Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEIR 93-02; Green Valley; Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (19),- February 22, 1994 TO: Enchitas Creek Technical Committee FROM: Don Rideout, Senior Management Analyst Meeting Notes fmm February 17,1994, Regarding Green Valley project Attached are my notes from our last meeting. Please review these and return your comments to me as soon as possible. The Green Valley project will be going to the City Council around mid-March. If you want to give me your comments by phone, my number is 438-1161 extension 4212. My fax number if 438-0894. Enchitas Creek Technical Committee Meeting of February 17, 1994 c Attendance: Phil Behrends (Dudek and Associates), Rick Alexander (private consultant), Janet Fairbanks (Sandag), Peter Stine (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service), Christer Westman (City of Carlsbad), Patrick Murphy (City of Enchitas), Ellen Benyman (US. Fish &Wildlife Service), David Lawhead (California Department of Fish & Game), Karen Messer (resident of Carlsbad), Don Rideout (City of Carlsbad). Mr. Rideout explained that the purpose of the meeting is to provide the Technical Committee with copies of a report prepared by the applicants for the Green Valley project in Carlsbad so that the Committee can have a discussion of the relevant wildlife issues. The report is the applicant's statement of how the project addresses the nine factors for corridor design which the Committee has previously developed. A copy of that report is attached to these meeting notes. Mr. Westman distributed copies of the report and provided a brief review of the project, especially as it relates to Encinitas Creek. He noted that the applicant is proposing two crossings of the creek at Calle Barcelona and Levante Street. The crossings would utilize prefabricated spans of approximately 36 ft. in length. The spans are superior to concrete culverts because they have a natural bottom (not concrete) and provide greater vertical clearance (11 ft.). The Committee noted that a single span is proposed to be used for each crossing. Since the creek's riparian vegetation is approximately 200 to 300 ft. wide, a significant amount of fill will be required for the approaches. The concern was expressed that this narrowing of the channel may cause flood flow problems as well as wildlife impacts. The effect of scouring during flood should be evaluated. It was suggested that two or more spans be considered for each crossing. Both the number of crossings and their design were a concern, but the design was a somewhat greater concern. The creek crossing at El Camino Real was discussed. Mr. Murphy noted that the Department of Fish and Game would like to see this crossing have a vertical clearance of 12 ft. and a width of 65 ft. to allow wildlife to move easterly along the creek. The Committee also discussed the feasibility of deleting one of the crossings and using Leucadia Boulevard as the second access for the project. Mr. Murphy indicated that the Enchitas Ranch project is currently planning to extend Leucadia Boulevard westerly to the bluffs from El Camino Real at about the same time that the Green Valley project will be starting construction. He indicated that this would only work if both projects modify the alignments of their primary north/south internal streets in order to meet at a common intersection. The feasibility of this modification is not known at this time. Access to the Green Valley project for public safety purposes may be a concern if one of the proposed crossings is deleted. - The width of the buffer for the creek was discussed. It was noted that the buffer should not be considered to include the north/south internal street. The buffer east of the street with an approximate width of 60 ft. would include a public trail having something like a gravel surface. It was suggested that landscaping between the trail and the existing riparian vegetation should be as dense as possible, including some large trees such as sycamores. Dense vegetation would discourage people from attempting to enter the riparian area and would provide better cover for wildlife. The creek crossing at La Costa Avenue was discussed. It was noted that this crossing is not a part of the Green Valley project. It was suggested that the City of Carlsbad consider installing a dry culvert west of the creek crossing as part of the La Costa Avenue widening project. It was noted that long-term management of the creek and surrounding habitat lands should be coordinated with the eventual MHCP regional management plan. Management activities should include removal of human habitation within the riparian vegetation and monitoring actual wildlife use of the corridor. Night lighting of the street and parking lots should be directed away from the riparian corridor. The Committee discussed the need for a linkage between the upland bluff areas and the riparian corridor. This is provided at the northern end of the project, and the desirability of a second link at the southern end of the project was discussed. This possibility has been considered in separate discussions between the two cities, although it has not been included in either plan as currently proposed. It was stated that a second linkage would be beneficial, but no specific recommendations were offered. In conclusion, it was agreed that this type of cooperative planning approach is worthwhile and is a good example of how the North County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan is intended to work. It was also agreed that meeting notes will be prepared and, after review by the Committee members for accuracy, will be submitted to the City Council for consideration in its review of the project. ? Notes on Green Valley Issues Wildlife Conidor Regarding the wildlife corridor generally, it is important to distinguish between the riparian corridor itself and the buffer. The corridor consists of the existing riparian vegetation, which is primarily willows. Its width varies between 200’ and 400’. The required buffer is an additional 50’ strip on the outside of the riparian vegetation. Its purpose is to separate the intensive urban activities fkom the wildlife in order to reduce impacts. The issue of wildlife movement has only recently become a consideration in environmental impact reports. Studies have shown that sensitive species are subject to a number of long- term impacts if confined to isolated habitat patches. The resource agencies are now recommending that areas set aside for sensitive species be linked together in some way to allow movement of animals into and out of conserved habitat. This concept is a fundamental issue in current regional habitat planning efforts. With respect to the Green Valley project, the objective would be to allow movement of wildlife between the lands surrounding Batiquitos Lagoon and other open space areas to the east. Enchitas Creek is one of the only remaining opportunities to accomplish this. The North County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP) is an effort jointly sponsored by the eight cites in North County, county government, and Sandag. It was decided to ask the MHCP to become involved in discussions regarding Encinitas Creek for three reasons: r 1. The issue of wildlife movement is very important to the success of the MHCP. If wildlife movement is blocked along Encinitas Creek, it could jeopardize the success of the MHCP in addressing this portion of North County. 2. There are a number of approved and pending projects along the creek. The cumulative impact of these projects on wildlife movement needs to be examined. 3. Enchitas Creek crosses several jurisdictional lines. One of the purposes of the MHCP is to coordinate habitat planning between North County jurisdictions. This is one of the first opportunities to do so. A technical committee consisting of staff members from the City of Carlsbad, the City of Encinitas, Sandag, the state and federal resource agencies, and the MHCP consultant team discussed the issues related to wildlife movement and compiled a list of nine factors that should be considered in the design of any projects along Encinitas Creek. These factors are provided in Attachment A. A special workshop was convened to discuss the nine factors and the status of the creek along its entire length. The technical committee established two groundrules and a process for utilizing these factors. First, already approved projects would not be reconsidered or made subject to any new requirements. Secondly, each pending project will be asked to provide a report to the MHCP and to the jurisdiction in which it is being processed discussing how the project addresses the nine factors. ' .. ,- I c What this means for Green Valley is that the applicant will need to prepare and submit a report on how the project addresses the nine factors. If this report is available in time for the Planning Commission to review it, the Commission can consider it along with all other information and testimony in arriving at a recommendation to the City Council. The Council can likewise consider the information in rendering a final decision. Because the project as proposed will require permits from the Coastal Commission and Department of Fish and Game, the applicant's report can be considered by those agencies as well. These opportunities to review the issue of wildlife movement are expected to be sufficient to assure that pending projects along Encinitas Creek do not present obstacles to wildlife movement and do not preclude long-term conservation opportunities for this portion of the MHCP. Fen& and Vegetative Barriers to Human Access At the January 19 hearing, Commissioner Irwin recommended fencing at the tops of retaining walls as a safety measure. In addition, several of the speakers at the hearing recommend the use of thorny vegetation instead of fencing as a barrier to human access to highly sensitive habitat areas. Commissioner Irwin's suggestion is supported by staff both for safety reasons and to prevent impacts to the habitat area. The suggestion regarding use of thorny vegetation is also supported by staff as an option for certain areas, such as in the riparian buffer area. It is proposed to locate a trail in a portion of the buffer, and it is important to assure that people stay on the trail and not attempt to enter the riparian area itself. Proper use of thorny vegetation could accomplish this in a more natural and aesthetically pleasing manner than fencing. Thorny vegetation could also be considered on the retaining walls in addition to fencing to further discourage people from attempting to climb up the walls. Intersection bel of Service One speaker at the January 19 hearing stated that the intersection of Olivenhain Road and El Camino Real is currently operating at LOS E which is not in compliance with the City's Growth Management Plan. Staff indicated that the intersection is operating at LOS D which is acceptable under the Growth Management Plan. Both the speaker and staff were partially correct. The traffic study prepared for the Green Valley Master Plan and LFMP showed the intersection as functioning at LOS D. However, the City's annual traffic monitoring report for 1993 shows the intersection as operating at LOS E for approximately 45 minutes during the p.m. peak. The most accurate way to describe the situation would be to say that it is not in conformance with the City's Growth Management Standard. Growth Management non-compliance is addressed by providing improvements to restore an acceptable level of service. At the present time, the intersection of Olivenhain Road and El Camino Real is substandard in several respects. Because the intersection lies on the border between Carlsbad and Encinitas, improvement of the intersection will ultimately be a joint project of the two cities. The Arroyo La Costa project is conditioned to provide some improvements with its first phase of development, and it is likely that this will occur prior to any development in Green Valley. However, there is the possibility that development could occur in Green Valley prior to Arroyo La Costa. To assure that - necessary improvements to the intersection regardless of which development proceeds first, it is recommended that a condition be added to the Master Plan and LFMP stating that development in Green Valley is contingent upon an acceptable level of service for this intersection.