HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCD/GPC 90-13; Vista/Carlsbad Sewer Interceptor; Planning Comm Determ/Gen Plan Consis (PCD/GPC) (4)ENVIRQNfl|pTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOREPART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. PCD/GPC 90-13/CDP 90-3
DATE: DECEMBER 11. 1990
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: VISTA / CARLSBAD INTERCEPTOR
2. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE
CARLSBAD. CA 92009
(6191438-1161X4430
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: AUGUST 17. 1990
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of a 36" to 48" diameter Sewer Interceptor along
Jefferson Street from 1-5 to Oak Avenue along Oak Avenue from Jefferson street to the Railroad
Right of Way to a point 1.400 feet south of Tamarack Avenue. Also, construction of a 12"
diameter sewer main in Chestnut Avenue from Harding Street to the Railroad Right of Way.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an
Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment.
The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist
identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and
provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental
Impact Report or Negative Declaration.
* A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or
any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checked
to indicate this determination.
* An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the
project may cause a significant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative
Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed
insignificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and "YES-insig"
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:•*^" ».msig)NO
1. Result in unstable earth conditions or
increase the exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards?
2. Appreciably change the topography or any
unique physical features?
3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils
either on or off the site?
4. Result in changes in the deposition of beach
sands, or modification of the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake?
5. Result in substantial adverse effects on
ambient air quality?
6. Result in substantial changes in air
movement, odor, moisture, or temperature?
7. Substantially change the course or flow of
water (marine, fresh or flood waters)?
8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface
water, ground water or public water supply?
9. Substantially increase usage or cause
depletion of any natural resources?
10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
11. Alter a significant archeological,
paleontological or historical site,
structure or object?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-2-
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO
12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
plants)? X
13. Introduce new species of plants into an area,
or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species? X
14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other farmland of state or local
importance? X
15. Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, all water dwelling organisms
and insects? X
16. Introduce new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the
migration or movement of animals? X
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO(sig) (msig)
17. Alter the present or planned land use
of an area? X
18. Substantially affect public utilities,
schools, police, fire, emergency or other
public services? X
-3-
HUMAN
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:S YES NO(msig)
19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control systems?
20. Increase existing noise levels?
21. Produce new light or glare?
22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
23. Substantially alter the density of the
human population of an area?
24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand
for additional housing?
25. Generate substantial additional traffic?
26. Affect existing parking facilities, or
create a large demand for new parking?
27. Impact existing transportation systems or
alter present patterns of circulation or
movement of people and/or goods?
28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic?
29. Increase traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
30. Interfere with emergency response plans or
emergency evacuation plans?
31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an
aesthetically offensive public view?
32. Affect the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-4-
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO(sig) Gnsig)
33. Does the project have the potential
to substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wild-
life species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or en-
dangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory. X
34. Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the dis-
advantage of long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.) X
35. Does the project have the possible
environmental effects which are in-
dividually limited but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively con-
siderable" means that the incremental
effects of an individual project are
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects.) X
36. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? X
-5-
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of trench grading to bury a 36" to 48" diameter and 12" diameter sewer interceptor
within the local street and the ATS&F Railroad rights of way. The purpose of the project is to expand
the capacity of the existing Vista/Carlsbad Sewer Interceptor to meet current as well as the projected
build-out demand of Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The new 36" to 48" sewer interceptor will
be buried parallel to existing interceptors.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
The proposed interceptor will be located beneath existing streets and along the railroad right of way;
therefore, no encroachment into a floodplain or geologically hazardous area will occur. Trench grading
on relatively flat graded surfaces should not result in erosion problems.
Trench grading will occur to accommodate the underground sewer interceptor which ends at the
approximate boundary of the Agua Hedionda floodplain; therefore no modification of any waterway
will occur. The proposed project will actually reduce the potentially adverse impacts to air and water
quality by ensuring adequate sewer line capacity to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility to meet
current and future demands for sewer service.
The proposed gravity flow sewer interceptors will require no additional pumping; therefore, additional
fuel or energy requirements are minimal.
All of the proposed grading will occur in previously disturbed transportation corridors thereby
eliminating the risk of disturbance to any archaeological, palenontological or historical sites, structures,
or objects.
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
The proposed project will occur under existing streets and within the ATS&F railroad right of way;
therefore, no adverse impacts to any species of plant or animal or habitat, or prime agricultural land
will result.
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
The project consists of the replacement of the existing sewer interceptor to supply current and future
demand for sewer service. Any noise impacts will be those resulting from the temporary grading and
construction.
The temporary grading and construction noise and dust impacts to surrounding residential and
commercial development are unavoidable; these impacts are necessary to provide adequate sewer
facilities to the area. The required grading permit will restrict construction operations to the hours of
7:00 a.m. to sunset on weekdays, and a dust abatement procedure is required to minimize these
impacts on the surrounding area. Since no construction above grade will occur, no light or glare
impacts are anticipated.
-6-
The interceptor will run under Jefferson Street, Oak Avenue, Chestnut Avenue and the ATS&F Railroad
right of way and during construction of the system, there will be short term impacts to the present
patterns of circulation and increased hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians due to heavy
equipment on the street, street closures, the reduction in the size of the travel lanes, trenching and
other construction hazards associated with working along an existing and established circulation
system. These impacts will be reduced to a level of insignificance by the use of safe construction
practices and an approved traffic management plan incorporating appropriate signage, barricades,
phasing, detours if necessary, and traffic management during peak hour traffic periods required as a
condition of the grading permit.
The location of the new interceptor has been engineered to avoid damage to or conflict with any
existing utility lines during construction; therefore risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances
is minimal.
The proposed expansion of sewer capacity resulting from the replacement of the existing interceptor
is required to meet the current through the projected build-out demand for sewer services based on
approved General Plan land uses for the area it will serve. Therefore, the proposed project is not
growth inducing and no additional population, housing or traffic beyond that anticipated by the
General Plan will result.
Although a portion of the new interceptor will be constructed within the railroad right of way, no
interruption or delay of scheduled rail trips is anticipated.
The project will not interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans.
The sewer interceptor will be constructed entirely below grade and therefore will have no visual
impacts.
The sewer interceptor will be constructed under existing street and railroad rights of way; therefore,
no recreational opportunities will be impacted.
The proposed Vista/Carlsbad sewer interceptor project is one phase of the Sewer Master Plan and is
required to expand the capacity of flow to meet the demand projected by the Zone 1 Local Facilities
Management Plan. The project was included in the 1987-88 Capital Improvement Program and will
be constructed entirely within the right of way of collector and local streets and the railroad in the
Northwest Quadrant.
-7-
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS:
a) Phased development of the project,
b) alternate site designs,
c) alternate scale of development,
d) alternate uses for the site,
e) development at some future time rather than now,
f) alternate sites for the proposed, and
g) no project alternative.
A. B. E. The adopted Sewer Master Plan and the City's adopted Growth Management Plan
which has set standards for the phasing and capacity of additional sewer facilities
provides the analysis of alternatives for A, B, and E above.
C. Not Applicable.
D. F. The proposed sewer interceptor will be buried parallel to the existing interceptor in
street and railroad rights of way; no alternate uses for the site are possible and no
alternate site is appropriate.
G. The no project alternative would preclude any future development in the City's
northwest quadrant due to the City's adopted performance standard requiring sewer
facilities to meet demand to be provided concurrent with development.
AH:lh
-8-
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached
sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative
Declaration will be proposed.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
Date Signature
Date
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
-9-