4.9 Land Use and Planning

Transcription

1 4.9 Land Use and Planning This section of the PEIR describes the potential physical environmental effects related to the issues of land use planning and compatibility with surrounding land uses resulting from development of proposed CIP projects under the 2008 Master Plan Environmental Setting The VWD service area encompasses portions of several jurisdictions, including the county of San Diego, and the cities of San Marcos, Escondido, Carlsbad, and Vista. Land uses vary widely within each jurisdiction. Existing land uses and existing land use designations surrounding potable water storage projects, potable water pump station projects, wastewater lift station projects and the proposed parallel land outfall are described below. Under the applicable legal framework, local zoning regulations apply only to proposed wastewater CIP projects in the 2008 Master Plan and do not apply to potable water CIP projects. Therefore, all 2008 Master Plan wastewater projects would be implemented in a manner to ensure full compliance with the applicable local zoning requirements. Refer to section 4.9.2, Regulatory Framework, for additional information. Proposed CIP pipeline projects would not result in long-term, permanent land use impacts, as they would be placed underground. However, proposed CIP pipeline projects P-43, P-52, P-53, P-30, P-64, P- 42, SP-2, SP-5, SP-11, SP-25 and SP-30 would construct permanent access roads within VWD easements over undeveloped land. Construction of the access roads would not represent a land use conflict because these roads would be located within easements designated specifically for VWD facilities. Refer to Section 4.8, Landform Alteration and Aesthetics, for a discussion of potential visual impacts associated with the proposed pipeline access roadways. For this reason, only above-ground proposed CIP facilities are discussed below CIP Potable Water Storage Projects This section describes the existing land uses at and surrounding each of the proposed CIP water storage reservoir and pump station projects under the 2008 Master Plan. R-1, Meadowlark #3 The R-1, Meadowlark #3, CIP reservoir project is located in San Marcos. This project would demolish an existing reservoir and construct a new reservoir on the same site. Areas to the north of the reservoir contain residential housing. Undeveloped land located to the east, south and west of the site is primarily designated as an environmental trust. The San Marcos General Plan land use designation for the CIP project R-1 site is residential, 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre. R-2, Wulff #2 The R-2, Wulff #2, CIP reservoir project is located in San Diego County. This project would demolish an existing reservoir and construct a new reservoir on the same site. The site is surrounded by agricultural land. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project R-2 site is Vacant and Undeveloped Land. Page 4.9-1

2 R-3, Coronado Hills #2 The R-3, Coronado Hills #2, CIP reservoir project is located in San Diego County. This project would construct a new reservoir adjacent to an existing VWD reservoir. Land to the east of the site includes residences while land to the north, south and west is undeveloped. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project R-3 site is Open Space and Park Preserve. R-4, Deer Springs #2 The R-4, Deer Springs #2, CIP reservoir project is located in San Diego County. This project would demolish an existing reservoir and construct a new reservoir on the same site. This site is surrounded by undeveloped land, with some agricultural land and Interstate 15 located to the east. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project R-4 site is Orchard or Vineyard. R-5, Coggan #2 The R-5, Coggan #2, CIP reservoir project is located in San Diego County. This project would demolish an existing reservoir and construct a new reservoir on the same site. Lands adjacent to and surrounding the site are also undeveloped. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project R-5 site is Vacant and Undeveloped land. R-6, North Twin Oaks #3 The R-6, North Twin Oaks, CIP reservoir project is located in San Diego County. This project would construct a new reservoir on the same site as the existing North Twin Oaks #2 Reservoir. Areas adjacent to and surrounding the project site are undeveloped. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project R-6 site is Vacant and Undeveloped land. R-7, Meadowlark #4 The R-7, Meadowlark #4, CIP reservoir project is located in San Marcos. This project would construct a new reservoir on a site that that currently contains two VWD reservoirs. Undeveloped land immediately adjacent to this site is primarily designated as an environmental trust. Some residences are located to the north. The San Marcos General Plan land use designation for the CIP project R-7 site is residential, 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre. R-8, Palos Vista #1 Rehabilitation The R-8, Palos Vista #1 Rehabilitation, CIP reservoir project is located in Escondido. This project would rehabilitate an existing reservoir on the same site. Residential development intermixed with open space surrounds this site. The site for CIP project R-8 is located in an area with the Escondido General Plan land use designation of Vacant and Undeveloped land. R-9, Coronado Hills #3 The R-9, Coronado Hills #3, CIP reservoir project is located in San Diego County. This project would construct a new reservoir on a site that currently contains a VWD reservoir. Undeveloped land surrounds the site on all sides with some residential development located to the east. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project R-9 site is Open Space and Park Preserve. Page 4.9-2

3 R-10, Twin Oaks #3 The R-10, Twin Oaks #3, CIP reservoir project is located in San Diego County. This project would construct a new reservoir on the same site as two existing reservoirs. Areas to the north include San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) facilities; areas to the east consist of agricultural lands; areas to the west are undeveloped and areas to the south contain rural single family homes. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project R-10 site is Vacant and Undeveloped land. R-11, Coggan # 3 The R-11 Coggan #3 CIP reservoir project is located in San Diego County. This project would construct a new reservoir on as site that is currently undeveloped. Lands adjacent to and surrounding the site are also undeveloped. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project R-11 site is Vacant and Undeveloped land CIP Potable Water Pump Station Projects PS-1, Desalinated Water The pump station CIP project PS-1, Desalinated Water, is located in San Marcos. This project would construct a new pump station on a site that is currently developed as a golf course. The site is surrounded by the Twin Oaks Valley Golf Course. The San Marcos General Plan land use designation for the CIP project PS-1 site is Golf Course. PS-2, 1625 High Point Hydro The pump station CIP project PS-2, 1625 High Point Hydro, is located in Escondido. This project would construct a new pump station on a site that is located in a newly developed residential area. Residences and open space surround the site. The Escondido General Plan land use designation for the CIP project PS-2 site is Vacant and Undeveloped land. PS-3, 1235 Deer Springs The pump station CIP project PS-3, 1235 Deer Springs, is located in San Diego County. This project would replace existing pumps with new pumps on the same site. Agricultural lands surround this site. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project PS-3 site is Vacant and Undeveloped land. PS-4, 1330 Mountain Belle The pump station CIP project PS-4, 1330 Mountain Belle, is located in San Diego County. This project would construct a new pump station on a site with an existing VWD reservoir. Areas adjacent to the CIP site are also undeveloped with some single family residences located to the west. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project PS-4 site is Vacant and Undeveloped land. PS-5, 1330 North Twin Oaks The pump station CIP project PS-5, 1330 North Twin Oaks, is located in San Diego County. This project would replace existing pumps with new pumps on the same site. Areas to the north and northeast contain additional VWD facilities; areas to the south and southeast contain agricultural uses; and areas Page 4.9-3

4 to the west are undeveloped. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project PS-5 site is Communications and Utilities. PS-6, 1530 Southlake The pump station CIP project PS-6, 1530 Southlake, is located in San Marcos. This project would replace existing pumps with new pumps on the same site. Land surrounding this site includes single and multifamily residential development to the north, a lake to the south, undeveloped land to the west and undeveloped land, homes and a roadway to the east. The San Marcos General Plan land use designation for the CIP project PS-6 site is Recreation (other). PS-7, 1608 Coggan The pump station CIP project PS-7, 1608 Coggan, is located in San Diego County. This project would replace existing pumps with new pumps on the same site. Areas adjacent to and surrounding the site include VWD facilities, rural residences and agricultural land. The County of San Diego General Plan land use designation for the CIP project PS-7 site is Spaced Rural Residential. PS-8, 1115 Schoolhouse The pump station CIP project PS-8, 1115 Schoolhouse, is located in San Marcos. This project would replace existing pumps with new pumps on the same site. Land surrounding this site includes residential development to the south, west and east and undeveloped area to the north. The San Marcos General Plan land use designation for the CIP project PS-8 site is Communications and Utilities CIP Wastewater Lift Station Projects SB-1 Montiel Lift Station Replacement The lift station CIP project SB-1, Montiel Lift Station Replacement, is located in San Marcos. This project would replace the existing pump station with a new pump station on the same site. This site is surrounded by residential and commercial development. The San Marcos General Plan land use designation for the CIP project SB-1 site is Commercial land. This wastewater CIP project would comply with all applicable zoning requirements Land Outfall The parallel land outfall CIP project is approximately eight miles long and traverses three different jurisdictions, including the cities of Vista, San Marcos, and Carlsbad. The outfall is adjacent to multiple land uses, including residential, commercial, agricultural, and open space. The outfall wastewater CIP project would comply with all applicable zoning requirements. Page 4.9-4

5 4.9.2 Regulatory Framework State As a district, VWD may acquire, construct, own, operate, control, or use works for supplying the inhabitants of its district with water or the means for the collection, treatment, or disposition of sewage; and may construct such works across or along any street or public highway, with the same rights and privileges appertaining thereto as are granted to municipalities, such as, the Cities of San Marcos, Escondido, Vista and Carlsbad (see California Public Utilities Code Sections and 12808). Under Section 53091(d) and (e) of the California Government Code, building ordinances of a county or city shall not apply to the location or construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage, treatment, or transmission of water or wastewater, and zoning ordinances of a county or city shall not apply to the location or construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage, treatment, or transmission of water by VWD. In addition, under Section of the Government Code, VWD, by a four fifths (4/5) vote of its members, may render a city or county zoning ordinance inapplicable to a proposed use of the property, related to the storage or transmission of water if VWD determines by resolution at a public hearing that there is no feasible alternative to its proposal. This determination may be made at the time VWD approves the Environmental Impact Report. Consequently, zoning regulations only apply to wastewater in the 2008 Master Plan. A discussion of the plans and policies that support the provision of both water and wastewater infrastructure is provided below Local San Diego County Water Authority Act The VWD is a member agency of the SDCWA, which is governed primarily by the County Water Authority Act (Stats. 1943, c. 545). This Act mandates the SDCWA to provide water to meet the needs of member agencies in its service area. As a district, SDCWA may acquire, construct, own, operate, control, or use works for supplying the inhabitants of its district with water or the means for the collection, treatment, or disposition of sewage; and may construct such works across or along any street or public highway, with the same rights and privileges appertaining thereto as are granted to municipalities, such as, the Cities of San Marcos, Escondido, Vista and Carlsbad (see California Public Utilities Code Sections and 12808). Under Section 53091(d) and (e) of the California Government Code, building ordinances of a county or city shall not apply to the location or construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage, treatment, or transmission of water or wastewater, and zoning ordinances of a county or city shall not apply to the location or construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage, treatment, or transmission of water by SDCWA. However, for the purposes of CEQA analysis, local land use planning documents are addressed in this PEIR. County of San Diego General Plan The adopted County of San Diego General Plan was written in The County of San Diego is currently updating its General Plan; however, the updated plan has not yet been adopted. The 2008 Master Plan water and wastewater demand projections were based upon data from the 1979 General Plan, with amendments through the year The 2007 amendments reflect land uses within the VWD service area through June 2008, the initiation year for the 2008 VWD Master Plan. Please refer to Page 4.9-5

6 Section 5.3 (Other CEQA Considerations, Growth Inducement) for further information on county land use and 2008 Master Plan projections. The existing General Plan for San Diego County identifies long-range goals and policies for the comprehensive development of land within its jurisdiction. The following 12 specific elements are included within the County General Plan: Open Space, Regional Land Use, Noise, Seismic Safety, Public Facility, Scenic Highway, Energy, Conservation, Public Safety, Recreation, Circulation, and Housing. The Public Facility Element of the General Plan recognizes the need for the timely provision of water facilities concurrent with approved development and growth in the county. Section 13 (Water Provision Systems), Objective 2, Policy 2.1 of the Public Facility Element states that the County will encourage the regional coordination of water resource management. Implementation Measure of this policy states that the County will support the SDCWA to obtain sufficient local, regional, and statewide water development facilities to meet the planned need. The County of San Diego subdivides its jurisdictional area into Subregional Plan Areas and CPAs. Subregional and community plans are used to focus the General Plan goals and policies to the specific or unique circumstances existing in individual communities throughout the county. City of San Marcos General Plan The City of San Marcos General Plan Land Use Element (1997) is a long-range guide to the development and use of all land within the City s eight community planning areas. As such, it sets forth goals, policies and standards to guide the location, density, and distribution of various land use activities within each of those areas. The General Plan Land Use Element sets forth the following city-wide objectives: 1) Direct future urban growth to undeveloped or underutilized lands within, or contiguous to, existing developed areas; 2) Prevent or reverse the physical decline or deterioration of developments within the city; and 3) Protect and enhance natural and cultural resources and promote recreational opportunities. The General Plan divides the city into eight community planning areas, each with a distinct community character and/or land use pattern. Portions of the VWD service area cover all eight community planning areas. City of Vista General Plan The City of Vista General Plan is a statement of long-range public policy to guide the use of private and public lands within the city boundaries. The existing General Plan for Vista includes the following elements: Circulation, Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Noise, Safety, Community Facilities, Community Identity and Scenic Roadways, and Land Use. Vista is currently in the process of updating its General Plan, which is expected to be adopted in late The update for the General Plan will establish the vision for the city through the year The Land Use Element of Vista s General Plan, upon which all other elements of the General Plan are based, was last updated in Since that time, the city has experienced considerable growth and change, adding over 32,000 new residents and more than 3,000 new housing units. Vista has also substantially increased its employment base with commercial and industrial development in areas south of Highway 78. Consequently, demand for roads, public utilities, recreational areas, commercial venues and other amenities have increased considerably over the past twenty years. The General Plan Update is meant to account for these significant changes to the city s physical, social and economic landscape, and, in turn, to establish the means to guide and accommodate additional change over the next two decades. Page 4.9-6

7 City of Escondido General Plan The City of Escondido General Plan is a statement of long-range public policy to guide the use of private and public lands within the city boundaries. The General Plan reflects the aspirations and values of the city. The General Plan is both general and comprehensive in that it provides broad guidelines for development in the city, while addressing a wide range of issues that affect the city s desirability as a place to live and work. It is comprehensive documents with policies not only directed at land use and private development, but also public facilities and services. The Escondido General Plan includes the following elements: Land Use, Community Facilities and Services, Community Protection and Safety, Community Open Space/Conservation, and Growth Management. The City of Escondido began updating its existing General Plan in 2009, which is still in draft form and expected to be adopted in City of Carlsbad General Plan The General Plan for the city of Carlsbad contains seven elements, with each element containing maps and figures, policy statements, over-arching goals, more specific objectives, implementing programs, and in some instances, development standards. Elements in the General Plan include Land Use, Housing, Open Space and Conservation, Parks and Recreation, Circulation, Public Safety, Noise and the Arts. The Carlsbad General Plan last underwent a comprehensive update in 1994, and in 2008, the city started the process Envision Carlsbad to update the plan again. This update is expected to be completed in spring City of Carlsbad Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone Ordinance Each of the 15 counties and 53 municipalities along the California coastline, including the city of Carlsbad, is required by the California Coastal Act to prepare a Local Coastal Program (LCP). Portions of the 2008 VWD Master Plan occur within the boundaries of the Coastal Zone within Carlsbad, as identified within the approved Carlsbad LCP. The LCP is used as a planning tool to guide development in the coastal zone, in partnership with the California Coastal Commission. The LCP contains the ground rules for future development and the protection of coastal resources. The Carlsbad LCP includes two main components: a land use plan and related implementing measures (including a zoning map, and zoning ordinance). In particular, the local coastal land use plans define Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas and include measures specifically intended to protect natural open space resources, scenic resources, agricultural lands, and public access rights. Refer to Section 4.2 (Biological Resources) for detailed information related to the 2008 Master Plan and the Carlsbad Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone Ordinance. Multiple Habitat Conservation Program The MHCP is a comprehensive, multiple jurisdictional planning program designed to develop an ecosystem preserve in northwestern San Diego County. Implementation of the regional preserve system is intended to protect viable populations of key sensitive plant and animal species and their habitats, while accommodating continued economic development and quality of life for residents of the North County region. The MHCP is one of several large multiple jurisdictional habitat planning efforts in San Diego County, each of which constitutes a subregional plan under the California NCCP Act of The MHCP includes seven incorporated cities in northwestern San Diego County: Carlsbad, Encinitas, Escondido, Oceanside, San Marcos, Solana Beach, and Vista. These jurisdictions will implement their respective portions of the MHCP through citywide subarea plans, which describe the specific implementing mechanisms each city will institute for the MHCP. The goal of the MHCP is to conserve Page 4.9-7

8 approximately 19,000 acres of habitat, of which roughly 8,800 acres (46 percent) are already in public ownership and contribute toward the habitat preserve system for the protection of more than 80 rare, threatened or endangered species. Carlsbad MHCP Subarea Plan The Carlsbad MHCP Subarea Plan, also referred to as the Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad or Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP), is the only approved Subarea Plan under the MHCP. The Carlsbad MHCP Subarea Plan has been successful in contributing toward the conservation of local habitats and recovery of regionally sensitive plant and animal species within Carlsbad since its approval. The Carlsbad MHCP Subarea Plan designates approximately 6,500 acres of the open space lands in the city for preservation based on its value as habitat for endangered animals and rare, unique or sensitive plant species. The plan identifies how the City of Carlsbad can protect and maintain these lands while still allowing additional public and private development consistent with the General Plan and the Growth Management Plan. Draft San Marcos and Escondido MHCP Subarea Plans The Draft San Marcos and Escondido MHCP Subarea Plans address how the Cities of San Marcos and Escondido will conserve natural biotic communities and sensitive plant and wildlife species under the MHCP framework. The Draft Subarea Plans would provide regulatory certainty to the landowners within the Cities and aid in conserving the region s biodiversity and enhancing the quality of life. The Draft Subarea Plans address the potential impacts to natural habitats and rare, threatened or endangered species caused by projects within the Cities. The Draft Subarea Plans will also form the basis for Implementing Agreements, which will be the legally binding agreements between the Cities and the Wildlife Agencies that ensure implementation of the plan and provides the Cities with State and federal Take Authority. As of November 2010, none of the Draft MHCP Subarea Plans have been adopted and finalized. Therefore, although projects within the Cities are encouraged to demonstrate consistency, they are not subject to the provisions of the Draft Plans and instead, must comply with existing local, State, and federal requirements with respect to CEQA, NEPA, CESA, and ESA. Multiple Species Conservation Plan The County of San Diego MSCP is a long-term regional conservation plan designed to establish connected preserve systems to ensure the long-term survival of sensitive plant and animal species and to protect the native vegetation found throughout portions of San Diego County. The MSCP addresses the potential impacts of urban growth, natural habitat loss, and species endangerment and creates a plan to mitigate for the potential loss of sensitive species and their habitats. The MSCP covers 582,243 acres over 12 jurisdictions. Each jurisdiction has its own Subarea Plan, which describes specific implementing mechanisms for the MSCP. Any habitat set aside for the protection of biological resources in accordance with the MSCP is considered sensitive. The MSCP divides habitats into tiers based on sensitivity, with habitat rankings from Tier 1 (most sensitive) to Tier IV (least sensitive, includes disturbed land). The combination of the MSCP Subregional Plan and Subarea Plans serve as a multiple species habitat conservation plan (pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the FESA and the California NCCP Act of 1991 and CESA). The conservation measures specified in the MSCP provide for coverage of 85 species of plants and animals (called covered species) under these State and federal endangered species laws. Page 4.9-8

9 The VWD Master Plan service area falls within portions of the county of San Diego s MSCP Subregion area, and specifically, the North County Segment MSCP Subarea, for which, a Draft Subarea Plan has been prepared. However, the only approved Subarea Plan within the County MSCP Subregion is the South County Segment MSCP Subarea Plan. Draft North County Segment MSCP Subarea Plan The Draft County of San Diego MSCP North County Segment, also referred to as the North County Plan, addresses how the natural biotic communities and sensitive plant and wildlife species will be conserved in the northwestern unincorporated county lands under the MSCP framework. The area included in the plan encompasses approximately 294,849 acres in and around the unincorporated communities of Bonsall, De Luz, Fallbrook, Harmony Grove, Lilac, Pala, Pauma Valley, Rainbow, Ramona, Rincon Springs, Twin Oaks Valley, and Valley Center. The plan provides economic benefits by reducing constraints on future development outside of proposed preserve areas and decreasing the costs of compliance with federal and state laws protecting biological resources. The plan is intended to be compatible with the County General Plan and ordinances. As such, it compliments existing policies in achieving economic goals by providing a regional conservation plan to streamline the permitting process. Implementation of this Plan will also protect biodiversity and enhance the quality of life in the San Diego region. This plan will help conserve habitat that benefits numerous species, including the 63 species covered under the plan. Biological goals for the Plan follow standard principles of conservation biology and a science based approach to conservation planning. Goals, objectives, and conservation strategies for the Plan were established based on the needs of 63 target species and their habitats in the Plan area. The proposed North County preserve system incorporates existing preserves and ensures connections between these preserves through soft-line conservation areas. The goal for this Plan is to preserve 106,780 acres of natural lands in a network of preserves. Another 7,022 acres of surrounding agricultural and disturbed habitats are estimated to be needed to maintain natural processes within the preserve system. The most recent version of the Draft MSCP Subarea Plan for the North County Segment was released in February Although projects within this portion of the unincorporated county are encouraged to demonstrate consistency, they are not subject to the provisions of the Draft Plan and instead, must comply with existing local, State, and federal requirements with respect to CEQA, NEPA, CESA, and ESA. Page 4.9-9

10 4.9.3 Master Plan Impacts and Mitigation Issue 1 Land Use Incompatibilities and Conflicts with Land Use Plans and Biological Conservation Plans Land Use and Planning Issue 1 Summary Would the 2008 Master Plan conflict with any land use plan, policy, regulation, biological habitat conservation plan, natural communities conservation plan or result in incompatibilities with surrounding land uses? Impact: The 2008 Master Plan has the potential to conflict with local land use policies and result in incompatibilities with surrounding land uses. Significance Before Mitigation: Significant. Mitigation: Applicable measures in other sections of this PEIR, including Section 4.1 (Air Quality), Section 4.2 (Biological Resources), Section 4.3 (Cultural Resources), Section 4.5 (Geology, Soils and Paleontology), Section 4.7 (Hydrology and Water Quality), Section 4.8 (Landform Alteration and Aesthetics), Section 4.10 (Noise), and Section 4.11 (Public Safety). Significance After Mitigation: Less than significant. Standards of Significance Based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, implementation of the 2008 Master Plan would have a significant impact if it would: 1. conflict with any applicable HCPs or NCCPs; 2. conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; or 3. result in incompatibilities between CIP facilities and surrounding land uses. Impact Analysis As a district, VWD may acquire, construct, own, operate, control, or use works for supplying the inhabitants of its district with water or the means for the collection, treatment, or disposition of sewage; and may construct such works across or along any street or public highway, with the same rights and privileges appertaining thereto as are granted to municipalities, such as, the Cities of San Marcos, Escondido, Vista and Carlsbad (see California Public Utilities Code Sections and 12808). Under Section 53091(d) and (e) of the California Government Code, building ordinances of a county or city shall not apply to the location or construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage, treatment, or transmission of water or wastewater, and zoning ordinances of a county or city shall not apply to the location or construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage, treatment, or transmission of water by VWD. In addition, under Section of the Government Code, VWD, by a four fifths (4/5) Page

11 vote of its members, may render a city or county zoning ordinance inapplicable to a proposed use of the property, related to the storage or transmission of water if VWD determines by resolution at a public hearing that there is no feasible alternative to its proposal. This determination may be made at the time VWD approves the Environmental Impact Report. Consequently, zoning regulations and land use requirement only apply to wastewater projects in the 2008 Master Plan. The 2008 Master Plan s compatibility with local land use plans and policies has been addressed in a variety of different sections within this PEIR. The potential for the 2008 Master Plan to conflict with or obstruct implementation of an applicable air quality plan or violate any air quality standard is addressed in Sections and (Air Quality Issues 1 and 2) of this PEIR. The potential for the 2008 Master Plan to conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources or to conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan is addressed in Sections and (Biological Resources Issues 4 and 5) of this PEIR. The potential for the 2008 Master Plan to result in or expose people to noise levels in excess of standards established in applicable noise plans, noise ordinances, or noise standards is addressed in Sections and (Noise Issues 1 and 2) of this PEIR. Table summarizes the consistency of the 2008 Master Plan with local community policies, including HCPs or NCCPs, and other local policies adopted for the purpose of avoiding an environmental impact. Consistency with local community policies also ensures that any potential impacts that would result in incompatibility with adjacent land uses, such as dust and noise from construction activity, which could impact sensitive receptors or air quality objectives, potential impacts associated with scenic vistas or community aesthetic character, or potential public safety hazards, would be avoided. The significance criteria for each impact listed below are described in Section 4.1 (Air Quality), Section 4.2 (Biological Resources), Section 4.3 (Cultural Resources), Section 4.5 (Geology, Soils and Paleontology), Section 4.7 (Hydrology and Water Quality), Section 4.8 (Landform Alteration and Aesthetics), Section 4.10 (Noise), and Section 4.11 (Public Safety). Mitigation Measures With implementation of mitigation measures identified in the following sections, the 2008 Master Plan would be compatible with adjacent land uses: Section 4.1 (Air Quality), Section 4.2 (Biological Resources), Section 4.3 (Cultural Resources), Section 4.5 (Geology, Soils and Paleontology), Section 4.7 (Hydrology and Water Quality), Section 4.8 (Landform Alteration and Aesthetics), Section 4.10 (Noise), and Section 4.11 (Public Safety). CEQA analysis has been conducted separately for CIP projects R-1, R-7, SP-2, SP-3, SP-11, and SP-12; therefore, these projects are not subject to these mitigation measures. Page

12 Table Summary of Community Policy Consistency and Land Use Compatibility Potential Impact Section 4.1, Air Quality Issue 3: The 2008 Master Plan would have the potential to create objectionable odors where new wastewater facilities would vent to open air. Section 4.2, Biological Resources Issue 1: Implementation of the 2008 Master Plan may result in direct and indirect impacts to sensitive plant and wildlife species. Issue 2: Implementation of the 2008 Master Plan has the potential to result in impacts to upland, riparian, and wetland habitats that are considered sensitive natural communities. Issue 3: Implementation of the 2008 Master Plan would result in impacts to waters, wetlands, and associated resources subject to the regulatory jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Game, including federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Issue 4: Implementation of the Master Plan could conflict with the County of San Diego Resource Protection Ordinance (RPO) and Carlsbad Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (CRPOZ) Ordinance. Issue 5: Implementation of the 2008 Master Plan could conflict with the Carlsbad MHCP Subarea Plan (Carlsbad HMP). Mitigation Measures Odor-control measures (Air-1). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Project-Level Biological Resource Surveys (Bio-1A); California Gnatcatcher and Least Bell s Vireo Avoidance Measures (Bio- 1B and Bio-1C); Avoidance of Nesting Birds and Raptors (Bio- 1D and Bio-1E); Construction Fencing (Bio-1F); Construction Staging Areas (Bio-1G); Pre-Construction Meeting (Bio-1H); Construction-Related Night Lighting (Bio-1I); Avoidance of Special Status Habitat Areas (Bio-1J); and Geotechnical Investigation and Construction-Related Erosion Control Plan (Geo-1 and Geo-2). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Habitat Replacement (Bio-2A); Riparian/wetland Replacement Ratio (Bio-2B); Hydroseeding of Graded Areas (Bio-2C); Project-Level Biological Resource Surveys (Bio-1A); Construction Fencing (Bio-1F); Construction Staging Areas (Bio- 1G); Pre-Construction Meeting (Bio-1H); Avoidance of Special Status Habitat Areas (Bio-1J); and, Geotechnical Investigation and Construction-Related Erosion Control Plan (Geo-1 and Geo-2). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Habitat Replacement (Bio-2A); Riparian/wetland Replacement Ratio (Bio-2B); and Hydroseeding of Graded Areas (Bio- 2C).Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Oak Tree Avoidance (Bio-4A); Oak Tree Replacement (Bio-4B); Project-level studies (Bio-1A); Habitat Replacement (Bio-2A); Riparian/wetland Replacement Ratio (Bio-2B); Hydroseeding of Graded Areas (Bio-2C); Construction Fencing (Bio-1F); Construction Staging Areas (Bio-1G); Pre-Construction Meeting (Bio-1H); Avoidance of Special Status Habitat Areas (Bio-1J); and, Construction-Related Erosion Control Plan and Geotechnical Investigation (Geo-1 and Geo-2).Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Project-Level Biological Studies (Bio-5A); Species and Habitat Avoidance within Carlsbad MHCP Subarea Plan (Bio-5B); Habitat In-Lieu Fees (Bio-5C), Habitat Replacement (Bio-2A); Riparian/Wetland Replacement Ratio (Bio-2B); Hydroseeding of Graded Areas (Bio-2C); Construction Fencing (Bio-1F); Construction Staging Areas (Bio-1G); Pre-Construction Meeting (Bio-1H); Avoidance of Special Status Habitat Areas (Bio-1J); and, Construction-Related Erosion Control Plan and Geotechnical Investigation (Geo-1 and Geo-2).Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Page

13 Table Continued Potential Impact Section 4.3 Cultural Resources Issue 1: Construction activities associated with construction of the proposed CIP projects, such as grading, trenching, and clearing have the potential to adversely affect historic resources or archeological resources within the VWD service area. Section 4.5, Geology and Soils Issue 1: Proposed CIP facilities could be located on geologic units or soil that is unstable and could result in liquefaction, lateral spreading, subsidence, expansive soils, and/or landslides. Issue 2: Construction activities associated with CIP projects could result in soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Issue 3: Construction of CIP projects proposed within the Santiago formation has the potential to disturb or destroy paleontological resources. Section 4.7, Hydrology and Water Quality Issue 3: Above-ground 2008 Master Plan CIP projects (reservoirs, pump and lift stations) could be subject to potential damage by a mudflow. Section 4.8, Landform Alteration and Aesthetics Issue 1: Construction of CIP projects and access roadways could both temporarily and permanently degrade the existing visual character of project sites and their surroundings during construction and in areas without existing VWD facilities. Issue 2: CIP project R-11 would be located on an undeveloped hillside within the Merriam Mountains Resource Conservation Area and construction of the proposed reservoir has the potential to adversely impact scenic views. Issue 3: Lighting associated with CIP projects would be limited to emergency lighting and temporary security lighting and would not create a substantial new lighting source. Glare impacts could occur from sunlight reflecting off of aboveground CIP facilities. Section 4.10, Noise Issue 2: Construction of CIP projects would temporarily increase ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. Section 4.11, Public Safety Issue 2: Excavation or trenching activities associated with construction of CIP projects could result in the accidental release of a hazardous material, resulting in a hazard to the public or the environment. Mitigation Measures Site-specific Records Search (Cul-1), Phase I Cultural Resources Survey (Cul-2); Procedure for Unintentional Disturbance of Cultural Resources (Cul-3). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Site-specific Geotechnical Investigations (Geo-1). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Construction-Related Erosion Control Plan (Geo-2). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Paleontological Resources Investigation (Geo-3). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Site-specific Geotechnical Investigations (Geo-1). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Landscaping Measures (Aes-1); Visually Compatible Design (Aes-2). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Visual Resources Report (Aes-3). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Landscaping Measures (Aes-1); Visually Compatible Design (Aes-2). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Construction Noise Limits (Noi-1). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Site Specific Geotechnical Investigation (Geo-1). Refer to Section for a complete discussion of this impact. Page

14 4.9.4 Cumulative Impacts Land Use and Planning Cumulative Issue Summary Would implementation of the 2008 Master Plan have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulative land use and planning impact considering past, present, and probable future projects? Cumulative Impact Significant? Proposed Master Plan Contribution Incompatibilities with adjacent land uses. No No cumulative impact. Refer to Section 4.2.4, Biological Resources Cumulative Impacts, for the cumulative impact analysis related to local policies, ordinances and habitat conservation plans. Incompatibilities with Adjacent Land Uses The geographic context for the analysis of cumulative impacts relative to adjacent land use incompatibilities includes development surrounding proposed 2008 Master Plan CIP facilities. For conflicts with habitat conservation plans and natural communities conservation plans, the cumulative impact study area includes all of the open space reserves within and adjacent to the VWD service area, as identified by MSCP s and MHCP s of local agencies. It is anticipated that development of future cumulative projects would undergo CEQA review which would require a consistency analysis with applicable plans and polices. As required by CEQA, cumulative projects would be consistent with the existing adopted plans, or require mitigation measures or design review to ensure consistency, in order for project approvals to occur. Therefore, it is anticipated that cumulative development would be consistent with applicable plans or policies, which would result in a less than significant cumulative impact. As discussed in Section above, implementation of the mitigation measures identified in other sections of this PEIR would reduce impacts to neighboring communities from the Master Plan to a level below significance. With implementation of these identified mitigation measures, the 2008 Master Plan, in combination with other cumulative projects, would be compatible with surrounding land uses and would not result in a cumulatively significant incompatibility of adjacent land uses within the local cumulative impact area CEQA Checklist Items Deemed Not Significant or Not Applicable to the 2008 Master Plan Would implementation of any of the CIP projects under the 2008 Master Plan physically divide an established community? The majority of CIP projects would be implemented in undeveloped areas or areas that currently contain VWD facilities. Some CIP projects would be located in residential areas, however, construction of these facilities would not create a physical barrier (ex. Highway), that would result in the physical division of an established community. Therefore, the 2008 Master Plan would not physically divide an established neighborhood and no further analysis is required. Page

15 4.9.6 References City of Carlsbad Carlsbad General Plan. Prepared 1994, Amended City of Escondido Escondido General Plan. City of San Marcos San Marcos General Plan. Prepared 1983, Amended City of Vista City of Vista General Plan. County of San Diego (County) San Diego County General Plan. Page

16 This page intentionally left blank. Page