The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCDP 99-30; POINSETTIA LANE BRIDGE WIDENING; MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION; 1999-11-23i - City of,.Carlsbad 7------'Planning Department ': " MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION I •' Project Address/Location: Poinsettia Lane between Avenida Encinas and Carlsbad Boulevard I Project Description: ' Approval of a Coastal Development Permit to allow widening of the existing bridge over the San Diego Northern railroad tracks.': ,: ,. The bridge will be widened from two lanes to four lanes of through traffic, two bicycle lanes, two sidewalks, and a raised center median Modifications to the approaches and turn lanes will also be made. •. . .. I The. City' of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the' City of Carlsbad. As a result of 'said review, the initial study (ETA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the envirdnment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the U , ' proposed negative declaration and initial' study are released for public, review would avoid' the effects or mitigate the effects 'to a point where clearly no. significant effect .on the environment would occur, and (2) there is 'no substantial evidence in light Of the whole record before the City I that the project "as revised" may have .a. significant effect on the 'envr0nment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on-file in the Planning Department., A copy of the Mitigated Negative' Declaration with supportive documents is 'on file in th ' 'Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the U ' ' public are invited; Please submit comments' in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Don Rideout in the Planning' Department at (760) 438-1161, extension 4212.' U DATED:NOVEMBER 23, 1999 U CASE NO CDP 99-30 CASE NAME POINSETTIA LANE BRIDGE WIDENING I PUBLISH DATE NOVEMBER 23, 1999 U MICHAEL J H ZMI1A,FR Planning Director • , ' I I 2075 Las .Palmas Dr. • 'Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 . '(760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-0894 I MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE POINSETTIA LANE BRIDGE WIDENING I November 15, 1999 Preparedfor: I City of Carlsbad Planning Department I . 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 Prepared by: . LSA Associates, Inc. I . 1 Park Plaza, Suite 500 Irvine, California 92614 . (949) 553-0666 . . . I LSA Project # DEC832 I, Under contract to: Dokken Engineering I .3914 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite A153 San Diego, California 92123 I . S.. S •. ..• I,. LSA Associates, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................1 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/PROPOSED ACTION....................................................1 2.0 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED. 10 3.0 EARLIER ANALYSES ............................................................................................. 11 4.0 DETERMiNATION ................................................................................................... 11 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST..........................................................................12 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT DISCUSSION..............................26 6.1 AESTHETICS ........................................................................................................... 26 6.11 AGRICULTURE RESOURCES .............................................................................27 6.111 AIR QUALITY ......................................................................................................... 27 6.IV BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................................................. 28 6.V CULTURAL RESOURCES .................................................................................... 31 6.VI GEOLOGY AND SOILS ........................................................................................32 6.VII HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ...................................................34 6.VIII HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ............................................................36 6.IX LAND USE AND PLANNING ............................... . ................................................ 38 6.X MINERAL RESOURCES ....................................................................................... 40 6.XI NOISE ...................................................................................................................... 40 6.XII POPULATION AND HOUSING ............................................................................. 44 6.XIII PUBLIC SERVICES ................................................................................................45 6.XIV RECREATION ........................................................................................................ 45 6.XV TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC ........................ ..................................................... 45 6.XVI UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ................................................................47 6.XVII MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.................................................48 7.0 LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES ......................................... . ............................... 50 APPENDICES A - Biological Evaluation B - Structure Foundation Report C - Vista Environmental Site Assessment Report D - Noise Analysis 11/15/99 <<P:DEC832US-MND1S-MND.D00> LSA Associates, Inc. FIGURES I Figure 1 - Vicinity Map ................ ....................................................... . ............................................. 2 Figure 2 - Project Location ........... ........................................................ . .......................................... 3 Figure 3 - Adjacent Land Uses ........................................................................................................4 I Figure 4- Proposed Project ............... .............................................................................................. 6 Figure 5 - Coastal Sage Scrub Impacts of Proposed Project .........................................................29 I Figure 6 - Noise Modeling Locations ....................................... .................................................... 41 TABLES I Table 6.XI.A - Peak Hour Noise Levels at Sensitive Receptor Locations 1 Hour Leq Levels 1 (dBA) ....................................................................................................................................42 Table 6.XV.B -.Traffic Volumes and Level of Service .............................. ................................... 46 I I I I I I I I I • 1 11/15/99 <<P:\DEC832\IS-MND1S-MND.DOC>> 111 LSA Associates, Inc. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM I " CASE NO: CDP-99-30 DATE RECEIVED: November 15, 1999 I : (To be completed by slafi) BACKGROUND I CASE NAME: Poinsettia Lane Bridge Widening APPLICANT: :• City 'of Carlsbad I ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT:: 2075 Las Palinas,'Cârlsbad, CA 92009-1576; Tel: (760) 438-1161 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/PROPOSED ACTION :• S. 1.1 Project Location and Site Description The -proposed project is located in northwestern San Diego County in the City of Carlsbad. Regional access to .the project 'area is provided, by Interstate 5 (1-5) via the Poinsettia Lane interchange. The segment of' existing Poinsettia Lane proposed for improvement is located between Avenida Encinás and Carlsbad Boulevard. Figures 1 and 2 identify the project area in a regional and local context, respectively. ' I . . Existing land uses adjacent to the project include residential, commercial, and recreational uses. . , . Existing land uses eat of Avenida Encinas to the I-S Freeway include a neighborhood shopping center, two motels, auto dealerships, and offices. Between 'Avenida Enemas and Carlsbad. I . Boulevard,' adjacent existing land uses are limited to the Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Homô Park :and agricultural land that is currently vacant. ,South Carlsbad State Beach and Pacific Ocean are located to the west of Carlsbad Boulevard. , I The City approved the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, which allows development of 1,009. dwelling units on the vacant property adjacent to Poinsettia Lane. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan in July, 1997 (State I Clearinghouse No. 96081027). 'Figure 3 depicts the existing and proposed adjacent land uses. 1.2 + Existing Facility . S Poinsettia Lane, between Avenida Encinas and Carlsbad Boulevard, is a two to four lane road with signalized intersections at either end. The current roadway section varies from 36 to 94 feet. 'Poinsettia Lane is four lanes at the approaches and reduces to two lanes as it spans the San Diego Northern Railroad tracks (owned and operated by' North County Transit District [NCTD] I railroad). On eastbound Poinsettia Lane at Avenida Encinas, there is a dedicated left turn lane, two through lanes, and a shared right turn lane. On Poinsettia Lane at Carlsbad Boulevard, there is one dedicated right turn lane and one dedicated left turn lane. When the existing facility was I . 5' 5 • .,: • 11/15/99 nP:\1)EC832\iS-1v1ND\IS-MND.D0C S • + I I 6/I6/99(DEC832) IN Scale in Miles 1 0 5 10 Figure 1 Vicinity Map IN j'-.. 'Iiç :- '--.. '5 5J fl BA IQ tJITOS T s, Calif." I I 6116/99(DEC832) 1 Scale in Feet LSAO--- 1000 2000 Figure 2 Project Location -Cf (" S. 1( - Water 5 UTank.< -5.... 5' h Q 97,\C' t( i - o: ..L. rr '-I - I S I - '. \0 :.''-. •,( I I 1.332 ailer . S....' 5 IS0. S. t_... .fft I S ''-- 5 -_; "5 >,'..'. _•. ' I'\5',,.i -'/.'-•..& 29\ ' :—' Trailer"., \. -.: - Park iro \\kt.14 - .. S. .Ponto .. 32 It ...' !!L I k! Wt r ,:.. ... POINSETTIA PROPERTIES POINSEi17IA PROPLERTIES, I 10 .. ' SPEcIFIC PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN J!F ': 4 )) (FUTURE -RESIDENTIAL) .J\ (FUTURE RESIDENTIAL9TYS & j 7"T Ko . .. . \'l\ _1ai&ø#j(qp1&EEZ A I b m i Fl Now x fl SIR I$' \ RPPER Val 40-'s Jfc4K4tIORE cRDENS A GE I L"_9 ; . :i:... :;' •. .MOBIIiH EOMEJtARl ujh. ' ' 'I I ISA Associates, Inc. 1 built in 1984, the embankments were constructed to accommodate the ultimate right-of-way necessary for construction of a four lane roadway. The existing bridge was constructed in the I southerly half of the right-of-way- The eastbound and westbound lanes of Poinsettia Lane are separated with double solid line I striping and a raised concrete median from Carlsbad Boulevard to 200 feet east of the intersection. The existing bridge overcrossing is a three span structure, approximately 142 feet in length and 45 feet wide. The bridge carries two traffic lanes, a bicycle lane, and a sidewalk along its 142 foot length. The bridge is constructed of pre-stressed concrete slabs and crosses the I railroad at a skew. Existing utility lines (sewer, natural gas, electricity, and telephone) travel under the eastern slope I embankment in a north-south direction A bicycle lane exists on westbound Poinsettia Lane; however, it is striped only from Avenida I Encinas to the bridge structure. A continuous sidewalk is provided adjacent to the eastbound lane. Sidewalks are also provided adjacent to the westbound lanes but only near the intersections, not over the bridge. I The existing bridge spans the NCTD railroad line and currently provides 23 feet of vertical clearance from the railroad tracks. The eastern and western bridge abutments and approaches are wider than the existing roadway improvements. A total right-of-way of 130 feet is provided on the top of the embankments Adjacent property owners have dedicated easements on the side slopes to the City. The existing facility is depicted in Figure 3. 1.3 Description of Proposed Project I The proposed project would briüg the portion of Poinsettia Lane within the project area into conformance with the City's General Plan Circulation Element. Poinsettia Lane is classified in the Circulation Element as a Major Arterial roadway (four travel lanes and a raised median). I Additionally, the widening would relieve existing weekend and summer traffic congestion and provide for Improved bicycle and pedestrian access on Poinsettia Lane. I As proposed, the existing Poinsettia Lane bridge structure and approaches would be widened from two lanes to four lanes. The widened facility would include four 12 foot traffic lanes, two variable width (5 to 8 feet) bicycle lanes, two 5 foot sidewalks, and a raised center median. The I approaches will be widened on the existing embankments. The bridge will be widened from 45 feet to 76 feet in order to provide for two additional lanes. All widening will occur on the north side of the existing roadway and bridge structure. No improvements or impacts (temporary or permanent) will occur on the south side embankments. Figure 4 depicts the roadway I improvements proposed. Additional features of the proposed project include the following. Approach of Poinsettia Lane/Avenida Encinas intersection would be improved to full width I to one dedicated left turn lane, two through lanes, and one shared right turn lane. The western approach of the Poinsettia Lane/Carlsbad Avenue intersection would remain unchanged with one dedicated left turn lane and a dedicated right turn lane. I I 11/I5/99P 'DEC832\IS MND\IS MND DOC> 5 - . - -- - - ii 0 - It —3t aPEDcCKCRETE wor 12 12, VACATEC OF GAT I& Ilion or. wAi PON - - POINSETTIA LANE, ftqpww For; Base Map Source: Doen Engineering. . - LSA Associates, Inc. . A varied width raised median is proposed from Avenida Encinas to approximately 200 feet east of Carlsbad Boulevard (proposed Sta. 1746+14) where it will join the existing raised median. Median landscaping will consist of palm trees and low shrubbery or ground cover. Three existing drainage inlets would be replaced on the north side of the eastern embankment between proposed Sta. 1756+00 and Sta. 1756+50. The inlet drainage pipe would be extended six feet to the north. A 12 inch water, line would be constructed in Poinsettia Lane to connect to the existing 12 inch water line in Avenida Encinas and the existing 10 inch water line in Carlsbad Boulevard. An eight inch reclaimed water line will be extended from Avenida Encinas and stubbed to a future connection in Carlsbad Boulevard. Continuous variable width (five to eight feet) striped bicycle lanes would be provided in both the eastbound and westbound direction. A continuous 5 foot concrete sidewalk will be provided on the north side of the edge of pavement and will connect to the existing sidewalk at approximately 240 feet east of Carlsbad Boulevard (proposed Sta. 1746+54). A three foot high concrete safety barrier will be provided on the north side of the proposed five foot sidewalk. The two foot wide barrier is proposed from Sta. 1746+54 to approximately Sta. 1749+60 and from approximately Sta. 1751+35 to Sta. 1757+44. All improvements can be accommodated within the existing right-of-way, as shown in Figure 4. Clearing and grubbing of existing vegetation and limited excavation will be required to construct the bridge piling and roadway deck. This limited excavation is exempt from the requirements of Section 11.06 (Grading Code) of the City's Municipal Code and, therefore, is not considered "grading activities as defined in Section 11.06." Section 11.06.030 exempts excavation activities that 1) have an unsupported height less than five feet; 2) are for wells, tunnels, and/or utilities; and 3) are less than four feet in vertical depth and move less than 100 cubic yards of material per. 8,000 square feet of area.' Excavation activities associated with the bridge widening meet all of the above criteria. In particular, the maximum vertical depth of excavation is 1.5 feet with movement of 410 cubic yards of material. The construction/staging area will be accessed from both Carlsbad Boulevard and Avenida Encinas. Environmental fencing will be provided five feet from the toe of the existing slope embankments. The fencing will be provided to protect vegetation located on the slope embankments. • 1 For the 135,000 square foot project area, 1,700 cubic yards of movement would be acceptable. 11/1 5/99((P:\I)EC832\IS-MND\IS-MND.DOC)) 7 I LSA Associates, Inc. 1.4 Alternatives Withdrawn from Consideration.. ' Alternatives Previously Analyzed As part of the Poinsettia Lane Final EIR (EIR No. 82-6, SCH No. 83010504), four project I, alternatives were analyzed and rejected. The analysis conducted for this EIR exhausted the possible alternatives for locating the existing roadway and bridge structure on and off site. Given the fact that this prior analysis was conducted and that the existing facility is constructed in its current location, no alternative locations for the proposed alternatives were evaluated in this 'I document. No Project Alternative - A No Project Alternative was considered; however, it was rejected I since it was inconsistent with the objectives of the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan. I . On-Grade Crossing Alternative - This alternative proposed to create a vehicular crossing at grade as opposed to an elevated crossing. This alternative was considered infeasible due to approvals required from the NCTD (previously Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad) and I . the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). . Alternate Location Alternative - This alternative considered the railroad overcrossing at an .I alternate location. This alternative would have required acquisition of additional right-of- way to locate the bridge in a different location, and would have resulted in local circulation and noise impacts. This alternative was rejected because of inconsistency with the Circulation Element of the General Plan. . - . . Alternate Alignment Alternative - This alternative considered an alternate alignment of the bridge crossing and eastern approaches. Acquisition of additional right-of-way between I Avenida Encinas and Carlsbad Boulevard would have been required. I Alternate Bridge Structure Height Recent engineering studies analyzed a bridge structure that provided 26 feet of vertical overhead I . clearance. This alternative was studied because it was considered possible that this vertical clearance would be required by NCTD. A structure with a vertical clearance of 26 feet would be three feet higher than the current bridge and could not be connected to the existing structure. A I 26 foot bridge would need to be built as a completely independent structure. Construction of an independent structure would result in higher project costs. An independent I . structure would serve westbound traffic, while the existing bridge would serve eastbound traffic. Because of the differential vertical clearance at the railroad tracks, the profile of the eastbound and westbound roadways would be different. Because of this difference in profile grades, I extensive retaining wall construction would be required to support the westbound roadway. Costs for retaining walls to support the westbound roadway would be approximately $300,000. Because of the increase in project costs and the differential roadway grade, the 26 foot vertical overhead clearance alternative was rejected by the City. It has also been subsequently determined I that a 26 foot vertical clearance would not be required by the NCTD. I, ... 11/15/99<P:DEC832\J5-MND'JS-MNDDcy>> • . ISA Associates, Inc. 2.0 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED Please check any of the environmental factors listed below that would be potentially affected by this project. This would be any environmental factor that has at least one impact checked "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" in the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Geological Problems Public Services Air Quality Hazards. Recreation Biological Resources Z Land Use and Planning Transportation/Circulation Cultural Resources F71 Noise Utilities & Service Systems Energy & Mineral Resources Population and Housing Water Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 ili5/99< 10 ISA Associates Inc 3.0 EARLIER ANALYSES . ,. I Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration (see Section I 15063(c)(3)(D) of CEQA Guidelines. . Master EIR for the General Plan Update . . .. S I . In March 1994, a Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) was prepared to evaluate the 1993 update of the City of Carlsbad General Plan. The MEIR evaluates a broad range of potential environmental impacts associated with long-term implementation of the Carlsbad General Plan. The MEIR provides a I program level analysis of build out conditions presented in the General Plan, which includes, the proposed bridge widening. Widening of Poinsettia Lane from two to four lanes will bring the roadway into conformance with the major arterial designation identified in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Given that the project. is consistent with the Circulation Element analyzed in the MEIR, the MEIR was used as substantiation for several environmental checklist questions lb 40 DETERMINATION El I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect onthe environment, and a I 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 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. . . . . • • ' I I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant, effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.. .. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potenially. significant 'impact" or "less than significant with mitigation incorporated" impact on the environment, bUt at least one effect 1) has I . been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,' but it must analyze only the , I effects that remain to be addressed. . *• . S • . S 5 • . I find that although the'proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or I NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards .and (b) have .been avoided or., mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior I Compliance has been prepared. S • . . ____________' •'.; i.1i 1 /7 .'• ', I 5 . Date ii/iJ' 1 • ' Planning-Director Sign re '. ' Date • S •' 1 -, S ' •''" •' • '', . S i /99ep:\DEC832\1SMND\1srvNIJD00) . . .. .. 'S • S '° •:• . 11 ri - LSA Associates, Inc. 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST I CEQA Guidelines requires that the lead agency conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears on the following pages in the form of a checklist. The checklist identifies any I 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 (EIR) or Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration I I I I 1 H '•-• 'S I ... I - I 1/15/99((P:\DEC8321S-MND'JS-MND.DOC), 12 LILI LI El- Z LI LI LSA Associates Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EIR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-0 1. CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997. Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. '1 I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Source: #1 and #2) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? (Source: #8) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Source: #8) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation, Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact LI LI LI ELI 1I/15/99<<P:\DEC832\IS-MND\IS-MND.DOC,> 13 ISA Associates, Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EiR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad. Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01. CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad. San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997. Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact III. AIR QUALITY - Where applicable, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable [I] El air quality plan? Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially El 0 to an existing or projected air quality violation? Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any [II criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of fl people? 11/15/99<<P:\DEC832'IS-MND\1S-MND.DOC>> .. 14 LSA Associates, Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EIR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad. Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01. CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997. Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. S City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than Significant S Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact lncoorated Impact Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California S Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? S Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or S regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? S Interfere substantially with the movement of any native S S El El S resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or * ordinance? 1 i/15/99<P:\DEC8321S-MND\jS-MND.DOC,> S 5. 15 LSA Associates, Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Frtpnvi,,n nfP,)incptfi,, 1mw FIR 82..6 City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City áf Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad. Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01. CYP, Inc., July 1 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997. Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than - Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource as defined in §15064.5? (Source: #8) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an El 11:1 Li 0 archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? (Source: #8) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological fl El El resource or site or unique geologic feature? (Source: #8) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (Source: #8) VI GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse Li E effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the El 1-1 most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other - substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. - Strong seismic ground shaking? El E E El Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Il/I 5/99eP:\DEC832JS-MND\iS-MND.DOC>> 16 LSA Associates Inc Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County ' Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane EIR 82-6 City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad CottonlBeland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01. CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997 Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated . Impact Impact iv) Landslides? .El liii liii Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? El El LI ' Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Be located on expansive soil, as defmed in Table 18-1-B of Lii the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment LI LI LI through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely fl hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? I I/15/99<<P:DEC832'jS-MNDJS-MND.DOC>> 17 ISA Associates, Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents maybe referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EIR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plait City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad. CottonlBelandlAssociates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01. CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997: Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than Significant rucituaiiy Significant YVIUL Mitigation Less 111dB Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d). Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would, it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Source: #4) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, , ' where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (Source: #5) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would E ' the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (Source: #4) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ' . El ' El Z adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Source: #5) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, El ' El D injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY— Would the project: . a) Violate any water quality staidârds or waste discharge El F] 'Z El requirements? il/i 5/99<<P:\DEC832IS-MND1S-MND.DOC>> 18 ISA Associates, Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) 1,. Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EIR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01; CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January,, 1997. Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or El X area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the [] capacity of existing or planned stonnwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Source: #4) il/i 5/99<P:DEC832\IS-MNDJS-MND.DOC>> ;.. 19 LSA Associates, Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially' Designated California Scenic Highways by Route.' City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983.. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EIR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad. Cotton/BelandlAssociates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01. CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997. Re-ional Transvortation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, El 1:1 injury or death, involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? (Source: #4) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (Source: 94)El El [1] IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:. Physically divide an established community? Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Source: #11) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: LI LI LI. LI El El Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral LI LI resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Source: #4) . Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important LI El . E]mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? . . LSA Associates, Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EIR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties - Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01. CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997. Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: . a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in E E ,..ftAOa IJL oIaLlua1La .,aLausnjln.n.a us u1 1u'..,al 5,IIsaI paws vs noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? For a project located within an airport land use plan or, El F-1 El 112711 where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Source: #4) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Source: 94) XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Source: #5) 11/I 5/99<<P:\DEC832IS-MND\JS-MND.DOC>> 21 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact 1I El 0 El LEI El E1 El 1zN No Impact Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EIR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works improvements in the City of Carlsbad CottonlBeland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Spec/lc Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-0 1. CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Sëenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997. Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? XIV. RECREATION - a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? LI LI LI LI LI LI LILILI LI:LILI LI LI LI LI LI LI 11/15/99<P:\DEC832IS-MND'JS-MND.DOC,> 22 - LSA Associates, Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EIR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. . 5 City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994 General Plan City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01. CYP, Inc., July 1,1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997. Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No V Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the V construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: V Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation El [1] to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system V (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of V vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or V congestion at intersections)? V Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of El El F service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an El El 01 M increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? V Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., V El 11 El N sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Result in inadequate emergency access? Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies,. plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 11/15/99<<P:\DEC832jS-MND\JS-MND.DOC,> V 23 XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. - Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? - Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and Ell regulations related to solid waste? LI LI El LILI 0 E - LSA Associates, Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) 1 Caltrans January, 1992 California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EIR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad. Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01. CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad. San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997. Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 11/15/99<P:'DEC$32\IS-MND'JS-MND.DOC>> - 24 LSA Associates, Inc. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached) Caltrans, January, 1992. California State and County Scenic Highways Map. Caltrans, September 5, 1996. Officially Designated California Scenic Highways by Route. City of Carlsbad Planning Office, March 10, 1983. Environmental Impact Report for the Widening and Extension of Poinsettia Lane, EIR 82-6. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March, 1994. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad, September 6, 1994. General Plan. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad. Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc., July, 1997. Final Program Environmental impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, SCH No. 96081027, EIR 96-01: CYP, Inc., July 1, 1988. Scenic Corridor Guidelines for the City of Carlsbad San Diego Association of Governments, January, 1997. Regional Transportation Plan 1996-2020. City of Carlsbad, July 16, 1996. Local Coastal Program. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE - Does the prdject have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife 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 endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a 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)? (Source: #4) Does the project have environmental effects which will E El IL Z11 cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? . I l/l5/99c<p:DEC832'JS-MND'jS-MND.DOC,> - 25 I ISA Associates, Inc. 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT DISCUSSION 61 AESTHETICS I Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? I Less Than Significant Impact. Poinsettia Lane is designated in the Circulation Element as a Community Scenic Corridor because it offers "back country" vistas, occasional "blue water" views of the ocean, distant views of the lagoon, and flower fields and nurseries. The City's ' Scenic Corridor Guidelines identify, goals for implementing community scenic corridors, including creation of a unique identity by selecting a predominant "theme" tree; preserving distant views of the ocean, lagoons, and backcountry; and encouraging special landscaped setbacks. On page 35 of the Guidelines, the recommended theme tree along Poinsettia Lane I is Magnolia gradiflora (Southern Magnolia) with supporting trees being Brachychiton acerfolius (Flame Tree); southern magnolia is also recommended as the median tree within I the Poinsettia Lane corridor. During roadway design, placement of Southern Magnolia specimen trees was considered. Due to the limited length of the median and the presence of other strong landscape elements (i.e., palm trees) at the Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park and South Carlsbad State Beach, it was determined that placement of palm trees within I the median would provide greater visual continuity within the existing setting than providing limited specimen trees of Southern Magnolia. However, the segment of Poinsettia Lane under study only provides views of the ocean and the South Carlsbad State Beach. ' Landscaping provided within the proposed median will consist of groupings of palm trees and small shrubbery or ground cover. The proposed landscape palette will provide visual continuity with existing palm trees at the Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park and South Carlsbad State Beach and will enhance existing views of and from this facility. As the I . proposed bridge structure will be the same design as the existing bridge, views from passenger trains on the railroad will not be substantially altered. Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, I trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. Poinsettia Lane is not .a State scenic highway. Refer to response 6.1.a for an assessment of the project's effect on City designated scenic corridors. Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site I and its surroundings? . No Impact As the proposed project is the widening of an existing facility at exactly the I same grade and profile, the existing visual character will not be substantially altered. I d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? No Impact. Lighting from the proposed project will not be substantially greater than existing I lighting on the bridge. I li/i 5/99<P:\DEC832'IS-MND\JS-MND.DOC,> : . 26 I LSA Associates, Inc. I 611 AGRICULTURE RESOURCES Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide I Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? No Impact. There are currently no agricultural activities occurring in the vicinity of the I project site or on the existing slope embankment. As noted in the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan EIR, the area surrounding the project site was historically used for agricultural purposes; however, the site has not been utilized in this manner since 1972 (Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan EIR, p. 5.1-1). There is no prime, unique or Statewide important I farmland in the area (Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan EIR, pg. 5.8-1). I Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? I No Impact. No portion of the Poinsettia Properties project area is under a Williamson Act preservation contract (Poinsettia Properties EIR, p. 5.8-3). I c) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? I No Impact. Refer to response 6 II a for discussion 1 6111 AIR QUALITY Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality I plan' No Impact. Given that the proposed project is consistent with the Circulation Element, the I widening will facilitate construction of the ultimate arterial system within the City and will help reduce the traffic impacts and traffic related air quality emissions of planned land uses within the City. As this is an anticipated roadway improvement, it will not obstruct implementation of the Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) developed by the San Diego I . Air Pollution Control District. Additionally, as a major, arterial, the proposed widening will provide continuous bicycle and I sidewalks within the study area providing two alternative modes of transportation. Provision of these types of facilities is recommended by the RAQS Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? I No Impact. Poinsettia Lane is projected to be Level of Service A with and without the proposed project, as discussed in response 6.XV.a (Transportation/Traffic). Due to the I acceptable level of service, there will be negligible impacts to local air quality. I i/i5/99<<P:DEC83215-MNDJS-MNDiy)C,> 27 LSA Associates, Inc. c) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or I state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? No. Impact. There will be no net increase in pollutants, as the volumes and level of service are the same for the with and without project scenarios. Additionally, beneficial air quality effects will result from reduced congestion and improved level of service during weekends and summer peak hours when traffic volume at the South Carlsbad State Beach is greatest. I d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? No Impact. As identified in Table 6.XV.A, the roadway will operate at an acceptable level of service with widening of the existing facility. Existing sensitive receptors at the Lakeshore I Gardens Mobile Home Park and at South Carlsbad State Beach are not expected to be exposed to concentrated localized pollution emissions or carbon monoxide "hot spots" from increased traffic volumes, with or without the project. I e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ofpeople? 1 Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction activities such as asphalt paving may generate short-term odors, which may be noticed by residents in the Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park. These odors would be typical of roadway construction work and would be temporary, lasting only for a limited duration. Odors generated by vehicles travelling on the additional travel lanes will not be substantially greater than those under current i conditions I 6.IV BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species I in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? I Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. LSA Associates, Inc. conducted a biological evaluation to assess potential project impacts to biological resources. Appendix A contains the biological evaluation in its entirety. The biological survey identified I . approximately 0.65 acre of mature coastal sage scrub (CSS) on the northern slope embankments of the existing Poinsettia Lane bridge and approaches, west of the NCTD tracks (refer to Figure 5). Approximately 0.34 acre will be permanently impacted by I construction of the proposed project. Three species of birds were observed during the biological survey; however, the coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila polioptila calfornica) was not observed. The wildlife inhabiting the CSS will lose a small amount of habitat as a result of the project; however, the CSS on site is isolated and does not have a I ' linkage to other CSS populations. No wildlife dependent on CSS was observed, and the small area in conjunction with, the isolation from other CSS communities reduces the il/i 5/99<P:\DEC832\iS-MND\IS-MND.DOC> . , . . 28 £W11 Scale in Feet LSA 0 50 100 U Figure 5 Coastal Sage Scrub Impacts of Proposed Project LSA Associates, Inc. habitat value of the CSS for supporting species such as gnatcatchers. Mitigation consistent with the Natural Communities Conservation Planning (NCCP) program will be provided. The City's existing interim Section 4(d) Incidental Take Authorization requires that all impacts to CSS habitat be mitigated, regardless of the presence of California gnatcatchers. The Draft Habitat Management Plan for the City of Carlsbad proposes to establish the Lake Calavera property as a mitigation bank for City projects. The approximately 250 acre property is owned by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD). The bank will be able to mitigate impacts to coastal sage scrub not occupied by the California gnatcatcher, chaparral, and non-native grasslands. Because the proposed Poinsettia Lane bridge widening project will impact coastal sage scrub not occupied by the California gnatcatcher, the impact can be mitigated at Lake Calavera. A meeting was held with representatives of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) on July 15, 1999, to discuss the project's impacts and mitigation requirements. Representatives from the USFWS and CDFG agreed that protocol gnatcatcher surveys would not be required and that mitigation of the 0.34 acre of impacted CSS habitat at a 1:1 ratio within the Lake Calavera mitigation bank is appropriate. For purpose of wildlife agency permitting, it was also agreed that the CSS impacts would be considered a "de minimus exemption" as defined in the Section 4(d) take authorization. A de minimus exemption is applicable only when 1) less than one acre of habitat is lost; 2) the habitat is not occupied by California gnatcatchers; 3) the loss of the habitat will not preclude the design of the reserve system; and 4) the habitat is of low value or medium value and is outside of identified preserve planning areas. Mitigation Measure 6.IV.1 Prior to project initiation, the City shall obtain a Section 4(d) take authorization from the USFWS. As part of this take authorization, the City shall mitigate impacts to CSS at a 1:1 ratio within the Lake Calavera mitigation bank. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? I . Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated . Sensitive habitat within the project study area is limited to coastal sage scrub (see response 6.IV.a, above). Vernal pool habitat has previously been identified north of the study area; however, no vernal pool habitat is identified within the study area (see Appendix A). Refer to response 6.IV.c for reducing I indirect effects to the vernal pool habitat. I c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other I . means? . . No Impact A vernal pool habitat is located north of the project boundary and east of the I NCTD tracks. The vernal pool habitat is bordered by a chain link fence on the east and south 11/I5/99<<P:DEC8321S-MND1S.MNDDOC>> . . . 30 I LSA Associates, Inc. edges and the NCTD tracks on the west Approximately 12 San Diego button-celery (Eryngium aristulatum parishii), a species listed as endangered (State and federal), were observed in the southeastern edge of the vernal pool habitat, approximately 14 feet outside of the project limits. No San Diego button-celery was observed within the project boundary. Given that the proposed improvements will be constructed on top of the existing embankments (Figure 4), there will be no effect on the hydrological regimen within the study area. As there will be no alteration of the area's hydrological regimen, no indirect effects to vernal pool resources are expected from the proposed widening. 1 - I I d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or 1 migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? I No Impact. No wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites within the project area were identified by the Biological Resources Evaluation Study (Appendix A) I e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? I No Impact As shown in Figure 3, the project study area does not contain any trees I f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? I S No Impact. Refer to response 6 IV a for discussion and mitigation 6.V CULTURAL RESOURCES I . a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource as defined in §15064.5? No Impact. A records search and literature review were conducted for the Poinsettia I Properties EIR, and a site survey was conducted by Gallegos and Associates' on July 14, 1994. The site survey found a single cultural resource, CA-SDI-137291H (W-6107), located southeast of the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Poinsettia Lane in Parcel C of the I Poinsettia Properties project. This site is not located within the area of the bridge widening or the temporary construction staging area; therefore, this site will not be affected by the I proposed project. The slope embankments currently supporting the road and bridge consist entirely of, fill material imported for the construction of the existing road and bridge in 1985. As I construction of the proposed project is limited to the existing embankment, the potential to encounter cultural resources is negligible. Staging areas for construction would be located in areas previously surveyed as part of the FEIR for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan. No I cultural resources were identified within the proposed staging areas. I i/i5/99<cP:DEC8321S-MNDJS-MND.DOC>, LSA Associates, Inc. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? No Impact. Refer to response 6.V.a for discussion. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature' No. Impact. The Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan project site is located in an area identified as a "potentially significant fossil area" from the Quarternary period. Quarternary age alluvium deposits have the potential to contain fossilferous rock from Pleistocene terrace deposits of not more than two million years in age. Further analysis identified that the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan project site is underlain by Pleistocene/Holocene sedimentary deposits, with the upper three feet containing modern alluvium and soils. Based on the findings of these analyses, the paleontological resource potential of the area is rated as moderate. Given that all grading will be limited to the existing embankments, the potential for encountering paleontological resources is considered negligible. As the project area is generally flat, there are no unique geologic features Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside offormal cemeteries? No Impact. The cultural resources assessment conducted for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan EIR did not identify any known human remains within the Specific Plan area. 6 VI GEOLOGY AND SOILS a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Aiquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. No Impact. As noted in the Structure Foundation Report (Appendix B), the project site is not located within a currently established Alquist—Priolo Earthquake Study Zone. a) Strong seismic ground shaking' I Less Than Significant Impact. The neatest active fault is the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon/East Fault, located approximately five miles to the west (Appendix B). The estimated peak acceleration during the maximum credible earthquake on this fault is I estimated to be 0.5g. Construction of the widening project will incorporate the seismic I i/15/99<> 32 I I LSA Associates, Inc. design recommendations identified in the Structure Foundation Report (Appendix B). These recommendations are consistent with Caltrans' seismic standards. Therefore, the potential for seismic hazards will be reduced to below a level of significance. Seismic-related groundfailure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction occurs when loose granular soils below the water table are subject to vibration, such as those induced by earthquakes (Appendix B). Dense materials were encountered at shallow depths in all of the sample borings conducted as part of the Structure Foundation Report, (Appendix B). Groundwater was encountered at depths of 18 to more than 50 feet below ground level. Since groundwater levels are relatively deep and shallow soils are dense, the potential for liquefaction or other seismic related ground failure is considered low. Landslides? No Impact. The existing slope embankments were constructed as an engineered artificial fill, consistent with Caltrans' standard specifications, and the potential for landslides is negligible. No other sources of landslides exist in the project area or surrounding vicinity. Would the project result insubstantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? No Impact. The proposed project would not alter the existing drainage pattern within the project study area. The existing drainage pattern of the site would remain the same since the configuration of the slopes and road would remain unchanged (Figure 4). As the drainage patterns remain the same, the rates of soil erosion and loss of topsoil under current conditions will not be affected. Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence or collapse? Less Than Significant Impact. The existing abutments were constructed by placing approximately 22 to 35 feet of fill. The fill at the abutments is underlain by terrace deposits, which in turn are underlain by the Santiago Formation. The terrace deposits extend to depths of 37 to 44 feet. The Santiago Formation continues to the maximum depth explored, 66.3 feet. The fill consists of silty sand. The terrace deposits are composed of medium dense to dense clayey and silty sandstones and sandy claystones. The underlying Santiago Formation consists of a very dense or hard silty sandstone and clayey siltstone. Refer to responses 6.VI.a.iii and 6.VI.a.iv for a discussion on the potential for liquefaction and landslides. Given that the existing embankments were constructed as engineered fill, the potential for lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse is considered negligible. 11/15/99eP:\DEC832'IS-MND\JS-MND.DOC>, - 33 I I I LSA Associates, Inc. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? No Impact. The Structure Foundation Report did not identify any expansive soils within the project study area (Appendix B). Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are proposed 6.VII HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact. Traffic utilizing existing Poinsettia Lane may include vehicles that are transporting hazardous materials or waste. The proposed project will expose the public to no greater risk of an accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances than occurs today. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? No Impact. Refer to response 6.VII.a for discussion. C) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or 'handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. There are no schools, existing or proposed, within one-quarter mile of the project site (MEIR, Map 5.12.7-2). d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a. result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. 'Given the fact that the existing embankment consists of imported material, the likelihood of encountering hazardous materials/waste during grading on the top of the embankment is considered negligible. However, since construction staging areas are anticipated at the base of the embankments, an assessment of the potential for encountering contamination in this area was conducted. An Environmental Site Assessment (Vista Environmental Site Assessment, June 7, 1999) was, conducted to determine the potential for underground tank leaks, hazardous ,waste sites, tank spills of hazardous materials, active and inactive landfills, solid waste transfer stations, and State and federal hazardous waste sites within the project vicinity (Appendix Q. 1 i/15/99<<P:DEC832\iS-MND1S-MND.DOC,> 34 I LSA Associates Inc I There are no known hazardous material/waste sites (Vista, 1999). However, two small generators of hazardous waste are located within one-half mile of the project site: Hour Photo, located at 7040 Avenida Encinas, and Carlsbad Volvo, located at 6830 Avenida I Encinas. Additionally, Hoehn Honda, located at 6800 Avenida Encinas, reported two leaking underground storage tanks in July, 1998. Both tanks are identified on, the State Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) list. One tank is currently undergoing a preliminary site I . assessment to determine appropriate remediation, and the other tank has not yet begun the preliminary site assessment process. Soil is primarily affected to a shallow depth, and the potential for groundwater contamination is low; therefore, the likelihood of migration of contaminated groundwater under the site is negligible project A site walkover was conducted by LSA Associates, Inc. in June, 1999, and did not reveal any substantial hazardous materials/waste concerns within the slope embankments or construction staging area e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result 1 in a safety hazardfor people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The nearest airport is the McClellan-Palomar Airport, is located approximately I ' 2.1 miles northwest of the project site (Map 2 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan). Due to its distance, the existing bridge does not affect vertical clearance requirements for airplanes accessing this airport. Given the fact that the proposed bridge structure will be the same height as the existing facility, potential safety hazards associated with the proposed I project would be no greater than occurs under existing conditions. I f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazardfor people residing or working in the project area2 I No Impact. The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip (MEIR, Map 59-l) g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan' I No Impact. Poinsettia Lane is not identified as an emergency evacuation route in the Public Safety Element of the General Plan (Public Safety Element, pg. 5). The proposed project would widen the Poinsettia Lane bridge from two to four lanes and, therefore, would improve I traffic movement on Poinsettia Lane between Avenida Encinas and Carlsbad Boulevard. I Ii) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildiand fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildiands? No Impact. There are no wildlands within the project vicinity (Figure 3); therefore, the project would not cause any increased risk of loss due to wildland fires. 11115199 35 LSA Associates, Inc. 6.VIII HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will increase the amount of impervious surface resulting in increased roadway runoff. The proposed project will not increase the number of cars using the bridge now and in the future. The amount of pollutants from what occurs under current conditions will not substantially increase. During construction, the potential exists for increased erosion and pollutants to enter the existing storm drain system. During final design, the project engineer will comply with the "Grading and Erosion Control - Design Criteria" of the "Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad" section of the City's Municipal Code, which requires preparation of an erosion control 'plan that, when implemented, limits off-site erosion during construction. The final project design will include detailed erosion control plans for use by the contractor. Mitigation Measure 6. VIII During final design, detailed erosion control plans shall be prepared for approval by. the Director, Department of Public Works. Approved detailed erosion control plans shall be included in the design plans and specifications provided to all contractors Mitigation Measure 6. VIII During construction, the Department of Public Works shall monitor the installation and maintenance of the erosion control plan to verify that all measures have been implemented and that runoff/sediment from the project work area is being intercepted. b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted' Less Than Significant Impact. There will be no long-term effects to groundwater supplies since the roadway will not draw water from this resource, it will use reclaimed water. Groundwater was encountered in two of the borings at 30.5 and '29.5 feet below ground surface (Appendix B). Construction of the proposed bridge structure will require foundation piles to be driven approximately 10 to 14 feet into the Santiago Formation. The formation is situated approximately 7 to 12 feet below the point where groundwater was encountered during the sample borings. Given the proximity of groundwater levels, cast-in-drilled hole (CIDH) piles will not be utilized to support the widening. Utilizing the driven pile construction technique, the piles will be driven into the bedrock formation through the groundwater table. Groundwater will be displaced underground, and no water will be brought to the surface. I I Ill 5/99<cP \DEC832\IS MND\IS MND 36 LSA Associates, Inc. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? No Impact. The proposed project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site and vicinity. The existing drainage pattern of the site would remain the same, since the configuration of the slopes and road would remain unchanged (Figure 4). As the drainage patterns remain the same, the rates of erosion and siltation that occUr, under current conditions will not be affected. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? No Impact. The widening of the bridge and approaches would increase the amount of impervious surface area, which could increase the rate of runoff during storm events. Post- project runoff would be accommodated by the existing storm drains and the proposed extension of the drainage inlet between Sta. 1756+00 and Sta. 1756+50. The contribution of the proposed project to stormwater runoff volumes would not alter existing rates of surface runoff. Downstream drainage facilities are sized in accordance with the City of Carlsbad Master Plan of Drainage, and are designed to accommodate the increased runoff associated with the planned widening of Poinsettia Lane Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? No Impact The proposed project would incrementally increase surface runoff due to the addition of two travel lanes; however, the increase would not exceed the capacity of the existing stormwater drainage system. Refer to responses 6.VIII.a and 6.VIII.d for discussions on facility capacity and water quality. J) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? No Impact Refer to response 6.VIII.4 for a discussion of water quality; g) Would the project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact No residential structures are proposed as part of the project i i/i5/99<<P:DEC832'JS-MND'JS-MND.DOC,> 37 LSA Associates, Inc. Would the project place within a 100-year flood, hazard area structures which would impede or redirectfloodflows? No ImpacL As shown in Figure 5.10.1-1 of the MEIR, the project site is not located with a FEMA 100 year flood hazard zone. Therefore, flood flows would not be affected. I Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death, involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact As shown in Figures 5.10.1-1 and 5.10.1-2 of the MEIR, the project site is not located within a FEMA 100 year flood zone or a catastrophic dam failure inundation area. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow' No Impact. As shown in Figure 5.10.1-2 of the MEIR, the project area is located outside the tsunami inundation area 6 IX LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project physically divide an established community' No Impact As shown in Figure 3, the proposed project will not physically divide an established community because all of the proposed improvements are within and adjacent to existing right-of-way, where no homes are located. The nearest residential units are located on the south side of the road where no improvements are occurring. Would the project conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect' No Impact. The proposed bridge widening is consistent with the major arterial designation for Poinsettia Lane in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The proposed project is located within the Coastal Zone. A Coastal Development Permit (CDP) was issued May 9, 1984, for the existing facility and acknowledged the future widening of the bridge. As part of the bridge widening process, an application for amendment to the original CDP was submitted to the California Coastal Commission on February 18, 1999. The Coastal Commission responded in a letter dated March 18, 1999, that stated that the original CDP did not address the proposed widening. Based on the Commission's determinations, a finding of consistency with the City's Local Coastal Program (LCP) will be required. The proposed project is located within the Mello II Segment of the City's Local Coastal Program. The City has permitting authority for projects within the Coastal Zone (except for the 'Agua Helionda LCP segment). Land uses and roadway improvements identified in the City's General Plan have been incorporated into the Mello II Segment of the LCP. Given that it is consistent with the Circulation Element of the 11115/99<<P:\DEC832'JS.MND'JS-MND.DOC,> 38 LSA Associates, Inc. General Plan, the proposed project is consistent with the planned roadways within this portion of the Coastal Zone. Poinsettia Lane between Avenida Encinas and Carsibad Boule- vard is identified on the LCP Segment Boundaries exhibit (pg. 5, LCP). Policy 5-5 of the Mello II Segment of the LCP recommends that Poinsettia Lane be completed as a major arterial (four lanes) providing direct coastal access to Carlsbad Boulevard. The proposed project is consistent with Policy 5-5 in that Poinsettia Lane would be constructed as a major arterial and provide enhanced access to Carlsbad Boulevard and South Carlsbad State Beach. The proposed project is consistent with other pertinent LCP policies, as described below, and will not adversely affect coastal resources or access. The proposed project will not affect visual access (Policy 7-13, Visual Access, of the LCP). The proposed landscape palette will provide visual continuity within the existing views of and from Poinsettia Lane and will not block or alter existing views of' the ocean and South Carlsbad State Beach from Carlsbad Boulevard. As described in Response 6.II.a and 6.V.a, the proposed project will not affect or convert any designated coastal agricultural lands (Policy 2-1, Conservation of Agricultural Lands) to urban development nor affect archaeological or paleontological resources (Policy 8-4, Archaeological and Paleontological Resources). Approximately 0.34 acre of non-occupied coastal sage scrub will be permanently impacted by the proposed project. As described in Response 6.IV.a, mitigation of the impacted acreage will be accomplished at a 1:1 ratio within the Lake Calavera mitigation bank. I The proposed project will not contribute to coastal erosion (Policy 4-1, Coastal Erosion). given that the project is located across Carlsbad Boulevard, direct or indirect beach sand erosion resulting from the project is unlikely. The project will not alter existing drainage patterns and would not result in increased soil erosion. During project construction, the I potential exists for increased 'erosion and pollutants to enter the storm drain system. The project will be in compliance with the "Grading and Erosion Control - Design Criteria" of the "Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of, 1 ' Carlsbad" section of the City's Municipal Code. In addition, a NPDES permit will be required for construction activities 1 ' Policy 3-4 of the LCP prohibits grading activities between October 1 and April 1 to reduce the potential for erosion and sediment to affect coastal resources. Since there is no grading, as defined in the, city's Grading Ordinance, the proposed project would not be subject to a limitation on grading between October and April I c) Would the project conflict with: any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan' Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated Refer to response 6.IV.a (Biological Resources) for discussion: , ,- I I I 11/15/99cP \DEC832\IS MND\IS MND DOC> 39 I I I' I I LSA Associates, Inc. 6.X MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. As depicted in Figure 5.13-2 of the MEIR, the project site is not located in an area of known mineral resources, either of regional or local value. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. Refer to response 6.X.a for discussion of the project's relationship to known mineral resources within the City. NOISE a) Would the project result in exposure ofpersons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less Than Significant Impact. A noise analysis (LSA Associates, Inc., 1999) was prepared for the proposed project and is included in its entirety in Appendix D. Eight receptor locations located in the Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park were modeled for two future scenarios: with and without the project. Traffic noise levels at these receptor locations would.. either decrease by as much as 1.4 dBA or increase no more than 0.2 dBA from the corresponding no project noise levels. The decrease in traffic noise level would result from traffic being moved north and would receive higher noise attenuation from the southern edge of the roadway and existing jersey barrier along the south side of the road. The increases at two of the receptors are small and statistically negligible. Any noise level change of less than three dBA is considered less than significant. As shown in Table 6.XI.A, there would be no substantial project related traffic noise impacts, future with project noise levels would not exceed established noise standards, and no mitigation is required. Figure 6 depicts the noise modeling locations. I I/i5/99<<P:DEC832'JS-MND1S-MNDDOC>> - I I - ... . . .. . . - I . ..r •. .. . . : I -. .. ... I B I I C - 7. 77-7 STAWPED cOhVRETE INLETS .77 Ow Op *.PV LINE I I - - CISTI •IGT UI I _UIfl CI OITT LANE -J. .- . t . . -• •RIGHT vrP- •.--. - :...... .-.•.-_._- UI' LANE - — I — =--'- - - - - - - -- - RIGHT UI UIT UI? ?0IU 16 TTII - I -, - - PIUCT II LUC . . . - . 14 t. I . . - . . . . . - r- :. . R2 . . 1• 1 R30 °R5 R? I. .:-, . --H•,. • R8° - MIA Base Map Source: Dokken Engineering. I 8/3/99(DEC832) . Figure 6 N . . . . . . . Scale in Feet . LS--A-- 0 50 100 . Noise Modeling Locations LSA Associates, Inc. Table 6.XI.A - Peak Hour Noise Levels at Sensitive Receptor Locations 1 Hour Leq Levels (dBA) Receptor Future Without Project Future With Project Project Related Increase RI 61.3 60.1 -1.2 R2 60.9 60.1 -0.8 R3 59.7 59.3 0.4 R4 614 600 -14 R5 596 59.0 -0.6 R6 63.2 63.4 0.2 R7 575 575 00 R8 569 570 01 b) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated The noise analysis (Appendix D) indicates that the proposed project would have beneficial effects on the existing mobile home residents to the south of the project, as indicated in response 6.XI.a, above. Short-term construction noise and groundborne vibrations will occur during foundation construction and are considered a potential short-term impact. Mitigation measure 6.XI. 1 will reduce impacts to below the level of significance. Pile driving activities would generate maximum noise levels ranging from 81 to 96 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. Because the piles would be driven into the ground, only the engine noise and impact sound between the pile driver and the pile being driven would be heard at a distance. As a worst case scenario, the level recommended for pile driving, 93 dBA Lm at 50 feet, is used in this analysis. At a distance of more than 100 feet from active pile driving, the noise would be reduced to 87 dBA or lower. At its nearest point, construction (i.e., bridge widening construction) on the north side of Poinsettia Lane west of the bridge would take place within a distance of about 100 to 150 feet from those receptors located along the south side of Poinsettia Lane east of the bridge In additidn to limiting hours of. construction activities (Mitigation Measure 6.XI.1), equipment and operational specifications shall be followed as identified in Mitigation Measure 6.XI.2 to reduce pile driving and other construction noise activities. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 6.XI.1 and 6.XI.2 will reduce noise impacts associated with construction activities to less than significant Mitigation Measure 6.XI.1 - Initial construction has the potential to create significant impacts at the homes located along Poinsettia Lane, and mitigation is warranted to reduce these impacts to the extent feasible. i i/I5/99nP:\DEC832\IS-MND\JS-MND.DOC>> 42 I LSA Associates, Inc. As part of the contract specifications for the proposed project, the City of Carlsbad shall require that the contractor implement the following measures: Construction shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:00, a.m. and 7:00 p.m. and not permitted on Sundays and federal holidays. All construction equipment shall be equipped with working manufacturer specified muffler system. Portable equipment shall be located as far as possible from the noise sensitive locations at the existing mobile home park. Construction vehicle staging areas and equipment maintenance areas shall be located as far as possible from sensitive receptor locations at the existing mobile home park. Mitigation Measure 6.XL2 As part of the contract specifications for the proposed project, the City of Carlsbad shall require the contractor to implement the following measures to further reduce noise during construction and pile driving activities Pre-drill each pile 15 feet prior to beginning the pile driving. Utilize steel H-piles. Utilize a vibratory hammer, except for the last few feet. Allow only the last few feet of each pile to be driven in order to ensure that bearing capacity has been reached. Notify the City Public Works Department and adjacent property owners five days prior to initiating noise activities. Would the project result in exposure of a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? No Impact Refer to response 6 XI a for a discussion of permanent noise increases Would the project result in exposure of a substantial temporary or periodic increase in - ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? No Impact. As the nature of traffic noise is continuous rather than episodic, it is not expected that substantial temporary or periodic increases in noise levels will result from widening the roadway. It will be similar to conditions that currently occur i i/i5/99<<P:DEC832\IS-MND\IS-MJ4D.DOC>> - 43 - LSA Associates, Inc. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. As shown on Map 1 of the Public Safety Element, the proposed project area is located outside of the airport influence area for the McClellan-Palomar Airport and is not substantially affected by aircraft noise. J For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip (MEIR, Map 5.9-1). 6.XII POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No Impact The widening of the existing bridge to accommodate four travel lanes was anticipated in the Circulation Element of the General Plan and was planned in coordination with future land uses identified in the Land Use Element of the General Plan to accommodate predicted traffic volumes. It is not expected that the widening will induce substantial growth over and above that anticipated in the General Plan. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. No existing housing will be displaced by the proposed bridge widening (see Figure 3). Would the project displace substantial numbers ofpeople, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact No existing housing will be displaced by the proposed bridge widening (see Figure 3). 11/I 5/99<P:DEC832'JS-MND\1S-MND.DOC,, - - 44 I LSA Associates, Inc. I 6.XIII PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically I altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police I protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? No Impact. No existing fire and police protection, schools, parks, or other public services are I located within the project study area (Figure 3). Beneficial indirect effects to fire and police protection services would result through improved access between Avenida Encinas and Carlsbad Boulevard. I 6.XIV RECREATION I a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? S No Impact. There are no local or regional parks in the vicinity of the project; however, South Carlsbad State Beach is located at the terminus of Poinsettia Lane and Carlsbad Boulevard I (Figure 3). Poinsettia Lane is the primary eastern access to the South Carlsbad State Beach. The State Beach is a popular destination point in the City of Carlsbad, and improving the access may encourage increased patronage of the beach to some degree. The level of I improved access is not expected to increase visitors to the point where a substantial degradation of park facilities or the environment will occur. Widening of the existing facility will improve access to the State Beach and reduce existing weekend and summer traffic congestion accessing the State Beach via Poinsettia Lane Does the project include recreationalfaciities or require the construction or expansion of I recrealionalfacilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. Refer to response 6.XIVa for discussion. 1 6 XV TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC I a) Would the project cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (Le., result in a substantial increase in either the number of I vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? No Impact. A traffic analysis was conducted for the future with and without project scenarios (Linscott, Law & Greenspan, May, 1999). As shown in Table 6.XV.A below, and I the existing LOS A would remain after implementation of the proposed project. I 11/15/99<P \DEC832\IS MND\IS MND DOC 45 ISA Associates, Inc. Table 6.XV.B - Traffic Volumes and Level of Service' No. of Build Out2 Segment Lanes Direction ADT VOL' v/c LOS Poinsettia Lane 12,100 Carlsbad Blvd. to •2 Eastbound 6050 910 0.25 A Avenida Enemas Carlsbad Blvd. to 2 Westbound 6050 910 0.25 A Avenida Encinas Traffic volumes for both with and without project scenarios. 2 SANDAG Series 8 - 2020 Build out (preliminary) Assumes 50/50 direction split and peak traffic = 15% ADT Notes: ADT - Average Daily Traffic VOL - Peak Hour Volume V/C - Volume to Capacity Ratio LOS - Level of Service Source: Linscott, Law & Greenspan, May, 1999. The proposed widening would bring Poinsettia Lane into conformance with the major arterial designation identified in the Circulation Element of the General Plan and increase the existing volume capacity. Given that the proposed project would increase traffic capacity on Poinsettia Lane between Avenida Encinas and Carlsbad Boulevard and that future with project traffic volumes would remain the same, the impact to existing traffic volumes and loads is negligible. The bridge widening would actually enhance traffic flow on Poinsettia Lane during weekend and summer peak hours. Would the project exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? No Impact. As indicated in response 6XV.a, Poinsettia Lane is predicted to be LOS A in the future. Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. As this is a local roadway widening, the proposed project will have no effect on air traffic patterns and would not increase the safety risk location area around McClellan- Palomar Airport. 1/15/99P:DEC832IS-MNDiS-MND.DOC>, 46 LSA Associates, Inc. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.,farm equipment)?. No Impact. All design features of the proposed project are within minimum City standards per "Standards for Design and Construction of Public Works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad." No safety hazards will be created. Would the project result in inadequate Emergency access? No ImpacL Emergency vehicles will not be impeded by the widened roadway. In fact, the proposed project will improve emergency access by increasing the capacity of the bridge. During project construction, two lanes will be kept open during peak traffic periods; therefore, there will be no short-term interruption of emergency vehicle access. f..i Would the project result in inadequate parking capacity? No Impact. The proposed project will not generate any development that would need additional parking facilities in the vicinity of the project. No existing or proposed parking spaces would be affected with implementation of the widening project (refer to Figure 4) g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. The project would result in a beneficial effect on alternative transportation modes by providing improved bicycle and pedestrian access on Poinsettia Lane between Avenida Enemas and Carlsbad Boulevard (refer to Figure 4). 6 XVI UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board' No Impact. As this is a roadwayproject, no development will be planned that will require additional demand for wastewater treatment facilities or systems Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. As this is a roadway project, no development will be planned that will require additional demand for water facilities or systems. A 12 inch water line will be constructed in Poinsettia Lane to connect to the existing 12 inch water line in Avenida Encinas and the existing 10 inch water line in Carlsbad Boulevard. An eight inch reclaimed water line will be extended from Avenida Encinas and stubbed to a future connection in Carlsbad Boulevard. I i/i5/99<<P:\DEC832US-MND'jS-MND.DOC>> 47 I ISA Associates, Inc. C) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause I significant environmental effects. Less Than Significant Impact. The three existing drainage inlets between proposed Sta. I 1756+00 and approximately Sta. 1756+50 will be replaced with the proposed project. The inlet drainage pipe would be extended six feet to the north, and there will be will no substantial change to the existing stormwater facility. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the projectfrom existing - entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? - No Impact. Reclaimed water, rather than domestic water, will be used to irrigate the landscaped median. Therewill be no effect on domestic water supplies. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which I serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? I .. No Impact. The project is not a development whereby additional housing units or commercial, industrial, office space is provided that would generate the need for wastewater treatment. Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate ' the project's solid waste disposal needs' No Impact. The proposed project will generate only a negligible amount of solid waste due to I demolition activities during construction. Given that roadways do not generate substantial solid waste, mainly litter, the proposed project will have a negligible effect on landfill capacity. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? I No Impact. Refer to response 6.X VI.f for discussion. I 6 XVII MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially I reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife 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 endangered plant or animal or eliminate I important examples of the major periods of California history orprehistory? Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. With implementation of the mitigation measures identified in this document, potential impacts to plants, wildlife, and I - cultural/scientific resources are less than significant. = I 1115199< 48 LSA Associates, Inc. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a. project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects ofprobablefuture projects)? Less Than Significant Impact. Impacts associated with build out of the General Plan land uses and circulation network were identified in the Master EIR for the General Plan. Given that this project is consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan and its impacts are or have been reduced to below the level of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is less than significant and accounted for in the MEIR analysis. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No Impact. No substantial direct or indirect environmental effects will result from the widening project. In general, the effects will be neutral to positive. Future noise conditions at the Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park are predicted to improve as a result of moving existing traffic on Poinsettia Lane further to the north. No hazardous materials or wastes would be generated or involved in project construction. Potential visual and air quality effects will not be substantially different from the current conditions at the South Carlsbad State Beach or Lakeshore Gardens Mobile Home Park. 11/15/99((P:'DEC832'jS-MND1S-MNDDOC)) . . . 49 I LSA Associates, Inc. I 7.0 LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES Mitigation Measure 6.IV.1 -Biological Resources I Prior to project initiation, the City shall obtain a Section 4(d) take authorization from the USFWS. As part of this take authorization, the City shall mitigate impacts to CSS at a 1:1 ratio within the Lake Calavera mitigation bank. I I Mitigation Measure 6 VIII 1- Hydrology During final design, detailed erosion control plans shall be prepared for approval by the Director, Department of Public Works. Approved detailed erosion control plans shall be included in the design plans and specifications provided to all contractors. I Mitigation Measure 6. VIII - Hydrology During construction, the Department of Public Works shall monitor the installation and maintenance of the erosion control plan to verify that all measures have been implemented and that runoff/sediment from I the project work area is being intercepted. 1 Mitigation Measure 6.XJ. 1- Noise As part of the contract specifications for the proposed project, the City of Carlsbad shall require that the I contractor implement the following measures. Applicable mitigation includes the following: Construction shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. and not permitted I on Sundays and federal holidays. All construction equipment shall be equipped with working manufacturer specified muffler system. I . Portable equipment shall be located as far as possible from the noise sensitive locations at the existing mobile home park I • Construction vehicle staging areas and equipment maintenance areas shall be located as far as possible from sensitive receptor locations at the existing mobile home park Mitigation Measure 6.XL2 - Noise I As part of the contract specifications for the proposed project, the City of Carlsbad shall require the contractor to implement the following measures to further reduce noise during construction and pile I driving activities Pre-drill each pile 15 feet prior to beginning the pile driving. Utilize steel H-piles. I . Utilize a vibratory hammer, except for the last few feet Allow the last few feet of each pile to be driven in order to ensure that bearing capacity has been reached. I . Notify the City Public Works Department and adjacent property owners five days prior to initiating noise activities i i/i5/99<<P:DEC832\J-MNDJS-MND.DOC,> 50 I I I I I I I I BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION I FOR THE POINSETTIA LANE BRIDGE WIDENING I October 5, 1999 I Preparedfor I ' City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009.1576 I Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. - I ' 1 Park Plaza, Suite 500 Irvine, California 92614 (949) 553-0666 LSA Project #DEC832 I Contract to I Under Dokken Engineering 3914 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite A153 I San Diego California 92123 I LSA Associates, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION' ...........................................................1 CONSULTATION TO DATE ..................I METHODS............................................................1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3 BIOLOGICAL SETTING 3 SENSITIVE SPECIES 6 EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 6 MITIGATION MEASURES ..............................................7 RECOMMENDATIONS ............ .................................... 7 REFERENCES ........................................................8 ATTACHMENTS A - SUMMARY OF SENSITIVE SPECIES B - VASCULAR PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED 10/5/99<<P:\DEC832\Biology\bioreport.wpd> ii I LSA Associates Inc I LIST OF FIGURES I PAGE 1 - Project Location ..................................................2 I 3 2 - Proposed Project ................................................4 - Coastal Sage Scrub Impacts of Proposed Project .....................5 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 10/5199(<P \DEC832\Biology\bioreport wpd)) 111 I I LSA Associates Inc I BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF PROPOSED POINSETTIA LANE BRIDGE WIDENING PROJECT EAST OF CARLSBAD I BOULEVARD IN CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION I The City of Carlsbad, California (City) proposes to widen the Poinsettia Lane bridge and approach, located between Carlsbad Boulevard and Avenida Encinas (see Figure I i). LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) has been retained by the City to prepare a biological 'evaluation of the project to document the site condition and evaluate potential impacts. I CONSULTATION TO DATE I .The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Natural Diversity Data Base, and a current California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Electronic Inventory (Skinner and Pavhk, 1994) search were used to compile a list of sensitive species potentially I occurring on the project site The City of Carlsbad met with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and I California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) on July 15, 1999, to discuss the proposed project's impacts to biological resources, the need for protocol gnatcatcher surveys, and mitigation requirements. Representatives from the USFWS and CDFG agreed that 1) the impacts are limited to coastal sage 'scrub (CSS) on the bridge em- bankments; 2) protocol surveys for gnatcatchers are not warranted given the limited size and isolation of the CSS habitat; and 3) mitigation of impacted CSS at a ratio of 1:1 ratio within the Lake Calavera mitigation bank is appropriate. For the purpose of I ' wildlife agency permitting, it was also agreed that the CSS impacts would be consid- ered a "de minimus exemption" as defined in the Section 4(d) take authorization. A de minimus exemption is applicable only when 1) less than one acre of habitat is lost; 2) I ' the habitat is not occupied by California gnatcatchers; 3) the loss of the habitat will not preclude the design of the reserve system; and 4) the habitat is of low value or medium value and is outside of identified preserve planning areas I METHODS LSA biologists visited the site on May 19, 1999, from 7:00 to 10:00 am It was cool with overcast sky during the Site visit, with a light breeze. The biologists surveyed the 1 ' entire project area on foot, and recorded all species present. Attachment B contains a listing of plant species observed within the project survey area. All animal species observed are listed in the text. Particular attention was focused on the presence or I . potential presence of endangered and threatened species, or suitable habitat for these species, based on the literature review and field assessment (Attachment A). Samples I . of unknown plant species were collected for identification. Vegetation communities within the project boundaries were characterized, measured I for dimensions, and mapped in the field on a 1 inch =40 feet map of the project area 10/5/99<> I I Al \ .V\ \\ \ q Trjjr •/.. .:. (Ii.' P.li t 3. •; I.-. (:J,) 11 I_Q S a f Encinitas Calif U 6/14/99(DEC832) 1 Scale in Feet L SA --- 0 1000 2000 Figure 1 Project Location LSA Associates, Inc. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is the widening of the Poinsettia Lane bridge and approaches from two to four lanes. The widened facility would include four 12 foot traffic lanes, two variable width bicycle lanes, two 5 foot sidewalks, and a raised center median. All widening improvements will occur on the north side of the existing roadway and bridge structure. No improvements or impacts (temporary or permanent) will occur on the south side embankments. All improvements can be accommodated within the existing right-of-way. Figure 2 depicts the proposed project BIOLOGICAL SETTING The project site (see Figure 3) is bounded by existing Poinsettia Lane to the south and consists of the northern road shoulder, manufactured slopes that serve to support the existing bridge and road, and flat sections of agricultural fields at the northern edge. The northern boundary crosses through the edges of the two agricultural fields. The bridge passes over the North County Transit District (NCTD) rail lines that divide the site. Vegetation LSA observed the following habitat types in the project area: coastal sage scrub (CSS), disced and cleared agricultural field, and ruderal habitat. The CSS occurs on the manufactured slopes north of existing Poinsettia Lane (see Figure 3). The flat area west of the NCTD railroad tracks is a frequently disced field that had no significant vegetative cover. The remainder of the project area consists of ruderal (weedy) habitat and a cleared dirt access road. The CSS, totaling 0.65 acre, is composed of mature scrub species dominated by coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis consanguinea) and coast goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii), and includes California sagebrush (Artemisia calfornica). The CSS occurs on the northern slopes of the existing bridge embankments divided by the rail lines, north of Poinsettia Lane. CSS was also observed on the embankment slope south of Poinsettia Lane, west of the rail lines. No other CSS was observed in the vicinity. The dominant plant species in the ruderal habitat are summer mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), black mustard (Brassica nigra), garland chrysanthemum (Chrysanthemum coronarium), and annual grasses. The dominant annual grasses are soft chess (Bromus madritensis rubens) and ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus). Portions of the ruderal habitat are densely populated with fascicled tarweed (Hemizoniafasciculata) and wild radish (Raphanus sativus). North of the project boundary, just east of the NCTD rail lines, vernal pool habitat has been documented, and was observed during the field survey (see Figure 3). The vernal pool habitat, previously identified by Dudek & Associates, Inc. (August 1995), is bordered by a chain link fence on the east and southern edges and the rail lines to the west. Approximately 12 San Diego button-celery (Eryngium aristulatum parishii), 10/5/99<<P:\DEC832BioIogy\bioreport.wpd>> 3 L I I I I I I P L H I H Li I H H 1 I I H 7 El I V. I 4. 0' - - --'V .. r •..i .V.• I- p".. . .•- - V Vt.. .•:--' -' V . * : I . * • -. - * . '-i V . i. . V V. - WrE S. NOW Cc 7 arm Ow 41 43 VACAIW -4-4 MV ~,PGUIMMIA LM ItIc" OF TAT WP Cr. vay or POINUTTIA Lug A A fe __ ks V 'V V -V V •V * V •' . V I V V Base Map Source: Dokken Engineering. 6IiIYYIULLöiZ) Scale in Feet mmwmmm" ___ LSA 0 50 100 4 . 7.. 2• - * -7. 4 .-, . .4... .4 .. .. 7 4 . -, ..:. --.•::: :- -. .4 .4 . ..- 4' 4 ii .1 •- - - - It !t z .:: . -.. OwSTJwxr . - - S ' STUfFED COMPETE La 9XISTOWS 0104 OF,41A, KO H - - —: y WW" JA LAW..0 . •-.\r -li 'I: 1 LEGEND CSS (0.21 acre) to be Preserved CSS (0.34 acre) o be impacted by Proposed Construction Base Map Source: Dokken Engineering. IFITL-fi.T*Ti 1 Scale in Feet I L S—A0 50 100 Figure 3 Coastal Sage Scrub Impacts of Proposed Project LSA Associates, Inc. a species listed as endangered (State and Federal), were observed in the southeastern edge of the vernal pool habitat, approximately 14 feet outside the project limits. No San Diego button-celery was observed within the project study boundary. Wildlife All animal species observed during the biological survey were recorded The species observed in the CSS habitat were one Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii), three Beechey ground squirrel (Sperm ophilus beecheyi), and one Audubon cottontail (Sylvilagus auduboni). A white-tailed kite (Elan us leucurus) was observed kiting (i.e., hovering) over the disced field area west of the NCTD rail lines. Two mallard ducks (Anas plalyryhynchos) flew over the project area during the survey. - SENSITIVE SPECIES A literature review was executed prior to conducting the site survey to assist in deter- mining the existence or potential occurrence of sensitive plant and animal species on the project site or in the vicinity of the site. Federal and State lists of sensitive species and current database reôords, including the California Natural Diversity Data Base (California Department of Fish and Game 1998) and the California Native Plant Soci- ety's Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (Skinner, et al. 1994), were examined. Attachment A provides a list of the sensitive species potentially present in the project vicinity, and discusses the potential for these species to occur on the site. Attachment B provides a list of plant species observed on- site at time of survey EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Vegetation CSS totaling 0.34 acre will be impacted to allow for widening the roadway and bridge, expanding a portion of the existing embankment slope, and the bridge support struc- tures. Other impacts will occur to the ruderal and disced habitats. The proposed construction in the project area will not impact the above mentioned vernal pool habi- tat, which is outside of the project impact area Given that the proposed improvements will be constructed on top of the existing embankments (Figure 2), there will be no effect on the hydrological regime within the study area. Because there will be no alteration of the area's hydrological regime, no indirect effects to vernal pool resources are expected from the proposed widening. Wildlife ; Wildlife inhabiting the CSS will lose a small amount of habitat as a result of this project. The CSS habitat on site does not have linkage to any CSS populations in the I O/5199<> 6 I . . . LSA Associates, Inc. I . vicinity. No wildlife dependent on CSS was observed, and the small size of the area, in conjunction with the isolation from other CSS communities, reduces the habitat value of the CSS. The coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptilapolioptila calfornica) I was not observed, although presence/absence surveys according to USFWS protocol were not completed. As described above, the USFWS has determined that protocol surveys are not required due to the limited size and isolation of the CSS habitat. I MITIGA TION MEASURES The project is located within the North County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP) area of the statewide Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) I . . program. The interim habitat loss (Special 4(d) Rule) process requires that all impacts. to CSS habitat be mitigated, regardless of the presence of California gnatcatchers. I The draft Habitat Management Plan for the City of Carlsbad proposes to establish the Lake Calavera property as a mitigation bank for City projects. The approximately 250 acre property is owned by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD). The bank will be able to mitigate impacts to CSS not occupied by the California gnatcatcher, chaparral, and non-native grasslands. Because the proposed Poinsettia Lane bridge widening project will impact CSS not occupied by the California gnatcatcher, the impact can be mitigated at Lake Calavera As discussed above, a meeting was held with representatives of USFWS and CDFG on I July 15, 1999, to discuss the project's impacts and mitigation requirements. Represen- tatives from the USFWS and CDFG agreed that mitigation of the 0.34 acre of impacted CSS habitat at a 1:1 ratio within the Lake Calavera mitigation bank is appropriate. For I the purpose of wildlife agency permitting, it was also agreed that the CSS impacts would be considered a "de minimus exemption" as defined in the Section 4(d) take authorization. This exemption is based on the low value, size, and location of the habitat, and the absence of California gnatcatchers: No additional mitigation measures I are required I RECOMMENDATIONS While no impacts to the adjacent vernal pool habitat that is beyond the northern edge I of the proposed project limits are expected, it would be prudent to protect the habitat from inadvertent damage with additional measures including the following I . Signage warning workers of the protected habitat and the need to avoid any impacts to the habitat. I • Placement of a physical barrier along the limit of work adjacent to the vernal pool habitat to prevent silt, weeds, or any spilled material from entering the vernal pool area. The nature and design of this barrier should be specified in I the erosion control plan and project specifications I 10/5199< 7 I LSA Associates, Inc. REFERENCES Skinner and Pâvlik. 1994 California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Electronic Inven- tory.. California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1999. California Department of I Fish and Game Natural Diversity Data Base. Dudek & Associates,, Inc.. 1995. Biological Resources Report for The Poinsettia I Property City of Carlsbad San Diego County, California. R. Mitchell Beauchamp.1 1986. A Flora of San Diego County, California. I I I I I • I I I I I . I 10/5/99(<P:DEC832'.BioIogy\bioreport.wpd>) - 8 I; - - - - - - .- - - - —. - - - Attachment A Summary of Sensitive Species LSA Associates, Inc. Activity/Blooming Status Species Habitat and Distribution Period Designation' Probability of Occurrence' SPECIES LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING AS THREATENED OR ENDANGERED VASCULAR PLANTS San Diego thorn mint Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, vernal Apr. Jun. Fed.: FT Low. Approximately 40 percent of the histori- Acanihornintha illicjfolia pools/clay. - State: CE cal occurrences in the state has been extir- CNPS lB pated The site has been previously disturbed Del Mar manzanita Chaparral maritime sandy. Dec Apr. Fed FE Absent No suitable habitat occurs on the site Arcioslaphylos glandulosa State none crass:fo!,a CNPS I B Encinitas baccharis Chaparral, maritime, sandstone Aug. - Nov. Fed.: FT Absent. No suitable habitat occurs on the site. Baccharis vanessae State: CE CNPS: I thread leaved brodiaea Chaparral (openings) cismontane woodland coastal scrub Mar. Jun Fed FT Low. Could occur in nearby vernal pool habi Brodiaeafi/fo/ia playas, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools/often clay. State: CE tat. Unlikely to occur in coastal scrub on the CNPS: I B project site due to previous grading. Orcutt's spineflower Chaparral (maritime), closed-coned coniferous forest, coastal Mar. - May Fed.: FE Absent. Known from only two occurrences in Chorizanihe orcuttiana scrub/sandy openings. . State: CE Encinitas and Point Loma. CNPS: I Del Mar mesa sand aster Coastal bluff scrub, chaparral (maritime, openings), coastal Apr. - Jun. Fed.: FT . Low. Openings in coastal scrub are not sandy. Core1/zrogynefi1agin fo1ia !injfo!ia scrub/ sandy. State: CE CNPS: 113 San Diego button celery Coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools/ mesic. Apr. - Jun. Fed.: FE Low. Not observed on the project site. Indi- Er:ng,uni arisiulatuin paris/Ill State CE viduals were observed to the north of the pro CNPS: 113 ject boundary. spreading navarretia - Chenopod scrub, marshes and swamps (shallow and freshwater), Apr. - Jun. Fed.: FT Absent. No suitable habitat on site. Navarretiafossalis playas, vernal pools. State: none - CNPS: I Nuttall's scrub oak Closed-cone coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal scrub (sandy Apr. - Jun. Fed.: FT Absent. Not observed. Quercus dunsosa soil), clay loam. State: CE CNPS: 113 I 015/99(< P:\DEC832\Biology\bioreport.wpd>) - - - - - - - - - - - - .- - - - - - - LSA Associates, Inc. Activity/Blooming Status Species Habitat and Distribution Period Designation' Probability of Occurrence' BIRDS California black rail (Lalerallus This species is found in salt marshes with dense pickleweed Year round - Fed: SOC Low. There is a low potential for the occur- jamaicensis colurniculus) cover, fresh-water and brackish marshes. State: CT rence of this species along the project area due to the lack of suitable habitat. Light-footed clapper rail (Rallies This species is found in salt marshes, and requires dense growth Year round Fed: FT Low. There is a low potential for the occur- longirosiris levipes) of either pickleweed or cordgrass for nesting and escape cover. State: CT rence of this species along the project area due to the lack of suitable habitat. western snowy plover (Charadrius This species is found in sandy beaches, salt pond levees, and ' Year round Fed: FT Low. There is a low potential for the occur- alexandrinus nivosus) alkali lake shores. State: SOC rence of this species along the project area due to the lack of suitable habitat. California least tern (Sterna This species is found along the coast, breeding on flat, sparsely Year round Fed: FE Low. There is a low potential for the occur- anlillarum brown:) vegetated areas. Found on sand beaches, alkali flats, or paved -. State: CE rence of this species along the project area due areas. to the lack of suitable habitat. Coastal California gnatcatcher Coastal sage scrub; occurs only in cismontane Southern Califor- Year-round Fed.: FT Low. There is a low potential for the occur- Polioplila cal jfornica californica nia and northwestern Baja California in low-lying foothills and State: CSC rence of this species along the project area due valleys. to the lack of suitable habitat. Belding's savannah sparrow Inhabits coastal salt marsh and nests in pickleweed in the vicin- Mid July to early April Fed: -- Low. There is a low potential for the occur- (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) ity of tidal flats. State: CE rence of this species along the project corridor due to the lack of suitable habitat. MAMMALS Pacific pocket mouse Historically occupied open habitats on sandy soils along the Mar. - Oct. Fed.: FE Low. Conditions on site are probably unsuit- Perognal/zus lonimenIbrispac(ficus coast from Los Angeles to the Mexican border. Now known State: CSC able for this species; native habitat on site is from only four sites in Orange and San Diego Cos. extremely limited, isolated, and highly de- graded. CRUSTACEANS Riverside fairy shrimp Known only from ephemeral pools in southern Orange and west- Spring Fed.: FE Low. None found during extensive focused Sireplocep/zalus woottoni ern Riverside and San Diego Counties. State: --- surveys, although a more common fairy shrimp, Branc/sinecta lindahli, was identified in the vernal pool adjacent to site. I O/5/99<<P:\DEC832\Biology\bioreport.wpd>> - - - - - - : .- LSA Associates, Inc. Activity/Blooming Status Species Habitat and Distribution Period Designation' Probability of Occurrence' SPECIES NOT LISTED NOR PROPOSED FOR LISTING VASCULAR PLANTS California adolphia Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, vernal Dec. - May Fed.: none Low to Moderate. previous disturbances on Adoip/tia caifornica . pools/clay. State: none site reduce the likelihood that this species oc- CNPS: 2 curs in the scrub habitat. San Diego sagewort This species is found in coastal scrub, chaparral, riparian forest July-September Fed: Absent. Not observed. Arlen: isia painteri and riparian woodland. Only known from San Diego County State: and Baja California. white coast ceanothus Chaparral. Dec. - Apr Fed.: SOC Absent. No suitable habitat occurs on the site. Ceanoihus verrucosus State: none - CNPS: 2 summer holly Chaparral. Apr. -Jun. Fed.: SOC Absent. No suitable habitat occurs on the site. Comarstaphylis diversifolia State: none divers jfoiia CNPS: 113 sea dahlia Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub. Mar. - May Fed.: none Moderate. Not observed. Coreopsis inarililna State: • none CNPS: 2 Palmer's grapplinghook Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland and clay. Mar. - May Fed.: Soc Absent. Not observed. 1-tarpogonella palmer! State: none CNPS: 2 Orcutt's hazardia Chaparral, coastal scrub/often clay. Aug. - Oct. Fed.: SOC Absent. Only known from one occurrence in Hazardia orculti! State: none California. CNPS: lB decumbent goldenbush - Chaparral, coastal scrub (sandy, disturbed areas). Apr. - Nov. Fed.: none Absent. Not observed. Isocoina menziesii decumbens State: none - CNPS: I Coulter's goldfields Marshes and swamps (coastal salt), vernal pools. Feb. - Jun. Fed.: SOC Absent. No suitable habitat on site. Lasthenia glabrala coulter! State: - none CNPS: I Nuttall's lotus Coastal dunes, coastal scrub (sandy). Mar. - Jun. Fed.: SOC Absent. Coastal scrub not in sandy soil. Lotus nuilallianus State: none CNPS: I I O/5/99<< P:\DEC832\Biology\bioreport.wpd>> — — — — —IM AM . -. — — - - No, — an — LS.4 Associates, Inc. Activity/Blooming Status Species Habitat and Distribution Period Designation' Probability of Occurrences coast woolly-heads Coastal dunes. . Apr. - Sep. Fed.: none Absent. No suitable habitat on site. Neinacaulis denudata denudata State: none CNPS: 2 short-lobed broom rape Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, coastal scrub (sandy soil). Apr. - Oct. Fed.: SOC Absent. Coastal scrub not in sandy soil. Orobanche parishii brachyloba State: none CNPS: I REPTILES San Diego horned lizard Wide variety of habitats including coastal sage scrub, grassland, Apr. - Jul. (with re- Fed.: ** . High. Reported from 2 locations within I Phrynosoma coronatu,n blainvillil riparian woodland; typically on or near loose sandy soils; duced activity Aug. - State: CSC mile of site, habitat on site appears suitable. coastal and inland areas from Ventura Co. to Baja Calif. Oct.) Orange-throated whiptail Floodplains and terraces with perennial plants and open areas Mar. - Jul. (with re- Fed.: ' Low. Not observed on site. Cneinidophorus hyperythrus be/dingi nearby; sea level to 3,000 feet elevation; inland and coastal val- duced activity Aug. - State: CSC leys of Riverside, Orange, and San Diego Cos. to Baja Calif. Oct.) BIRDS coastal cactus wren This species is found in tall cactus (Opunlia sp.). Year round Fed: none Low. There is a low potential for the occur- (Campylorynchus brunneicapillus State: SOC rence of this species along the project area due couesi) to the lack of suitable habitat. MAMMALS Northwestern San Diego pocket Sandy herbaceous areas, usually with rocks or coarse gravel. Nocturnal; active year Fed.: ** High. Reported from locations within 4 miles mouse Arid coastal areas in grassland, coastal scrub and chaparral. San round. State: CSC of site, habitat on site sppears suitable. Perognaihusfallaxfal/ax Diego, San Bernardino, Los angeles, and riverside cos. GASTROPODS Mimic tryonia This species inhabits coastal lagoons, estuaries and salt marshes Year round Fed: Low. Not observed. There is a low potential Tryonia imitator from Sonoma County south to San Diego County. Found only State: * for this species to occur within the project area in permanently submerged areas in a variety of sediment types; due to the lack of suitable habitat. able to withstand a wide range of salinities I 0/5/99((P:\DEC832\Biology\bioreport.wpd)> — — — an — .- - — W. Im am — - — — — — — LSA Associates, Inc. Activity/Blooming Status Species Habitat and Distribution Period Designation' Probability of Occurrence' INSECTS Monarch butterfly Winter roost sites extend along the coast from northern Year round. Fed: * Low. Not observed. There is a low potential, Danaus plexippus Mendocino to Baja California, Mexico. Roosts located in wind State: * for the occurrence of this species within the protected tree groves, with nectar and water sources nearby. project area due to the lack of roosting sites. l. For a description of status designations see Legend on following page. 2 Based on the following categories Absent Low Moderate High Observed I O/5199<<P:\DEC832\Biology\bioreport.wpd>> LSA Associates, inc. I . Legend: Status Designation I FE FEDERAL STATUS Federally listed as Endangered. FT Federally listed as Threatened. PE I . Federally proposed as Endangered. PT Federally proposed as Threatened. - Note: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has recently revised its classification system for candidate taxa (species, subspecies, and other taxonomic designations), as described below. I C . Certain species formerly designated as "Category 1" (Cl) and a few "Category 2" (C2) candidates for federal listing are now known as "Candidate." Refers to taxa for which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has sufficient information available to support a ' proposal to list as Endangered or Threatened. Issuance of the proposal(s) is anticipated, but precluded at this time. ** Species formerly designated as "Category l"(Cl) or "Category 2" (C2) candidates for federal listing; not designated presently as "Candidate" species, these Cl and C2 designations have I . been discontinued by the USFWS. The State now refers to these taxa as "Species of Con- cern." C3a Species considered to be extinct. I C3b Former federal candidate for listing as Endangered or Threatened, but which is not believed by the Service to represent a distinct taxa meeting the Endangered Species Act's definition of a "species". Species taxonomically invalid. C3c Former federal candidate for listing as Endangered or Threatened, but which has been deter- I mined by the Service to be too widespread and/or not threatened at this time. STATE STATUS CE State listed as Endangered. CT . State listed as Threatened. I CR CFP State listed as Rare. California Fully Protected. Species legally protected under special legislation enacted prior to the California Endangered Species Act. I . CCE CCT State candidate for listing as Endangered. State candidate for listing as Threatened. CSC California Species of Special Concern. These are taxa with pops. declining seriously or I otherwise CSA highly vulnerable to human developments. Species included on the California Department of Fish and Game's list of "Special Animals" of California. No specific designation assigned I' CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY LISTING . . IA - List of plants that are presumed extinct in California. I lB - List of plants that are considered by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) to be Rare, - Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere. 2 . List of plants that are considered by CNPS to be Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in Califor- nia, but more common elsewhere. 3 CNPS review list of plants suggested for consideration as Endangered but about which more information is needed. 4 CNPS watch list of plants of limited distribution whose status should be monitored I lO/5/99<<P:DEC832\Biology\bioreportwpd>> . I LSA Associates, Inc. I ATTACHMENT B VASCULAR PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED 1 The following plant species were observed on the project site by LSA biologists during the current study. * Introduced non-native species I ANGIOSPERMAE: DICOTYLEDONAE DICOT FLOWERING PLANTS Aizoaceae - Capel-weedfamily I *C.pobrotjj edulis Anacardiaceae S Sumacfamily I *Schinus molle Peruvian pepper tree Asteraceae Sunflower family I Arternisia cal[ornica California sagebrush I Baccharis pilularis consanguinea coyote bush melitensis tocalote i *Chrysanthemum coronarium garland chrysanthemum *Conyza bonariensis flax-leaved horseweed Gnaphaliumpalustre lowland cudweed Hemizoniafa.sciculata fascicled tarweed I Heterotheca grandfiora telegraph weed Isocoma menziesii coast goldenbush I *Xanthjum sirumarium Boraginaceae Boragefamily I Heliotropurn curassavicium alkali heliotrope a U Brassicaceae 0 *Brassica Mustardfamily nigra black mustard i *Hjrschfeldja incana summer mustard I *Raph,p. sativus wild radish I Chenopodiaceae goosefootfamily *A tr iplex semibaccata Australian saltbush I 10/5/99<<P:DEC832\BioIogy\bioreport.wpd>> 1. 0 0 O LSA Associates, Inc. ANGIOSPERMAE: DICOTYLEDONAE DICOT FLOWERING PLANTS *Salsola rragus Russian thistle Fabaceae Pea family - Lotus scoparius deerweed *Melilotus indica yellow sweet clover Geraniaceae Geranium family *Erod,um cicutarium red-stemmed filaree Malvaceae Mallow family Malvella leprosa alkali-mallow Plumbaginaceae Leadwortfamdy *Lzmonzum sp. statice Polygonaceae Buckwheat family *Rumex crisp us curly dock Primulaceae family Primrose family *Anagallis arvensis scarlet pimpernel MONOCOTYLEDONEAE MONOCOT FLOWERING PLANTS Poacae Grass family diandrus - ripgut brome *Bromus hordeaceous soft chess *Bromus madritensis rubens fortail chess Deschampsia danthonioides - annual hairgrass Distichits spicata coastal salt grass *Lolzum perenne multifiorum Italian ryegrass *pennlserum setaceum African fountain grass *phalaris aquatica Harding grass *Vulpia myuros rattail fescue 1O/5/99<<P:\DEC832\Bioiogybioreport.wpd>> I a- AGRA Earth & I ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS - Environmental, Inc. 16760W. Bernardo Dr. San Diego, CA 92127 Tel (619)487-2113 I . Fax (619) 487-2357 I I STRUCTURE FOUNDATION REPORT POINSETTIA LANE OVERHEAD WIDENING CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 1 I I Submitted To DOKKEN ENGINEERING 1 3914 MURPHY CANYON ROAD, SUITE A-153 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92123 I 1 I Submitted By: AGRA EARTH & ENVIRONMENTAL I . . 16760 WEST BERNARDO DRIVE SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92127-1904 I 1 I May 25, 1999 Job No. 9-252-102500 I I Recycled Paper I f4 AGRA ' r' i — AGRA Earth & ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS ' Environmental, Inc. 16760W. Bernardo Dr. IA . San Diego, CA 92127 I May , Tel (619) 487-2113 Job No. 9-252-102500 Fax (619) 487-2357 I Dokken Engineering 3914 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite A-153 . San Diego, California 92123 Attention: Mr. Kirk Bradbury Re: POINSETTIA LANE OVERHEAD WIDENING This letter transmits AGRA Earth & Environmental's revised structure foundation report for the Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening at the. San Diego Northern Railroad tracks in Carlsbad California. This investigation was conducted in general conformance with the scope of work Ipresented in AGRA's proposal dated October 29, 1998. I If you have any questions concerning this report, or need additional information, please call me at (619)487-2113. Yours truly, AGRA Earth & Environmental - c7James sá Stone, RGE 808 Principal Engineer i. .., I ... I - Recycled Paper Job No. 9-252-102500 Dokken Engineering Structure Foundation Report May 25, 1999 Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (I) 1' ., 1 . TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................... 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............. ....... .......................................... i I 1.1 GENERAL .......................................................I 1.2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ..............................................I I 1.3 SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................I 2.0 DATA ACQUISITION ............................................................3 1 2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION ......................................................3 2.2 LABORATORY TESTING .............................................3 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS ...................................................... 5 3.1 SURFACE CONDITIONS .................................................5 I 3.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................5 3.3 SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ...................................5 3.3.1 General ......................................................5 I 3.3.2 Regional Faulting ...............................................6 3.3.3 Local Faulting ...............................................6 - Liquefaction ....................................................6 I 3.3.4 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............... ............6 4.1 EARTHWORK .........................................................6 I 4.1.1 General ......................................................6 4.1.2 Settlements ...................................................8 4.2 BRIDGE FOUNDATIONS ......... .................... ............. ..... 8 1 4.2.1 General .......................................................8 4.2.2 Deep Foundations ...........................................8 4.2.2.1 Foundation Capacity and Settlement .....................8 I 4.2.2.2 Pile Driving ...........................................10 4.2.3 Other Design Parameters .........................................10 I . 4.2.4 Seismic Design Criteria .........................................11 4.2.5 Corrosion .....................................................11 I 5.0 CLOSURE ..................................................................11 5.1 GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW ............................................11 5.2 LIMITATIONS ..........................................................11 I REFERENCES ........................ ............................................ .13 I . .. . (AGRA ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Recycled Paper - Dokken Engineering Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report . May 25, 1999 I Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (ii) I I LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Vicinity Map ...........................................................2 Figure 2 - Location of Test Borings .................................................4 I Figure 3 - Fault Map ..............................................................7 LIST OF TABLES Table I - Tip Elevations for Class 45 and Class 70 Piles ............................. 9 I Table 2A - Lateral Capacities for Piles (Steel H Piles) ...............................9 Table 2B - Lateral Capacities for Piles (12-inch square Concrete Piles) ................ I APPENDICES I Appendix A - Test Boring Log ........... ................................ Appendix B - Laboratory Test Results ........................ .......... A-I to A-5 . ... B-I to B-3 Appendix C - Log of Test Borings ......................... .. .. (In Pocket) I I I I I I I I I I (4AGRA - - Recycled Paper ENGINEERING GLOBAl. SOLlJBlO.S Dokken Engineering Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report May 25, 1999 Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (iii) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This executive summary presents a brief description of the prominent conditions, conclusions and recommendations from the structure foundation investigation performed by AGRA Earth & Environmental for the Poinse ttia Lane Overhead Widening at the San Diego Northern Railroad right-of-way in Carlsbad, California. The bridge is located on Poinsettia Lane between Carlsbad Boulevard on the west and Avenida Encinas on the east. The existing bridge is a prestressed concrete, 3-span structure 142.2 feet long and 44.7 feet wide. It carries 2 traffic lanes, a bicycle lane and a sidewalk. Approach embankments were constructed originally across the entire Poinsettia Lane right-of-way and will accommodate abutments for the new construction. It is understood that the existing bridge may be widened, or a new bridge constructed adjacent to, but at a higher elevation than, the existing structure. The determination of the preferred alternative is part of the current project. The final configuration will carry 4, 12-foot wide traffic lanes; 2, 8-foot wide bicycle lanes; 2, 5-foot wide sidewalks and a raised center median. - The existing overhead configuration was achieved by placing about 22 to 35 feet of fill at the abutments. Between 2 and 4 feet of fill were placed along the railroad tracks, probably part of the original railroad construction. The fill at the abutments is underlain by terrace deposits which in turn are underlain by Santiago Formation. A 5-foot-thick layer of colluvium overlies the terrace deposits at the location of boring B-I along the railroad tracks. The fill consists of silty sand. The terrace deposits are comprised of medium dense to dense clayey and silty sandstones and sandy claystones. The underlying Santiago Formation consists of a very dense or hard silty sandstone I I and clayey siltstone Groundwater was encountered at depths of about 18 to more than 50 feet below the ground surface, corresponding to an elevation as high as about 30 feet above sea level Foundation plans have not been finalized. Due to the presence of deep fills at the abutments, and relatively compressible fill and colluvium at bent locations, deep foundations are considered most appropriate for support of the widening. Recommendations for Class 45 and Class 70 piles are contained in this report. Recommendations for alternative types of piles can be provided when foundation pans are finalized. The regional seismicity is not unique compared to the rest of southern California. A peak horizontal bedrock acceleration of 0.5g can be used in design. The depth to rock-like material is between 10 and 80 feet. The fill soils and formational materials at the overhead represent a corrosive environment based on Caltrans criteria. Concrete forstructural elements in contactwith the ground should incorporate Type II portland cement in the mix It is understood that no new fill will be placed. No special settlement period 1& needed. S AGRA ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Recycled Paper Dokken Engineering Structure Foundation Report Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening 1.0 INTRODUCTION Job No. 9-252-102500 May 25, 1999 Page (1) 1.1 GENERAL This report presents the results of the structure foundation investigation performed for the Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening at the San Diego Northern Railroad right-of-way in Carlsbad, California. The bridge is located on Poinsettia Lane between Carlsbad Boulevard on the west and Avenida Encinas on the east. (Figure 1) This investigation was conducted in general conformance with the scope of work presented in AGRA's proposal dated October 29, 1998. 1.2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The existing bridge is a prestressed concrete, 3-span structure 142.2 feet long and 44.7 feet wide. It carries 2 traffic lanes, a bicycle lane and a sidewalk. Approach embankments were constructed originally across the entire Poinsettia Lane right-of-way and will accommodate abutments for the new construction. It is understood that the existing bridge may be widened, or a new bridge constructed adjacent to, but at a higher elevation than, the existing structure. The determination of the preferred alternative is part of the current project. The final configuration will carry 4,12-foot wide traffic lanes; 2, 8-foot wide bicycle lanes; 2, 5-foot wide sidewalks and a raised center median. . . . 1.3 SCOPE OF WORK Initially, AEE made a site reconnaissance and reviewed published geologic and seismicity data as well as data from similar projects in the area. The structure foundation investigation included subsurface exploration, soil sampling, laboratory testing, engineering analyses and consultation with designers. Laboratory tests were performed to evaluate selected engineering properties and to provide a basis for geotechnical design recommendations. The data collected were analyzed to develop conclusions and recommendations regarding: Types, locations and engineering characteristics of foundation materials. Engineering seismology, of the project area, including liquefaction potential. Geotechnical factors potentially affecting the design of the proposed structure, including settlement and groundwater. Geotechnical design parameters for the most suitable methods of foundation support including allowable bearing capacities and resistance to lateral loads. Corrosivity of on-site soils with respect to steel and concrete. 6 Fill and backfill material, placement and compaction procedures . .. .. /At ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Recycled Paper .- A Approx. North -2- Dokken Engineering Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report : May 25, 1999 Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (3) 2.0 DATA ACQUISITION 2.1 FIELD EXPLORATION I The field exploration program consisted of 4 test borings drilled with hollow-stem augerequipment to depths of 40.5 to 66.3 feet. The locations of the borings are shown on Figure 2. I Relatively undisturbed samples wereobtained using a 2.5-inch I.D. sampler driven by a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. Standard penetration tests were performed using a 1.4-inch I.D. sampler driven by a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches in general conformance with ASTM D 1 1586. Disturbed samples were obtained from the standard penetration sampler. The drilling and sampling operations were performed under the supervision of an AGRA geologist who also logged the borings and obtained the samples for examination and laboratory testing. The logs of the test borings are contained in Appendix A. Soils are classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System described in-Appendix A. Rock is described according to its physical I characteristics. Existing groundwater conditions were noted during drilling. Upon completion of the field I exploration program, the borings were backfilled. V I 2.2 LABORATORY TESTING . 'V Laboratory tests were performed to evaluate selected engineering properties and to provide a basis for geotechnical design recommendations. The following tests were performed: Moisture Content and Dry Density V I Direct Shear V I Resistivity V V I . pH V Soluble Sulphate Content V V I . Chloride Ion Content V V V I . Grain size analyses . V Results of the moisture content and dry density determinations are shown on the boring log in I Appendix A. Remaining test results and brief descriptions of the test procedures are contained in Appendix B. I V V V /At V V V V V V ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Recycled Paper V V V V - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B-3 L' \ exist PoIrsItIo Low \ ,c /,00 \4 12# B - I PLAN Locations of Test Borings (current study) 1=40' POINSETTIA LANE OH WIDENING CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 2- LOCATION OF TEST BRINGS L& AGRA Frth P. PnvirnnmnfaI Dokken Engineering Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report , May 25, 1999 I Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening •. Page (5) I 3;0 SITE CONDITIONS •, * 31 SURFACE CONDITIONS I The Poinsettia Lane Overhead spans the San Diego Northern Railroad right-of-way between deep abutment fills on both the east and west ends. The fills were placed initially to accommodate future widening and extend beyond the current traveled way. Existing fill slopes range from about 1:144 I (vertical: horizontal) to 1:1 where the slopes are paved in front of the abutments. Minor amounts of fill have been placed along the railroad tracks. Surface vegetation consists of.sparse grass and I weeds. , 3.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS •. . The existing overhead configuration was, achieved by placing about 22 to 35 feet of fill at the abutments. Between 2 and-4 feet of fill were placed along the railroad tracks, probably part of the I original railroad construction. The fill at the abutments is underlain by terrace deposits which in turn are underlain, by Santiago FormatiOn The terrace deposits extend to depths of 37 to 44 feet. The Santiago Formation continues to the maximum depth explored, 66.3 feet. A 5-foot-thick layer of colluvium overlies the terrace deposits at the location of boring B-I along the railroad tracks. The top of the terrace depots was encountered at depths of 4 to 7 feet along the railroad tracks. The top of the Santiago Formation at bent locations is at depths of 25 to 31 feet below the ground surface'. I The fill consists of silty sand. The terrace deposits are composed of medium dense to dense clayey and silty sandstones and sandy claystones. The underlying Santiago Formation consists of a very dense or hard silty sandstone and clayey siltstone. . Groundwater was encountered at depths of about 18 to more than 50 feet below the ground surface, corresponding to an elevation as high as about 30 feet above sea level. Groundwater I levels can rise following periods of rainfall and during the wet season. , 3.3 SEISMOLOGY AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS . .•• , .. 3.3.1 General Southern California is known' to be seismically active, and much geologic and seismologic evidence of earthquake activity is available. The engineering seismology study for this project included review of regional and local faulting, the general tectonic regime, and existing historic data. . • ' , ' . . 1 •: I • • . •:: , . , (AGRA • ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Recycled Paper • ' , . • , . • . Dokken Engineering Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report May 25, 1999 Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (6) 3.3.2 Regional Faulting Earthquakes within about 60 miles of the site are capable of generating ground shaking of engineering significance to the structure. The site is located within the regional influence of several fault systems that are classified as active or potentially active. Figure 3 shows the proximity of the project to these faults. The most significant fault to the design of the project is the Newport- Inglewood-Rose Canyon/East Fault, about 5 miles to the west. The estimated peak acceleration during the maximum credible earthquake on this fault is estimated to be 0.5g. 3.3.3 Local Faulting The project site is not located within a currently established Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Study Zone. Consequently, trenching to locate active fault traces is not mandated. Surface fault rupture at the site during the design life of the structure is considered unlikely. However, the area is vulnerable to strong, earthquake-induced ground shaking during the design life of the project. Recommendations for seismic design in accordance with Caltrans procedures are contained in subsequent sections of this report. 3.3.4 Liquefaction Liquefaction can occur when loose, granular soils below the water table are subjected to vibratory motions such as those induced by earthquakes. The vibrations cause a rise in the pore water pressure. If the pressure rises high enough, the sand can lose strength and behave as a fluid. Liquefaction can result in substantial settlements or other disruptions at the ground surface. Dense formational materials were encountered at relatively shallow depths in all the borings, and groundwater levels are relatively deep. Therefore, the potential for liquefaction is considered slight. 40 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 EARTHWORK 4.1.1 General Minor earthwork associated with the widening and backfill adjacent to the bridge supports associated with construction of the foundation system are planned. All grading should be performed in conformance with Sections 6-3, 19-3, 19-5 and 19-6 of the Caltrans Standard Specifications. Consideration should be given to including the following amendments to the Standard Specifications in the project special provisions: A. Section 19-3.06 - Ponding or jetting of backfill should not be permitted. (4AGRA - ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS - Recycled Paper 117* 116 34• \ k\, 60 miles -, \ \\\ \ 0 4km '. \ •\ 6 32 48 32 S POINSETTIA LANE OH WIDENING CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA " I FIGURE 3-FAULT MAP \. — AGRA prv!mnmentaI -7- Dokken Engineering Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report May 25, 1999 Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (8) B. Section 19-3.065 - Pervious backfill should have a gradation which will minimize migration of fines from the adjacent soil. Alternatively, a non-woven geotextile (e.g. Supac 4NP or Nilex N45) can be placed between pervious backfill and adjacent soil. Prefabricated drainage material (e.g. Tensar DC 1100) can be used behind abutments, wing walls and retaining walls in lieu of pervious backfill. Backfil' placed behind abutment walls, retaining walls and wingwalls should be non-expansive. The extent and placement of the non-expansive soils should conform to Caltrans Standard Specifications 19-5.03. Non-expansive soils should have an expansion index (El) less than 30. Fill slopes probably will be composed of granular soils which are susceptible to surface erosion. Slope paving should be incorporated where 1:1 Y2 slopes are used. Consideration should be given to the use of jute mesh or other surface treatments to those slopes not being. paved to minimize soil transport by run-off. All roadway drainage should be directed to appropriate collection and discharge facilities so that run-off does not flow over the tops of slopes. 4.1.2 Settlements I Only minor fills will be placed for final grading, and ground surface settlements are expected to be minimal. Settlements should be complete shortly after placement of the fill. No special settlement period is necessary I 42 BRIDGE FOUNDATIONS I 4.2 .1 General It is understood that the existing overhead structure is supported on driven piles. A potential for significant settlement exists if the new structure is supported on shallow foundations in existing fill. Cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) piles can be considered for support of the widening. However, caving occurred during drilling of the test borings, and groundwater levels are within anticipated pile depths. Therefore, driven piles appear most appropriate for foundation support. 4.2.2 Deep Foundations . 4.2.2.1 Foundation CaDacitv and Settlement I Driven piles will develop support by friction along the sides of the piles in the dense and hard formational materials at depth. Pile tip elevations for Class 45 piles at abutments and Class 70 I piles at abutments and bents are presented in Table 1. Ultimate uplift capacities of the piles are also shown in Table 1. Actual uplift capacity for design may be limited by structural considerations as outlined in Caltrans' Bridge Design Specifications, Section 4.6.4.3. If pile spacing is at least 3 I times the maximum dimension of the pile, no reduction in axial capacity for group effects is considered necessary. I . (41AGRA ENGINEERING GLOBAL BOLVTONS Recycled Paper - Dokken Engineering Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report May 25, 1999 Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (9) TABLE I TIP ELEVATIONS FOR CLASS 45 AND CLASS 70 PILES Location Design Nominal Resistance Design Tip Elevation Specified Loading (feet) Tip Compression Tension (Service) Elevation (feet) Abutment 1 70 tons 280 kips 140 kips 30 (1); 30 (2); 30 (5) 30 45 tons 180 kips 90 kips 37 (1); 37 (2); 37 (5) 37 Bent 2 70 tons 280 kips 140 kips 10 (1); 10 (2); 10 (5) 10 Bent 3 70 tons 280 kips 140 kips 10(1); 10(2); 10 (5) 10 Abutment 4 70 tons 280 kips 140 kips 26 (1); 26 (2); 26 (5) 26 45 tons 180 kips 90 kips 30 (1); 30(2); 30 (5) 30 (1) Compression; (2) Tension; (3) Lateral Loads -Table 2; (4) Scour Potential -was not evaluated for this study; (5) Liquefaction - very unlikely. Lateral loads causing % inch of deflection at the ground surface for 12-inch square piles are provided in Table 2. Lateral pile capacity can be assumed to increase linearly with deflection up to a maximum deflection of 1 inch. If deflections greater than 1 inch are anticipated, lateral capacities should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. TABLE 2A LATERAL CAPACITIES FOR PILES (Steel H Piles) Pile Location Lateral Load at Y4 inch Deflection Free Fixed Strong Weak Strong Weak Abutment 1 2.5 kips 1.4 kips 6.6 kips 4.1 kips Bent 2 7.9 kips 4.1 kips 23.8 kips 13.2 kips Bent 3 9.7 kips 5.9 kips 25.0 kips 15.2 kips Abutment 4 T 2.5 kips 1.4 kips 6.5 kips 4.1 kips (AGRA ENGINEERING GL09L SOLUTIONS Recycled Paper Dokken Engineering Structure Foundation Report Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening I TABLE 2A LATERAL CAPACITIES FOR PILES (12-Inch Square Concrete Piles) Job No. 9-252-102500 May 25, 1999 Page (10) Pile Location Lateral Load at % inch Deflection Free Fixed Abutment 1 1.7 kips 4.7 kips Bent 2 . . .4.9 kips 15.6 kips Bent 3 6.8 kips 17.3 kips Abutment 4 1.7 kips 4.6 kips Pile settlement is expected to be on the order of % inch and should be essentially complete shortly I after completion of the widening superstructure. 4.2.2.2 Pile Driving I Predrilling through embankments should be performed in accordance with Caltrans Standard Specifications Section 47-1.06. Each pile should be evaluated during driving to determine if I adequate capacity has been achieved. For practical purposes, final set should equal or exceed that required for the recommended allowable load capacity based on Caltrans Standard Specifications. If specified tip elevation is reached without satisfying the Caltrans formula, pile I driving should continue until final set is attained. Piles which encounter practical driving refusal above the specified tip elevation may be acceptable, depending on pile and hammer behavior during driving. The geotechnical, engineer should observe pile driving and evaluate each pile on I a case-by-case basis. It is recommended that a pile hammer which develops a minimum energy of 40,000 foot-pounds per blow be used. . . . I Drilling in the terrace deposits for pile installation at the abutments and bents does not appear needed unless cobbles or extensive gravel lenses are encountered. Calculations indicate that the piles will have to be driven 10 to 14 feet into Santiago Formation at the bents in order to develop I required vertical capacities. Drilling likely will be needed to advance the piles to specified tip elevations at the bents. Drilled holes in the Santiago Formation should not have diameters larger than the minimum pile, dimension and should not extend closer than 5 feet to specified tip I elevations. I 4.2.3 Other Design Parameters . ., Average geotechnical parameters for bridge design are I The wet density can be taken as 130 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) (AGRA ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Recycled Paper , .,. . .. . Dokken Engineering : Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report May 25, 1999 Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening S Page (11) u The modulus of subgrade reaction under vertical loads for soils at abutments can • : be taken as 150 pounds per cubic inch. Active and passive equivalent fluid pressures of 35 pcf and 350 pd, respectively, can be used for wingwall design. : S 4.2.4 Seismic Design Criteria As discussed in Section 3.3.5, a peak horizontal bedrock acceleration of 0.5g should be used for this site. For design purposes, the. depth to rock-like material can be considered to be 10 to 80 feet. 4.2.5 Corrosion Laboratory test results indicate that the soils underlying the site form a slightly to moderatley corrosive environment with respect to steel and reinforced concrete. Type II portland cement is recommended for use in concrete in contact with the ground. Adequate concrete cover over reinforcing steel should be provided in accordance with good construction practices and design standards 5.0 CLOSURE S .5 5.1 GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW : : •:• : :: : : The foundation and earthwork plans and pertinent sections of the project specifications should be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer to evaluate conformance with the intent of the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report. If project conditions orfinal design vary from those described in this report, AGRA should : be contacted regarding the applicability of, and the necessity for any revisions to, the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report. Removal of unsuitable sails, placement and compaction of structural fill, and excavations for footings should be observed by the geotechnical engineer and engineering geologist of record. Appropriate field tests should be performed to provide quality control and quality assurance for structural fills and related earthwork elements. . 5.2 LIMITATIONS: . .. S . This report is based on the project as described and the information obtained from the test borings at the approximate locations indicated on Figure 2. The findings are based on the results of the field, laboratory and office investigations, combined with interpolation and extrapolation of conditions between and beyond the boring locations and reflect interpretation of the limited direct evidence obtained. AGRA ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Recycled Paper S S S Dokken Engineering 0 Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report May 25, 1999 I Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (12), I .:. •0 , I This report has been prepared for the use of Dokken Engineering in design of the described project. It may not contain sufficient information for other users or other purposes. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical practice in the San Diego County area. It may not contain sufficient information for other projects or uses. - AGRA Earth & Environmental' • 1 "m es J. one, GE No. 808 ''' Brian'H. Reck, CEG 1792 Principal Engineer 0 , Senior Geologist I i Distribution: (6) client J. GE I q. I I 0 i 0 '.'H -: ;0• ,,,, 0; , I. ':' •0, I .1:... 0 • 0 0• /Al ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Recycled Paper 0 •, 0 0 Dokken Engineering Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report May 25, 1999 I Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening .' .. . Page (13) REFERENCES 1 i. Blake, T.F., 1992, EQFAULT Ver. 1.01, Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Digitized California Faults, Computer Program- 2. 2. of California Department Transportation, 1989, Bridge Design Aids Manual. 13. . , 1986, Bridge Design Details Manual. , 1987, Bridge Design Specifications Manual. I 1986, Bridge Memo to Designers Manual. 1995, Highway Design Manual. 7. . S 1995, Standard Specifications. . . California Department of Transportation, Division of Structures, As-Built Plans, Woodley I Street Overhead, December 1960(?). . . . . .;. . California Division of Mines and Geology, Weber, F.H., 1982, Recent Slope Failures, and Related Geology of the North-Central Coastal Area, San Diego County, California. io: California Division of Mines and Geology, Weber, F.H., 1963; Geology and Mineral I Resources of San Diego County, California, County Report 3. - Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1982, NAVFAC DM-7.2, Foundations and Earth Structures. S S Jennings, C.W., 1992, Preliminary Fault Activity Map of.Califomia, 'Compilation and I . Interpretation: California Division of Mines and Geology, DMG Open-File Report 92-03. ... ' 'S.. . . Mualchin L., California Seismic Hazard Detail Index Map, dated July 1996. i . -' .,,, , ' ' : ' . '5• .5. • . S S ('AGRA Recycled Paper S ' • . 5 ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOWIO5 • ' ' S • . .S • • 5 .. 5 '5 1 No. 252-102500 Job Doen Engineering Structure Foundation Report May 25, 1999 Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (14) I Seed, H.B. and Idriss, l.M., 1982, Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During I Earthquakes: EERI Monograph Series, Berkeley, California. I Slemmons, D.B., 1982, Determination of Design Microzonation, Proceeding of Third International Earthquake Magnitudes for Microzonation Conference, Vol. 1. I I I I H . I 'I I S I S . •.. S S . u .. I .,... S.. I . .. S.... I (AGRA ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Recycled Paper Blows I Foot* Granular Blows I Foot* Cohesive 0-5 Very Loose 0-5 Very Soft 6-10 Loose 6-10 Soft 11-30 Medium Dense 11-30 Medium Stiff 31-50 Dense 31-50 Stiff 50 Very Dense 50 Very Stiff >70 Hard * using 140-lb. hammer with 30" drop = 350 ft-lb/blow LEGEND OF BORING Bulk Sample Driven Sampl later Level Material Change PIP -WaL Bottom of the Boring Project: Poinsettia Lane Bridge Job. No. 9-252-102500 5/25/99 Page A-i UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SAC P't H CH MH OL CL ML SM SP SW GC GM GP GW Sands with Fines Clean Sands ;ravels with Fine Clean Gravels Highly Silts and Clays Silts and Clays >12% Fines <5% Fines >12% Fines <5% Fines an,cl Liquid Limit >50% Liquid Limit <50% Sands - more than 50% of coarse Gravels - more than 50% of coarse oils fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve Fine Grained boils . (more than 50% is smaller than No. 200 sieve) Coarse Grained Soils (more than 50% is larger than No. 200 sieve) iIuiuiiui I1..i.r4111 'IIaPAiII: LABORATORY CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA GW and SW: Cu = D /D10 greater than 4 for GW, greater than 6 for SW Cc = D30 x D10 between 1 and 3 GP and SP: Clean gravel or sand not meeting requirements for GW and SW GM and SM: Atterberg Limit below "A-LINE" or P1 less than 4 GC and SC: Atterberg Limit above "A-LINE", or P1 greater than 4 ilt or L I Fine Medium' Coarse I Fine Coarse I Cobble I Boulder I Clay Sand Sand Sand Gravel Gravel I I Sieve200 40 10 4 3/4' 12 I I Size I Classification of earth materials is based on field inspection and should not be construed to imply laboratory analysis unless so stated MATERIAL SYMBOLS Asphalt Calcaerous Sandstone Concrete Marl Conglomerate _______ Limestone Sandstone / I I A / Il Dolostone Silty Sandstone VM Breccia Clayey Sandstone Volcanic Ash/Tuff Siltstone Metamorphic Rock Sandy Siltstone Quartzite = Cla L' yV Extrusive Igneous Roc Claystone/Shale I+71 F + +1 Intrusive Igneous Rock CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION FOR SOILS A,,..,1..,., +,s 4k DAnfrtinn Tact "NSR" indicates NO SAMPLE RECOVERY I I Recycled Paper i' AGRA ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Project: Poinsettia Lane Bridge Job. No. 9-252-102500 5/25/99 - Page A-2 TEST BORING LOG BORING: B—I Sheet lofi Date(s) Drilled: 5/5/99 Surface Elevation (ft): 49 Total Depth of Boring (ft): 40.5 Hole Diameter (in):8 3/4" Rig Type: Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor: C & K Drilling Depth to Groundwater (ft): 18.5 Boring Completion: Backfilled on 5/5/99 Caving: up to 21 ft after pulling auger out M_ FILL: b bag 1 'Tan fine SILTY SAND. - - -/ \ Dark broniine CLAYEY SAND. CL COLLUVIUM: 101 24.9 15 2.5 2 71Dark brown SILTY CLAY with minute voids. - TERRACE DEPOSITS: - 10 Mottled gray-green poorly indurated fine CLAYEY 29 1.4 3 - - SANDSTONE. Gray-green poorly indurated fine to medium SILTY SANDSTONE. 15 114 15.2 31 2.5 4 z 20 38 1.4 5 ...Trace of fine GRAVEL at 21 ft. 63 1.4 6 25 . - SANTIAGO FORMATION: Tan-white slightly indurated fine to medium SILTY SANDSTONE. 30 7116" 1.4 7 C. - 35 79/6" 1.4 8 .__ - - - - - - - - - - Gray-white CLAYEY SILTSTONE, poorly bedded. AA IAN -4-A— -9--- 40 ...Red-gray-brown below 38 ft. - - - NOTES: 45 Total depth 40.5 feet. Sampler driven by 140-pound hammer falling from 30" height. 50 - Elevation obtained from on-site survey. 55 11 _________________________________________________ LU Lu . . 0 . - ' E. coo . j c d . a) — ' ce E =.0 c THIS BORING LOG SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE TIME AND LOCATION INDICATED. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. Logged by: TMP I Recycled Paper (AGRA ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS Project: Poinsettia Lane Bridge Job. No. 9-252-102500 5/25/99 Page A-3 TEST BORING LOG BORING: B-2 Sheet 1 of 1 Date(s) Drilled: 5/5/99 Surface Elevation (ft): 50 Total Depth of Boring (ft): 41 Hole Diameter (in):8 3/4" Rig Type: Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor: C & K Drilling Depth to Groundwater (ft): 20.5 Boring Completion: Backfihled on 5/5/99 Caving: up to 23.5 ft after pulling auger ou bag I - - - . S Sc FILL: ' Yellow-brown fine SILTY SAND. . Dãk bronniGrAVE?SAN Qiihcattered 7 5 - \ COBBLES. - 15' 1.4 2 TERRACE DEPOSITS: - Red-brown to orange-brown poorly indurated fine - CLAYEY SANDSTONE, with minute voids and 110 9.6 29 2.5 3 10 - magnesium-oxide staining. - - - - Gray-green SANDY CLAYSTONE with minute voids. - - . Gray-green and orange-brown poorly indurated fine • SILTY SANDSTONE. 15 -:--- 32 1.4 bag 4 5 20 100 23.9 39 2.5 6 Z S : 25 - 69 1.4 7 30.. 67/6' 1.4 8 . SANTIAGO FORMATION: - Gray-white slightly indurated fine to medium SILTY 35 - :— SANDSTONE.. 71 1.4 9 Tan poorly bedded CLAYEY SILTSTONE. - 40 ...Red gray-brown below 38 ft. 50/4" 1.4 10 - NOTES: 45 Refusal on hard rock at 41 feet. Sampler driven by 140-pound hammer falling from 50 30" height. Elevation obtained from on-site survey. .55 U) u ' 93 0 . O L, 2 r-.af o2 . E d . E - a o • E = .2 041 THIS BORING LOG SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE TIME AND LOCATION INDICATED. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. Logged by: TMP I . I Recycled Paper (AGRA ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOLUTIONS ri Dokken Engineering Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report - May 25, 1999 I Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (B-I) APPENDIX B I .. LABORATORY TESTING The laboratory test program was designed to fit the specific needs of this project and was limited I to testing on-site materials. A brief description of each type of test is presented below. Results are given on the following pages and on the boring logs in Appendix A. I Moisture contents and dry densities were determined for numerous relatively undisturbed samples. Results are listed on the boring logs in Appendix A and the Log of Test Borings. I In addition to the in-situ field tests, strength characteristics of the subsurface soils were determined in the laboratory by direct shear tests performed on 3 relatively undisturbed samples. Specimens were submerged and tested at 3 normal loads. All samples were tested in a 2.5-inch 1 I.D. circular shear box, using a controlled displacement rate. The direct shear tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 3080. Results are listed in Table B-I. I Corrosivity tests were performed on I sample. The pH and minimum electrical resistivity were determined in general accordance with California Test 643. Soluble Sulphate content was determined in accordance with California Test 417. Total chloride ion content was determined in I accordance with California Test 532. Results gee contained in Table B-2. I The grain size distribution of 1 sample was determined in general accordance with ASTM 0 422. Results are plotted on Page B-3. I Soil samples not tested are now stored in our laboratory for future reference and analysis, if needed. Unless notified to the contrary, all samples will be disposed of 30 days from the date of this report. i I . I I . H I . . (Ak AGRA - - ENGINEERING GLOBAL SOIUTONS Recycled Paper - - Dokken Engineering Job No. 9-252-102500 Structure Foundation Report May 25, 1999 I Poinsettia Lane Overhead Widening Page (13-2) TABLE B-I I SUMMARY OF DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS (ASTM D 3080-72) I I I - I TABLE B-2 SUMMARY OF CORROSIVITY I TEST RESULTS (California Test Nos. 417, 422 and 643) Boring No. I Peak Shear Shear Stress at Sample No. Normal Stress Stress 0.25 in Displacement (psf) (psf) (psf) 1125 1526 712 B-114 2160 2729 1619 3195 3571 2461 1125 1221 842 B-312 2160 2303 1720 3195 2867 2387 1125 888 731 B-3/6 2160 1647 1443 3195 2432 2128 Boring No. I Soluble Sample No. pH Resistivity Sulfate Chloride (ohm-cm) (ppm) (ppm) B-4/2 7.3 2990 1 C DIST COUNTY ROUTE TOTAL T MILES SHEET TOTAL PcT NO. SHEETS cr FE U0730 U \ REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER CL U PLANS APPROVAL DATE AGRA B-2 FRI Earth & Environmental, Inc. B-1 PLAN / \ SCALE 1"= 10 NOTES: (I) 1) GROUNDWATER ENCOUNTERED IN BORINGS B- 1 B- 2 AND B-3AT ELEVATIONS 3O5 295 AND 260 FEET 0 Fr - UOiD3cfl C I 2.) ELEVATIONS BASED ON L O0 Z BORINGS LOGGED BY TED PRIMAS, STAFF GEOLOGIST AND - --' CARLTON E. NE1TLETON, J u -c I_- R4 B3 \ FRI 8-4 BENCHMARK - 2-1/4' CDOT BR. DISK 5 CL Cn CO ! \ 2 U 16 ELJ LL H Ct 03 ll--oo - - - _1i5O - - - _l2OO - POINSh1IIALANE - _i2-5O _% 13+00 °° T4- r / - 0 ca CL 0 FF LL - 0 a) C o Lo o o o A c E _ 0 00 ELEVATION D 0 CO ELEVATION <2 . < a- B-4 i ,. 80 ° I ° - c i i i --7 (I) L S ELEV. II ou ELEV.77 1. FILL Yellow-brown tine to medium SILTY SAND 4EJI FILL Light brown fine to medium SILTY SAND W CC cn E UO!T0301I I ______________________________________________________________________________________________ 1100+12. 5 I I / 70 BULK . I BULK2 70 1.! 100+12.5 -- I - I I- Ck.O - Z - W -I LOco Z 60, 1C14 10- 100+11.4 , I -± __________________________________________________ 1100+12.5 ' -- I 1 60 CL F1_0_0+72.5 __ ± 1100+12.5, -- I -. I ' 1100+11.4 -- - I Li 1=1 UL:i TERRACE DEPOSITS: Red-brown, fine to medium <2 '-' ' 5 B-i .. SILTY SANDSTONE, poorly indurated ELEV. 50 ° _______ ...color change to dark red-brown EO 50 1100+11.4 - I 1 _.._Jit _____________ELEV.49_d1) ___ 1100+12.5 -- I -- I 50 - ______ell Lii FILLY II b f SILTY SNr _____ 3" = . eow- rown, me , ! 8- FILL: Tan, f SILTY ... color change to light brown III ~0_ (nm afm <M 0 U , LLJ a- Ile Dark brown, fine CLAYEY SAND scattered COBBLES F1_00_+T2_.5_, Dark brown, fine CLAYEY SAND 0 E!J E1 LII <*' [!!} 1100+11.4 -- - i TERRACE DEPOSITS: Red-brown to orange-brown, fine CLAYEY SANDSTONE, poorly indurated, with minute 1100+1 2.5 -- - COLLUVIUM: Dark brown SILTY CLAY with minute voids 1100+11.4 -- I -1 voids and magnesium-oxide staining _________TERRACE DEPOSITS: Mottled gray green, fine CLAYEY ' I0O+I 2.5 - I -- I TERRACE DEPOSITS: Red-brown, fine to medium 40 Lj 40 color change to red-yellow 1100+125 -- I - I Gray-green SANDY CLAYSTONE with minute voids 1100+1 1.4 -- - SANDSTONE, poorly indurated SILTY SANDSTONE, poorly indurated Cn of 1100+! 25 -- - Gray-green and orange-brown, fine SILTY SANDSTONE,- Gray green, fine to medium SILTY SANDSTONE, poorly -- 1100+11.4 -- -- poorly indurated _______ _______ indurated Yellow-brown to orange-brown, fine to coarse, 0 _j IOU 0 5-5-99 30 1100+114 -- I I BULK ITOO+!25 11 1100+125 -- I -- SANDSTONE, poorly indurated 30 E] El El M ffl ___ SANTIAGO FORMATION: Light brown, fine to medium 1100+1 2.5, -- -- 1100+1 1.4 - - I ...trace of fine GRAVEL Mottled gray-brown, fine to medium SILTY SANDSTONE, . - 1100+ I 2.5 - - SILTY SANDSTONE, slightly indurated 1100+11.4 -- I -- J poorly indurated >... - _Y, 1109+11.4 -- -- 1100+1 1.4 - I -- i SANTIAGO FORMATION: Tan-white, fine to medium 5-&99 SANTIAGO FORMATION: Gray-white, fine to medium ° 20 1100+11.4 -- -j SILTY SANDSTONE, slightly indurated 1100+ 1.4 -- SILTY SANDSTONE interbedded with CLAYEY SILTSTONE, slightIly indurate 20 W z 8 White-gray SANDY SILTSTONE, slightly indurated SANTIAGO FORMATION: Gray-white, fine to medium 1100+ 1 1.4 Light gray-brown CLAYEY SILTSTONE with scattered 1100+11 4 - I - I SILTY SANDSTONE, slightly indurated - [100+11 4 - I - i fine SANDSTONE lenses, slightly indurated EiI LI EI El - 5-5-99 1100+ I 1.4 - I -- I Tan CLAYEY SILTSTONE, poorly bedded 1100+11. 4 - -- -- Gray-white CLAYEY SILTSTONE, poorly bedded ...color change to red-gray-brown = color change to red-gray-brown 1100+11 .4 -- -- I -o - . , PROFILE _______________. .color changeto red gray-brown ... ________________________________________________________ 10 1100+114 'i - -- 1 1100+114 - -- -- I NO GROUNDWATER - HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 10' , 5599 ENCOUNTERED VERTICAL SCALE: 1 = 10' - 'V..- 0 0 STATIONING 11+00 11+50 12+00 12+50 13+00 co -t' C - 0 c . I I I I 200 (QPOINSE1TIA LANE) . JOB No. 9-252-1025 PLATE I ZLL 0 POINSETTIA ui BRIDGE NO. Cn 0 bi DRAWN BY J.B. DePOORTER PREPARED FOR -THE 0 Cn -4- X 0 - 19' ? DESIGN OVERSIGHT FIELD INVESTIGATOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA PROJECT ENGINEER POST MILE < - - LOG OF TEST BORINGS SIGN OFF DATE CHECK BY JAMES STONE DATE MAY 5, 1999 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION I I REVISION DATES (PRELIMINARY STAGE ONLY) SHEET OF ORIGINAL SCALE IN INCHES DISREGARD PRINTS BEARING FOR REDUCED PLANS o 1 2 3 EARLIER REVISION 6/1/99 L_ SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT (ALL DATABASES SEARCHEDTO .1 -MILE) PROPERTY CLIENT INFORMATION INFORMATION Project Name/Ref #: Not Provided AGRA EarthEnvironmenta Carlsbad, CA 92008 AGRA EarthEnvironmental-San D Latitude/Longitude: (33.102634, 117.315246) 16760 West Bernardo Dr. I San Diego, CA 92127 Site Distribution Summary Agency! Database - Type of Records '' Ole 1.4 m,lv 7.'410 12 mile 12zo I mde A) Databases searched to 1 mile: US EPA NPL National Priority Ust 0 0 0 0 US EPA CORRACTS RCRA Corrective Actions and associated TSD (TSD) 0 0 0 0 STATE SPL State equivalent priority list 0 0 0 0 B) Databases searched to 1 mile: STATE SCL State equivalent CERCLIS list 0 0 0 0 US EPA CERCLIS I Sites currently or formerly under review by US EPA NFRAP 0 0 0 0 US EPA TSD RCRA permitted treatment, storage, disposal facilities 0 0 0 0 STATE LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 0 0 2 1 STATE SWLF Permitted as solid waste landfills, incinerators, or transfer stations 0 0 0 0 C) Databases searched to 1 mile: STATE UST Registered underground storage tanks 0 0 5 2 STATE AST Registered aboveground storage tanks 0 0 0 0 D) Databases searched to 1 mile: US EPA ERNS Emergency Response Notification System of spills 0 0 0 0 US EPA LG GEN RCRA registered large generators of hazardous waste 0 0 0 0 US EPA SM GEN RCRA registered small generators of hazardous waste 1 0 1 1 STATE SPILLS State spills list 0 0 0 0 For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767-0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report June 7, 1999 Vesion2.6.1 Page ll This report meets the ASTM standard E.1 527 for standard federal and state government database research in a Phase I environmental site assessment. A (.) indicates a distance not searched because it exceeds these ASTM search parameters. LIMITATION OF UABHJTY. Customer proceeds at its own risk in choosing to rely on VISTA services; in whole or in part, prior to proceeding with any transaction. VISTA cannot be an insurer of the accuracy of the information, errors occurring in conversion of data or for customer's use of data: VISTA and itsãffuiated conipanes, officers,agents,employees and independent contractors cannot be held liable for accuracy, storage, delivery, loss or expense suffered by customer resulting directly or indirectly from any information nrovided by VISTA. NOTES pggggg .04 For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 .767 - 0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report June 7, 1999 SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT (ALL DATABASES SEARCHED TO 1 MILE) SITE INVENTORY ' PROPERTY AND ADJACENT AREA ADJACEN AREA MAP - A - - B - C (within 118 mile) ID I- - WSTAID HOUR PHOTO AN , 4061006 1 1O4O AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA 92009 0.1OM - - - x A B C D SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA MAP (within 114-; 1/2 mile) l) ID VISTA 10 Li. flU.l j CARLSBAD VOLVO 3976054 - - - - 2 6830 AVENIDA ENCINAS 0.26M] x x CARLSBAD, CA 92009 CARLSBAD VOLVO 1004905 - - - - - - - - 2 683O AVENIDA ENCINAS 0.26M1 x CARLSBAD, CA 92009 N HOEHN HONDA 197360 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 6800 AVENIDA ENCINAS 0.30H N CARLSBAD, CA 92009 HOEHN HONDA 1004904 - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 6800 AVENIDA ENCINAS 0.30 Ml x - CARLSBAD, CA 92009 N HOEHN HONDA 10788290 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 6800 AVENIDA ENCINAS 0.30 Ml x CARLSBAD, CA 92009 HOEHN HONDA 11498274 - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 6800 AVENIDA ENCINAS 0.3060 x CARLSBAD, CA 92009 N - X = search criteria; • = lag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767- 0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report: June 7, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page 17 SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA MAP (within 1/2- 1 mile) ID I- V7STAD D1 STANCE mul Lu LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT 5297263 - 4 2017 HY 101 0.73 MI x NA ENCINITAS, CA 92024 THOMPSON ROSE CO INC 423226 5 7440 BATIQUITOS DR 0.77 MI X — E CARLSBAD, CA 92009 DENNIS FLOWERS 1587469 - - - - 6 0.93 MI 8000 POINSETTIA LANE END x 1XI — CARLSBAD, CA 92008 X = search criteria; • = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767 - 0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report June 7, 1999 Vetson2.6.1 Page 18 A'5B 'T UNMAPPED, SITES An S S :ww; I7STAIDZU(flñ I- SOUTH CARLSBAD STATE BEACH 1238666 - - - HIGHWAY 101 X CARLSBAD, CA 92008 CECIL J. HANNAN 4016137 - - - - 2433-707TH ST x ENCINITAS, CA 92024 H G FENTON 4020671 - - - - - 16251 BRANDY CANYON S X SAN DIEGO, CA 92073 USN-FLEET ASW TRAINING CENTER 4012201 - - - - HARBOR HARBOR OR X SAN DIEGO, CA 92147 THE FIELDSTONE COMPANY RANCHO SAN DIEGO 124449 VIA RANCHO SAN DIEGO X X SAN DIEGO, CA 92199 S SOUTHLAND CORP 7499536 8355 OTAY MESA RD S X SAN DIEGO, CA MURRAY CANYON BURNSITE 5813398 - - - - - - - TB 53-D4 ADJ MURRAY RIDGE PK S X SAN DIEGO, CA SOUTH BAY LAND OUTFALL PHASE 1 6830853 ALIGNMENT ALONG MONUMENT RD TO PACIF X SAN DIEGO, CA S S SAN DIEGO CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSIO 6830526 - - - - SAN DIEGO, CA S S BELL J HIGH SLF/SWEETWATER II 6829882 - - - - - - SAN DIEGO, CA X SAN DIEGO, CA 6612668 - - - - - X - - - - SOLEDAD (SAN TMLR) 4041717 SOLEDAD MOUNTAIN MOUNTAIN X SAN DIEGO, CA 92073 5 X search criteria; • = tag-along (beyond search criteria). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800-767 .0403. Report ID: 595501901 - S. Date of Report June 7 1999 Vet&'0n2.6.1 Page #9 SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT (ALL DATABASES SEARCHED TO 1 MILE) DETAILS PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT AREA (within 118 mile) NiSTA Address: - - - - HOUR PHOTO AN 7040 AVENIDA ENCINAS ; cARLSBAD,.CA.92009 VISTA ID 4061006 map DistancelDireciion: Plotted.as. Point KLKR-maII uenerator I KC#555 lEPAID: I CAD983665282 I I Agency Address: .4I%H0UR PHOTO 7040AVEMDA ENCINAS UNIT 106 CARLSBAD, CA 92009 Generator Class: - Genefates 100 kgimonth but less than 1000 *gimonth of non.awtely hazardous waste SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA Uithih I18.l 1414ae) No Records Found SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 114. 112 mile) \flSTA CARLSBAD VOLVO - 'VISTA IDE. j976054 Map ID Address: 6830 AVENIDA ENCINAS DistancelDirection: 026 MI! N CARLSBAD, CA 92009 -- -....... Ploed 2 as: Point ui u U4 I • QLdle unuerqruunu Storaqe I anK i bKUN 1 b1 I EPNAgency ID: I N/A Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORTED Tanks Removed: NOTREPORTED Tank ID: 001 Tank Status: AC11VEIIN SERViCE Tank Contents: PETROLEUM Leak Monitoring: Agency Code (1 Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): 1000 (GALLONS) Tank Material: OTHER DESCRIPTIONS RCRA•SmGen. RCRA-Small Generator! SRC# 5596 I EPA ID: I CAD981983323 lAgency Address: CARLSBAD VOLVO 6830AVEMDA ENCIfiL4S CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Generator Class: Generates 100 kgimonih but less than 1000*9./month of non'awtey hazardous waste VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767 .0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report: June 7, 1999 Veison2.6.1 Page 110 I" SFES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1/4 112 mile) CONT I ,VISTA 1 V1ST'AjD# 7004905 Map ID Address '6830A ENCINAS Disianc&Direction 026 MI! N CARLSBAD, CA 92009 Pktieda,s Point 2 [STATE UST - State Underground Storage Tank! SRC# 5835 Agency ID: H20071 Agency Address: SAMEAS ABOVE Underground Tanks: 1 Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORTED Tanks Removed: NOTREPORTED Tank ID: TO= Tank Status: ACT! yE/IN SER VICE Tank Contents: WASTE OIL Leak Monitoring: NOTAVAJIABLE Tank Age: 12 Tank Piping: SUCTION Tank Size (Units): 1000 (GALLONS) Tank Material: DOUBLE WALLED OR SINGLE WALLED "VISTA S*:, HOEHNHONDA 6800-AVENIDA ENCINAS .CARLSADCM2009 *ID: 19736O. MâpiD DistarIce/Direcnon 0 30 MI! N Pftéta~: I i L US I scare unaerqrouna StoragE Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: Tank ID: TOM Tank Contents: PETROLEUM Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Size (Units): 1000 (GALLONS) 1512 IEPNAgencyID: I SSAMEAS ABOVE NOT REPORTED NOT REPOR TED Tank Status: ACTiVE/IN SERVICE Leak Monitoring: Agency Code () Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Material: FIBERGLASS Address HOEHNH.ONDA ;S •. ,. •. 6800 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARADCA,9OO9:.. S:. .. VAlD# 5•S 17 d04904• MaPID. Distance!Direction 030 MI! N PIolled,as.. .t. in, t ub i - rae unuergrouna scoragi Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: Tank ID: TOM Tank Contents: WASTE OIL Tank Age: 11 Tank Size (Units): 1000 (GALLONS) I SAMEAS ABOVE NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Tank Status Leak Monitoring: Tank Piping: Tank Material: NOTAVAILABLE GRAVIIY DOUBLE WALLED OR SINGLE WALLED ISTA. ''MEHUM Address 6800 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD 'CA-120 10788290 S5S MID 2 Distance !Direction 030 MWN as: j JaIMIC LU I -Ztdte LedKlHq unuerqrounu 310rage I flK I SKI.ff bl1. l.u'NAgency IL): IN/A Agency Address: HOEHN HONDA 68OOAVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA 92018 Facility ID: 9UT3700 Leak Date: 07/22198 Leak Report Date: 07/22198 Site Assessment Began: . 08/14/98 Leak Detection Method: TANK CL OSURE VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767- 0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report: June 7, 1999 Ve,on2.6.1 Pageill SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 114 112 mile) CONT Leak Cause: Leak Source: UNKNOWN UNKNOWN Substance: WASTE OIL Remediation Event: LEAK STOPPED BY: CLOSE TANKLEAK STOP DATE 07/22/98 Remediation Status: PRELIMINARY SITEASSESSAIENT UNDER WA V Media Affected: SOIL ONLY Description I Comment: PRIORITY. LOWPOTENTL4L HEAL TN/SAFElY/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EXISTSAFTER INVE5TIGBENEFICIAL: NO BENEFICIAL GROUNDWATER USELOCASENUM' H19612'001,B4S/NNUM'904,40,GWDEPTH: 13' VIVA'.' Address HOEHNHONDA , 6800 AVENIDA ENCINAS cAALsBAD,:cA92009 : ' : V1STAID#: 11498214 : MàpID Distance/Direcuon 030 MI/N ilôitedas: .IJiIC LUI - atdtC I-CM11LI unuei Agency Address: Facility ID: Leak Report Date: Site Assessment Plan Submitted: Substance: Remediation Event: Remediation Status: Media Affected: Region! District: Description I Comment: Description I Comment: Description! Comment: lank, Z1KWF04I ILF'R/Agencylu: HOEHN HONDA 6800AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA 92018 9UT3700 07/22)98 08/27/98 WASTE OIL EXCA VA TE AND DISPOSE PRELIMINARY SITE ASSESSMENT WORKPLAAIREQ SOIL ONLY SAND/EGO REGION COUNTY. SAN DIEGO CROSS STREET: PAL OM4RAIRPORTRD REVIEWDAT&09/28/98 .VISTA.>:.:: Address :RATANRAMS.: '. : : .•VlrAID#. '1260600 4038485:ID 3 Distance/Direction 034 Ml / S PlOtte da áiit Ifl UU - IdLe uiiueiqruunu tuiage ldflftl ct.r 101i I UNAgency ID: INIA Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE Underground Tanks: 7 Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORTED Tanks Removed: NOTREPORTED, Tank ID: TOO1U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: UNLEADED r.s Leak Monitoring: Agency Code Q Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): 8000 (GALLONS) Tank Material: OTHER DESCRIPTIONS Tank ID: TOOIU Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: UNKNOWN Leak Monitoring: Agency Cede () Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): NOT REPORTED (GALLONS) Tank Material: OTHER DESCRIPTiONS Tank ID: 71001U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: UNKNOWN Leak Monitoring: Agency Code () Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): NOTREPORTED (GALLONS) Tank Material: OTHER DESCRIPTIONS VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 .800 - 761 -0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report June 7, 1999 Ve,son2.6.1 Page #12 VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 767- 0403. Report ID: 595501901 Verson 2.6.1 Date of Report: June 1, 1999 Page 113 Tank ID: TOO1U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: PETROLEUM Leak Monitoring: Agency Code Q Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): NOTREPORTED (GALLONS) Tank Material: OTHER DESCRIPTIONS Tank ID: TOOIU Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: PETROLEUM Leak Monitoring: Agency Code () Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): NOTREPORTED (GALLONS) Tank Material: OTHER DESCRIPTIONS Tank ID: TOOIU Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: OTHER Leak Monitoring: Agency Code () Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): 3003 (GALLONS) Tank Material: OTHER DESCRIPTIONS Tank ID: TOOIU Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: OTHER Leak Monitoring: Ageniy Code () Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): 8101 (GALLONS) Tank Material: OTHER DESCRIPTIONS [STATEUST. State Underground Storage Tank! SRC#5835 I AgencyID: I H171 55 Agency Address: RA TAN RAMS 7204 PONTODR CARLSBAD, CA 92009 Underground Tanks: 7 Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORTED Tanks Removed: NOTREPORTED Tank IN T001U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: DIESEL Leak Monitoring: NOTAVAILABLE Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): 8101 (GALLONS) Tank Material: UNKNOWN Tank ID: 7002U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: DIESEL Leak Monitoring: NOTAVAILABLE Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): 3003 (GALLONS) Tank Material: UNKNOWN Tank ID: T003U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: WASTE OIL Leak Monitoring: NOTAVAILABLE Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): NOTREPORTED (GALLONS) Tank Material: UNKNOWN Tank ID: 7004U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: WASTE OIL Leak Monitoring: NOTAVAILABLE Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): NOTREPORTED(GALLONS) Tank Material: UNKNOWN Tank IN T005U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: OTHER Leak Monitoring: NOTAVAILABLE Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): NOTREPORTED (GALLONS) Tank Material: UNKNOWN Tank ID: T006U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: OTHER Leak Monitoring: NOTAVAILABLE Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): NOTREPORTED (GALLONS) Tank Material: UNKNOWN F SITES IN ThE SURROUNDING AREA (within 1!41I2mile)'CONT I Tank IN T007U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: UNLEADED GAS Leak Monitoring: NOTAVAJLABLE Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): 8000 (GALLONS) Tank Material: DOUBLE WALLED OR SINGLE WALLED I SITES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA (within 112 1 mile) LEUCADIACOUNTY WATERDISTRICT: VISTA ID#: .2 5297263 MàpID Address 2011 HY 101 Distance/Direction 073 MI! NA 2ENINffAsCA9o24./.:;. ... .; I?IL UI • IQIC UIIU Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: Tank ID: Tank Contents: Tank Age: Tank Size (Units): uunu Moragei dflK I bKug Il SAMEAS ABOVE NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED 7001U Tank Status: DIESEL Leak Monitoring: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: 280 (GALLONS) Tank Material: CLOSED REMOVED NOTAVAILABLE UNKNOWN DOUBLE WALLED OR SINGLE WALLED vIST THOMPSQNROSECOlNC '• . •. . . :423226 pID Address 7440 BATIQIJITOS DR Disiance/Direction 077 Ml! E CARLSBAD . 02 09": .5 Plóuëdas:T : Point •, ;.. . .i-mun • lL,IU%-WauI uenerwri 3Ktff 33b I LI'R ID: I CA092368854 Agency Address: THOMPSON ROSE COMPANYINC 7440 BA TIQUITOS DR. CARLSBAD, CA 92008 Generator Class: Genejates 100 kg./n7onth but less than 1000 kg/month of non.awtelyhazaidous waste 1 DENNIS FLOWERS S.. •• 1 r .1587469 Tj 5 1 Address 4600T ; INS &LANE END Distance/Direction 093 MI! E tARBADCA92oo8 2 .6 . Point'. . . u, i u, - taw unuerqwunu widge ianubKt.9101Z I LiRJAgency ID: IN/A Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: NOTREPORTED Tanks Removed: NOTREPORTED Tank ID: TOO1U Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Tank Contents: OTHER Leak Monitoring: . Agency Code () Tank Age: NOTREPORTED Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Size (Units): 10000 (GALLONS) . Tank Material: OTHER DESCRIPTIONS STATE LUST - State Leaking Underground Storage Tank! SRC# 5497 I EPA/Agency ID: IN/A Agency Address: DENNIS FLOWERS 8000 POINSE771A LN CARLSBAD, CA 92007 Facility ID: 9UT1764 Leak Report Date: 07/25/90 Site Assessment Plan Submitted: 08/09/90 Contamination Confirmed Date: 07125/90 Case Closed Date: 05/11/93 VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767.0403. Report ID: 595501901 . Date of Report June 7, 1999 Vemon 2.6.1 Page #14 I I Substance: DIESEL Remediation Status: CASE CL USED Media Affected: SOIL ONLY Region! District: SAN DIEGO REGION Description! Comment: COUNTY SAN DIEGO Description / Comment: REVIEWDATE:11/30/93 [STATE LUST - State Leaking Underground Storage Tank! SRC# 5671 I EPA/Agency ID: IN/A Agency Address: Facility ID: Leak Date: DENNIS FLOWERS 8000 POINSETTIA LN CARLSBAD, CA 92007 91JT1764 07/12/90 Leak Report Date: 07/25190 Contamination Confirmed Date: 07/25/90 Case Closed Date: 05/11/93 Leak Detection Method: OTHER MEANS Leak Cause: Leak Source: UNKNOWN UNKNOWN Substance: DIESEL Remediation Event: LEAK STOPPED BY: OTHERMEANSLEAK STOP DATE 07112190ENFORCEMENT NONE TAKEN Remediation Status: CASE CL USED Media Affected: SOIL ONLY Description! Comment: PRIORITY. LU WLOCASENUFk H99083001BASINNUM9o4.51.GWDEPTH: [STATE UST -State Underground Storage Tank / SRC# 5835 I Agency ID: I H99083 Agency Address: Underground Tanks: Aboveground Tanks: Tanks Removed: DENNIS FLOWERS 8000 POINSE17I4 LN END CARLSBAD, CA 92008 1 NOTREPORTED NOTREPORTED Tank ID: Tank Contents: Tank Age: Tank Size (Units): TOOIU DIESEL NOTREPORTED 10000 (GALLONS) Tank Status: CLOSED REMOVED Leak Monitoring: NOTA VA/tABLE - Tank Piping: UNKNOWN Tank Material: UNKNOWN 4 gggagg- VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767- 0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report: June 7, 1999 Version 2.6.1 Page #15 i I I UNMAPPED SITES I VISTA Address THE FIELDSTONECOMPANYRAWCHOSANDiEGO VIA RANCHO SAN DIEGO VISTA ID#: 124449 SAN DIEGO, CA 92199 STATE SWLF - Solid Waste Landfill I SRC# 5689 Agency ID: 37-CR-0101 Agency Address: NCCOSC SAN DIEGO NCCOSC SAN DIEGO SAN DIEGO, CA Facility Type: SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY Facility Status: CLOSURE PENDING Permit Status: UNDER REVIEW VISTA,MURRAYCANYONBURNSITE : VISTAID#f 58133981: Address TB 53 D4 ADJ MURRAY RIDGE PK SAN DIEGO, CA - STATE SWLF - Solid Waste Landfill I SRC# 5689 Agency ID: 37-CR-0051 Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE Facility Type: SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY Facility Status: CLOSED Permit Status: OTHER vistA-:. SOOT BAY1. ND:OUTFALLPHASE1;::. : VISTAIID#: :6830853 '.Address-..,'.'.AUGNMENT ALONG MONUMENT RD TO PACIF SAN DIEGO, STATE SWLF - Solid Waste Landfill I SRC# 5689 Agency ID: 31-AA-0914 Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE Facility Type: TREATMENT PROCESSING Facility Status: PROPOSED Permit Status: PROPOSED/PLANNED viSTA'- SAN.D1EG0-CONVENTIONCENTERIEXPANSiO: VISTA lD#: :J1 683O526 Address SAN DIEGO, CA - STATE SWLF - Solid Waste Landfill I SRC# 5689 Agency ID: 37-CR.0098 Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE Facility Type: SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY Facility Status: OTHER Permit Status: UNDER REVIEW [VISTA '- BELL-JR'HlGH1SLFlSWEETWATERU: •::; VISTA ID#: '- 6829882 jAddress SAN DIEGO, CA STATE SWLF . Solid Waste Landfill I SRC# 5689 Agency ID: 37-C R-0088 Agency Address: SAMEASABOVE Facility Type: SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY Facility Status: OTHER Permit Status: UNDER REVIEW VISTA address includes enhanced city and ZIP. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 .800.767 -0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report: June 7, 1999 Verswn2.6.1 Page 076 I 1 SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT (ALL DATABASES SEARCHED. TO 1 MILE) DESCRIPTION OF DATABASES-SEARCHED I A) DATABASES SEARCHED TO 1 MILE NPL VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mite of your property. .I SRC#: 5789 The agency release date for NPL was April, 1999. -- The National Priorities List (NPL) is the EPA's database of uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites identified for priority remedial actions under the Superfund program. A site must meet or surpass a predetermined I hazard ranking system score, be chosen as a states top priority site, or meet three specific criteria set jointly by the US Dept of Health and Human Services and the US EPA in order to become an NPL site. SPL VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. I SRC#: 5455 The agency release date for Calsites Database: Annual Workplan Sites was October, 1998. The CalSites database contains information on properties (or 'sites') in California where hazardous substances have been released, or where the potential for such a release exists. This database is used primarily by the Department of I Toxic Substances Control to evaluate and track activities at sites that may have been affected by the release of hazardous substances. Also see SPLISCL: Annual Work Plan (AWP) sites are deassifled as SPL and all the other ' sites are classified as SCL CORRACTS VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#: 5596 The agency release date for HWDMSIRCRIS was February, 1999. I The EPA maintains this database of RCRA facilities which are undergoing 'corrective action'. A 'corrective action order' is issued pursuant to RCRA Section 3008 (h) when there has been a release of hazardous waste or constituents into the environment from a RCRA facility. Corrective actions may be required beyond the facility's boundary and can be required regardless of when the release occurred, even if it predates RCRA. B) DATABASES SEARCHED 10.1 MILE -. . .... : . I CERCUS VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#: 5790 The agency release date for CERCUS was March, 1999. The CERCLIS List contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List(NPL) and sites which I . are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. The information on each site includes a history of all pre-remedial, remedial, removal and community relations activiies or events at the site, financial funding information for the events, and unrestricted enforcement activities. I NFRAP VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#: 5791 The agency release date for CERCLIS-NFRAP was March, 1999. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an initial investigation, no contamination was found, contamination was I removed quickly, or the contamination was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. I For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 167 - 0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report June 7, 1999 I I 'I SCL VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. 1 SRC#: 5454 The agency release date for Calsites Database: All Sites except Annual Woilpian Sites (Incl. ASPIS) was October, 1998. The CalSites database contains information on properties (or 'sites') in California where hazardous substances have been released, or where the potential for such a release exists. This database is used primarily by the Department of I Toxic Substances Control to evaluate and track activities at sites that may have been affected by the release of hazardous substances. Also see SPlJ5CL: Annual Work Plan (AWP) sites are cleassifled as SPL and all the other sites are classified as SCL. I The CalSites database includes both known and potential sites. Two- thirds of these sites have been classified, based on available information, as needing 'No Further Action' (NFA) by the Department of Toxic Substances Control. The remaining sites are in various stages of review and remediation to determine if a problem exists at the site. Several hundred sites have been remediated and are considered certified. Some of these sites may be in long term operation .I and maintenance. RCRA.TSD VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. I SRC#: 5596 The agency release date for lIWDMS!RCRIS was February, 1999. The EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal. The RCRA Facilities database is a compilation by the EPA of facilities I . which report generation, storage, transportation, treatment or disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA TSDs are facilities which treat, store and/or dispose of hazardous waste. SWLF VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. I SRC#: 5689 The agency release date for Ca Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) was December, 1998. This database is provided by the Integrated Waste Management Board. The agency may be contacted at 916-255-4021. The California Solid Waste Information System (SWlS) database consists of both open as well as closed and inactive - solid waste disposal facilities and transfer stations pursuant to the Solid Waste Management and Resource Recovery Act of 1972, Government Code Section 2.66790(b). Generally, the California Integrated Waste Management Board I learns of locations of disposal facilities through permit applications and from local enforcement agencies. LUST VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. 1' SRC#: 5366 The agency release date for Region #7-Colorado River Basin Leaking Underground Storage Tank Listing was August. 1998. - This database is provided by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region #7. The agency may be contacted at I LUST 760-346-7491. VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#: 5497 The agency release date for Lust Information System (LUSTIS) was October, 1998. ,I This database is provided by the California Environmental Protection Agency. The agency may be contacted at: 916.445-6532. - I LUST VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of ydur property. SRC#: 5670 The agency release date for Lahontan Region LUST List was January, 1999. This database is provided by the Lahontan Region Six South Lake Tahoe The agency may be contacted at 1 530-542-5400. For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 -800-767- 0403. 1 Report ID 595501901 Date of Report. June 7,1999 Page if 78 1 0 I LUST VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. I SRC#: 5671. The agency release date for Region #9 Leaking Underground Storage Tank List was December, 1998. This database is provided by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region #9. The agency may be contacted at 619-467-2980. I DATABASES SEARCHED TO 1 MILE UST's VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#: 1612 The agency release date for Underground Storage Tank Registrations Database was January, 1994. This database is provided by the State Water Resources Control Board, Office of Underground Storage Tanks. The agency may be contacted at: 916-227.4364; Caution-Many states do not require registration of heating oil tanks, especially those used for residential purposes. UST's VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#: 5835 The agency release date for San Diego County Environmental Health Services Database-UST Sites was January, 1999. This database is provided by the San Diego County Department of Health Services. The agency may be contacted at: 619-338-2268; Caution-Many states do not require registration of heating oil tanks, especially those used for residential purposes. AST's VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#: 5513 The agency release date for Aboveground Storage Tank Database was December, 1998. This database is provided by the State Water Resources Control Board. The agency may be contacted at: 916-227-4364. ... :_.,; ...................... . .. 0) DATABASES SEARCHED 101 MILE ERNS VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#: 5598 The agency release date for was December, 1998. The Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS) is 'a national database containing records from October 1986 to the release date above and is used to collect information for reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. The database contains information from spill reports made to federal authorities including the EPA. the US Coast Guard, the National Response Center and the Department of Transportation. The ERNS hotline number is (202) 260-2342. RCRA-LgGen VISTA conducts a database search to identify all sites within 1 mile of your property. SRC#: 5596 The agency release date for HWDMS/RCRIS was February, 1999. The EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Program identifies and tracks hazardous waste from the point of generation to the point of disposal. The RCRA Facilities database is compilation by the EPA of facilities which report generation, storage, transportation, treatment or disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA Large Generators are facilities which generate at least 1000 kg/month of non-acutely hazardous waste (or 1 kg./month of acutely hazardous waste). For more information call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at 1 - 800 - 761- 0403. Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report: June 7, 1999 Ve,on2.6.1 Page #19 1 iv SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT (ALL DATABASES SEARCHED TO I MILE) Map of Sites within I Mile 11 I> >1 < , CT. 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Category: Subject Site Da-abases Searched to: Single Sites Multiple Sites Highways anc Major Roads _--- Roads Railroa Rivers or Water Bodies - - Utilities A I ml. NPL, SPL, CORRACTS (TSD) B 1/2 mi. U U CERCLIS\ NFRAP, TSD, LUST, SWLF, SCL C D 1/4mi. 1/8mi. 0 0 UST ERNS, GENERATORS For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403 Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report: June 7, 1999 Page #3 I 1 I., I I 1 I I I I I, I I . 1• I 1 I I SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT (ALL ATABASES SEARCHED TO 1 LE) Map of Sites within 1/4 Mile - Se GULF OF SANT ãATINA\ ogonberry Dr I \'•.. \ \ ç X \ \ I -S Miles Category: A B C D Subject Site Databases Searched to: I mi. 1/2 ml. 1/4 mi. 1/8 mi. Single Sites A 0 Multiple Sites \ 0 Highways and Major Roads NPL, SPL, CERCLIS\ UST ERNS, -- Roads CORRACTS NFRAP, GENERATORS Railroads (TSD) TSD, LUST. :- Rivers or Water Bodies SWLF, SCL - - Utilities For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767. 0403 Report ID: 595501901 Date of Report: June 7, 1999 Page #4 SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT (ALL DATABASES SEARCHED TO I MILE). Street: Map For More Information Call VISTA Information Solutions, Inc. at I - 800 - 767 - 0403 E?port D: 595501901 Date of Report: June 7, 1999 Page #6 I I I I I 'I I I I I ' I I I I I I I POINSETTIA LANE BRIDGE WII)ENINGIIMPROVEM.ENT PROJECT NOISE ANALYSIS November 15, 1999 Preparedfor. City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc 1 Park Plaza, Suite 500 Irvine, California 92614 (949) 553-0666 LSA Project lDEC832 Under Contract to: Dokken Engineering 3914 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite 4153 San Diego, California 92123 ISA Associates, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE. 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................... 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................1 3.0 SETTING ......................................................4 3.1 NOISE DEFINITIONS .................................4 3.2 NOISE SCALES ......................................4 3.3 REGULATORY BACKGROUND .........................5 4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ........................................7 4.1 PREVIOUS NOISE STUDIES ................................7 4.2 FIELD MEASUREMENTS ..............................9 5.0 IMPACTS ........9 5.1 CONSTRUCTION .........................................11 5.2 OPERATIONS ..........................................12 6.0 MITIGATION MEASURES .....................................16 6.1 CONSTRUCTION .....................................16 6.2 OPERATIONS ......................................... 16 7.0 REFERENCES ..................................................17 ATTACHMENTS A - SOUND32 NOISE MODELING OF FUTURE NO BUILD SCENARIO B - SOUND32 NOISE MODELING OF FUTURE BUILD ALTERNATIVES C - FHWA HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL OUTPUTS I 1/5/99((P:\DEC832Noise\dec832.nsewpcD> II I ISA Associates, Inc. I LIST OF FIGURES PAGE 1 - Regional Location Map .........................................2 I 2 - Proposed Project ..................................................3 3 - Noise Monitoring Locations ...................................10 4 - Noise Modeling Locations .....................................14 I LIST OF TABLES I PAGE I A - Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) .....................................5 B - Existing Noise Level Measurements .................................9 C - 24 Hour CNEL Traffic Noise Levels Distance to Roadway Centerline, Feet .. 12 i D - Peak Hour Noise Levels at Sensitive Receptor Locations ................15 I I I. I I i I I I I I 1/5/99<(P:\DEC832\Noise\1ec832.nse.wpd)> I A Associates, Inc. 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Carlsbad proposes to widen the Poinsettia Lane bridge, in the City of Carlsbad, California The widening/improvements will assist in increasing the level of service at this bridge to accommodate growth in the project area. It will also help to improve Interstate-5'(I-5) access along Poinsettia Lane. The following analysis provides, a discussion of the fundamentals of sound; examines State and City noise guidelines and policies; reviews noise levels at representative existing sensitive receptor locations; evaluates potential noise impacts associated with the proposed project; and provides mitigation for identified significant impacts. Modeled traffic noise levels are based upon vehicle data provided by Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers, May 1999. This evaluation was prepared in conformance with local standards, and utilizes procedures and methodologies as specified by Caltrans. The technical noise data, including model run results, are provided in the Appendices A through C. During the construction phase of the project, ambient noise levels in the project vicinity would be raised, especially at the existing mobile home park to the southeast of the bridge. Although noise associated with construction would be temporary, mitigation measures would be required to reduce the noise impacts during construction period. The proposed project would not alter noise associated with aircraft overflight and train pass by in the project area. The analysis shows that future baseline traffic noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptor locations would not exceed the City of Calsbad's 24 hour criterion of 60 dBA CNEL and Caltrans' peak hour criterion of 67 dBA Leq. Since the increases in traffic volumes are not expected as a direct consequence of the project, no project related noise impacts may be attributed to changes in traffic volumes. Implementation of the pro- posed project would not change the projected future noise levels in areas outside the project improvement area. The proposed project would result in changes in the noise exposure along Poinsettia Lane where proposed new travel lanes would move some traffic away from receptors at the existing mobile home park to the south. However, project related traffic noise level changes would be small and less than significant. Future residential uses proposed in the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan area adjacent to Poinsettia Lane have incorporated mitigation measures to reduce traffic noise impact from Poinsettia Lane. No mitigation measures are required for long-term project im- pacts. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 illustrates the regional location of the proposed project. The project site is located in the City of Carlsbad. Figure 2 illustrates the project improvement plan. The proposed plan includes widening the bridge over the rail tracks on the north side, adding a travel lane to both eastbound and westbound directions. 11/5/99<> 00 lot 1120 vc- ..\\ (/•.' —JO/,)1 .• &\ 1 railer ...• .. ...— .. .. r i( V t rrlv " 29 Trailer I, Park --- ' I PROJECT . •. . •:. i' 2.r' .J\:: ...:. :. LOCATION zoo...- I \ . Y. . . •.. '.'•. \ '-( '- -. Ponto I \J1 r -. - " I •' ••' \ —\ BA IQtJITOS 33 . o8qsid 3. • I'. I 30 / • .. • k5I •. ••• •:; Source: USGS 7.5 Topographic Quadrangle, Encinitas, Calif." s, •:. • •: ••. '-:' 6116/99(DEC832) Scale in Feet I L S-A 0 1--000 2000 Figure 1 Project Location I S r - - • 4 4- ---- - - 4- -, - .- - • - -- .- S. .-. - - _, - - - - - C -. - - --- - - - V. IthAN Ift It cow ! .. tpe VV - . — - -- — -----' -¼'*----, - 'I 7 my WP 71 'I ' •' b - - - - - - - -, 0!... -.•-: - I - •: Base Map Source: Dokken Engineering. - - I 813199(DEC832) - Scale in Feet i L S—A 050 100 Figure 2 Proposed Project ISA Associates, Inc. 30 SETTING 31 NOISE DEFINITIONS Sound is a pressure wave transmitted through the air. It is described in terms of loud- ness or amplitude (measured in decibels), frequency or pitch (measured in Hertz [Hz] or - cycles per second), and duration (measured in seconds or minutes). The standard unit of measurement of the loudness of sound is the decibel (dB). Typical human hearing can detect changes in sound levels of approximately 3 dB under normal conditions. Changes of 1 to 3 dB are detectable under quiet, controlled conditions, and changes of less than 1 dB are usually undiscernible. The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies. Sound waves below 16 Hz are not heard at all and are "felt" more as a vibration. Similarly, while people with ex- tremely sensitive hearing can hear sounds as high as 20,000 Hz, most people cannot hear above 15,000 Hz. In all cases, hearing acuity falls off rapidly above about 10,000 Hz and below about 200 Hz. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to sound at all frequencies, a special frequency dependent rating scale is usually used to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) performs this compensation by discriminating against frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear. - Noise is defined as unwanted sound, and is known to have several adverse effects on people, including hearing loss, speech and sleep interference, physiological responses, and annoyance. Based on these known adverse effects of noise, the federal government, the State of California, and many local governments have established criteria to protect public health and safety and to prevent disruption of certain human activities. 3.2 NOISE SCALES Several rating scales (or noise "metrics") exist to analyze adverse effects of noise (in- cluding traffic generated noise) on a community. These scales include the equivalent continuous noise level (L), the community noise equivalent level (CNEL), and the day- night average noise level (La,). L is a measurement of the sound energy level averaged over a specified time period (usually one hour). L represents the amount of variable sound energy received by a receptor over a time interval in a single numerical value. For example, a one hour L. noise level measurement represents the average amount of acoustic energy that occurred in that hour. Other values of concern include the L,, and L,,,. These are the minimum and maximum values recorded over a designated time interval or event. - Unlike the L metric, the CNEL noisemetric is based on 24 hours of measurement. CNEL also differs from L in that it applies a time weighted factor designed to empha- size noise events that occur during the evening and nighttime hours (when quiet time and sleep disturbance is of particular concern). Noise occurring during the daytime period (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) receives no adjustment. Noise produced during the evening time period (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) is adjusted by 5 cIBA, while nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise is adjusted by 10 CIBA. 11/5/99<<P:\DEC832\Noise\dec832.nse.wpd>> 4 ISA Associates, Inc. The L1, noise metric is similar to the CNEL metric except that the period from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. receives no adjustment. Both the CNEL and L,,, metrics yield approximately the same 24 hour value (within one dBA), with the CNEL being the more restrictive of the two, or approximately 1 dBA higher than the L,,, value. 3.3 REGULA TOR YBACKGROUND 3.3.1 State Guidelines and Standards California Department of Transportation Caltrans indicated in its Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (October, 1998) that reason- able and feasible noise abatement measures should be incorporated into new or recon- struction highway projects Caltrans has established a noise abatement criterion (NAC) of 67 dBA (exterior L) for noise sensitive activities/land uses. Table A lists the NAC for various land use catego- ries. "Sensitive" land uses are defined as picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals. Table A - Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) Hourly A-Weighted Noise Levels' Activity - Category L (dBA) Description of Activity Category A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary (exterior) significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports (exterior) ' areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, 'schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals. C 72 , Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in (exterior) Categories A or B, above.' D --- . Undeveloped lands. , E , 2 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, (interior) , churches, libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums. Source: State of California Department of Transportation, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, Octo- ber, 1998 ' Noise attenuation requirements under California law (i.e., the California Environ-mental Quality Act [CEQA]) differ from the requirements of the Federal Highway Administra- tion (FHWA), which are based on Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772 (23 CFR, Part 772). Under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), impacts and measures to mitigate adverse impacts must be identified, including the identification of I 115199(<P:\DEC832\Noise'dec832.nse.wpd>) ' 5 1 0 - ISA Associates, Inc. I impacts for which no or only partial mitigation is possible. Under CEQA, a substantial noise increase may result in a significant adverse environmental effect and, if so, must I be mitigated or identified as a noise impact for which it is likely that no, or only partial abatement measures are available. Specific economic, social, environmental, legal, and technological conditions may make additional noise attenuation measures infeasible. I Under FHWA regulations (23 CFR 772), noise abatement must be considered for Type I project when the project results in a substantial noise increase, or when the predicted noise levels approach or exceed the Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC). Noise abatement I measures which are reasonable and feasible and that are likely to be incorporated in the project, as well as noise impacts for which no apparent solution is available, must be identified and incorporated into the project's plans and specifications (23 CFR I 772.1 l(e)(1) and (2)) A noise increase is substantial when the predicted noise levels with the project exceed I existing noise levels by 12 dBA, L ) A traffic noise impact will also occur when predicted noise levels with project approach within 1 dBA, or exceed the Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) I 3.3.2 City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Noise Element I The noise standards specified in the City of Carlsbad General Plan (September 6, 1994), Noise Element are used as a guideline to evaluate the acceptability of the noise levels I . generated by the traffic flow. These standards are for assessment of long-term vehicular traffic noise impacts. The City of Carlsbad uses 60 dBA CNEL as the critical criterion (65 dBA CNEL for McClellan-Palomar Airport noise) for assessing the compatibility of I residential land uses with noise sources. The City of Carlsbad requires that the interior living areas for residential land uses not exceed 45 dBA CNEL, with openings to the exterior of the residence open or closed. I For along-term noise impact assessment in areas already exposed to noise levels ex- ceeding the 65 dBA CNEL, a change of 3 dBA or more in noise level by the project would be considered significant. I Noise Ordinance The City of Carlsbad does not have a comprehensive noise ordinance. However, Chap- ter 8.48 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) limits the hours of construction. I Construction activities are limited to normal weekday working hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday). No construction work is allowed on Sundays and I federal holidays In addition, the City's Municipal Code requires that all construction equipment should maintain properly equipped muffler systems to reduce noise during construction phase I i i/5/99<<P:\DEC832'Noise\dec832.nse.wpd>> .- . - 6 I ISA Associates, Inc 4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS There are existing residences in the mobile home park on the south side of Poinsettia Lane east of the bridge. Other areas along this segment of Poinsettia Lane are currently vacant, with future residential and commercial uses proposed abutting Poinsettia Lane. Residents at the existing mobile home park are sensitive receptors that would be affected by the construction and future traffic flow on Poinsettia Lane bridge. Residents at the proposed residential uses would be affected by the traffic noise from Poinsettia Lane. There is an existing (5-1/2 foot high) masonry jersey wall along the south side of the road adjacent to the mobile home park. On the bridge, there is a (2-1/2 foot high) masonry jersey wall on both sides of the bridge for safety purposes. The most significant and common source of noise in the project area is transportation related, including on-road vehicles, trains, and aircraft activities. Of these, motor vehicle noise is of concern because of its high rate of occurrence and roadway proximity to sensitive areas. This was confirmed in the field study to be discussed below, where existing noise levels in the project area are those typical of urban development and consist mainly of vehicular traffic. Aircraft overflight generates occasional short-term noise, but their integrated contribution is small. Train pass by generates relatively high single event noise, but contributes less to the long term ambient noise than vehicular traffic does. The following discussion summarizes noise findings in two previous noise studies and a recent field noise monitoring. 4.1 PREVIOUS NOISE STUDIES 4.1.1 City of Carlsbad General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact Report In the Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (March 1994), noise from several mobile sources were identified, including aircraft, rail, and vehicular traffic. The project site and its immediate vicinity are not and will not be impacted by the 65 CIBA CNEL from the McClellan-Palomar Airport. The following summarize the noise impacts from rail and vehicular traffic in the project area discussed in this document. Rail The San Diego Northern Railroad tracks (owned and operated by North County Transit District [NCTD]) run parallel to the coastline through the project area. The railroad right-of-way is 100 feet wide. Currently AMTRAK operates several daily passenger trains between San Diego and Los Angeles. There are also a total of 18 Coaster com- muter trains (nine northbound and nine southbound between San Diego and Oceanside) travel through the project area. Additionally, approximately five freight trains pass through the project area daily, some after 5:00 p.m. Currently, there is an existing six foot wall along. the, western property line of the mobile home park adjacent to the rail tracks. 11/5/99<<P:'DEC832'Noise'dec832.nse.wpd>> 7 LSA Associates, Inc. Vehicular Traffic The distance from roadway centerline to noise contours were projected for the year 2010. Along Poinsettia Lane between Carlsbad Boulevard and Paseo Del Norte, the 70, 65, and 60 cIBA CNEL were projected to extend to 115, 247, and 533 feet, respectively, from the roadway centerline. Currently, there is an existing 5-1/2 foot high jersey barrier along the south side of Poinsettia Lane. 4.1.2 Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report In the Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan (July 1997), noise from several mobile sources were identified, including rail and vehicular traffic. The following summarize the noise impacts from rail and vehicular traffic in the project area discussed in this document.' Rail The NCTD railroad tracks pass through the project area. Currently AMTRAK operates several daily passenger trains between San Diego and Los Angeles. There are also a total of 18 Coaster commuter trains (nine northbound and nine southbound between San Diego and Oceanside) travel through the project area. Additionally, approximately five freight trains pass through the project area daily, some after 5:00 p.m. The Wyle Model (Assessment of Noise Environments Around Railroad Operations, Wyle Laboratories Report WCR-73-5, July 1973) was used to determine railroad noise levels. The noise level at distances of 100, 200, and 400 feet from the tracks were projected to be 67.9, 63.9, and 58.2 CIBA CNEL, respectively. Because the railroad right-of-way is 100 feet wide in this area, and there is an existing six foot sound barrier along the mobile home park boundary along the railroad right-of-way, existing residences at the mobile home park are not impacted by noise exceeding the 60 CIBA CNEL. Vehicular Traffic The distance from roadway centerline to noise contours were projected for future condi- tions. Along Poinsettia Lane between Carlsbad Boulevard and Paseo Del Norte, the 70, 65, and 60 cIBA CNEL were projected to extend to 26, 56, and 120 feet, respectively, from the roadway centerline. Currently, there is an existing 5-1/2 foot high jersey barrier along the south side of Poinsettia Lane. Existing residences at the mobile home park are not impacted by traffic noise exceeding the 60 dBA CNEL exterior noise criterion established by the City. 4.2 FIELD MEASUREMENTS A short term noise monitoring as conducted on May 29, 1999, using a Larson-Davis Model 720 Type 2 Integrating/Logging Sound Level Meter. The unit meets the Amer- 1 i/5/99<<P:\DEC832'Noise\dec832.nse.wpd>> 8 ISA Associates, Inc. ican National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard Si .4-1983 for Type 2, International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 651-1979 for Type 2, and IEC Standard 651-1979 for Type 2 sound level meters. The unit was calibrated prior to the first set of readings. The accuracy of the calibrator is maintained through a program established through the manufacturer, and is traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. The unit meets the requirements of the ANSI Standard Si .4-1984 and the IEC Standard 942: 1988 for Class 1 equipment. The study included 15 minute readings in the afternoon at two (2) representative recep- tor locations, including mobile home park residences on the south side of Poinsettia Lane. Monitoring locations are shown in Figure 3. Measured noise levels ranged from the high SOs where there are barrier or structural walls that shield the receptor Iodation to the mid 60s where the receptor has direct line of sight to the traffic on Poinsettia Lane. Each reading is summarized in Table B. Buses and passenger cars on Poinsettia Lane generated noise levels between 60 to 75 dBA. Aircraft overflight generated be- tween 50 to 65 dBA. No train pass by noise was observed during the time of noise monitoring. Table B - Existing Noise Level Measurements' Location/Start Time Noise Sources - Leq, dBA Other Observation N-I/3:30 P.M. 57.4 Traffic on Poinsettia Lane; air- Sound level meter (SLM) located at craft overflight; car alarm; birds mobile home park, approximately 50 chirping. feet from western boundary wall and 5 feet above ground level. N-2/3:50 p.m. 65.5 Traffic on Poinsettia Lane and SLM located approximately 8 feet Carlsbad Boulevard; bus and from Poinsettia Lane edge, 200 feet truck driving by. east of Carlsbad Boulevard, and 5 feet above ground level. Source LSA Associates, Inc 1999 50 IMPACTS Implementation of the proposed project would result in short term construction noise impact and long term traffic noise from the widened bridge/roadway. The proposed project would not affect noise associated with aircraft overflight and train pass by in the project vicinity. Aircraft and train noise in the project vicinity would remain similar to those described in the existing condition. The following focuses on the noise impact associated with project construction and future traffic noise along Poinsettia Lane Noise measurements taken on May 29, 1999; 15 minute measurements. 11/5/99<(P:\DEC832\Noise\dec832.nse.wpd)> 9 I - I : I - - - 4-- - I I - B 4 - - , ; i 4 - to -. • ; It at : \--tj '.-:•' 4 -iX kj IQ AVPED Ni 7"A CONCRETE nr I — — — — 00 Ar WY 12, al WK VACMD pep - - I - - - - I - - EXISTINO RIGHT OF, WAI ___ - - I LAW - - Ad : :-v I. TTIAN • .i 1 I — I I I t NY Base Map Source: Dokken Engineering. I 8/3/99(DEC832) Scale in Feet i LSA 50 100• Figure 3 Noise Monitoring Locations - ISA Associates, Inc. 51 CONSTRUCTION Construction noise represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels, as noise levels produced by construction activities can reach relatively high levels. Noise typi- cally associated with the use of construction equipment is best estimated in a study sponsored by the U.S. EPA (Bolt, Beranek, and Newman, 1971), and is estimated at an L of between 79 and 89 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the construction effort for the grading phase except for pile driving activities. Pile driving activities would gener- ate maximum noise levels ranging from 81 to 96 dBA L at a distance of 50 feet. Because the piles would be driven into the ground, only the engine noise and impact sound between the pile driver and the pile being driven would be heard at a distance. As a worst case scenario, the level recommended for pile driving, 93 dBA I. at 50 feet, is used in this analysis. At a distance of more than 100 feet from active pile driving, the noise would be reduced to 87 dBA I. or lower. Later phases of construction, such as the pouring of forms, typically involve smaller and quieter pieces of equipment. At its nearest point, construction (i.e., bridge widening construction) on the north side of Poinsettia Lane west of the bridge would take place within a distance of about 100 to 150 feet from those receptors located along the south side of Poinsettia Lane east of the bridge. These mobile home residences are approximately 20 to 30 feet below the high point of the bridge, and are shielded by an existing jersey barrier along the south side of Poinsettia Lane. The projected maximum, intermittent noise from construction of the road widening at the nearest existing residences along Poinsettia Lane is estimated at between 80 and 87 dBA L,.,. These values represent a potential short-term nuisance. Depending on the timing of the construction, the proposed residential uses in the Poin- settia Properties Specific Plan may also be exposed to construction noise from the bridge/roadway widening. Construction hour restrictions established by the City of Carlsbad, identified in Section 3.3.2 and in Chapter 6.0, should be followed. In addition to limiting hours of construction activities, equipment and operational speci- - fications shall be followed as identified in Chapter 6.0, Mitigation Measures, to reduce pile driving noise and other construction activities. Implementation of the construction mitigation measures set forth in Chapter 6.0 will reduce noise associated with construc- tion activities to below a level of significance. Noise will also' be created by the vehicles that transport both workers and materials to the site. This analysis assumes that construction involves as many as 30 workers at any one time. The pieces of heavy equipment for grading and construction activities will be moved on site, will remain for the duration of each construction phase, and will not add to the daily traffic volume. When added to the current traffic volumes along Poinsettia Lane, Avenida Encinas, and Carlsbad Boulevard, the projected volume of construction traffic will be small and its associated noise level change will not be perceptible. How- ever, there will be a relatively high single event noise exposure potential with passing trucks at a maximum level of 87 dBA at 50 feet. This would be a short-term intermit- tent annoyance to noise sensitive receptors adjacent to the construction areas. I I I I 5.2 I.. - ISA Associates, Inc. OPERATIONS Potential noise impacts associated with project operations are solely from traffic noise created by vehicles that use the system of roadways. It should be noted that the pro- posed project is a bridge/roadway widening/improvement project. Future increases in traffic volumes are not expected as a direct consequence of the project. Therefore, there are no project related noise impacts that may be attributed to changes in traffic volumes. However, changes in bridge/roadway configuration caused by the proposed project will potentially affect noise exposure along the roadway. The FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108, December 1978) was used to calculate future noise levels along Poinsettia Lane. Table C lists the distance to the CNEL contour lines from the centerline of the roadway. Traffic noise along Poinsettia Lane is moderate, with the 60 dBA CNEL extending to 151 feet from the centerline (without the effect of sound barriers) under the future (with or without project) conditions. Mobile home park residents to the southeast of the bridge, where there is an existing 5-1/2 foot jersey barrier along the roadway right-of-way, would not be exposed to noise levels exceeding the 60 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard adopted by the City. Proposed residences in the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan adjacent to Poinsettia Lane have identified mitigation measures in terms of free standing sound walls along their property boundary to mitigate traffic noise from Poinsettia Lane to below the 60 dBA CNEL exterior noise standard. Table C -24 Hour CNEL Traffic Noise Levels I Distance to Roadway Centerline, Feet Future CNEL Roadway Segment 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA Poinsettia Lane <501 72 151 Carlsbad Boulevard to Avenida Encmas 'Traffic noise within 50 feet of the roadway centerline requires site specific study. Source LSA Associates, Inc., 1999 Because the above traffic noise prediction model predicts noise contours by distance from the roadway centerline, the model is not sensitive to roadway widening or improve- ment that involves mostly right-of-way changes and little centerline movement; there- fore, it is not adequate for impact analysis for the proposed project. Cáltrans Sound32 noise model was performed for the future without and with project scenarios to more closely identify the changes resulted from the proposed 'bridge/roadway widening/improvement. Receptors modeled are the same for both scenarios, and are illustrated in Figure 4, Noise Modeling Locations. Because the project involves the widening of westbound Poinsettia Lane (on the north side), travel lanes on Poinsettia Lane were defined in gridded coordinates and used in the modeling. Noise receptor locations and existing barriers/structures were also gridded for the model I 1/5199< 12 I I ISA Associates, Inc. I input. For the future with and without project scenarios, this involved two separate links (one eastbound and one westbound) with the projected noise levels logarithmically added together. (A link is a stretch of road that is demarcated by such things as changes in roadway geometrics [e.g., lane configuration, curves, bridges, etc.] and additional traffic entering or leaving the roadway [e.g., an intersection]). Link and receptor loca- tions were scaled off a 1:40 scale map (Dokken Engineering, May 17, 1999). The afternoon (p.m.) peak hour traffic volumes with soft site geometry were modeled. Vehicle count data were provided by Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers, May 21, 1999. The Sound32 model is sensitive to the volumes of trucks on the roadway, as they con- tribute disproportionally to the traffic noise. The ratios of autos, medium trucks, and heavy trucks in the project area were assumed to be 92, 5, and 3 percent, respectively, on Poinsettia Lane, based on our field observations during the noise monitoring. In addition to vehicle ratios, the noise model is sensitive to vehicle speeds. Due to the change in elevation from Carlsbad Boulevard and Avenida Encinas to the high point of the bridge, speeds used included the following: All passenger vehicles were modeled at an average speed of 45 mph All medium-duty trucks were modeled at an average speed of 40 mph. Heavy-duty trucks were assigned an average speed of 35 mph. For future no project scenarios, the current roadway configuration is used for the travel lanes and roadway edges. Travel lanes and roadway edges are modified for the future with project scenario. Both future scenarios, with or without the project, have the same afternoon peak hour traffic volumes along Poinsettia Lane. Table D lists the noise level at the eight receptor locations for future without project and future with project scenarios. These modeled noise levels are different from the moni- tored noise levels, because the locations do not coincide with each other. Due to the difficulty in accessing and measuring the distances for an exact match between modeled and monitored locations, monitored noise levels were for comparison purposes only, and were not used to calibrate the noise model. Although monitored noise levels were all lower than the modeled noise levels, they are in general agreement with modeled noise levels. Modeled noise levels between the future without and with project scenarios show the project's effect on the receptor locations along Poinsettia Lane, as will be discussed in more detail below. Based on results shown in Table D, all receptor sites on the south side of Poinsettia Lane west of Avenida Encinas, RI through R8, would not be exposed to traffic noise level exceeding the 67 dBA one hour L criterion during peak hours, under the future no 11/5/99<<P:\DEC832\Noise\1ec832.nse.wpd>> 13 I - I - I . H 1 VIE 514 _t COXWUE —1 QQ Amm w. I ---- i CLAW - — - — Lro K PARML p" ta --:-----.. R3 R5 16 In I 4, Ri® I - R8® .1 1. Base Map Source: Dokken Engineering. I 8/3/99(DEC832) Figure 4 H 4 iN U - Scale in Feet - i L S_ A 0 50 100 - Noise Modeling Locations ISA Associates, Inc. Table D - Peak Hour Noise Levels at Sensitive Receptor Locations' 1 Hour L Levels (dBA) Future Future Project Without With Related Receptor Project Project Increase RI 61.3 60.1 -1.2 R2 60.9 60.1 -0.8 R3 59.7 59.3 -0.4 R4 61.4 60.0 -1.4 R5 59.6 59.0 -0.6 R6 63.2 63.4 0.2 R7 57.5 57.5 0.0 R8 56.9 57.0 0.1 Source: LSA Associates, Inc., 1999. project scenario. Under the future with project scenario, the widened bridge/roadway would extend travel lanes to the north side of, or the westbound Poinsettia Lane in this area, there- fore moving some traffic away from these receptor locations on the south side of Poinsettia Lane. Table D indicates that, under the future with project scenario, traffic noise levels at these eight receptor locations would either decrease by as much as 1.4 dBA or increase by as much as 0.2 dBA from their corresponding no project levels. The decrease in traffic noise level would be due to traffic being moved northwards and would receive higher noise attenu- ation from the roadway southern edge and existing jersey barrier along the south side of the road. The increases at R6 (0.2 dBA) and R8 (0.1 dBA) are small and statistically negligi- ble. This range of noise level changes is considered small (less than 3 dBA) and less than significant. All eight receptor locations modeled would continue to experience traffic noise below the 67 dBA L, standard established by Caltrans. Therefore, no significant project related traffic noise impacts would occur for these existing residences. Proposed residential uses in the Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan adjacent to Poinsettia Lane have identified free standing sound walls along their property boundary to mitigate future traffic noise from Poinsettia Lane. No significant traffic noise impact would occur to these proposed residences from the proposed bridge/roadway widening. No mitigation measure is required for the proposed project. Soft site noise drop off rate of 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance was used. 11/5/99<0> 15 I A Associates, Inc. 1 6.0 MITIGATION MEASURES I 6.1 CONSTRUCTION Initial construction has the potential to create significant impacts at the homes located along I Poinsettia Lane, and mitigation is warranted to reduce these impacts to the extent feasible. Applicable mitigation includes the following: Construction shall be restricted to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. and I not permitted on Sundays and federal holidays. All construction equipment shall be equipped with working manufacturer specified I muffler system. Portable equipment shall be located as far as possible from the noise sensitive 1 locations at the existing mobile home park. Construction vehicle staging areas and equipment maintenance areas shall be lo- cated as far as possible from sensitive receptor locations at the existing mobile home park. I As part of the contract specifications, the City of Carlsbad shall require the contractor to implement the following measures to further reduce noise during construction and pile I : driving activities: Pre-drill each pile 15 feet prior to beginning the pile driving. Utilize steel 11-piles. 1 . .. Utilize a vibratory hammer whenever possible, except for the last few feet. Allow only for the last few feet of each pile to be driven in order to ensure that bearing capacity has been reached. I . . Notify the City Public Works Departmeit and adjacent property owners five days prior to initiating nighttime noise activities. 1 6.2 OPERATIONS . I Implementation of the proposed project, i.e., widening the bridge on Poinsettia Lane, would not attract new traffic trips to the project area, but would affect traffic noise along Poinsettia - Lane due to proposed bridge/roadway configuration changes. Traffic noise at the receptor I locations modeled would either increase or decrease slightly from their corresponding no project levels. The changes would be small, and less than two dBA. There would be no project related significant traffic noise impacts. No mitigation measures are required for long-term operation of the proposed project. I 11/5/99<<P:\DEC832\Noise\dec832.nse.wpd>> I . .. ., LSA Associates, Inc. I 7.0 REFERENCES I Caltrans, Sound32 Noise Prediction Model, Release 07/30/91 Caltrans, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, October, 1998 1 Carlsbad, City of, General Plan Noise Element and Municipal Code. I Harris, Cyril, Hcrndbook of Noise Control, 1991 U. S. Environmental Protection Act. 1971. Bolt, Beranek, and Newman. Noise From 1 Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances, December 31,1971. I 1 I I 1 H 1 I I I H: ..... I H.. I . 11/5/99<<P:'DEC832\Noise\iec832.nse.wpd>> 17 I . . . Poinsettia Lane Bridge Widening T-Poinsettia Road Peak Hour, 1 837 , 45 , 46 , 40 , 27 , 35 T-Poinsettia Road Peak Hour, 2 837 ,45 , 46 , 40 , 27 , 35 L-Eastbound Poinsettia Road, 1 Y,174400.,65,61.5, Y, 174500. , 69, 62 .3, Y,174600.,68,63, Y,174700.,70,65.8, Y,174800.,74,71.5, Y,174900.,75,75.6, - Y, 175000. , 73, 77. 1, Y,175100.,75,76.3, Y,175200.,77,74.1, Y, 175300. , 78, 69 .2, Y,175400.,76,62.3,- Y,175500.,76,57.2, Y,175600.,77,54.4, Y,175700.,75,55.4, Y,175800.,74,58.8, L-Poinsettia Road Westbound, 2 Y,175800.,122,59, Y, 175700. , 119, 55 . 8, Y,175600.,117,54.5, Y, 175500. , 115 ,.57 .4, Y,175400.,109,62.5, Y,175300.,98,69.3, Y,175200.,921 74.5, Y,175100.,91,76.3, 175000. , 91, 77. 1, Y,174900.,92,75.6, Y,174800.,101,71.8, Y,174700.,115,65.9, Y,174600.,119,62.8, Y,174500.,120,61.9, Y,174400.,123,61.6, B-Eastbound Road Edge, 1 , 1 , 0 ,0 174440.,57,61.7,61.7 ' edge 174500. , 55, 62 . 1, 62 . 1, 174600.,54,62.8,62.8, 174700. ,55,65.6,65.6, 174800.,62,71.3,71.3, 174900. ,67,75.5,75.5, B-Eastbound Jersey Wall, 2 , 3 , 0 ,0 174900. ,67,75.5,78,jersey 174960.,60,76.6,79.1, 175000.,61,77.2,79.7, 175100.,61,76.3,78.8, 175140.,61,75.3,77.8, B-Eastbound Edge Barrier, 3 , 3 , 0 ,0 175140.,61,75.3,80.8,5.5'wall -' 175200.,68,73.9,79.4, 175300. ,62, 68.6,74.1,. 175400.,55,61.5,67, 175500. ,54,56.4,61.9, 175600. ,54,54.4,59.9, 175700.,55,54.6,60.1, 175800.,54,58,63.5, B-Walls around mobile homes, 4 , 2 , 0 ,0 175152. ,12,51.1,57.1,wall - 175175.,-130,50.9,56.9, I 175265.,-130,51.8,57.8, • 175245.,12,51.6,57.6, 175152. ,12,51.1,57.1, • I B-Mobile homes, 5 , 1 , 0 ,0 175265.,5,51.8,61.8,homes - 175260.,-53,51.6,61.6, 175645.,,-55,51.5,61.5, 175650. ,2, 51, 61, 1 175265.,5,51.8,61.8, B-Mobile homes, 6 , 1 , 0 ,0 175295.,-100,51.1,61,homes I 175300.,-153,50,60, • 175670.,-162,50,60, 175665.,-106,50,60, 175295.,-100,51.1,61, R, 1 , 67 ,20 • 175185,-12,57.5,R1 R, 2 , 67 ,20 • 175220,-41,57.7,R2 1 R, 3 , 67 ,20 175195,-85,57.1,R3 R, 4 , 67 ,20 I 175260,3,56.8,R4 R, 5 , 67 ,20 175275,-86,56.1,R5 R, 6 , 67 ,20 I 175655,3,56.0,R6 • R, 7 , 67 ,20 175660,-90,55.0,R7 - R, 8 , 67 ,20 I 175340,-200,55.,R8 - D, 4.5 ALL,ALL dc I I I I i I I H I I SOUND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91 I TITLE: Poinsettia Lane Bridge Widening EFFECTIVENESS COST PATIOS H I ELE 0 12 3 4 5 6 7 1 ------------------------------------------------------ - 0. edge I 2 _0.*. B1 P2 3 - 0. B1 P3 4 - 0. B1 P4 I 5 . B1 P5 - 0* jersey 7 - o. B2 P2 8 - O.* ,. B2 P3 I 9 - o.*•, B2 P4 10 - o. 5.51 wall . 11 -O.t -. B3 P2 I 12 0. B3 P3 .13 - 0. . .. B3 P4 I 14 15 - 0.*- - O.* B3 P5 B3 P6 1.6 - 0.*B3 P7 17 - .0 . wall I 18 - 0. B4 P2 19 - 0.. . . . B4P3 20 - O. . B4 P4 I 21 - .0. . . homes 22 - 0. .,.. B5P2 . 23 -. 0.' .-. . - - B5 P3 1 24 -, 0.*. . B5 25 - 0. . . homes I 26 27 - o. ., - o. . B6 P2 -- B6 P3 28 - o. . . B6 P4 . ------------------------------------------------------- 1 2, 3 4 5 6 7. I 1 BARRIER DATA . .. - I BAR BARRIER HEIGHTS BAR ELE 0 1 2. 3. . 4 5 6 7 - ID - LENGTH TYPE I l - 0. . edge. 60.0 BERN 2 - 0.*- . El P2 100.0 BERN 3 - 0. . - Bl 23 - 100.0 BERN I 4 - 5 - 0* . . 0. . . Bl P4 - El P5 100.4 100.2 BERN BERN I 1 6 - jersey 60.4 MASONRYJERSEY 7 - 3* B2 P2 40.0 MASONRYJERSEY 8 3* B2.P3 100.0 MASONRYJERSEY 9 - 3* B2 P4 40.0 MASONRYJERSEY 10 - 6.* * 5.51 wall 60.4 MASONRYJERSEY 11 - 6 * B3 P2 100.3 MASONRYJERSEY 12 - 6.* B3 P3 100.5 MASONRYJERSEY 13 - 6.* B3 P4 100.1 MASONRYJERSEY 14 -. 6.* B3 P5 100.0 MASONRYJERSEY 15 - 6.* 33 P6 100.0 MASONRYJERSEY 16 - 6.* 33 P7 100.1 MASONRYJERSEY 17 - 6.. . wall 143:9 MASONRY 18 - 6.* B4 P2 90.0 MASONRY 19 - 6.* B4 P3 143.4 MASONRY 20 - .. 6. . : B4P4 93.0 MASONRY 21 - 10. homes 58.2 BERN .22 - 10.' . B5 P2 385.0 BERN 23 - 10. . 35 P3 57.2 BERN 24 - 10. . 35 P4 385.0 BERN 25 - 10.* homes 53.2 BERN 26 - 10. B6 P2 370.1 BERN 27 / - io. 36 P3 56.2 BERN 28 - 10. B6P4 370.0 BERN 0 1 2 .3 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .5 6 7 1 REC RECID DNL PEOPLE LEQ(CAL) 1 Ri ----------------------------- 67. 20. 61.3 2 R2 .67. 20. 60.9 . . . . 3 R3 . 67. 20. 59.7 4 R4 67. 20. 61.4 5 . R5 67. 20. 59.6 6 R6 . 67. 20. . 63.2 7 R7 67. 20. 57.5 8 R8 67 20 569 BARRIER TYPE . COST BERN 67562 MASONRY 24736. MASONRY/JERSEY 73345. CONCRETE 0. -------------------------------- TOTAL COST = $ 166000. BARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION iliillliliiillllll 1111111 111 CORRESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION 0. 0. 0..0. 0. 3. 3. 3. 3. 6 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6.10.10.10.10.10. 10.10.10. . . I - ISA Associates, Inc. I ATTACHMENT B I SOUND32 NOISE MODELING OF FUTURE BUILD ALTERNATIVES I --- -' .1 0 1 H H 1 H.. I - . I ., .- I I . 1 ; H-- 1 1/5/99(<P:'DEC832\Noise\dec832.nse.wpd>> I Poinsettia Lane Bridge Widening I T-Poinsettia Road Peak Hour, 1 837 , 45 , 46 , 40 , 27 , 35 T-Poinsettia Road Peak Hour, 2 837 , 45 , 46 , 40 , 27 , 35 I L-Eastbound Poinsettia Road, 1 Y,174400.,72,61.6, Y,174500.,73,62.5, Y,174600.,73,64, . . I Y,174700.,74,66.5, R Y,174800.,80,75.5, Y,174900. ,84,75.5,. . — Y,175000.,85,77.5, Y,175100.,85,77.5, - Y,175200.,85,74.5, - Y,175300.,81,69, Y,175400.,77,63, I Y,175500.,74,57.5, Y,175600.,75,55, - Y,175700.,75,56, Y,175800.,75,59.5, L-Poinsettia Road Westbound, 2 Y,175800.,130,59.5, Y, 175700. , 130, 56, I Y,175600.,130,55, . Y,175500.,130,57.5, Y,175400.,125,63, . Y,175300.,118,69, I Y,175200.,114,74.5, - Y,175100.,114,77.5, . S Y,175000.,114,77.8, Y,174900.,114,75.5, I Y,174800.,114,71, Y,174700.,113,66.5, - Y,174600.,113,64, I Y,174500.,113,62.5, I Y,174400.,113,61.6, B-Eastbound Road Edge, 1 , 1' , 0 ,0 174440.,57,61.7,61.7,edge . S I 174500.,55,62.1,62.1, U 174600.,54,62.8,62.8, . 174700.,55,65.6,65.6, - 174800.,62,71.3,71.3, . S 174900.,67,75.5,75.5, - - B-Eastbound Jersey Wall, 2 , 3 , 0 1 0 174900.,67,75.5,78,jersey 174960.,60,76.6,79.1, I 175000.,61,77.2 79.7, . S 175100.,61,76.3,78.8, 175140. ,61,75.3,77.8, B-Eastbound Edge Barrier, 3 , 3 , •o ,0 175140.,61,75.3,80.8,5.5'wall 175200. ,68,73.9,79.4, . 175300.,62,68.6,74.1, S I 175400.,55,61.5,67, 175500.,54,56.4,61.9, S 175600. ,54,54.4,59.9, 175700.,55,54.6,60.1, I 175800.,54,58,63.5, B-Walls around mobile homes, 4 ,.2 , 0 ,0 I 1 .5 -- , •- -• I 175152.,12,51.l,57.1,wall . . I 175175.,-130,50.9,56.9, 175265.,-130,51.8,57..8, • 175245.,12,51.6,57.6, :175152.,12,51.1,57.1, • B-Mobile homes, 5 , 1 , 0 ,O 175265.,5,51.8,61.8,homes 175260.,-53,51.6,61.6, 175645.,-55,51.5,61.5, I 175650.,2,51,61, I 175265.,5,51..8,61.8, B-Mobile homes, 6 , 1 , 0 ,0 - 175295.,-100,51.1,61,homes 175300.,-].53,50,60, • 175670.,-162,50,60, 175665.,-106,50,60, - 175295.,-100,51.1,61, R, 1 , 67 ,20 175185,-12,57.5,R1 R, 2 , 67 ,20 • 175220,-41,57.7,R2 R, 3 , 67 ,20 175195,-85,57.1,R3 R, 4 , 67 ,20 I 175260,3,56.8,R4 R, 5 , 67 ,20 175275,-86,56.1,R5 I R, 6 , 67 ,20 175655,3,56;0,R6 • 'R, 7 , 67 ,20 .' 175660,-90,55.0,R7 • R, .8 i 67 ,20 175340,-200,55.,R8 D, 4.5, ALL,ALL dc I I I I I I I I SOUND32 - RELEASE 07/30/91 TITLE: Poinsettia Lane Bridge Widening EFFECTIVENESS / COST RATIOS *************************** BAR ELE 0 12 3 4. 5 6 7 1 - 0* edge 2 -, 0. B1 P2 3 -, 0. B1 P3 4 - 0. B1 P4 5 . - 0. B1 P5 6 - 0. jersey 7 - 0. B2 P2 8 - 0. B2 P3 9 - 0. . B2 P4 10 - 5.51 wall 11 - 0. B3 P2 12 0. B3 P3 13 - 0.- . B3 P4 14 - 0. B3 P5 15 - 0. . B3 P6 16 - 0. . B3 P7 17 - 0. wall 18 - O.* B4 P2 19 - 0.*B4 P3 20 - 0* B4 P4 21 - 0. homes 22 - O. B5 P2 23 - 0. B5 P3 24 .- 0. B5 P4 25 - 0. homes 26 - 0. B6 P2 27 - 0. . B6 P3 28 - 0. B6 P4 0 ------------------------------------------------------ 1 2 3 4 5 6 .7 1 BARRIER DATA ************ BAR BARRIER HEIGHTS . BAR ELE 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ID LENGTH TYPE 1 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0. edge 60.0 BERM 2 - 0. . Bi P2 100.0 BERM 3 - o. B]. P3 100.0 BERM 4 - o. Bi P4 100.4 BERM 5 - 0. B]. P5 100.2 BERM 6 - 3,.* jersey 60.4 MASONRYJERSEY 7 - 3* B2 P2 ' 40.0 MASONRYJERSEY 8 3* B2 P3 100.0 MASONRYJERSEY 9 - 3* : . B2 P4 40.0 MASONRYJERSEY 10 - 6.* ' 5.51 wall 60.4 MASONRYJERSEY 11 - 6.* B3 P2 100.3 MASONRYJERSEY 12 - 6.* B3 P3 100.5 MASONRYJERSEY 13 - 6.* B3 P4 100.1, MASONRYJERSEY 14 - 6.* B3 P5 100.0 MASONRYJERSEY 15 - 6.* B3 P6 '100.0 MASONRYJERSEY 16 - 6.*. B3 P7 100.1 MASONRYJERSEY 17 - 6.* wall 143.9 MASONRY 18 - 6.* B4 P2 90.0 MASONRY 19 - 6.* : E4 P3 143.4 MASONRY 20 - 6.* B4 P4 93.0 MASONRY 21 - 10. homes 58.2 BERM 22 - 10.'.' B5 P2 385.0 BERN 23 - 10. ' , B5 P3 57.2 BERN 24 - 10. ' ES P4 385.0 BERN 25 - 10. homes 53.2 BERN 26 - 10. ' " B6 P2 370.1 BERN 27 - 10. ' B6 P3 56.2 BERN 28 - 10. ', B6 P4 370.0 BERN 0 1 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 3 4 5 6 7' REC REC ID DNL PEOPLE LEQ(CAL) 1 Ri -------------------------------- 67 20 601 2 R2 67. 20. .60.1 3 R3 67. 20. 59.3 4 R4 67. 20. ' 60.0 5 RS 67. 20., '59.0 6 R6 67. 20. 63.4 7 R7 67. 20. 57.5 8 RB -------------------------------- 67. ' 20. 57.0 BARRIER TYPE COST BERN 67562. ' MASONRY 24736.' MASONRY/JERSEY 73345. CONCRETE 0. TOTAL COST = $ 166000. BARRIER HEIGHT INDEX FOR EACH BARRIER SECTION L 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CORRESPONDING BARRIER HEIGHTS FOR EACH SECTION 0.0.0.0.0.3.3.3.3.6. 6.6. 6.6.6.6.6.6.6. 6.10.10.10.10.10. 10.10.10. TABLE DEC830 FHWA. ROADWAY NOISE LEVEL ANALYSIS I RUN DATE: 6/3/99 I ROADWAY SEGMENT: POINSETTIA LANE CARLSBAD TO ENCINAS NOTES: FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUME I * * ASSUMPTIONS * * AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 12100 SPEED (MPH) : 40 GRADE: 1.5 I TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES DAY EVENING NIGHT AUTOS I 75.51 12.57 9.34 N-TRUCK S 1.56 0.09 0.19 I H-TRUCKS 0.64 0.02 0.08 ACTIVE HALF-WIDTH (FT): 18 SITE CHARACTERISTICS: SOFT I * * CALCULATED NOISE LEVELS * * I CNEL AT 50 FT FROM NEAR TRAVEL LANE CENTERLINE (dB) = 65.37 DISTANCE (FEET) FROM ROADWAY CENTERLINE TO CNEL 70 CNEL 65CNEL 60 CNEL 55 CNEL 0.0 71.7 150.5 322.3 I I I I I I I I I