HomeMy WebLinkAbout; Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station; County of San Diego Environmental Impact Report-Draft; 1977-07-29\\ } WOODSIDK/KUBOTA*ASSOCIATBS,INC.
2965 Roosevelt St. • P, O. Box 1095 • Cartsbad, California 92008 • 1714) 729-1194 ,
July 29, 1977
San Diego County
Environmental Review Board
Environmental Analysis Division
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, Ca. 92123
Subject: Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station, Public Project,
Log #77-7-34 - Carlsbad Municipal Water District
Gentlemen:
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the draft E.I.R, for the
subject project which is a proposed facility immediately adjacent to
the administration and operations center of the Carlsbad Municipal
Water District, We have reveiwed the draft E.I.R. in detail and
offer the following comments for your consideration:
1. With respect to public water service to the proposed facility,
our District is working with the City of Carlsbad and the County
of San Diego for the design and construction of an arterial water
main that will provide adequate water service and fire protection
service for the proposed solid waste transfer station as well as
a proposed City of Carlsbad operations center. Upon the completion
of such facilities, this District will provide complete public water
service.
2. The draft E.I.R. contains considerable information regarding the
impact of traffic upon the major highways that will service the
proposed facilities. We note a complete absence of an evaluation
of the structural capability of these highways to accomodate the
additional heavy truck traffic that will be generated by this new
facility. Specifically, the section of Palomar Airport Road easter-
ly of El Camino Real within the City limits of Carlsbad is currently
being systematically destroyed by the heavy traffic. As a daily
user of that important highway, I have noted the dramatic deteri-
oration.
In Orange County, Santa Ana
County of San Diego
July 29, 1977
Page 2
3. The draft E.I.R. is silent with respect to the highly visible
problem for the control of debris which becomes scattered along our
highways as the various hauling vehicles move towards the disposal
point. Over the years Water District personnel have observed rampant
disregard for containment of trash resulting in litter along the
highways. We suggest you address this problem and identify alterna-
tive solutions,
4. As immediate neighbors to the transfer station, we would expect
that the opinions expressed in the draft E.I.R. relating to noise
control will be demonstrated in fact at such time operations commence
We trust that these comments will merit your attention and please contact
the undersigned if you have any questions. In addition, please advise
this office as to the time and place of the various proceedings relating
to this draft E.I.R.
Very truly your
•/ //
k Y./Ki/bota, District Engineer
Isba4>flun1cipal Water District
cc: Carlsbad Municipal Water District
Legal Counsel
Lovel1 Hulbert
R. E. Shepherd
JYK/wv
CMWD
A Legal Notice to be*i.at)lished in the Evening Tribune pn July 1,- 1977'
San Diego County
Environmental Review Board
Environmental Analysis Division
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San-Diego, Califomia 92123
(714) E65-5757
RECEIVED
11977
WOODSiUt-ilUBUlA & ASSOC.
\ • i CONSULTtNG ENGINEEPjo
Notice is hereby given that the County of San Diego has received a draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for:
PALOMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION, Public Project, Log #77-7-34,
This public project is the construction of a resource recovery refuse transfer
facility on County-owned land northeast of the intersection of El Camino
Real.and Palomar Airport Road, Carlsbad.
NOTE: Thisnotice is an extension of the review period to allow for the
review o£ additional information provided by the applicant.
The draft EIR for this project is available for REVIEW ONLY at the
Environmental Analysis Division, 9150 Chesapeake Drive; the Ecology Centre;
340 Kalmia, S.D.; and the El Cajon, Encinitas, Fallbrook, Lemon'Grove
and Vista branches of the County library.
In addition to the above libraries, the draft can be reviewed at the
Carlsbad Library, 1250 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad.
Comments on this draft must be submitted in writing to the Environmental
Analysis Division by August 1, 1977. The Environmental Review Board (ERB)
meeting is tentatively scheduled for August 4, 1977.
For additional information as to the date and place of the Environmental
Review Board meeting regarding the above project, please call 565-3927,
nrnm nARtSBAD MUNICIPAL r IM o rv'"77
"RTCETVTD"
The numbers and letters refer to the memo sent to us on Jiine 16, 1977. \
WOUUo.uL- <iLJB01A & ASSOC
1. Department of Transportation archaeologist, Gary R. Fink,
archaeologist as defined by the San Diego County Guidelines for Archaeology
(1974). Mr. Fink reviewed and signed the archaeology report before sub-
mission. Mr. Fink assumes all responsibility for the quality of the
survey done by Janet Hightower. Therefore, the survey report written by
her will remain as submitted.
A) Please refer to the Archaeology Appendix, page 8, Section VII. The
size of the sites are limited to the outline of the milling features and
the surface area which one artifact covers. No midden or cultural deposit
was present, hence no subsurface potential exists. Please refer to page 8,
Section VII, for cultural placement of the sites.
B) Site CE #123 (W-1202) will be destroyed as a result of project imple-
mentation. The single artifact associated with this site has been collected
and will be donated to the County Parks and Recreation Department for use
in their interpretive program. Loss of the milling features is consideriag
a minor loss of scientific information as outlined in the report. Project
redesign is totally unnecessary.
C) Please refer to Archaeology Appendix and answer A above for proof that
no subsurface remains exist.
D) The surface artifact was collected and catalogued (See answer B above).
The measurements of the milling features are as follows:
Site CE #123 (W-1202) Site CE #124 (W-1203)
Slick 1 5 X 3^ X V Slick 1 4^^ x 3 x ^"
Slick 2 5 3/4 X 4 x V
E) No plot plan is presently available upon which to superimpose the sites
discovered.
2, Aj The Dawson-Los Monos Ecological Reserve, consisting of 93 acres
(37.7 hectares), is located approximately 3/4 mile northeast of the proposed
project in Los Monos Canyon. This reserve is a part of the University of
California's Natural Land and Water Reserve System. It will not be impacted,
directly or indirectly, by the project.
B) The area from the project site west to El Camino Real has been disturbed
by past agricultural activities. North, east, and slightly south of the
project site is an inland sage/mixed chaparral community, (Refer to
attached vegetation map). The former plant type is on the western fringe
of the mixed chaparral and blends in with it. A steep sided canyon is
located approximately 500 feet east of the project site. An intermittent
stream and a dirt road cuts through this canyon bottom. No water was
observed in the stream at the time of the survey, November 30, 1976.
The areas along the sides of the canyon were densely vegetated and virtually
undisturbed. However, the cannon crests have been moderately disturbed
by trails, and scattered refuse disposal. The canyon bottom has been very
disturbed by the dirt road and off-road vehicles which use this area.
Run-off from this canyon and adjacent areas drains northerly into Agua
Hedionda Creek located about 2,000 feet north of the project site. The
construction of the iiransfer site and associated roads may slightly increase
surface run-off into the previously mentioned canyon which borders the
project on the east.
A complete discussion of characteristic plants observed in the vicinity of
the project can be found in the Biology Appendix.
The majority of the land immediately surrounding the project site on all
sides, except to the south, is vacant land. Two light manufacturing
businesses are located 800 feet northwest of the project site. The nearest
f
Map J.
' ^''^<i Chan
Qua,...,.
residence is 1,900 feet west. The Carlsbad Municipal Water District is
adjacent and south of the site. Agricultural fields are about 2,000 feet
to the east.
C) Four species of raptors were observed flying in the project area and
nearby vicinity. They were the turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), white-tailed
kite (Elanus leucurus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and American
kestrel (Faljco sparverius). During the biological survey on November 30,
1976 (9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.) these species were presumed to be utilizing
the disturbed, open areas. These raptors cannot easily penelirate the
densely vegetated chaparral areas. The red-tailed hawk and American kestrel
are very common throughout San Diego County and can exist adjacent to
urban areas. The turkey vulture and white-tailed kite are also common
in the County, but are usually observed in the more rural areas.
Although these were the only raptors observed during survey, it is
expected that other species, such as the great horned owl (Bubo virginianus)
could utilize this area.
3. There are three general categories of solid waste as defined by the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control:
Class I: These include certain industrial wastes, petroleum products, paint
products, insecticides, pesticides, strippers, chemicals, and other hazardous
and toxic materials. Only one Class I landfill is operative in San Diego
County (Otay), No Glass I materials will be processed at the Palomar Shredder
site.
Class II: Household rubbish, small dead animals, paper, wood, rubber,
plastics, and similar relatively non-toxic materials are contained in this
class. This is the solid waste that will be processed at the shredder site.
Class III: These include dirt, rock, used paving materials, rubble,
abandoned automobiles, and other similar bulky wastes. No Class III
materials will be process at the shredder site.
As outlined in the draft EIR, magnetic separation and recovery of ferrous
materieils will be done at the shredder site. This is discussed on pages
1 through 3 of the draft EIR.
4. The General Plan zoning in the area of the proposed Palomar Airport Solid
Waste Transfer site is as follows and as shown on the attached Map 2,
1, Site - Open Space (OS)
2, West of the site and Palomar Airport - Industrial M & M2
3, Carlsbad Municipal Water District Property - Residential R-l(lO)
4, Northerly and Easterly of site - Planned Industrial PM
5, Southeast and Southwest corners of El Camino Real and Palomar
Airport Road - Commercial C &C-1
6, South of Palomar Airport Road - Agricultural A-3-(8)
5, Noise Impact - The Carlsbad Municipal Water District Office, workshop and
storage area is located on the R-l(lO) zoning. The L^^ the R-l(lO) is
62 dB(A). The noise reaching the office buildings would be attenuated
28 dB(A) due to distance and would not adversely affect the building
occupants.
The rest of the area surrounding the project site is zoned Industrial
(M & M-2), Planned Industrial (PM), Commercial (C & G-1) and Agricultural
(A-3(8) . The noise generated by the shredder operation would be compatible
with the development of the area.
6, Odor impacts associated with the proposed transfer station will be controlled
by the rapid processing of incoming trash and by confining any remaining
trash in a totally enclosed building.
Incoming trash is dumped from the packers and immediately pushed onto a
conveyor belt which feeds it into the shredder. The shredding process has
a tendency to reduce odors by thoroughly mixing the paper products with
any damp materials. This mixing process assists the paper wastes in absorbing
and retaining moisture, which results in less evapcaration and fewer odors.
Normal plant operating procedures include not leaving trash in the building
overnight. All incoming material will be processed and transported to the
landfill site the same day. In the event of a severe equipment breakdown,
there is capacity at the transfer site for 24-hour storage of trash. The
storage bins are totally enclosed, and therefore present minimal escape
potential for odor. If the equipment malfunction cannot be quickly
repaired, the trash trucks will be sent directly to the landfill until
the problem can be corrected.
The Resource Recovery Plant, a similar operation in the El Cajon area,
has been in operation since December 1976. According to plant personnel
and the Air Pollution Contxol District, no odor related complaints have
been received.
7. The proposed shredding operation can be successfully located either at
the San Marcos Landfill or the Palomar area, but several considerations
make the Palcxnar site the superior choice.
TRANSPQRTATION - Existing transportation access corridors have more
unused capacity at the Palomar site. El Camino Real and Palomar Airport
Road both have capacities well beyond their existing ADT's. Access roads
to the San Marcos site, Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road, are entirely
adequate, but do not contain the extra lanes and the higher average speeds
of the Palomar access routes,
CENTRALIZATION - Having the shredder operation at the San Marcos
Landfill would eliminate the need for prime movers to haul the shredded
trash for ultimate disposal. Even taking into account the energy, time,
cost, and air pollution saved by having the shredder on the landfill site,
the Palomar location will be a better choice. Being 4.5 air miles north
and west of the San Marcos location, the Palomar site is closer to the
beach and northwest populations such as Vista and Carlsbad, The reduced
driving distance for the public will save more vehicle miles than the
elimination of the prime mover mileage. Although the Palomar site is a
couple of miles further from downtown Escondido, the travel time is less
because of the well developed road systems. State Highway 78 and Palomar
Airport Road to the Palomar site will be a quicker route for Escondido
people, than Harmony Grove Road and Questhaven Road will be to the San
Marcos Landfi3J.,
UTILITIES - All major utility services (electricity, water and
sewer) are within easier reach at the Palomar site than at the San Marcos
site,
AIR QUALITY - Air quality impacts associated with the actual oper-
ation of the shredder and metal separator will have minimal impacts on
either site since the majority of the operation is electrically operated.
Transportation-related air quality impacts will be less severe with the
transfer and shredder located at the Palomar site. The reduced driving
distances for the general public to reach this site more than compensates
for the elimination of the prime movers with the shredder located at the
San Marcos site.
8. The operation of the Palomar Transfer Station will have an insignificant
effect on local air quality. The majority of the plant is electrical,
with intemal combustion engines being used only in two small trash movers.
Engines for these movers are smaller than those found in the average auto-
mobile. Dust is a potential problem, but a minor one. Trash contains
moisture which discourages dust. Dumping, moving, shredding, and ferrous
metal separation will all take place in an enclosed building, thereby
minimizing particulate pollution. In the event dust becomes a problem,
it can be easily controlled with standard watering techniques.
Anticipating the number of days in which Federal standards of air quality
will be exceeded at the site is not possible at this time, because of
uncontrollable variables such as inversion heights, temperatures, and
wind conditions. There should, however, be no change from the present
c ire ums tanc es,
9. The shredding operation is 1,500 feet from the nearest County property line.
10. There are three soil types on the project site. The majority of the
project area consists of Las Flores loamy fine sand (LeC2) with erosion
potential slight to moderate. The second most common soil type is Huerhuero
loam (HrG2) with slight to moderate erosion potential. The last soil type
is Cieneba coarse sandy loam, located in the canyon to the east of this
project. Run-off in Cieneba soils is rapid to very rapid. Rminofl potential
in Cieneba soils is high.
Refer to the Geology Appendix for a discussion of the landslide east of
the project area. It states, "The portion of the project site underlain
by the Del Mar Formation should not be susceptible to sliding." Further,
the project will be located on a higher elevation and far enough away from
the landslide area so as not to impact it at all.
Agencies that will issue discretionary permits for this project and which
will be covered by this draft EIR include the following:
City of Carlsbad
Carlsbad Municipal Water District
Comprehensive Planning Organization Land Use Commission
Air Pollution Control District
State Solid Waste Management Board
County Health Department
01
PROJECT LOCATION
MAP 2: Zoning Map. See question 4.
LOS Monos Ecological Reserve and «^ the Dawson-Los raoui^= . MA? 3 : Locations of the
MAP 4
PROJECT LOCATION - P^^OMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STAT^'^^N
U.S.G.S. SAN LUIS REY 7.5" Quadrangle
7. (contd)
WASTE DISPOSAL
Approximately 20 employees will generate about 40 gallons of
wastewater each per day, or 800 gallons total per day. Wastewater
is also generated from periodic wash down of equipment. Wash down
will be kept to a minimum by designing a system mostly cleaned by
sweepers and vacuums. It is expected that 500-1000 gallons per
week of wastewater would be generated at the site.
There is a moratorium on new sewer connections in Carlsbad until
new capacity is available, probably at least two years away. An
interim sewage disposal system will be the use of a septic tank and
leach field. Although no percolation tests have been made at the site,
soil maps of the Soil Conservation Service indicate that percolation
is possible but the soil types have severe limitations for sewage dis-
posal. (See Map - Sheet 22 and Soil Survey Part III, pages 58 and 134.)
The County Health Department has indicated that a septic tank and
leach field system is possible with sufficient sized leach fields.
Extensive soils tests will be performed and the appropriate length of
leach lines provided according to Department of Public Health requirements
In the event that a septic tank and leach field system is not
possible, chemical toilets will be provided until public sewers are
available. The plant will be designed so that no wash down water is
used. All clean up would be sweepers and vacuums. What little water
that might be used for cleaning equipment would be settled in a sump
and the water recycled for dust control within the shredder. The plant
would be operated without discharge of any water.
COUNTY OF SJN DIEGO
COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY
Department of Sanitation & Flood Control mm
County Optratlons Cantar, 5555 Ovarland Avanue, San Ditgo, California 92123 Telaphone: 565-5325
C. J. HOUSON
Diractor
n JUN ^977 REF: SFC4/1480
Carlsbad Municipal Water District
c/o Jack Kubota
Woodside, Kubota % Associates
2965 Roosevelt
Carlsbad, Califomia 92008
SUBJECT: Transmittal of Draft Environmental Impact Report
for the Proposed Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station
Enclosed for your preliminary review and use is one copy of the
draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Appendices. The
County Environmental Analysis Division will also be sending you
a copy for comments during their review period. They will ask
you to convey your comments directly to them.
Site plans for the project will be ready the week of June 27.
C. J. HOUSON
Principal Civil Engineer
GWWtmep
Enclosure: Draft EIR and Appendices
RECEIVED
JUN 2 0 1977
WOODSIDE-hUBUlA & ASSOC CONSULTJNG ENnfMFFgQ "
A Legal Notice to be'i:€tblished in the Evening Trib'une on June 17, 1977
San Diego County
Environmental Review Board
Environmental Analysis Division
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, Califomia 92123 ^ wOUUdiut - KUBUiA & ASSOC.
(714) E65-5757 j CONSULTING ENGINEERS
RECEIVED
JUN 2 41977
Notice is hereby given that the County of San Diego .has received
a draft (EIR) Environmental Impact Report for:
PALOMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION, (Public Project) Log #77-7-34.
This public project is the construction and operation of a resource
recovery refuse -transfer facility on County owned land located about
1600 feet northeast of the intersection of El Camino Real and Palomar
Airport Road, Carlsbad.
The draft EIR for this project is available for REVIEW ONLY at
Environmental Analysis Division, 9150 Chesapeake Drive; the Ecology
Center, 340 Kalmia, S.D., and the El Cajon, Encinitas, Fallbrook,
Lemon Grove and Vista branches of County library.
In addition to the above libraries, this draft can be reviewed at
the following locaton,
CARLSBAD LIBRARY 1250 Elm Ave.
Comments on this draft must be submitted in writing to the Environ-
mental Analysis Division by July 17, 1977. The Environmental Review
Board meeting is tentatively scheduled for July 21, 1977,
For additional information as to the date and place of the Environmental
Review Board meeting regarding this project, please call 565-3927,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
Department of Transportation
BIOLOGICAL SURVEY
Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station
W. A, UJ0.226
Prepared by:
CATHY C, COOK SUSAN T. WELKER
Environmental Management Trainee Student Worker III
B.A. Biology B.S. Botany
December 14, 1976
PALOMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION
Introduction
The project site (21 acres) is located about 1600 feet northeast
of the intersection of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road in
north coastal San Diego County. The City of Carlsbad is 4.5 miles
to the northwest. Vista is 4.3 miles northeast, and San Marcos is
5.3 miles east. Palomar Airport is located roughly 2000 feet to
the southwest.
The topography of the project area is fairly flat, sloping
north to south. A small canyon is 500 feet east of the solid waste
processing site. A small drainage swale traverses the area from west
to east and merges with the canyon. (Refer to Map 1)
A biological survey of the project site and vicinity was con-
ducted on November 30, 1976. This survey consisted of identifying
plants, vegetation communities and associated wildlife. A Flora of
Southern California, 1974, by P.A. Munz was the naming and plant identi-
fication authority used for the botany portion of the survey. Reference
was also made to R.F. Thome's (1976) publication. The Vascular Plant
Communities of California, California Native Plant Society Special
Publication No. 2,
Identification of avian and reptilian species was aided by
Robbins, 1966, Birds of North America, and Stebbins, 1972, Amphibians
and Reptiles of California. 8x20 binoculars were also used to observe
birds in the area.
Environmental Setting
The majority of the project area has been disturbed by past
agricultural activities. It presently supports primarily native
and introduced species of grasses and forbs. The main components of
this system are the wild oat (Avena fatua), tumbleweed (Salsola
iberica), bromegrass (Bromus sp.), and filaree (Erodium sp.). The
plants are typical of disturbed land in many communities (Thome, 1976).
A small part of an inland sage/mixed chaparral community is
located along the eastern boundary of the site. This is the western
fringe of a larger complex located north, east, and southeast of
the project. The inland sage corrmunity extends to the north, but
blends with the mixed chaparral community to the south. The latter
extends primarily into the canyon, east aad southeast of the project
site. (Refer to Map 1, showing the vegetation of the area)
The dominant members of the inland sage community occurring
in the project area are Artemisia californica (California Sagebrush),
Eriogonum fasciculatum(California buckwheat), and Haplopappus sp.
Broad-leaved sclerophyllous scrub consisting of Rhus integrifolia
(1 emonadeberry), Quercus dumosa (scrub oak), Xylococcus faicol or
(mission manzanita), and Adenostomafasciculatum (chamise) were more
common in the mixed chaparral community.
The California Native Plant Society Maps were checked for the
presence of any rare and/or endangered plant species occurring in
or around the project site. No such species have been recorded in
this area.
The animals observed on the site and near vicinity were primarily
birds. Several species of raptors such as the turkey vulture, white-tailed
kite and red-tailed hawk were noted in the area indicating a sub-
stantial small mammal population. This was further indicated by
abundant large mammal fecal material containing rabbit and rodent
fur occurring throughout the site and vicinity. Expected mammalian
species include the desert cottontail (Sylvilagus auduboni), agile
kangaroo rat (Dipodomys agilis), and southern pocket gopher (Thomomys
bottae). Larger, carnivorous mammals in the area are the coyote
(Canis latrans) and the bobcat (Lynx rufus). (Refer to attached
species lists)
Passerine birds which may use the disturbed grassland area as
a food source include several meadow larks (Sturnella neglecta),
house finches (Carpodacus mexicanus), and lesser goldfinches (Spinus
psaltria). Avian species observed common to chaparral environments
are the wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens),
and Bewick's wren (Thryomanes bewickii).
No reptiles were observed as most become inactive during the
winter months (Stebbins, 1974). A pacific tree frog was heard in the
inland sage community in a dry drainage swale. The western fence
lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus)
and western rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis) are expected to occur in
this area.
No rare or endangered species were observed.
Environmental Impacts
Vegetation removal (10 acres) for the construction of the access
road and shredding operations site will take place primarily in the
disturbed area. Approximately one-half of the project site consists
of inland sage/mixed chaparral type of vegetation while the remaining
one-half is in the disturbed area. The loss of the former vegetation
will be relatively minor as the majority of this type of vegetation
occurs to the north, east, and southeast of the project site. The
removal of the grasses and forbs will also be minimal as most of
these plants are short-lived and would eventually be replaced by a
climax vegetation (mixed chaparral).
Wildlife associated with the loss of this vegetation may either
reinvade other suitable habitats in the vicinity or may perish.
Animals incapable of escaping construction activities include small
reptiles and rodents. Other animals such as birds and larger mammals
are quite mobile and may seek refuge elsewhere only to compete with
resident wildlife for food and shelter.
Noise from construction activities and shredding operations could
also affect shy wildlife species in the vicinity. Also, seagulls,
scavengers of refuse, should not be attracted to this site as the refuse
will be quickly shredded and/or compacted and then transferred to a
sanitary landfill for proper disposal.
Mitigation Measures
The site will receive low-maintenance landscaping to blend in
with surrounding native vegetation.
Literature Cited
1. Aribib, Robert, Dec, 1974. "The Blue List for 1976," American Birds,
Vol, 29, No. 6, Published by the National Audubon Society in
collaboration with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service,
New York,
2. Ingles, Lloyd 6., 1973. Vertebrates and Natural History of Southern
California, Jackson Publications, Santee, CA.
3. Robbins, Chandler S., Bertel Bruun, and Herbert S. Zim, 1966.
Birds of North America, Golden Press, New York.
4. Stebbins, Robert C, 1972. Amphibians and Reptiles of California.
University of California Press, Berkeley.
Flora
1. Beauchamp, Ruble Mitchel, Floral Diversity of San Diego County,
California, unpublished Master's Thesis, San Diego State
- University, 1972.
2. Munz, P.A,, A Flora of Southern California, University of California
Press, Berkeley, California, 1974.
3. Thorne, R.F., The Vascular Plant Communities of California, 1976,
CNPS publication #2.
•1 jt IT "i:
Map 1: Project boundaries and location
Vegetation was classified
according to R.F. Thorne, 1976,
The Vascular Plant Communities
of California, CNPS pub. #2.
KEY
Disturbed
Area
Mixed chaparral/Inland
Sage Scrub
San Luis Rey Quadrangle
U5GS.Topographical Map-
7.5 Minute Series
No Scale
Species List
Fl ora
This list has been compounded from the species lists of the North
County and Letterbox landfill environmental impact reports. These reports
cover areas very close to the site.
Anacardiaceae
Lemonadeberry
Laurel Sumac
Rhus integrifolia
Rhus laurina
Apiaceae
Sweet fennel Foeniculum vulgare
Asteraceae
Yarrow
California Sagebrush
Mule-Fat
Italian thistle
Star thistle
Rabbit-Brush
Achillea boreal is ssp. californica
Artemisia californica
Baccharis viminea
Carduus pycuocephalus
Centaurea melitensis
Chrysothamnus sp.
Encelia californica
Haplopappus sp.
Boraginaceae
Verba santa Eriodictyon crassifolium
Brassicaceae
Yellow mustard Brassica campestris
Cactaceae
Prickley-Pear Opuntia occidentalis
Capparaceae
Bladder pod
Caprifoiiaceae
San Diego Honeysuckle
Chenopodiaceae
Austrilian Saltbush
Russian thistle
Cistaceae
Rock Rose
Convolvulaceae
Bindweed
Cucurbitaceae
Wild Cucumber
Eriaceae
Manzanita
Mission Manazanita
Euphorbiaceae
Castor bean
Fabaceae
Rattle weed
Lupine
Fagaceae
Scrub Oak
Isomeris arborea
Lonicera subspicata var. denudata
Atriplex semibaccata
Sasola iberica
Helianthemum scoparium
Convolvulus arvensis
Marah macrocarpus
Arctostaphylos sp.
Xylococcus biocolor
Ricinis communis
Astragalus sp.
Lupine sp.
Quercus dumosa
Geraniaceae
Storksbill
Lamiaceae
White sage
Black Sage
Malvaceae
Checker
Nyctaginaceae
Coastal Four-O'clock
Polygonaceae
California Buckwheat
Rosaceae
Chamise
Toyon
Holly-leaf Cherry
Rhamnaceae
Redberry
Scrophulariaceae
Monkey-Flower
Solanaceae
Jimson weed
Tree tobacco
Nightshade
Erodium sp.
Salvia apiana
Saliva mellifera
Horsfordia alata
Sidalcea sp.
Mirabilis laevis
Eriogonum fasciculatum
Adenostoma fasiculatum
Adolphia californica
Heteromeles arbutifolia
Prunus ilicifolia
Rhamnus crocea
Mimulus puncieus
Datura meteloides
^^^^
Nicotiana glauca
Solanum xantii var. hoffmannii
Agavaceae
Mohave Yucca
Amaryllidaceae
Golden Stars
Liliaceae
Mariposa Lily
Soap Plant
Poaceae
Wild Oats
Foxtail chess
Yucca schidigera
Bloomeria crocea
Calochortus sp.
Chlorogalum pomeridianum
Avena fatua
Bromus rubens
PALOMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION
OBSERVED SPECIES LIST
Time: November 30, 1976, 9:00 to 11:00 a.m.
Weather: Clear, and sunny with a light breeze
Key
0 = Observed
V = Vocalization
S = Scat
(1,2,3,etc.) = number observed
* = on 1976 Audubon Blue List
AMPHIB lA-^AMPHIB lANS
ORDER: Salientia
Family: Hylidae
Hyla regilia
AVES-aiRDS
ORDER: Falc onif ormes
Family: Cathartidae
Cathartes aura
Family: Accipitridae
Elanus leucurus
Buteo jamaicensis
Family: Falconidae
*Falco sparverius
ORDER: Galliformes
Family: Phas ianidae
Lophortyx californicus
ORDER: Apodiformes
Family: Trochilidae
Calypte anna
Pacific Treefrog (V,l)
Turkey Vulture (0,1)
White-tailed Kite (0,1)
Red-tailed Hawk (0,1)
American Kestrel (0,1)
California Quail (0,V,1 flock)
Annans Hummingbird (0,V,2)
•"Mi'-'
ORDER: Passeriformes
Family: Tyrannidae
Sayornis saya
Family: Gorvidae
Aphelocoma coerulescens
Family: Chatnaeidae
Chamaea fasclata
Family: Troglodypidae
*Thryomanes bewickii
Family: Icteridae
Sturnella neglecta
Family: Fringillidae
Carpodacus mexicanus
Pipilo fuseus
Say^s Phoebe (0,1)
Scrub Jay (0,V,4)
Wrentit (V,2)
Bewick's Wren (V,l)
Western Meadowlark (0,V,1 flock)
House Finch (0,3)
Brown Towhee (0,1)
MAMMALIA-MAMMALS
ORDER: Carnivora
Family: Canidae
Canis latrans Coyote (0,S)
PALOMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION
EXPECTED SPECIES LIST
REPTILIA-REPTILES
ORDER: Squamata
S ub order: Lac ertilza
Family: Iquanidae
Sceloporus occidentalis
Uta stansburiana
Family: Scincidae
Eumeces skiltonianus
Family: Anguidae
Gerrhonotus multic ar i natus
Suborder: Ophidia
Family: Colubridae
Pituophis melanoleucus
Arizona elegans
Lampropeltis getulus
Family: Viperidae
Crotalus viridis
Western Fence Lizard
Side-blotch Lizard
Western Skink
Southern Alligator Lizard
Gopher snake
Glossy snake
California Kingsnake
Western Rattlesnake
AVES-BIRDS
ORDER: C olumb iformes
Family: Columbidae
Zenaida macroura
ORDER: Cue ulif ormes
Family: Cuculidae
(^ococcyx californianus
Mourning Dove
Roadrunner
ORDER: Strigiformes
Family: Strigidae
Bubo virginianus
ORDER: Pas s eri formes
Family: Tyrannidae
Tyrannus verticalls
Family: Paridae
Psaltriparus minimus
Family: Mimidae
Mimus polyglottos
Toxos t oma.re div ivum
Family: Sylviidae
Poliop tila.c aerulea
Family: Laniidae
*Lanius ludovicianus
Family: Parulidae
Dendroica coronata
Wils onia.pus ilia
Family: Ploceidae
Passer domesticus
Family: Fringillidae
Spinus psaltria
Zonotrichia leucophyrys
Great Homed Owl
Western Kingbird
Bushtit
Mockingbird
California Thrasher
Blue-gray Gnatcatcher
Loggerhead Shrike
Yellow-rumped Warbler
Wilson's Warbler
House Sparrow
Lesser Goldfinch
White-crowned Sparrow
MAMMALIS-MAMMALS
ORDER: Ghiroptera
Family: Vespertilionidae
MyOtis californicus California Myotis
* = on 1976 Audubon Blue List
ORDER: Lagomorpha
Family: Leporidae
Sylvilagus auduboni
ORDER: Rodentia
Family: Sc iur idae
Otospermophilus beecheyi
Family: Geomyidae
Thomomys bottae
Family: Heteromyidae
Perognathus californicus
Dipodomys agilis
Family: Cricetidae
Peromyscus eremicus
Neotoma fuse ipes
ORDER: Carnivora
Family: Mustelidae
Mustela frenata
Spilogale putorius
Family: Felidae
Lynx rufus
Desert Cottontail
California Ground Squirrel
Southern Pocket Gopher
California Pocket Mouse
Agile Kangaroo Rat
Cactus Mouse
Dusky-footed Wood Rat
Long-tailed Weasel
Spotted Skunk
Bobcat
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
GEOLOGY REPORT
for
PALOMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION
W. 0. No. UJ7842
Prepared by:
CURTIS R. BURDETT
Geologist
Approved by: •
J. R. DAVIDSON
Materials Engineer
December 1, 1976
Project Description
The project consists of the construction and operation of a solid waste
transfer station to be located approximately 0.5 mile north of the inter-
section of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road.
Geology
There are three geologic formations of sedimentary origin that are exposed
in the project area. From youngest to oldest, these are the Delmar Formation,
the Point Loma Formation, and the Lusardi Formation.
The Delmar Formation is the youngest formation in the project area and con-
sists locally of fine to medium grained sandstones and mudstones with thin
interbedded layers of shale. The Delmar Formation is typically green,
yellow, or reddish brown where fresh and dark green where weathered. The
age of the Delmar Formation is well established as Eocene on the basis of
its stratigraphic relationship and its fossil content.
The Point Loma Formation, the middle member of the Cretaceous Rosario Group,
consists of dark gray to green shales with interbedded layers of fine grained,
gray to yellow, highly cemented sandstones. The Upper Cretaceous age of the
Point Loma Formation is based on abundant collections of mollusks, foramini-
fera and coccoliths.
The Lusardi Formation, the lower member of the Rosario Group, is a massive
boulder and cobble conglomerate with lenses of medium grained sandstone.
In the project area the Lusardi Formation is composed almost entirely of
weathered quartz diorite boulders and granitic debris. It is very similar in
appearance to in-place weathered granitic rocks of the Southern California
Batholith and has many clasts which exceed ten feet in diameter. The
Lusardi is generally thought to be overlain with apparent conformity by,
and interfingered with, the Point Loma Formation, No fossils have been
collected from the Lusardi Formation but its apparent stratigraphic position
indicates an age of early Late Cretaceous.
Structure
The age relationships given above for the geologic formations are the tradi-
tional ones accepted by most geologists. Sherrod (1974) described this area
and presented a case for the Point Loma Formation being older than the Lusardi
Formation. On the northwestern wall of the canyon east of the project site,
there are at least 100 feet of fine grained sediments underlying the Lusardi
Formation. No megafossils have been found in the sediments so a definite
age has not been established. Until further work is done in this area and
the age relationships are redefined we will accept the traditional view.
The sediments in the project area are essentially flat-lying. Only the Point
Loma Formation, which strikes north-south and dips approximately 5° to 10° to
the west shows any significant deviation from horizontal bedding.
Engineering Geology
No major faults have been found in the vicinity of the project area, but
several minor faults have been described in the Letterbox Canyon area and
in the Palomar Airport area. No faults were found in the limits of the project
site, but it is possible that some small faults may be present. These minor
faults will probably be of such age and small size as to have no significance
for this project.
No landslides were found on the project site but a landslide is present on
the Southeastern wall of the large canyon east of the site. This slide
apparently involved sediments of the Delmar Formation near the contact
with the Lusardi Formation. The portion of the project site underlain by
the Delmar Formation should not be susceptible to sliding.
Due to the amount of clay in the sedimentary formations in the project area
cut slopes should be no steeper than 1-1/2 : 1 and fill slopes should be no
steeper than 2:1.
Environmental Impact:
This project will not seriously affect the unique geologic exposures found
in the area. Most of the project will be located on the higher elevations,
away from the floor and lower walls of the canyon area.
Qal Alluvium
Qls Landslide
Delmar Fm.
Lusardi Fm.
Point Loma Fm.
1 M^LE (Geology after Sherrod,1974)
i^L sunwev wAaniNSTON.
ENCir^lTAS 3 Ml. *7&"°"E.
ROAD CLASSIFICATION
Heav>'-duty . Light-duty . =.
Medium-duty. ,, Unimproved dirt = = =
Interstate Route Q State Route
ii7n5'
SAN LUiS REY, CALIF.
REFERENCES
Liska, R. D,, "The Geology and Biostratigraphy of Letterbox Canyon," Master's
Thesis, San Diego State College, 1964.
Kennedy, M. P., "Bedrock Lithologies, San Diego Coastal Area, California," in
Studies on the Geology and Geologic Hazards of the Greater San Diego Area,
California, pp. 9-15, 1973.
Kennedy, M. P. and Moore, G. W,, "Stratigraphic Relations of Upper Cretaceous and
Eocene Formations, San Diego Coastal Area, California," The American Associa-
tion of Petroleum Geologists, 1971.
Nordstrom, C. E., "Lusardi Formation: A Post-Batholithic Cretaceous Conglomerate
North of San Diego, California," Geological Society of America Bulletin, V, 81,
pp. 601-606, February 1970.
Sherrod, K. L., "Geology Report, Palomar Airport Road Landfill," unpublished report
for San Diego County, 1974.
Wilson, K. L., "Eocene and Related Geology of a Portion of the San Luis Rey and
Encinitas Quadrangles, San Diego County, California," unpublished Master's
Thesis, University of Califomia, Riverside, 1972.
Weber, F. Harold Jr., Geology and Mineral Resources of San Diego County, Call- ,0%
fomia, California Division of Mines and Geology, County Report 3, 1963. w
County of San Diego
Community Services Agency
Department of Transportation
Archaeological Survey
for the proposed
Palomar Shredder
Carlsbad, California
Project No.: UJ7842
Prepared for: Department of Sanitation
and Flood Control
Prepared by: Reviewed by:
Janet Hightower Gary R. Fink
Assistant Archaeologist Archaeologist
Revised
December 20, 1976
Table of Contents ^.^
Page
Introduction 1
Physical and Biological Environment 2
Cultural History 3
Record Checks 5
Survey Procedure 6
Archaeological Resources 7
Evaluation of the Significance of 8
the Affected Resources
Research Potential 8
Environmental Impact of the 9
Proposed Action
Mitigating Action 9
Persons and Organizations Consulted 10
Bibliography 11
Attachments 12
I. Introduction
The proposed Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station site has been examined
in the field to determine the presence or absence of archaeological
and/or historical resources within or around the proposed project area.
The survey was conducted by Janet Hightower of the San Diego County Depart-
ment of Transportation under the supervision of Gary Fink. Assistance
was provided by Gary Vamer of Palomar Community College on November 26,
1976. Further surveying was conducted by Janet Hightower on December 16,
1976. The survey was done for the Department of Sanitation and Flood
Control.
The area surveyed comprises approximately 21 acres of land east
of El Camino Real and north of Palomar Airport Road and in the community
of Carlsbad, California (see attachments).
The results of the survey were positive, with two archaeological
sites discovered and recorded. Recommendations for mitigating any loss of
historic and/or prehistoric resources as prescribed by the National Environ-
mental Policy Act of 1969, the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970,
and the San Diego County Guidelines for Archaeology (1974), are contained
in this report.
-1-
II. Physical and Biological Environment
The proposed project area for the Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station
consists of a relatively flat terrace above a steep canyon. The terrace has
an elevation ranging from 300 to 400 feet above mean sea-level while the
canyon, which bounds the terrace on its southeast side, has an elevation of
about 100 feet.
Biologically, the area can be classified as being in the coastal sage
scrub and chaparral plant communities. Vegetation included extremely dense
chamise, sage, prickley pear cactus, lemonade berry sumac, yucca, manzanita,
scrub oak, coastal live oak, toyon, and laurel sumac. Fauna consisted of
numerous sightings of hawks and other species of birds, cottontail rabbit,
and fecal evidence of a large animal population. An area as rich in both
floral and faunal species, as is this, would have been most conducive to
early prehistoric populations as an important food resource.
-2-
III. Cultural History
Three distinctive cultural patterns have been defined in San Diego
County to date. Physical evidence of the San Dieguito, La JoUan, and Yuman
and Shoshonean culture groups have been identified in the San Diego region.
Since the exact chronology and cultural characteristics of each of the
culture groups have not been clearly defined yet, the following descriptions
may be subject to periodic revision.
The earliest inhabitants of San Diego County were the Paleo-Indian group
known as the San Dieguito. Evidence indicates they were nomadic hunters
approximately 12,000 to 7,500 years before present (Rogers 1966: 140; Warren
and True 1961). Their material culture (physical remains) consisted of
numerous scrapers and scraper planes, knife blades, few projectile points,
and large stone tools. Burial practices of the San Dieguito people are
currently unknown. Based upon certain archaeological criteria, the San
Dieguito people have been integrated into three major divisions: San Dieguito I,
San Dieguito II, and San Dieguito III,
The oldest of the three phases, San Dieguito I, is prevalent in eastern
San Diego County but has not been found west of the Laguna Mountains (Rogers
1966: 179) with the exception of one site (Fink 1974) found in Poway.
Fifty-two sites representing the San Dieguito II phase were found by Rogers
(Rogers 1966: 178-84), throughout the County, with San Dieguito III being
equally well represented in the County.
The La Jollan culture is distinguished from the San Dieguito culture
by a major change in subsistence pattems. "They were seed grinders and
seafood gatherers, more than hunters ..." (Rogers 1966: 8). The presence
of numerous manos and metates (grinding implements), in addition to extensive
shell middens (darkened or discolored soil caused by prolonged human activity
-3-
in one general area), have been noted in conjunction with La Jollan sites.
Lithic technology remained relatively the same, with little improvement in
tool refinement. Burial was by inhumation in the flexed position. The La
Jollan Complex lasted from approximately 7,500 years before the present until
about 1,000 years ago. Both the La Jollan and the San Dieguito Complexes
lack pottery. Sites resembling the La Jollan pattern have been found only
on the coast, whereas San Dieguito sites are found throughout the County.
With the appearance of the Yuman-speaking Kumeyaay (Diegueno) and the
Shoshonean-speaking Luiseno, Cahuilla, and Cupeno some time prior to 1,000
B.P., a change in subsistence patterns is noted. A corrfcination hunting and
gathering economy was practiced by these people. They brought with them
ceramics known as Tizon Brown Ware, finely worked projectile points and
stone tools, and disposal of the dead by cremation. Numerous bedrock mortars,
metates, and manos, all connected with a partial grinding economy, have
been found at known Yuman and Shoshonean sites. These are the people
encountered by the early Spanish explorers and subsequently dubbed the
"Mission Indians."
-4-
IV. Record Checks
To determine the presence of archaeological resources within or around
the proposed project area, records on file at the two major scientific
institutions in San Diego County were reviewed.
At the Anthropology Laboratory at San Diego State University, which
also contains the records of the University of California at Los Angeles,
nothing was on record. The San Diego Museum of Man had one site, W-310,
on file located north of the proposed project area. Also on file at the
Museum of Man were four other sites; W-122, W-123, W-124, W-128; which were
in the vicinity of the project area. These sites will not be affected by
the proposed project. This site should not be affected by this project in
any way. In addition, the Natural Resource Inventory of San Diego County
had nothing of historic interest recorded for the area. These record
checks were made in 1974 for a project adjacent to the Palomar Transfer
Station. It was not deemed necessary to make new record checks with these
institutions.
An archaeological survey conducted by Richard L. Carrico, a private
consultant, disclosed the presence of ten archaeological sites directly east
of the proposed Palomar Transfer Station in November 1973. Also, an arch-
aeological survey conducted by Gary R, Fink, County archaeologist, identified
oie other archaeological site located just north of the project area. For
this reason the project area was carefully examined since the possibility of
sites appeared to be much better.
-5-
V. Survey Procedure
A thorough archaeological survey by a series of north/south transects
conducted on foot, disclosed the presence of two archaeological sites
located within the boundaries of the proposed project. Topography for the
most part was very conducive to this method of surveying. A total of nine
man-hours were expended on this survey.
-6-
VI, Archaeological Resources
The 21 acre project area contains many favored plant and animal resources
of the California Indians and a water supply in a nearby canyon.
However, only two archaeological sites were discovered and subsequently
recorded.
Site CE # 123
This site may be located on the San Luis Rey 7^' Quadrangle, Township
12 South, Range 4 West. It is in the northern corner of the project area.
It lies at an elevation of approximately 370 feet, and is surrounded by a
thick growth of chamise. See Map 2, page 13 of this appendix.
The site consists of two small granite outcrops with one grinding
slick on each. These outcrops are separated by about 75 feet. Necir the
center point between these two outcrops, a San Dieguito tool was found.
It appears to be multipurpose in use, combining a scraping edge with a
spokeshave edge. This artifact was found adjacent to a large rodent burrow.
No other artifacts were found in conjunction with this site.
Site CE # 124
This site is also located on the San Luis Rey 7^" Quadrangle, Township
12 South, Range 4 West, It was found near the southern point of the project
on a flat alluvial area directly above the steep canyon. It lies at an
elevation of approximately 280 feet above sea level. It is surrounded by
a thin layer of brush. See Map 2, page 13 of this appendix.
The site consists of a large granite rock outcrop with one grinding
slick on it. There is no apparent midden associated with the site^ An
isolated find was made near this site. It consisted of one San Dieguito •
artifact, a scraping tool made of andesite.
-7-
VII, Evaluation of the Significance of the Affected Resources
Site CE # 123 can be assigned to the Luiseno culture group. It appears
to have been a sporadically used food processing area. The San Dieguito
artifact is not associated with the two grinding slicks. However, recent
*
excavations in San Diego County have shown that some San Dieguito sites
contain milling features once believed to be found only in sites used
by later cultures (O'Neil personal communication). Since no other artifacts
were found this site is deemed minor in terms of scientific importance.
Site CE # 124 can also be assigned to the Luiseno culture and was
probably used for intermittent food processing. As in the previous casej
the San Dieguito artifact is not associated with the grinding slick. This
site is also deemed of minor significance.
VIII, Research Potential
Not only for these sites in particular, but for the general vicinity,
a regional study of the archaeological resources would be most conducive
to the prehistory of the area. For the present, however, it is not within
the scope of this project to do so.
IX. Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action
For this project the impact on archaeological resources will be minimal,
since both sites found on the property are of minor significance and relatively
void of scientific interest.
X. Mitigating Action
For the proposed project, two archaeological sites were discovered
within the limits of the 21 acre parcel. Only one mitigating action is
necessary:
1. If, during project construction, archaeological or historical
material is uncovered, it should be reported to a qualified
archaeologist for advice and consultation.
The archaeological sites discovered have been recorded with the San
Diego Museum of Man. Their new numbers-are W-1202 and W-1203.
-9-
XI, Persons and Organizations Consulted
Anthropology Laboratory, San Diego State University
David Hanna
County of San Diego, Community Services Agency
Department of Sanitation and Flood Control
Dwight Smith
O'Neil, Dennis
Palomar Community College
San Diego Museum of Man
Ken Hedges
Gary Varner
Palomar Garanunity College
-10-
r
XII. Bibliography
Carrico, Richard L,
1973 Archaeological Environmental Impact Report - Palomar Airport
Road Properties 4584E. Unpublished manuscript, Westec Services,
Fink, Gary R.
1974 Archaeological Survey for the Proposed Palomar Airport Master
Plan. Unpublished manuscript.
O'Neil, Dennis
1976 Personal communication,
Rogers, Malcolm J.
1966 Ancient Hunters of the Far West. Copley Press, San Diego,
Warren, Claude N. and D. L. True
1961 "The San Dieguito Complex and Its Place in California Prehistory."
UCLA Survey Annual Report 1960-61, pp. 246-308.
-11-
PROJECT LOCATION FOR PALOIAR SHREDDER
•o U A -^^^ - Vl./X.c-
' W"--wiier. San Francisco ^ ^ ' -Tank *i)Peak ". ,'; «70
10'
/
•^7(_;;V>:y[;•7^:•T^ .. .. •
SITS FORM
PC)SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY , { )SAN DIEGO MUSSUil OP MAN
SOURCE OF REQUEST County Engineer
DATE OP REQUEST Aui^ust X^, 1974 DATE RECEIVED August 1^, 197^
PROJECT TITLE Palonar Airport Master Plan
.(X)THERE ARE NO RECORDED SITES IN TKE PROJECT AREA IN OUR PILES
•( )THE FOLLOWING SITES ARE RECORDED IK OR HEAR THS PROJECT AREA:
SITE
CULTURE: ( )SAN DIEGUITO ( )LA JOLLAN ( jKOTETAAY ( ) OTHER
y . . COMMENT - ' ^ O
TfpS:' . .( )VILLAGE ( )GAI'1P ( )HIDOEN '( )GRINDING STATIONS
.-..(• )ROCK ART ( )BURIAL ( )FLAKING STATION ( ) QUARRY
{ )OTHER
COMMENT
SITE
CULTUP^r ( )SAN DIEGUITO ( )LA JOLLAN ( )Km^kA1 ( )OTHER
•COMMENT " ; ^
TOPE: ( )VILLAGE ( )CAMP ( )MIDDE1'I ( )GRINDING STATION
( )ROCK ART ( )BURIAL ( )PLAKING STATION ( ).QUARRY ( -^OTEER
COMMENT •
1350 El Prado. Balboa Park, San Diego. California 92101, Telephone (714) 239-2001
REPORT ON ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FILES RECORD SEARCH
Source of Request: San Diego County
> of Request: August 5, 1974 __'Oc)Letter ( )Telephone ( ) In Person
Date Request Received: August 7, 1974 (x)Map Received (x)Map Returned
Name of Project: Palomar Airport Master Plan.
( ) The Museum of Man files show no recorded sites for the project area.
(x) The Museum of Man files show the following sites (x)within (x)in the vicinity of
the project area.
Site No. W-122 Culture(s): San Dieguito II. La Jolla II
Description: Highland accretion midden; oobble hearths. reported burial and
house pits -
Site No. Culture(s): La Jollan I-II, Yuman III
Description: Slough margin midden in canyon bottom; cobble hearths, reported
cretaation
Site No. W-124 Culture(s): San Dieguito II (trace). La Jolla II '
- Description; Highland scattered camps; cobble hearths and platforms
Site Ho, W-128 Culture(s): La Jolla I-II, Yuman III
Description: Highland accretion midden; cobble hearths, bedrock metates
Site No. W-310 Culture(s); San Dieguito II (trace). La Jollan II, Luiseno
Description: Coastal -valley creek terrace midden with hearths
Site Ho. W-521 ta Jolla II - Knoll top can^slte (recorded as County Engineer #16)
Please note: The project area may contain archaeological resources in addition to those
noted above. This report is made from San Diego Museum of Man files only
and may not include data pertaining to localities other than those covered
in previous Museum of Man surveys or gathered by other institutions or by
individuals.
j^^xt. check by: Ken Hedges • ^ ^ A
Date: Aupiust 7, 1974 " SignedI'^tci^jP ^^<q{JiaJ^J
__ J
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
NOISE STUDY
for
PALOMAR AIRPORT SOLID WASTE TRANSFER SITE
W. A. No. UJ7824
Reported by:
R. G. HALSTEAD
Engineering Technician III
Approved by:
Vj. R. DAVIDSON
Materials Engineer
December 22, 1976
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. Introduc tion 1
2. Present Noise 2
3. Future Noise 4
4. Environmental Impact 5
5. Mitigating Action 7
Attachments
Figure "A" - Location and Zoning Map
Figure "B" - Ldn 60 dB(A) Contour
Explanation of Noise Level Terms
i» Introduction
The Department of Sanitation and Flood Control of San Diego County proposes
to establish a Solid Waste Transfer Station near Palomar Airport. The 21-
acre site is located on County-owned property, within the Carlsbad City
Limits, east of El Camino Real and 2000 feet north of Palomar Airport Road.
The site is presently zoned OS - Open Space, The area adjacent to the site is
zoned M - Manufacturing and A - Agricultural.
The Transfer Station will consist of one to four buildings on the site,
depending on final design. The functions of the buildings are listed in Table I
TABLE I
Building Function
Receiving Refuse is dumped in this building by Trash
Trucks and private vehicles.
Shredding Refuse is transferred to shredder by conveyor
belt where the material is shredded.
Truck Loading/Compacting Shredded material is transferred to this
building by conveyor belt. The ferrous
metals are separated and the remaining
materials are loaded and compacted into
trailers for transfer to a nearby sanitary
landfill.
Access to the site will be via El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road.
El Camino Real is the major north-south route, which parallels Interstate
5, in the north coast area. In the area of the Transfer Site El Camino
Real is 82 feet wide, with 4 traffic lanes and a two-way left turn lane
in the median. Palomar Airport Road is the main route between Interstate
5 in the Carlsbad area and San Marcos. Between Palomar Airport and El
Camino Real it is a 64 foot roadway, with 4 traffic lanes. The remaining
portions of road are 40 feet wide. Listed in Table II are the present
traffic volumes furnished by the Department of Transportation Traffic
Division.
TABLE II
Road Name Location 1976 ADT
El Camino Real North of Palomar Airport Road 5920
El Camino Real South of Palomar Airport Road 6350
Palomar Airport Road East of El Camino Real 5480
Palomar Airport Road West of El Camino Real 4020
Approximately 5% of the vehicles using El Camino Real and Palomar Airport
Road are trucks.
The hours of operation of the Transfer Site will be from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m,
daily.
The nearest residence is located approximately 1900 feet westerly of the
property line. The nearest commercial building is located 400 feet from the
property line. The distance between the Beckman Instrument Facility and
the planned location of the shredder building is about 800 feet. These
buildings and the location of the site are shown on Figure "A".
For an explanation of the noise level terms in this report, see the
attachment at the end of this report.
2. Present Noise
The Equivalent Noise Level (L^^) and Ambient Noise Level (Lgg) were measured
at three locations in the area of the project site. The equipment used was
a BBN Instrument Company Model 614 Portable Noise Monitor, The location,
Leq and L90 measured are shown in Table III.
TABLE III
dB(A)
Location Date Time Leq L90
(1) Project Site 11-23-76 0450-0550 42 31
Project Site 12- 6-76 1220-1320 49 45
(2) El Camino Real 2000 ft. No. of
Palomar Airport Road
11-23-76 0345-0445 44 32
El Camino Real 2000 ft. No. of
Palomar Airport Road
12- 6-76 1325-1425 61 52
(3) Palomar Airport Road 3000 ft.
East of El Camino Real
11-23-76 0240-0340 55 31
Palomar Airport Road 3000 ft. 12- 6-76 1435-1535 70 57
East of El Camino Real
Using the measured Leq, the Day Night Average Sound Level (Ldn) was calcu-
lated for each measurement point. These Ldn values used for the roads
represent noise levels at a distance of 50 feet from the near lane of traffic
TABLE IV
Location
(1) Project Site
(2) El Camino Real 2000 ft, north of Palomar Airport Road
(3) Palomar Airport Road 3000 ft. east of El Camino Real
Ldn
50 dB(A)
62 dB(A)
69 dB(A)
The noise that is present at the proposed Transfer Site is generated by
traffic on El Cami no Real and Palomar Airport Road, aircraft flying over-
head and farm and construction equipment working in the area.
3. Future Noise
When the proposed Solid Waste Transfer Station is in operation, the noise
originating from the site will be from the increased traffic on El Camino
Real and Palomar Airport Road to and from the site and the shredding operation.
The Department of Sanitation and Flood Control estimates that 370 vehicles
per day will use the proposed facility. Of the 370 vehicles, 135 will be
"packer" type trash trucks which will bring in the refuse and 35 haul trucks
to remove the shredded material. The anticipated increase in the noise level
on El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road due to the increase in traffic
will be in the range of 2dB(A) at 50 feet from the near lane of traffic.
The noise generated by the shredding operation is estimated to be in the
range of 95-100 dBCA) at a distance of 50 feet from the source. Assuming
the noise source is a point-source and the drop-off rate is 6dB(A) per doubling
of distance, the 60dB(A) contour is calculated to be 2250 feet from the shred-
ding operation. If the shredding operation is located in a building, the
amount of noise reduction depends on the type of construction. For a wood
frame building with stucco exterior and drywall or plaster interior and the
windows closed, the reduction is 25-30dB(A). With the wood frame construction
and assuming the 6dB(A) drop-off, the 60dB(A) contour is calculated to be
280 feet from the exterior of the building. The noise reduction for a masonry
block fatiilding is in the range of 30-40 dB(A). The 60dB(A) contour with the
shredding operation housed in a masonry block building is calculated to be
160 feet from the exterior of the building.
The Integrated Planning Office at San Diego County has furnished a 1995
traffic projection of 30,000 ADT on El Camino Real and 27,000 ADT on Palomar
Airport Road, If these projected volumes are reached, it is anticipated
that the noise level will increase in the range of 6-7 dB(A), at 50 feet
from the near lane of traffic, over the present noise level. The traffic
to the Transfer Station will increase proportionally to the increase in
population in the area served by this site.
4. Environmental Impact
The present Ldn of the proposed Solid Waste Transfer Station site is
50 dB(A). If the Transfer Station is not developed, the Ldn will increase
by an amount directly proportional to the development of the area, the
increase in air traffic using Palomar Airport and the increase in traffic
on El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road.
The shredding operation will add significantly to the noise originating
from the Transfer Station.. If the shredder is housed in a light gage metal
building, which has few noise attenuating properties, the Ldn at Beckman
Instruments Co. Building, the closest building, will be in the estimated
range of 70 - 75 dB(A), The Ldn is anticipated to be in the range of 50 -
55 dB(A) if the shredder is housed in a wood frame or masonry block building-
The anticipated L90 at the Beckman Instruments Building will be in range of
45 - 65 dB(A) depending on the attenuation of the shredder building. This
is below the L90 limit of 70 dB(A) for a manufaction zone as shown, in
Table V, later in this report.
The shredder will be located about 200 feet from the easterly property line.
The Ldn and L90 are estimated to be in the range of 60 to 90 dB(A) and 55
to 85 dB(A) respectively at the easterly property line, depending on the
attenuation of the building in which the shredder is housed.
The nearest residence is located about 1,900 feet from the property line.
It is outside of the 60dB(A), Ldn contour, as shown on Figure "B".
The Transfer Station will be in the acceptable category as defined by
Table 3, on Page 18, of the "Preliminary Noise Element" of the San Diego
County General Plan, dated February 1975.
In Appendix A of the "Preliminary Noise Element," titled "Summary of Exist-
ing Noise Control Laws and Regulation," on pages 36 and 37 are portions of
Sections 36.401 through 36.443, Noise Abatement Control of the San Diego
County Code. Table V of this report gives the Zone Ambient Noise Level
Limits set by the San Diego County Code, as follows:
TABLE V
Zone
ZONE AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL LIMITS
Time
Sound Level Limit
(A-Weighted)
Decibels
R-1, R-l-A 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. 50
E-l-A, R-l-B, R-1(15) 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. 45
LC, LC-A, T-Temporary 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 40
R-2 and R-2-A
R-3, R-4. R-5, R-P, PRD, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. 60
and all other residential 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. 55
and estate zones 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 50
All Commercial zones 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. 60
7 p.m. to 10 p.m. 55
10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 55
M, M-1, M-2 Anytime 70
M-3 and all other Industrial and
Agricultural Zones, including
E-2-B Anytime 75
If a measurement location is on a boundary between two zoning
districts, the noise level limit for the zone from which the
sound is emanating shall apply.
The ambient noise levels which will originate from the Transfer Station
operation will be in the 70 to 85 dB(A) range at the property line, with
the shredders housed in light gage metal buildings. Therefore, the Trans-
fer station would be in violation of the County Code. (See page 4)
5. Mitigating Action
The shredding operations at the Transfer Station will raise the ambient
noise levels at the property line above the limits specified in the San
Dlego County Code. The shredders will have to be housed in buildings with
noise attenuating properties of 25 dB(A) minimum.
The noise from the shredders will also have to be attenuated for the health
and safety of personnel working at the Transfer Station.
The desired attenuation can be achieved by housing the shredders in either
wood frameJ masonry block buildings, a metal building with appropriate
noise attenuation.
Source: Development of Ground Transportation Systems Noise Contours
for the San Diego Region, Wyle Research Report WCR 73-78,
December 1973.
A-Weighted Sound Pressure Level, dB(A)
Sound levels that are integrated over all levels of several discrete frequency
bands with selective descrimination against loti and high frequencies are
termed A-weighted levels or simply dB(A) levels. They are commonly measured
with a sound level meter (ANSI Standard Sl.13-1971) that integrates and
weights the broadband signal input electronically- The A-weighting network
closely approximates the frequency response of the human ear, and the associated
levels can be time-averaged to yield average sound pressure levels which have
been widely correlated with degrees ofv community impact and annoyance.
Sound pressure level measurements in dB(A) are the basis for several more compre-
hensive measurement scales.
Ln Statistical A-Weighted Noise Level
The Ljj level represents .the A-weighted noise level which is exceeded N
percent of the time over the duration of the sample noise measurement. This
statistical descriptor has been utilized for assessment of noise impact of
traffic noise, where it has been applied to the peak traffic flow periods.
It represents a measure of the higher order sound levels occurring during the
measurement sample, L^ is normally expressed an L^Q, L^Q or LgQ,
Equivalent Noise Level, Lg
Lg is an average noise level based on the average energy content of the sound
rather than average sound pressure level. It is the sound pressure level,
in dB(A), which corresponds to the average energy of a sound propagating
past a point of interest during the averaging time period. Due to the math-
ematical definition of the decibel, the "energy mean" level will differ from
a mean of sound pressure levels. L is not measured directly but is calculated
from sound pressure levels measured^in dB(A), This descriptor is the basis
for both the and CNEL scales.
Community Noise Equivalent Level, CNEL
CNEL is a measure of the ciimulative noise exposure in the community. It
results from the summation of hourly Lg*s over a 24-hour time period with
increasing weighting factors applied to evening and nighttime time periods.
For CITKL calculations, day is defined as 7 AM to 7 PM with a weighting factor
of unity. Evening is 7 PM to 10 PM with a weighting factor of 3. Night- is
defined as 10 PM to 7 AM with occurrences during this time period deemed
10 times as significant as daytime.
Day-Night Average Sound Level, L^^
The day-night level is essentially the same as CNEL with the exception that
the evening time period has been dropped and all occurrences during this
3-hour period are now lumped into the daytime period. The formulation of
CNEL and L^^ produces will normally agree within 1 dB, The L^^
technique represents the evolution of CNEL in that this method provides
computational simplification of an established rating scale with no significant
loss of accuracy.
CUMULATIVE NOISE LEVEL FORMULAS:
1. Energy Equivalent Noise Level, Lgq
This is the average noise level (NL) based on energy
r 1 X% NL -[
Leq - 10 Logio L t2 - tl ^ 10 dt J
2. Community Noise Equivalent Level, CNEL
1900 D 2200 E 0700 N
CNEL = 10 Logio 24 j^ry^To- y^To y^ioi
L ^ 10 +3XZ_. 10 +10X^10 .J
D - Hourly L^q between 0700 and 1900
E - Hourly Lgq between 1900 and 2200
N - Hourly L^q between 2200 and 0700
3. Day-Night Noise Level, L^j^j ^
2200. D 0700 N+10
r n ^ C ^1
L 10 + 10 J
Ldn 10 Logio 24 L ^ygg 10 + §200
D - Hourly Lgq between 0700 and 2200
N - Hourly Lgq between 2200 and 0700
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AIR QUALITY CALCULATIONS
for
PALOMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION
W.A. No. UJ7842
Prepared by:
• • JON T. ROLLIN
B.A, Mathematics
January 17, 1977
AIR QUALITY
The opening of the Palomar Shredder Transfer Station will result in no
additional pollution from motor vehicles on a regional level in San Diego
County. The transportation related pollutants now associated with the
Encinitas operation will be transfered, with no increase, to the Palomar
Transfer Station and the Bonsall landfill site.
Locally, there will be air quality impacts in the area of the Palomar
Transfer operation. An estimate of these impacts is made in Section #1.
Section #2 calculates the amount of emissions saved on a regional level
if this facility begins operation.
Section #3 shows emissions saved.as the result of reduced cover material
requirements for shredded trash.
Section #4 is a summary of the first 3 sections.
SECTION #1 - LOCAL AIR QUALITY IMPACTS
Assumptions:
1. There will be a maximum daily average of 200 automobiles, pickups and
small trucks (1 ton or less). In addition there will be a maximum of 173
heavy duty vehicles (HDV) trips per day. This 173 vehicles includes 135
collection trucks, 35 truck tractor trips hauling shredded material and 3
truck trips to remove the ferrous metals. For calculation purposes a 50/50
gas/diesel split of HDV is assumed.
2. For calculating "local effects," the final two miles of driving
distance are included, for a total trip distance of 4 miles.
3. The shredder will operate 6 days a week, or 312 days a year. Total
"local'^ miles per year:
(200 cars/day)(4 miles)(312 days) = 249,600 miles/year
(173 HDV/day)(4 miles)(312 days) = 215,904 miles/year
The following figures for CO, NOx, and HG were derived from "Advanced
Air Quality Analysis" CALTRANS, June 1975,
Auto/Small Trucks HDV-gasoline HDV-diesel
CO
NOx
HC
32 gr/raile
3.1 gr/mile
2.7 gr/mile
130 gr/mile
8.9 gr/mile
15.0 gr/mile
19.5 gr/mile
30.6 gr/mile
3.1 gr/mile
Pollutants per year autos and pickup trucks:
CO = (249,600 miles)(32 gr/mile) =
NQx:= (249,600 miles)(3.1 gr/mile) =
HC = (249,600 miles)(2.7 gr/mile) =
7,987,200 gr/yr =
773,760 gr/yr =:
673,920 gr/yr =
8.8 ton/yr
.8 ton/yr
.7 ton/yr
Pollutants per year HDV (trucks-gasoline)
Since assuming 50/50 gas-diesel split, total yearly mileage must be
divided hence 215,904/2 = 107,952.
GO = (107,952)(130 gr/mile) = 14,033,740 gr/yr = 15.5 tons/year
N05G= (107,952)(8.9 gr/mile) = 960,773 gr/yr = 1.1 tons/year
HC = (107,952)(15.0 gr/mile) = 1,619,280 gr/yr = 1.8 tons/year
Pollutants per year HDV (trucks-diesel)
CO = (107,952)(19.5 gr/mile) = 2,105,064 gr/yr
NOx= (107,9S2)(30.6 gr/mile) = 3,303,331 gr/yr
HC
CO
NOx
HG
(107,952)( 3.1 gr/mile) = 334,651 gr/yr
TOTALS - VEHICLE GENERATED POLLUTANTS fLOCAL)
2.3 tons/year
3.6 tons/year
,4 ton/year
TOTALS
vehiclf
type
Cars
Pickups
Tons/Year
HDV
Gas
Tons/Year
HDV
Diesel
Tons/Year
TOTALS
Tons/Year
8,8 15.5 2.3 26.6
.8 1.1 3.6 5.5
.7 1.8 .4 2.9
10.3 18.4 6.3 35.0
SECTION #2 - NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE - AIR
Assumptions
1. People now using Encinitas would have to drive to Bonsall, an
additional 38 miles round trip. Approximately 30% of the traffic would
be impacted.
30% x 200 autos = 60 x 38 miles/day x 312 day/yr = 711,360 mi/yr
30% X 173 HDV = 52 X 38 miles/day x 312 day/yr = 616,512 mi/yr
2. The same pollution rate figures as appear in Section #1 apply
for these computations.
Pollutants per year: Auto and Light Truck
GO = (711,360 mi)(32 gr/mi) = 22,763,520 gr/yr = 25.1 tons/yr
NOx = (711,360 mi)(3.1 gr/mi) = 2,205,216 gr/yr = 2.4 tons/yr
HC = (711,360.mi)(2.7 gr/mi) = 1,920,672 gr/yr ~ 2.1 tons/yr
Pollutants per year: 50% HDV-gasoline 616,512/2 = 308,256
CO = (308,256 mi)(130 gr/mi) = 40,073,280 gr/yr = 44.1 tons/yr
NOx = (308,256 mi)(8.9 gr/mi) = 2,743,478 gr/yr =3,0 tons/yr
HC - (308,256 mi)(15,0 gr/mi) = 4,623,840 gr/yr = 5,1 tons/yr
Pollutants per year: 50% HDV-diesel
CO = (308,256 mi)(19,5 gr/mi) = 6,010,992 gr/yr = 6.6 tons/yr
NOx = (308,256 mi)(30.6 gr/mi) = 9,432,634 gr/yr =10.4 tons/yr
HC = (308,256 mi)(3.1 gr/mi) = 955,594 gr/yr = 1.0 tons/yr
Gars
tons/yr
TOTALS
HDV
gas-tons/yr
HDV
diesel-tons yr
TOTAL
POLLUTANT
tons/yr
CO 25.1 44.1 6.6 75.8
NOx 2.4 3.0 10.4 15.8
HC 2.4 5.1 1.0 8.2
TOTALS BY
VEHGILE TYPE 29.6
TONS/YEAR
52.2 18.0 99.8
SECTION #3 - EMISSIONS SAVED AT LANDFILL
Estimate of on site equipment not necessary at Bonsall because trash has been
shredded at Palomar and does not need to be covered as often.
1. Equipment usage, hours per day
1 dozer - 4 hrs/day
1 scraper - 2 hrs/day
2. Landfill operating at a maximum of 9 hours per day, 7 days a week,
360 days per year.
The following figures for CO, NOx, HG were derived from "Compilation
of Air Pollution Emissions Factors, AP-42," All figures are grams/hour.
CO NOx HC
Dozer 175 665 50
Scraper 660 2820 284
Average hourly rates per year:
dozer = 4 hours/day x 360 days/year = 1440 hours/year
scraper= 2 hours/day x 360 days/year = 720 hours/year
Dozer
CO = (1440 hrs/yr)(175 gr/hr) = 252,000 gr/yr = .3 tons/yr
NOx = (1440 hrs/yr)(66^ gr/hr) = 957,600 gr/yr =1.1 tons/yr
HC = (1440 hrs/yr)( 50 gr/hr) =* 72,000 gr/yr = .1 ton/yr
Scraper
CO = (720 hrs/yr)(660 gr/hr) = 475,200 gr/yr = .5 ton/yr
NOx = (720 hrs/yr)(2820 gr/hr)=2,030,400 gr/yr = 2.2 tons/yr
HC = (720 hrs/yr)(284 gr/hr) = 204,480 gr/yr = .2 ton/yr
Dozer Scraper Total Pollutant
Tons/Year
CO .3 .5 .8
NOx 1.1 2.2 3.3
HC .1 .2 .3
Total by
Equipment
type tons/yr
1.5 2.9 4.4
SECTION #4 - SUMMARY
Section #1
The opening of the Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station will impact
local air quality. A 1982 projected maximum of approximately 35 tons of
pollutants will be dispursed along the final two miles of the transfer station
access roads. It must be remembered that 9Q% of these emission volumes (not
the transfer vehicles moving shredded materials) are already existing at the
Encinitas Landfill, and will simply be relocated to the Palomar Site vicinity
when it begins operation. The reduced trip distance for private vehicles
and trash haulers more than compensates for the extra trip miles of the
transfer vehicles.
Section #2
If this facility were not opened, there would be additional dispursal of
approximately 99,8 tons/year of pollutants. The additional miles private
citizens and trash haulers would have to travel to get to the Bonsall landfill
would be the cause of the increase of pollutants to the regional air cell.
Section #3
Approximately 4.4 tons/year of emissions would be conserved locally
at the Bonsall landfill due to the reduced heavy equipment maintenance
required for shredded trash. If the unprocessed trash were brought directly
to the landfill, another bulldozer and scraper would be required.
Prepared hy:
JON T. ROLLIN
B.A. Mathematics
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CCMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ENERGY CALCULATIONS
for
PALOMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER
W.A No. UJ7842
January 20, 1977
ENERGY
Initially the transfer station will process 160,000 tons per year (540 tons
per day). The volume is expected to increase to 220,000 tons per year (740 tons
per day) by 1982. Energy in the form of electricity will be consumed operating
conveyers, sorters, shredders, compactors, and other associated equipment. The
Department of Sanitation and Flood Control estimates it will take 20 kilowatt
hours of electricity to process 1 tons of trash based upon knowledge of known
similar installations.
Once the trash has been processed, the shredded material will be taken to
the nearest landfill, which at this time is Bonsall (19 miles away). Twenty-ton
capacity trailers pulled by diesel powered prime movers will be used as transport
vehicles. It will require approximately 35 trips by the prime movers to remove
the shredded material and 2 or 3 trips a day to remove the ferrous metels. A
6-day a week maximum average of 135 trash packers and 200 private automobiles
and smaller trucks are expected at the transfer station each day by 1982.
Galciilations do not include the energy content of capital equipment, nor
do they include the requirements for general administration or research and
development. Human energy is omitted by convention, whatever its magnitude.
All energies are expressed in terms of BTU^s (amount of energy needed to increase
the temperature of 1 pound of water 1° farenheit), used for the operation or
inherent as fuel in the process. Electrical power generated from fossil fuel
stations (which operate at about 33% efficiency) is converted to BTU's by
multiplying by 10.342 BTU/KWH.* One gallon of petroleum fuel products cal-
culates out to 138,095 BTU.
This appendix contains three sections: energy expended as the result of
this operation; energy saved as the result of this operation; and a summary
* ir From Source to Use, Energy," Stoker, 1975
of the first two sections.
SECTION #1
Energy expended as the result of the Palomar Transfer Station
Below, in part a, are calculations showing approximate energy consumptions
for the operation of the shredder and recovery machinery. Part b shows energy
in the form of fuel expended moving the shredded trash to the Bonsall landfill.
a) Equipment Operations
Assumptions:
1) Shredding and ferrous metal recovery will require 20 KWH
(kilowatt hours) per ton. (Dept. of Sanitation & Flood Control)
2) The maximum volume figure of 740 tons per day will be used,
20 KWH/ton x 740 tons/day = (14,800 KWH) x (10,342 BTU/KWH) =
153,060,000 BTU/day
b) Transportation
Assumptions:
1) Round trip distance will be 38 miles to the Bonsall landfill site.
2) A maximum of 35 trips per day will be necessary.
3) Transfer vehicles average 5 m.p.g. (County General Services)
35 trips X 38 miles ^ 1,330 miles/day 5 m.p.g. = 266 gallons/day x
138,095 BTU/Gal = 36,733,270 BTU/day.
SECTION #2
Energy conserved aa the result of the Palomar Transfer Station
Calculations in part a convert miles not driven by commercial haulers and
private citizens because of the transfer station into BTU's per day. Part b
shows the energy savings realized by recycling the ferrous metals. The energy
not consumed by an additional bulldozer and scrapper at the Bonsall landfill
is computed in part c.
a) Transportation
Assumptions:
1) Approximately 30% of the 135 packers and private automobiles
coming from the south and west of the Palomar operation will
not have to drive the additional 38 miles round trip to the
Bonsall landfill.
2) Automobiles and pickup trucks average 14 m.p.g.
3) Collection vehicles (packers) average 5 m.p.g.
4) Petroleum fuel = 138,095 BTU/Gallon
30% x 135 packers per day x 38 miles = 1,539 miles per day saved
1,539 miles per day i-5 mpg = 308 gal. x 138,095 BTU/Gal = 42,505,641 BTU/day
30% X 200 autos and pickups per day x 38 miles = 2,280 miles per day saved
2,280 miles per day * 14 m.p.g. = 163 Gal. x 138,095 BTU/Gal = 22,509,485 B
day
TOTAL 65,015,126 BTU/day
b) Resource Recovery
Assumptions:
1) The only material recovery included in this project will be
ferrous metals. 6% of the total U.S. energy is used by the steel
industry. To process a ton of steel, beginning with mining oper-
ations through mill processing, requires approximately 40,000,000 BTU.*
Recycling steel requires only 27,000,000 BTU per ton to reach the
same stage of production.* Each ton of recycled steel than saves
13,000,000 BTU.
* Russell, A.S. - Energy Conservation in Primary Metals Processing in Energy
Delta, Supply vs. Demand (Vol 35 of Science & Technology Series).
2) The maximum figure of 740 tons/day will be used.
3) An average of 7% by weight of incoming trash is recyclable ferrous
metals. Due to mechanical efficiencies, about 90% of these metals
can be recovered. (Dept. of Sanitation & Flood Control)
7% X 740 tons/day x 90% = 47 tons/day
47 tons/day x 13,000,000 BTU/ton = 611,000,000 BTU/day
c) Landfill Equipment
Assumptions:
1) When the material reaches the landfill, it will not have to be
covered as frequently as unshredded trash. This effect will save
energy in the form of diesel fuel forone D-8 tractor (9 gal. per
hour) and a scrapper (4 gal. per hour). (General Services)
2) Petroleum fuels = 138,095 BTU per gallon.
3) The bulldozer would have worked 4 hours a day and the scrapper
2 hours per day.
1 scrapper x 2 hrs/day x 4 gallons per hour = 8 gallons/day
8 gallons/day x 138,095 BTU/gal = 1,104,760 BTU/day
1 bull dozer x 4 hours/day x 9 gallons per hour = 36 gallons/day
36 gaUons/day x 138,095 BTU/gallons = 4,971,420 BTU/day
TOTAL = 6,076,180 BTU/day
SECTION #3
Summary
The Palomar Transfer Station is an efficient operation that nets a surplus
of energy on a comparison of consumption and conservation. Below is a summary
of the energy 'T)alance sheet."
Section 1 - Energy Consumed Section 2 - Energy Conserved
(Part A) On-Site
Equipment Usage
(Part B) Trans-
portation of
Shredded Trash
153,060,000 BTU/day
36,733,270 BTU/day
(Part A) Reduced
Public Driving 65,015,126 BTU/day
Distance
(Part B) Recov-
ered Metal -611,000,000 BTU/day
(Part C) Reduced
Equipment Usage 6,076,180 BTU/day
at Landfill
TOTALS 189,793,270 BTU/day .682,091,306 BTU/day
As can be seen by subtracting the "consumed" from the "conserved" a surplus
of 492,298,036 BTU/day, in the form of energy conserved, is realized. Assuming
the shredder is operated 312 days per year, this results in a savings of
153,596,000,000 BTU's peryear. This figure is equivalent to over 1 million
gallons of petroleum fuels each year.
Future expansion of the station may dictate the addition of more recovery
equipment including a machine or device to separate and recover aluminum.
The total energy requirement for production per ton of shipped aluminum is
approximately 200,000,000 BTU. Recycled alimiinum consumes only 25,000,000
BTU per ton, a net saving of 175,000,000 BTU per ton. 1/2% of the total
incoming trash weight at the Palomar site is expected to be reclaimable
aluminum. When the 220,000 ton/year maximum incoming volume is reached at
the Palomar Transfer Station, approximately 1100 tons per year of recyclable
aluminum should be available for recovery. When the aluminum separator is
added on, an additional 192,500,000,000 BTU's per year will be able to be
conserved, which is equivalent to a savings of well over "1.3 million gallons
of oil.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
PALOMAR SOLID WASTE TRANSFER STATION
Carlsbad, California
Project UJ7842
March 1, 1977
C ontents
Page
I. Description of Project 1
A. Location 1
B. Objectives 1
II. Environmental Setting 3
A. Topography 3
B. Land Use 3
C. Biology 4
D. Geology 5
E. Archaeology 6
F. Noise 7
0. Climate and Air Quality 7
H. Traffic/Circulation 9
1, Energy 9
III. Environmental Impacts 9
A. Biology 9
B. Geology 10
C. Archaeology 11
D. Noise 11
E. Air Quality 12
F. Traffic 13
G. Energy 15
H. Economics 16
IV. Summary of Beneficial and Adverse Environmental Impacts 16
V. Mitigation Measures 18
VI. Alternatives to the Proposed Project 18
VII. Short-term vs. Long-term Impacts 19
VIII, Irreversible Environmental Impacts 20
IX. Growth Inducing Impacts of the Project 20
X. Agencies, Organizations and Individuals Consulted 20
Table of Appendices
Appendix 1 - Biology
Appendix 2 - Geology
Appendix 3 - Archaeology
Appendix 4 - Noise
Appendix 5 - Air Quality
Appendix 6 - Energy
In the interest of conserving energy and paper, we have not included copies
of the technical reports with the draft EIR. Each appendix has been summarized
in the body of the report. If you wish to review one or more appendices,
they are available at the following locations:
1) Environmental Analysis Division
9150 Chesapeake Drive
San Diego, GA 92123
2) Department of Sanitation and Flood Control
5555 Overland Avenue, Bldg. 2
San Diego, CA 92123
3) The County Branch Library nearest the project site
I. Description of Project
A. Location
The Palomar Solid Waste Transfer Station will be located about 1600 feet
northeast of the intersection of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road
in north coastal San Diego County. The project site is entirely within the
city limits of Carlsbad. Vista is 4,3 miles to the northeast, and San
Marcos is 5.3 miles east. Palomar Airport, a county-operated facility,
is to the west across El Camino Real. (Map 1 - Vicinity Map)
B. Objectives
This project is the construction and operation of a resource recovery
refuse transfer facility on county-owned land. This operation will produce
shredded solid waste materials which can be more easily disposed at
sanitary landfill sites without using excessive amounts of cover material.
Recovery of recyclable material will also be done at the project site.
Because of the current shortage of available landfill sites, and the
large volume of solid wastes generated annually in the county, an alter-
native to the potential shortage of landfill space is needed. This transfer
station and associated landfill will serve as a replacement for the closed
county landfills previously operated at Palomar Airport and Encinitas.
The transfer station will initially be capable of receiving and processing
166,000 tons of solid waste per year and will increase to 220,000 tons per
year by 1982, The facility will shred wastes, separate ferrous metals
for resale, and compact the remaining material into Icirge tractor trailers
for efficient transportation to appropriate disposal sites.
1
Perhaps the most important purpose of shredding is the savings in
space and earth cover material. Shredded solid wastes compacts with less
effort and has a greater density than unshredded solid wastes. Less
material is required for periodic covering.
Currently there are approximately 50 shredder operations in the U.S.
and Canada. At this time shredding is most commonly employed to prepare
refuse for landfilling; however, it is probable that resource recovery
will provide the major impetus for future increases in the number of
shredder operations. Shredding facilitates resource recovery by reducing
refuse to small 4" nominal size particles which can be processed by
resource recovery equipment such as magnetic separators, air classifiers,
and electronic sorting equipment. Most resource recovery systems require
shredding as one of the first steps in the overall process.
The facility will consist of approximately three buildings (1. 6000
square feet and 36 feet high, 2. 2000 square feet and 24 feet high,
3. 3000 square feet and 24 feet high), conveyor belts, shredder machines,
magnetic separators, trailer loaders, pavement, security fencing, utilities,
parking and appurtenant items for complete operation. All processing
operations will be done in enclosed buildings to reduce noise and odor
impacts. Approximately 11,000 square feet of space may be required.
Some buildings may be as high as 36 feet. The project site is within
reach of sewer, electricity, and water services.
A similar, although more extensive, resource recovery plant is
currently operating in the El Cajon area. This facility has full resource
recovery capability, while the Palomar project will only shred the solid
waste and separate ferrous metals.
c o
•H -P CC +J
CO
^1
OJ
c
CO
EH
i~l Cd E O
o
•H
O
CJ
O U
6il
>• 2
J»
ffl -I 9
£91 -1
6
V
CO cu
CO O S 2:
Not included in this project, but planned for the future, are devices
to recover additional resources from processed trash. Sufficient ground
and building space will be reserved to add additional equipment, which
might include the following items: 1) an air classifier which will
separate paper and other organics from heavier items, 2) extracting
equipment to separate out zinc, brass, copper and aluminum, 3) glass
extraction, if it becomes economically feasible, 4) automobile and truck
tire recovery, and 5) energy conversion process.
II. Environmental Setting of the Proposed Project
A. Topography
The Palomar Transfer Station will be situated on 21 acres of County-owned
land in the southwesterly portion of the City of Carlsbad. The general
vicinity consists of gently rolling hills with an occasional canyon or
creek bed among them. The elevations adjacent to the site range from
200 to 400 feet above mean sea level. The Pacific Ocean is 4.25 miles
to the west. The site includes a creek, which is tributary to Agua
Hedionda Creek, directly east of the project location.
Elevations on the site range from 290 to 370 feet above mean sea
level. Natural drainage crosses the property in a north to south pattern,
until it is diverted southeast by a natural channel and eventually empties
into Agua Hedionda Creek.
B. Land Use
There are several land uses in the general vicinity of the proposed
Palomar Transfer Station. The land to the west contains the Palomar
Airport, while to the south is land owned by the County of San Diego in
conjunction with the F.A.A.'s clear zone requirements. To the southwest
of the site are 2 small buildings owned by the Carlsbad Mimicipal Water District.
3
To the north are two light manufacturing businesses similar to the
ones occupying the industrial park south of Palomar Airport Road. Most
of the land in this direction has been disturbed by agriculture in the
past, but is now vacant.
The predominant land use in this area of the county is agriculture,
although urbanization is reducing this land use.
The Palomar Transfer Station is not in conformance with the City of
Carlsbad's General Plan. Current zoning for the subject property is 0-^
(open space). The City of Carlsbad is considering an amendment to its
General Plan to designate the area for government use.
The nearest residence is more than 0.3 mile north of the project
site, while the closest private industry is 0.4 mile to the northwest.
G. Biology
The majority of the project site is located in an area previously
used for farming activities. It presently supports introduced and native
grasses and forbs. Indicative species of this disturbed environment are
mustard, tumbleweed, filaree, and various grasses such as wild oat.
An inland sage scrub community (Thorne 1976) covers approximately
one-half of the shredder site. This is the western fringe of a larger
inland sage/mixed chaparral complex located east and north of the project.
(Refer to Vegetation Map, included in the Biology Appendix) Species
such as scrub oak, manzanita, lemonadeberry, and prickley-pear cactus
were noted here.
Animals observed on the site and in the vicinity are indicative of
the disturbed conditions of this environment.
Avian raptor species noted included one white-tailed kite, one
red-tailed hawk and one turkey vulture. This seems to indicate a sub-
stantial small mammal population such as various species of rodents and
rabbits. This is further indicated by the large amount of fecal material
containing mammal fur observed in this area. The scat was identified
to be from the coyote. Other large carnivorous mammals expected are
the bobcat and gray fox.
No reptiles were observed as the biology field survey was conducted
during the winter. Most reptilian species become inactive during this
time of year. A pacific tree frog was heard in the inland sage community,
A small drainage swale, containing no water, runs through this area.
(Refer to Vegetation Map included in the Biology Appendix)
No rare or endangered species were observed. The Califomia Native
Plant Society maps were checked for the presence of any rare or endangered
plant species. These maps did not show any recorded rare or endangered
plants growing in or around the project site. j
If further Information on this subject is required, the Biology
Appendix is available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division,
the Department of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch
library nearest the project site.
D. Geology
There are three geologic formations of sedimentary origin that are
exposed in the project area. From youngest to oldest, these are the
Del Mar formation, the Point Loma formation, and the Lusardi formation.
The Del Mar Formation is the youngest formation in the project
area and consists locally of fine to medium grained sandstones and mudstones
with thin interbedded layers of shale. The age of the Del Mar Formation
is well established as Eocene on the basis of its stratigraphic relationship
and its fossil content.
The Point Loma Formation, the middle member of the Cretaceous Rosario
Group, consists of dark gray to green shales with interbedded layers of
fine grained, gray to yellow, highly cemented sandstones. The Upper
Cretaceous age of the Point Loma Formation is based on abundant collections
of mollusks, foraminifera and coccoliths.
The Lusardi Formation, the lower member of the Rosario Group, is
a massive boulder and cobble conglomerate with lenses of medium grained
sandstone. In the project area the Lusardi Formation is composed almost
entirely of weathered quartz diorite boulders and granitic debris. The
Lusardi is generally thought to be overlain with apparent conformity by,
and interfingered with, the Point Loma Formation. No fossils have been
collected from the Lusardi Formation but its apparent stratigraphic
position indicates an age of early Late Cretaceous.
No landslides were found on the project site, but a landslide is
present on the southeastern wall of the large canyon east of the site.
The portion of the project site underlain by the Del Mar formation,
should not be susceptible to sliding.
If you require further information on this subject, the appendix
is available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the
Department of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch
library nearest the project site. (See Table of Appendices)
E, Archaeology
An archaeological survey of the Palomar Transfer Station site was
done by Janet Hightower, archaeologist with the Department of Transportation,
6
Two small archaeological sites of minor significance were discovered
and recorded.
Site CE#123 consists of two small milling areas and a non-associated
tool. Two grinding slicks and a San Dieguito tool were the only cultural
remains present. Site CE^^124 consists of one grinding slick with no
artifacts or midden observed.
If you require further information on this subject, the Appendix
is available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the
Department of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library
nearest the project site, (See Table of Appendices)
F. Noise
The present noise level at the site is very low, with Lgo levels of
31 dB(A) during the night and 45 dB(A) during the day. On-site noise is
generated from traffic on El Camino Real and aircraft noise from Palomar
Airport,
If you require further information on this subject, the Appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)
G. Climate and Air Quality
Temperatures are moderate in the project area. The mean daily
maximum in July and August is 82°F but higher readings of over lOOOp
have been recorded during September and October. Minimum readings during
the summer average near 6OOE During the winter months the minimum averages
420F while afternoon readings will range in the upper 60*^?^ s.
Precipitation is light in ths Palomar Airport area. The mean of
fourteen years of available records shows 16.28 inches per year. Normally,
there are about 28 days per year with 0,10 inch or more of precipitation.
Typically, this area receives about 233 clear days per year, 62
days of partly cloudy weather, and 70 cloudy days. The wind is usually
out of the west or southwest, although winds from other directions may
occur under various climatic conditions.
Relative humidity during the winter months ranges from about 55 to
75 percent, while summer readings- might average about 5 percent higher.
The nearest Air Pollution Control District monitoring station is
in Oceanside, 8 miles to the northwest. There is a monitoring station
in Escondido, but due to its inland location, Oceanside,wuld more closely
approximate the air quality conditions of the Palomar transfer site.
Air quality conditions measured in total oxidants parts per million
(PPM) at the Oceanside station during 1975 were:
Average of Daily
Maximum Hourly
Number of Hours
Exceeding Federal
Period Averages (PPM) Standards
January .04 7
February .04 0
March No Data 2
April ,05 2
May .06 16
June .06 13
July .06 4
August .05 5
September .08 37
October .07 38
November .07 29
December .05 9
If you require further information on this subject, the Appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest
the project site, (See Table of Appendices)
8
H. Traffic/C ireulation
Access to the proposed Palomar Transfer Station will be provided
from El Camino Real, a major highway, and Palomar Airport Road.
El Camino Real extends from the City of Oceanside to within a mile
of San Elijo Lagoon. Near the site, it contains 48 feet of driving
lanes, 14 feet of two-way left turn lanes and 16 feet of paved shoulders.
Current Average Daily Traffic (ADT) is 7,000. The existing peak traffic
capacity is 30,000 ADT.
Palomar Airport Road connects Interstate 5 to the western fringe
of San Marcos, It has 64 feet of paved roadbed width west of El Camino
Real, East of El Camino Real the average width of Palomar Airport Road is
36-40 feet. Existing traffic is 4,000 vehicles- per day, but the road can
accommodate up to 18,000 ADT.
Since 1974 there have been three accidents, all non-fatal at the
intersection of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real. ^5
I, Energy
The existing site is in an undeveloped state, and thus consumes
or conserves no energy.
III. Environmental Impacts
A. Biology
Most of the project area has been disrupted by previous agricultural
activities. As a consequence, most of the constinction (4-5 acres) and
road grading will primarily result in loss of grasses and forbs. The
majorilry of these plants are short-lived and would eventually be replaced
by species of the climax community (such as laurel sumac, sage brush,
etc.,.); therefore, their loss is minimal.
The construction of the solid waste transfer station will also
remove approximately 4-5 acres of inland sage/mixed chaparral vegetation.
This is a relatively small portion of a much larger stand of inland
sage/mixed chaparral vegetation. This stand extends approximately
one-half mile north, 1,000 feet east, and 1,500 feet southeast of the
project site.
Approximately 10 acres of wildlife habitat will be lost due to
construction activities. This loss will be relatively unimportant and
have minimal impacts as the area is very disturbed.
Animals such as small rodents and reptiles, incapable of escaping
construction activities could be destroyed. Others may migrate to
surrounding areas and compete with resident wildlife for food and shelter.
Noise from construction and shredding operations could affect some
shy wildlife species in tlie vicinity. California seagulls, scavengers
of refuse, should not be attracted to this site as the refuse will be
processed daily in enclosed buildings, compacted into trailers, and then
transferred to a sanitary landfill for proper disposal.
If further information is required on this subject, the Appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest
the project site,
B, Geology
This project will not seriously affect the understanding of the
geologic exposures found in the area. The project will be located on the higher
10
elevations, away from the floor and lower walls of the adjacent canyon.
If you require further information on this subject, the appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)
G. Archaeology
Both sites discovered are of minor scientific importance. The recordation
of them is sufficient to mitigate impact which will occur as a result of this
project. Both sites have been submitted to the San Diego Museum of Man for
recordation.
If you require fxn:ther information on this subject, the appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)
D. Noise
The major source of noise, when the Palomar Solid Waste Transfer
Station becomes operational, will be the shredding operation and
vehicular traffic. The noise generated by the shredder
will be in the range of 95-100 dB(A) at distance of 50 feet. Depending on the
type of construction used for building and housing the shredder, the 100 dB(A)
noise level would be reduced to 55 dB(A) at a distance of 500 feet. This
distance is based on the assumption that the shredder would act as a point
source of noise and the noise dropoff rate would be 5 dB(A) per doubling
of distance.
The Federal Highway Administration has established environmentally
acceptable Leq levels adjacent to highways in terms of adjacent property
use or development. The maximum Leq level for residential areas is 67 dB(A)
11
and for parks, cemeteries and similar facilities, 57 dB(A). No levels have
been established for undeveloped lands. The estimated on-site sound levels
can be evaluated relative to these criteria.
California Vehicle Code Section 23130 specifies noise limits for certain
sized vehicles, operating speeds and distances from the roadway. For a gross
vehicle weight of 6,000 pounds or more at 50 feet from the center of the lane
of travel, the noise limit is 86 dB(A) if the speed is less than 35 miles
per hour (mph) and 90 dB(A) if the speed is greater than 35 mph. Large
vehicles are restricted to 80 dB(A) after 1977; 70 dB(A) after 1987.
When the Transfer Station becomes operational, it is anticipated that
the initial daily traffic volume increase on El Cajnino Real and Palomar
Airport Road to the site will be 200 passenger cars and pickup trucks, 135
collector trucks and 35 haul trucks. The present Leq generated by traffic
on El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road near the site are 61 dB(A) and
70 dB(A) respectively. It is anticipated the increase in traffic will produce
an increase in the Leq of both roads less than 4 dB(A) at 50 feet from the
near lane of traffic.
The noise impact on the property adjacent to the Palomar Solid Waste
Transfer Station, along El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road due to the
operation of the Transfer Station and increase in traffic will not be significant.
If you require further information on this subject, the appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)
E. Air Quality
Air quality will be impacted both locally and regionally by this project.
Locally, the vehicle exhaust emissions now associated with the travel to the
12
Encinitas Landfill will be redirected to the Palomar site. A 1982 projected
maximum of approximately 35 tons per year of pollutants from vehicles bringing
lirash to be processed will be dispersed along the final two miles of the transfer
station access roads. It must be remembered that 90% of these emission volumes
(not the transfer vehicles moving shredded materials) are already existing
at the Encinitas Landfill, and will simply be transferred to the Palomar
site when it begins operation. The reduced trip distance for private vehicles
and trash haulers more than compensates for the extra miles per trip by the
transfer vehicles.
Another beneficial local impact will involve the dispersal of shredded
trash at a landfill. Approximately 4.4 tons/year of vehicle emissions will
be conserved locally at the Bonsall landfill (currently the only existing landfill
in the vicinity) due to the reduced heavy equipment required for shredded
trash. If unprocessed trash were brought directly to the landfill, another
bulldozer and scraper would be required for a total of six hours every workday.
On a regional level a beneficial impact will result when this project
is implemented. If this facility were not opened, the additional miles
private citizens and trash haulers would have to travel to get to the Bonsall
landfill would be the cause of the increase of pollutants to the regional
air cell.
If you require further information on this subject, the appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis.Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)
Traffic
Traffic on El Camino Real in the vicinity of the transfer station entrance
is expected to increase by an average of 375 vehicles per day by 1982. This
13
additional traffic would be comprised of 135 trash packers, 3 trucks hauling
ferrous metals for recycling, 200 private automobiles and pickups and 35 prime
movers (trucks hauling the shredded trash to the nearest available landfill).
Three hundred seventy-five vehicles added to the existing traffic on either
road. El Camino Real or Palomar Airport Road, equivalent to 750 ADT, will result
in traffic volumes well within the capacity of these roads (see traffic table).
The transfer station will be open 6 days a week, Monday through Saturday,
It will result in no significant traffic impacts.
The current adopted County General Plan Circulation Element (Sheet 4)
shows both Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real as prime arterials with
capacities of 40,000 each. The County's Integrated Planning Office has
projected ADT's for 1995 of less than 30,000 on both roads in the vicinity
of the project.
Traffic Table
Road
Name
Existing
ADT
C urrent
Capacity
(ADT)
1995
Projected
ADT
(IPO)
*1995
Circulation
Element
Capacity
Palomar Airport
(West of El
Camino Real)
4,020 18,000 8,000 40,000
Palomar Airport
(East of El
Camino Real)
5,480 18,000 27,000 40,000
El Camino Real
(North of Palomar
Airport Road)
5,920 30,000 19,000 40,000
El Camino Real
(South of Palomar
Airport Road)
6,350 30,000 30,000 40,000
to accommodate population growth.
14
G. Energy
The Palomar Transfer Station will net a surplus of energy on a comparison
of consumption and conservation. The following is a summary of the energy
"balance sheet."
Section 1 - Energy Consumed
On-Site
Equipment 153,060,000 BTU/day
Usage
Section 2 - Energy Conserved
Reduced
Public 65,015,126 BTU/day
Driving
Distance
Transpor-
tation of
Shredded
Trash
36,733,270 BTU/day
TOTAL 189,793,270 BTU/day
Recovered
Metal
Reduced
Equipment
Usage at
Landfill
(After trash
shredding)
585,000,000 BTU/day
6,076,180 BTU/day
TOTAL 656,091,306 BTU/day
As can be seen by subtracting the "consumed" value from the "conserved"
value, a surplus of 466,298,036 BTU/day in the form of energy conserved, is
realized. Assuming the shredder is operated 312 days per year, this results
in a savings of 145,390,000,000 BTU's per year. This figure is equivalent to
the energy potential of over 1 million gallons of petroleum fuels each year.
The facility will be designed to allow the future addition of more
recovery equipment including a device to separate and recover aluminum. Total
energy requirement for production per ton of shipped aluminum is approximately
200,000,000 BTU. Recycled aluminum consumes only 25,000,000 BTU per ton, a
net saving of 175,000,000 BTU per ton. One-half percent (^%) of the total
incoming trash weight at the Palomar site is expected to be reclaimable
—efluminum. When the 220,000 ton/year maximum of solid waste material is reached
at the Palomar Transfer Station, it is expected that about 1100 tons per year
of recyclable aluminum will be salvaged per year.
15
If you require further information on this subject, the appendix is
available for review at the Environmental Analysis Division, the Department
of Sanitation and Flood Control, and the County branch library nearest the
project site. (See Table of Appendices)
H. Economics
Initial construction cost for the transfer station will be $3,5 million.
Fixed equipment such as the shredder, conveyers and magnetic separators will
cost approximately $673,000 a year to operate- The mobile equipment (trucks
and trailers) needed to transport the shredded material to the Bonsall Landfill
will cost approximately $300,000 a year.
Seven-percent of the bulk incoming volume of trash will be recoverable
ferrous metals. At a 90% recovery rate, 10,080 tons per year of saleable
scrap iron and other ferrous metals can be recovered and recycled. At an
average price of $25 a ton, this will generate revenues of about $252,000
a year. Tbis revenue will help offset the operational costs mentioned above,
A shredder transfer operation is currently about 25% more expensive than
a regular landfill. Due to increased resistance by citizens to landfills,
trash disposal will necessarily become more expensive. Shredder operations
and ultimately full resource recovery will be a large portion of the solution
to this pressing problem.
IV, Summary of Beneficial and Adverse Environmental Impacts
Beneficial
Due to the ferrous metals recovered and the transfer station's centralized
location, over 145 billion BTUs.are expected to be conserved annually. That
represents energy equivalent to over 1 million gallons of petroleum fuels
each year.
16
Although the additional traffic generated by the Palomar Transfer
Station will add a maximum of 35 tons of pollutants annually along the
final two miles of access roads, the overall air quality impact will be
beneficial. If the facility were not opened, an additional 99.8 tons/year
of pollutants would be dispersed by vehicles driving the additional miles
necessary to reach the Bonsall site. Four and four-tenths (4.4) tons of
emissions per year will also be conserved at the Bonsall landfill due to
the reduced need of labor to cover shredded trash.
Adverse
Ten (10) acres of land previously disturbed by agriculture will be
graded and built upon. This construction will result in the loss of
existing grasses and habitat for animals in the area.
The two minor archaeology sites found within the project boundaries
will be covered by construction activity. The San Diego County Department
of Transportation archaeologist has indicated, however, that the recording
of these sites with the San Diego Museum of Man and surface collection
of artifacts, is sufficient to mitigate them. This has been done by
Department of Transportation archaeologists.
Increased noise levels will result from both the on-site shredding
operation and the increased vehicular activity of El Camino Real and
Palomar Airport Road, Existing attenuation techniques can reduce processing
noises to an acceptable level. The noise increase associated with the 1982
maximum traffic generated by this project is 4 dB(A), Leq.
Traffic will increase on both El Camino Real and Palomar Airport
Road. An average of 373 vehicles per day generated by this project,
expected to be reached by 1982, will be an increase well within the capacity
of both roads.
17
The transfer operation will cost about three-quarters of a million
dollars per year. This is roughly 25 percent higher than the operating
costs of a landfill. As technology increases, and resource recovery
becomes more efficient, the cost per ton for an operation such as the
one proposed will become financially comparable to landfills.
V* Mitigation Measures
1. Dust control will be maintained on site.
2. Design of the facility and the access road will include all
appropriate safety criteria.
3. Any cultural remains discovered during construction will be
reported to a qualified archaeologist for evaluation and consideration.
4. - Noise from the plant operation will be attenuated to acceptable
levels, at the property line, according to 1±e County's noise ordinance.
5. The site will be landscaped to blend in with surrounding native
vegetation. All buildings will be painted earthtone (light brown) to
minimize the visual impact from the main roads.
6. Blowing of waste and waste fragments will be prevented by the
use of enclosed structures.
VI. Altematives to the Project
A. No Project
If this project is not implemented, an opportunity to reclaim or
recover usable materials and conserve landfill volume will be lost.
The Encinitas Landfill closed in April 1977. Public and private
collectors from Carlsbad, Vista, San Marcos, Escondido and surrounding
rural areas in the vicinity are now served only by the Bonsall Landfill,
Waste from the southem portion of the San Dieguito area is transported to
the City's Miramar Landfill. The lack of a centralized disposal site
to replace Encinitas would be costly in terms of driving distances.
18
energy consumption, trash hauling costs and the remaining life of existing
landfills.
B. Aitemative Sites
Several sites were evaluated using the following criteria: (See Map 2)
1) Land Use - A prime site would already belong to the County and
have been disturbed by some previous activity. For a project such as
this, isolation from private residences and compatability with airrounding
land uses would be preferred.
2) Location - A centralized location was necessary to minimize
driving distances, A site must have access roads with sufficient
capacity and structural capability to accomodate anticipated traffic
increases.
3) Utilities - The site should also have full sewer, electricity,
and water services with a reasonable distance.
None of the aitemative sites evaluated could meet as many of the
required criteria as the Palomar site. The only other possible location
for the shredder which meets the above criteria is the San Marcos Landfill.
This proposed landfill, located seven miles to the southeast of the current ^
site, is in various stages of governmental approval. As part of the Environ-
mental Impact Report which was written for this project, the possibility
of locating the shredder there was discussed. Thus, if the Palomar
location for the shredder is not approved, the shredder will be located
at the San Marcos Landfill site.
VII. Short-term vs. Long-term Impacts
Short-term impacts will include construction impacts associated
with the project. Dust, if not properly controlled, and noise and traffic
from construction equipment will last during the construction phase of
the operation.
19
ALTERNATE SITES
Alternate Sites Considered for Resource
Recovery Plant. These sites all had
EIRs and were submitted to the appro-
priate cities:
Escondido-traffic problems
San Maircos-traffic problems
San Marc OS-traffic problems
Encinitas-large development,
citizen pressiire against site
Lake Hodges-traffic problems
Imperial Beach-trailer court
nearbyj is not secluded
Site of El Cajon Resource
Recovery Plant
Site for Transfer Station
r /
SOL ID WASTE MANAGENEN
COASTAL ZONE
• Sanitary Fill
• Resource Recovery plont
Resource Recovery
Service Area
Colors Fill Service Area
imperial
Beach
Long-term impacts will be the permanent land re-configuration which
will include grading, paving and construction on the site for buildings
and access roads. Increased traffic and noise are potential Jong-term
impacts associated with the operation of the transfer site.
VIII. Irreversible Environmental Impacts
The project, if implemented, will take about 10 acres of vacant land
and commit it to use for a County transfer station. All plants on the
site and all animals that cannot escape before grading will be lost.
The site will be landscaped upon completion of construction and birds and
rodents characteristic of disturbed areas might move back onto the site.
IX. Growth Inducing Impacts
This project is a replacement for two landfills. Design capacity
of 800 tons/day will provide for projected solid waste tonnages.through
1982, The utilities sewer, water, telephone, electricity are already
available and will not require any new services brought into the area.
While the existence of a solid waste transfer station should not induce
businesses or residents to move into the area, certain businesses that
produce large quantities of solid wastes may find the availability of
the transfer station desirable in their location deliberations.
For these reasons, the project should not be considering growth
inducing.
X. Agencies, Organizations and Individuals Consulted
Agencies
Comprehensive Planning Organization
Community Services Agency Advisory Board
Cities of Carlsbad, San Marcos, Vista, Oceanside, Escondido
Regional Water Quality Control Board
County of San Diego
Air Pollution Control District
Department of Transportation
Land Use and Environmental Regulation
20
Organizations
San Diego County Disposal Association
(Community Groups - Carlsbad)
Individuals
Clarence Kaufman Solid Waste Management Task Force
Jim Barrett Solid Waste Management Task Force
Dave Anderson Solid Waste Management Task Force
21
o
4^'
ter
o
MAP 3 : Project location.
No Scale. USGS San Luis Rey,
7.5 Minute Quad.