses those street segments along
which the entrance to the. facilities would likely be established and the major access
routes for collection vehicles and for transfer vehicles. In conducting this study, vehicle
count data from SanDAG, Caltrans, and the individual cities was used to establish the
most current average daily vehicle counts. Other sources of information were the city
plans, EIRs (where available), and discussions with local city traffic engineers. This
research yielded qualitative information regarding overall traffic impact, future
problems, and alternate solutions, as well as projected traffic volumes and levels-of-
service (see Appendix' A for list of traffic engineers). Estimated vehicle counts
associated with the transfer stations include commercial collection vehicles, commercial
and public self-haul vehicles, transfer trailers, and vehicles hauling recyclables to
market, and take into account vehicle round-trips.
Tables 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3 provide the average vehicles per day and the associated transfer
station vehicles for each of the 17 sites based on waste generation projections for the
years 1992, 2000, and 2010. Figures 4-1 through 4-13 show the assumed routes for
collection and transfer vehicles. For collection vehicles, only those close to roadways
were identified, since actual collection vehicles travel routes are speculative at this
time.
Where available, the study determined several factors pertaining to traffic impacts and
constraints:
1. The current and future traffic volumes on the streets which will service the
transfer station;
2. The current and future level-of-service (degree of congestion based on roadway
capacity, see Appendix A) for each such street; and
3. Any other factors, such as construction and development, which could impact
traffic patterns.
JOB:89001-4 12/12/89 4-6
Using this information, and estimated vehicular traffic to be generated by the transfer
station, a qualitative assessment of each site was made.
Discussion of the degree of congestion on roadways is typically expressed using a level-
of-service designation. These designations are applied to the current traffic situations
where available. Table 4-4 shows the meaning attached to these designations.
4.3.3 Site-by-Site Findings
Each of the 17 sites is discussed in turn; Table 4-5 summarizes these findings.
Fallbrook
The Fallbrook sites are located on the east side of Highway 15, one adjacent to 15 at
Tecalote Lane (F-2) and the other on the north side of Pala Road (Highway 76) at Shearer
Road (F-l). Highway 15 has sufficient capacity to handle the added volume of traffic
associated with the transfer station. It is currently at level-of-service "A" and is
projected to reach level-of-service "C" or "D". There is a 4 percent grade south of the
76/15 interchange.
The transfer station would add an estimated 60 vehicles per day in the first year of
operation (1992), with an increase of 165 vehicles per day by the year 2010. The more
significant impact would be on Pala Road. Pala Road is currently a two-lane highway,
which does not allow passing. Heavy development is planned along the highway corridor,
which will increase traffic volumes significantly. There is also, however, the possibility
that Pala Road will be expanded to four lanes in the near future to accommodate this
growth. These plans are not yet final.
Oceanside
The two proposed transfer station sites in Oceanside are located, respectively, on Mission
Avenue at Foussat Street (O-l) and on Oceanside Boulevard at Rancho del Oro (O-2). A
transfer station at one of these sites would generate an estimated 210 (year 1992) to 480
(year 2010) vehicles per day. The current traffic volume on Mission is 40,000 vehicles
per day and that on Oceanside is 25,000 vehicles per day. Both are classified as major
arterials, Mission being over capacity and Oceanside being under capacity.
JOB:89001-4 12/12/89 4-7
Table 4-1
Transfer Station Vehicle Count (1992)
(Preferred Scenario)
Site
Collection
Vehicles
Per Daya)
Transfer
Vehicles
Per Dayu)
Vehicles
Hauling
Recyclables
to Market
Per Day(3'
Total
Vehicles
Per day(4)
Fallbrook 54
(F-l, F-2)
Oceanside 183
(0-1, 0-2)
Carlsbad 111
(C-l, C-2, C-3, C-4, C-5)
Vista 114
(V-l.V-2)
San Marcos 60
(SM-1, SM-2, SM-3)
Escondido 228
(ES-1, ES-2)
Encinitas 147
(E-l)
7
22
13
14
7
27
17
3
8
5
5
3
10
6
64
213
129
129
70
265
170
(1) Assumes 3.3 tons per vehicle average. Total number of vehicles is distributed
roughly equally among commercial collection, commercial self-haul, and public self
haul vehicles.
(2) Assumes 25 tons per vehicle average.
(3) Assumes 10 tons per vehicle average.
(4) Each vehicle makes a round trip, therefore the total impact is two times the total
number of vehicles listed.
JOB:89001T4-1 page 1 12/12/89 4-8
Table 4-2
Transfer Station Vehicle Count (2000)
(Preferred Scenario)
Collection Transfer
Vehicles Vehicles
Site Per Day11'
Fallbrook
(F-l, F-2)
Oceanside
(0-1,0-2)
Carlsbad
(C-l, C-2, C-3, C-4, C-5)
Vista
tV-l.V-2)
San Marcos
(SM-1, SM-2, SM-3)
Escondido
(ES-1, ES-2)
Encinitas
(E-l)
84
252
195
165
123
333
174
Vehicles
Hauling
Recyclables
to Market
Per Dayu)
10
30
23
20
15
39
21
Total
Vehicles
Per Day(3) Per day(4)
4 98
11 293
8 226
7 192
6 144
14 386
8 203
(1) Assumes 3.3 tons per vehicle average. Total number of vehicles is distributed
roughly equally among commercial collection, commercial self-haul, and public self
haul vehicles.
(2) Assumes 25 tons per vehicle average.
(3) Assumes 10 tons per vehicle average.
(4) Each vehicle makes a round trip, therefore the total impact is two times the total
number of vehicles listed.
JOB:89001T4-1 page 2 12/07/89 4-9
Ta:- ^ 4-3
Transfer Station Ve. ,cle Count (2010)
(Preferred Scenario)
Site
Collection
Vehicles
Per
Transfer
Vehicle
Per
Vehicles
Hauling .
Recyclables
to Mark
Per
Total
Vehicles
Per day(4)
Fallbrook 141
(F-l, F-2)
Oceanside 414
(0-1, 0-2)
Carlsbad 324
(C-l, C-2, C-3, C-4, C-5)
Vista 246
(V-l, V-2)
San Marcos 216
(SM-1, SM-2, SM-3)
Escondido 549
(ES-1, ES-2)
Encinitas 264
(E-l)
17
49
38
29
26
65
31
6
18
14
11
9
23
11
164
481
376
286
251
637
306
. (1) Assumes 3.3 tons per vehicle average. Total number of vehicles is distributed
roughly equally among commercial collection, commercial self-haul, and public self
haul vehicles.
(2) Assumes 25 tons per vehicle average.
(3) Assumes 10 tons per vehicle average.
(4) Each vehicle makes a round trip, therefore the total impact is two times the total
number of vehicles listed.
JOB:89001T4-1 page 3 12/07/89 4- 10
Table 4-4
Levels of Service for Roadways*
Designation Description
A Free flow, unimpeded manuverability
B Reasonably unimpeded operations at average travel speeds 70 percent of
free flow speeds. Slightly restricted manuverability.
C Stable operations, restricted manuverability. Average travel speeds 50
percent of free flow speeds.
D Approaches unstable flow, very restricted manuverability. Average travel
speeds 40 percent of free flow speeds.
E Roadway capacity, unstable flow, poor manuverability. Average travel
speeds one-third of free flow speeds or less.
F Forced flow, heavy congestion, slow travel speeds, stop and go.
*From 1985 Highway Capacity Manual, published by Transportation Research Board.
JOB:89001T4-4 12/07/89 4 -
Table 4-5
Traffic Condition Summary for
Transfer Station Site Access Roads
(Collection Vehicles Impact)
1992
Site
Access
Road
Current
LOS*
(where
available)
Current
Vehicles
per day
Maximum
Additional
Vehicles
per day**
FalJbrook
F-l
F-2
Pala Road east of 1-15 (entrance)
Interstate 15
Pala Road west of -I- 15
Pala Road east of 1-15 (entrance)
Interstate 15
Pala Road west of 1-15
D
A
D
D
A
D
4,200
43,000
4,200
4,200
43,000
4,200
112
108
4
112
108
4
Oceanside
0-1
O-2
Mission Avenue (entrance)
Foussat Road
Mission Ave (west of Foussat)
Mission Ave (east of Foussat)
Oceanside Blvd (entrance)
Oceanside (west of Rancho del Oro)
Oceanside (east of Rancho del Oro)
El Camino Real (north
of Oceanside)
El Camino Real (south
of Oceanside)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA -
NA
40,000
4,000
40,000
40,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
17,500
17,500
366
37
183
146
202
172
30
81
10
San Marcos
SM-1/
SM-2
SM-3
Questhaven Road (entrance)
Rancho Santa Fe (below San Marcos)
Rancho Santa Fe (above San Marcos)
San Marcos
Via Vera Cruz (entrance)
Via Vera Cruz
(north of Linda Vista)
Grand Avenue
San Marcos Blvd.
(west of Via Vera Cruz)
San Marcos Blvd.
(east of Via Vera Cruz)
Highway 78
D
C
C
C
NA
NA
B
C
C
D
4,000
27,000
27,000
32,000
9,000
9,000
7,000
32,000
32,000
91,000
120
114
6
108
120
12
12
12
96
36
*See Table 4-4
** Accounts for vehicle roundtrips
JOB:89001Wilm3
4-12