Reso 1248-07/2005
RESOLUTION NO. 1248
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE VALLECITOS WATER DISTRICT
CERTIFYING AS COMPLETE AND ADEQUATE THE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE VALLECITOS WATER DISTRICT UPDATED WATER,
WASTEWATER AND WATER RECLAMATION MASTER PLAN, ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN, AND APPROVING THE 2002 MASTER PLAN UPDATE
_._;,1
WHEREAS, the Vallecitos Water District ("District") Board of Directors has detennined that
an update to the 1997 Water, Wastewater and Reclamation Master Plan ("2002 Master Plan Update"
or 'Project') is required for orderly planning and to meet the water and sewer needs of the
Residences of the District; and
WHEREAS, in conjunction with the 2002 Master Plan Update, a Supplemental Environmental
Impact Report (SEIR) has been prepared (State Clearinghouse [SCH} number 97021033), which
incorporated the 1991 Program EIR (SCH number 9001 0707) and the 1997 Master Plan Update EIR
(also SCH number 97021033), and which analyzed the incremental environmental changes which
have occurred since the adoption of the 1991 Master Plan and 1997 Master Plan Update; and
WHEREAS, the SEIR for the 2002 Master Plan was prepared pursuant to the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act ('CEQA"), as amended; and
WHEREAS, the draft SEIR was distributed to those public agencies having jurisdiction by law
with respect to the Project and to other interested persons and agencies for review and comment for
a period of forty five (45) days; and . . ..' . .
WHEREAS, notice of the draft SEIR was posted in accordance with section 21091 of the
California Public Resources Code; and
WHEREAS, one public hearing was conducted during the review period to provide an
additional forum for public input; and
WHEREAS, written comments were received from responsible agencies and the public; and
WHEREAS, the final SEIR, including responses to comments, has been prepared; and
, WHEREAS, the District has reviewed and considered the SEIR prior to acting on the proposed
Project and has certified that the SEIR has been completed in compliance with CECA Guidelines;
and
t ~
,
WHEREAS, the District has determined that the SEIR adequately addresses the impacts of
'- the Project being considered and that mitigation measures have been incorporated Into the proposed
Project which substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of the Project as identified in
theSEIR; and .
- - --":;v"
'.~.--...........-.
i
,
!
,
1
I
I,
I
I
,
I
,
I
~
~
, Resolution No. 1248
Page 2
WHEREAS, the District has reviewed the environment documentation comprising the SEIR
and has found that the SEIR considers all environmental impacts of the proposed Project and is
complete and adequate and fully complies with all requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Vallecitos Water
District as follows:
Section 1: The Board of Directors of the Vallecitos Water District does hereby certify the final
SEIR as complete and adequate in that it addresses all the environmental effects of the proposed
changes to the Project and fully complies with the requirements of CEQA and the CECA Guidelines.
Section 2: The Board of Directors hereby adopts the Statement of Findings (attached hereto
as Exhibit "A") incorporated herein by this reference, which finds that the mitigation measures
described in SEIR should mitigate all identified potentially significant adverse effects of the proposed
changes to the Project to a less than significant level.
Section 3: The Board of Directors hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Plan (attached
hereto as Exhibit "B") incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 4: The Board of Directors hereby adopts the 2002 Master Plan and directs that the
General Manager file an amended notice of detennination with the San Diego County Clerk and
appropriate documentation with all Federal, State and Local Agencies.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Vallecitos Water
District at a regular meeting held on this 6th day of July, 2005 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
GENTRY,HANNAN,SHELL,FERGUSON
DAVY
~"
Margan~ E. Ferguson, Pre . ent
Board of Directors
Val/ecitos Water District
ATTEST:
L0tQtJ Lii)P
William W. Rucker, Secretary
Board of Directors
Vallecitos Water District
_=J
Resolution No. 1248
Page 3
EXHmIT A
A. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS
CEQA prohibits a public agency from approving or carrying out a project for which a CEQA
document has been completed which identifies one or more significant adverse environmental
effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of
those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding
(CEQA Guidelines 915091). The following sets forth the findings of the Vallecitos Water
District ("District") for significant adverse impacts identified in the Supplemental Environmental
Impact Report (SEIR). The findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record as
explained in each finding. This Statement of Findings will be included in the record of project
approval.
FINDING: The District finds that the proposed project could result in potentially significant
adverse impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, air quality, visual quality, noise,
traffic and circulation, geology and soils, and hydrology/water quality.
Explanation: The final SEIR (see Table 2-1 Environmental Impacts Summary) shows that
potentially significant impacts could occur from Master Plan projects and activities as noted in
the table.
FINDING: The Vallecitos Water District finds that imposition of the mitigation measures
contained in the final SEIR would reduce all identified potentially significant adverse
environmental impacts to a less than significant level.
Explanation: The final SEIR identifies mitigation measures for each of the potentially significant
adverse impacts that may be caused by the project. These measures are summarized in Table 2-1
of the final SEIR and are listed in detail in the project Mitigation Monitoring Plan (see fmal
SEIR Appendix B).
B. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS CONCLUSION
Changes or alterations have been incorporated into the project to mitigate or minimize the
potentially significant adverse environmental effects associated with all project impacts. Feasible
mitigation measures identified in the final SEIR have been adopted as set forth in the mitigation
monitoring program. These measures would reduce all potentially significant project impacts to a
less than significant level.
Of the alternatives considered in the SEIR, the District finds that the proposed project achieves
the best balance between minimizing potential adverse environmental impacts and achieving the
project objectives. The District further finds that all of the findings presented here are supported
by substantial evidence in the record. The record of approval for this project may be found in the
District's office located at 201 Vallecitos de Oro, San Marcos, California.
Resolution No. 1248
Page 4
EXHIBIT B
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
16855 W. Bernardo Dr., Suite 360
San Diego, California 92127-1667
858-676-3620
858-676-3625 (Fax)
Vallecitos Water District
Water, Wastewater, and Water
Reclamation Master Plan Update
Final Supplemental Environmental
Impact Report
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program
?R ,Ii on'" ?nn<;
Prepared for
Vallecitos Water District
201 Vallecitos de Oro
San Marcos, California 92069
K1J Project No. 014670.03
Resolution No. 1248
Page 5
Table of Contents
Section 1:
Section 2:
Background and Project Description.......................................... 1
1.1 Background.......................................................................................... 1
1.2 Project Objective '.' ................. ... .... ... ........... c............ ......... ..... ... ..... ... ... 1
1.3 Project Description Summary............................................................... 2
1.3.1 Water ................................................................................2
1.3.2 Wastewater and Reclaimed Water ........................................... 2
1.4 Guidelines for Project-Specific Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program ..................... .............. ................... ... ............... ... .... 3
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program............................ 5
2.1 Master Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program................... 5
2.2 Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Strategies................................... 5
2.2.1 Land Use 6
2.2.1.1 Summary of Impacts ...............................................6
2.2.1.2 Mitigation Measures ................................................6
2.2.1.3 Mitigation Monitoring ............................................... 6
2.2.2 Biological Resources ................................................................ 7
2.2.2.1 Summary of Impacts ...............................................7
2.2.2.2 Mitigation Measures ................................................7
2.2.2.3 Mitigation Monitoring ........................................,.....10
2.2.3 Cultural Resources ..................................................................1 0
2.2.3.1 Summary of Impacts ..............................................10
2.2.3.2 Mitigation Measures ..............................................11
2.2.3.3 Mitigation Monitoring ..............................................12
2.2.4 Air Quality 12
2.2.4.1 Summary of Impacts ..............................................12
2.2.4.2 Mitigation Measures ...............................................13
2.2.4.3 Mitigation Monitoring ..............................................13
2.2.5 Visual Quality .......................................................................,..14
2.2.5.1 Summary of Impacts ..............................................14
2.2.5.2 Mitigation Measures ...............................................14
2.2.5.3 Mitigation Monitoring ..............................................14
2.2.6 Noise 14
2.2.6.1 Summary of Impacts ..............................................14
2.2.6.2 Mitigation Measures ......................................,........15
2.2.6.3 Mitigation Monitoring ..............................................15
2.2.7 Traffic/Circulation...... ................ ....... .... ................ ....... ... ... ..... ..16
2.2.7.1 Summary of Impacts ..............................................16
2.2.7.2 Mitigation Measures ...............................................16
2.2.7.3 Mitigation Monitoring ..........................................,...16
2.2.8 Geology and Soils ...................................................................17
2.2.8.1 Summary of Impacts ..............................................17
Val/ecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
'11:\Wp\:;sb(jo(;1'a51erpi~n'.;1pp~ndix,.,b mmr!) l} 14,05.&.)<;
Resolution No. 1248
Page 6
Table of,Contents (cont'd)
2.2.8.2 Mitigation Measures ...............................................17
2.2.8.3 Mitigation Monitoring ..............................................19
2.2.9 HydrologylWater Cuality..........................................................19
2.2.9.1 Summary of Impacts ..............................................19
2.2.9.2 Mitigation Measures ...............................................20
2.2.9.3 Mitigation Monitoring ..............................................21
Valleeitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
m;\""'CsMoclr;J';I~~kjn.~'lp~x__b mmm6-1f..05.d.'lc
ii
Resolution No. 1248
Page 7
Section 1: Background and Project Description
This section contains the background, objectives, and description of the Vallecitos Water District
(District) Water, Wastewater, and Water Reclamation Master Plan Update. The regulatory
setting and guidelines for a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) are also
presented in this section.
1.1 Background
This MMRP has been prepared for the Vallecitos Water District Water, Wastewater, and Water
. Reclamation Master Plan Update. The project was initially described and analyzed in the 1991
Water, Wastewater, and Water Reclamation Master Plan Program Environmental Impact Report
(1991 PEIR) (KEA, 1991), and was reevaluated in the 1997 Water, Wastewater, and Water
Reclamation Master Plan Update Supplemental EIR (1997 SEIR) (COM, 1997). In 2002, the
District again updated its Master Plan, resulting in the 2002 Water, Wastewater, and Water
Reclamation Master Plan Update (2002 Master Plan Update). In order to comply with California
Environmental Cuality Act (CECA) requirements, the District has prepared an SEIR for the
Water, Wastewater, and Water Reclamation Master Plan Update (2004 SEIR) that focuses
primarily on the' environmental impacts of new or modified projects as reflected in the
2002 Master Plan Update. Proposed water improvements include pipelines, pump stations,
pressure reducing stations, and storage reservoirs. Proposed wastewater improvements
include gravity sewers, force mains, and lift stations. The 2002 Master Plan Update also revises
water and wastewater demand projections.
The Master Plan Update SEIR is a program-level EIR, and is part of a tiered environmental
review process, as allowed by CECA. The 1991 PEIR, 1997 SEIR, and 2004 SEIR function as
the first tier of environmental analysis by establishing a resource database and assessing the
anticipated environmental impacts from implementing the Master Plan. Subsequent second-tier
environmental documentation (e.g., Categorical Exemptions, Negative Declarations, Mitigated
Negative Declarations, or EIRs) will be prepared for specific projects, as required. All specific
Master Plan projects will be subject to further CEQA review at a project-level analysis prior to
their implementation. Project-specific MMRPs will be prepared for such projects, as
appropriate.
This 2004 SEIR is focused on those environmental topics for which new impacts might occur
due to changes in baseline conditions, namely land use, biological resources, and cultural
resources. However, the 2004 SEIR incorporates the 1991 PEIR by reference and, as such,
this MMRP includes mitigation measures from the 1991 PEIR, 1997 SEIR, and 2004 SEIR,
covering the full range of potential impacts.
1.2 Project Objective
The District has experienced in the past, and is expected to experience in the future, a period of
relatively rapid growth. Water demand and wastewater flows in existing service areas are
expected to increase over the next 30 years as population increases and densification occurs.
In addition, as new areas of the District develop, service areas for both water and wastewater
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
f!1;\,w~;st:d.y';ilT1a;;la<pl;,n'.!lprl)n{j,,_b mmr\ll},14.i)~,do:;
Page 1
Resolution No. 1248
Page 8
are expected to expand. The objective of the Water, Wastewater, and Water Reclamation
Master Plan Update is to refine the existing Master Plan in order to meet projected demands in
a feasible, efficient, and effective manner. The District is legally obligated to provide water and
wastewater service within its service area (known as the will serve requirement). The Master
Plan enables the District to plan for future demands and meet this requirement.
The Master Plan Update provides a comprehensive assessment of capacity and demand for
water, reclaimed water, and wastewater service, as summarized below, and recommends
strategies for meeting the projected service demands.
1.3 Project Description Summary
The District's 2002 Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed Water Master Plan Update prOVides a
comprehensive assessment of existing service capacities, projected demands, and
recommended facilities for five-year and full development periods. It is based upon the 1991
Master Plan and 1997 Master Pian Update, with adjustments and modifications made for
changes in projected demands.
1.3.1
Water
The District currently operates 24 pressure zones within its water service boundaries. Of the
24 pressure zones, seven are considered pumped zones, as they require pump stations in order
to transfer water from the source to the customer. The remaining 17 zones are gravity zones, in
which water is supplied without the aid of pump stations. Overall, the District operates 7 pump
stations, 21 pressure reducing stations, and 17 storage reservoirs. In addition, pipelines,
ranging in diameter from 2 to 48 inches, connect the turnouts, pump stations, storage
reservoirs, pressure reducing stations, and customers.
The existing (2001) average, maximum week, maximum day, and peak hour water demands are
13.01 million gallons per day (mgd), 24.70 mgd, 27.30 mgd, and 41.60 mgd, respectively. The
total five-year average demand is projected to increase to 15.94 mgd, an increase of
approximately 17.3 percent over current demands. Water demands are projected to increase to
a total of 21.36 mgd in 2020, an increase of 63.6 percent over current demands.
Numerous five-year and full development improvements to the existing water system are
identified in the 2002 Master Plan Update. These improvements primarily involve the
construction or modification of transmission pipelines, pump stations, pressure reducing
stations, and storage reservoirs. The 2002 Master Plan Update and Section 3 of the 2004 SEIR
describe the recommended improvements for the five-year planning period and buildout.
1.3.2
Wastewater and Reclaimed Water
The existing District wastewater system includes a series of interrelated collection, conveyance,
and treatment facilities. These facilities include gravity sewers, force mains, and lift stations, as
well as two treatment facilities: Meadowlark Water Reclamation Facility (MWRF) and Encina
Water Poliution Control Facility (EWPCF). The MWRF is located just south of the City of San
Marcos in the City of Carlsbad and the EWPCF is located in Carls bad between 1-5 and the
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR'
m:'''iP',:5b~..Jr,\llw;ti)lI'I''lllarpen'11'_b mrn~1 t)-14-il5.dCX:
Page 2
Resolution No. 1248
Page 9
Pacific Ocean just south of Palomar Airport Road. The EWPCF is a regional facility that serves
six member agencies, including the District.
The District's existing water reclamation facilities consist of the MWRF, Mahr Reservoir, and a
failsafe connection between the MWRF and EWPCF. Mahr Reservoir provides approximately
24 days of storage capacity (54 million gallons) based on the MWRF's 2.25 mgd capacity.
Currently, the District wholesales reclaimed water to the City of Carlsbad for use in irrigation.
The projected full development wastewater flows are 14.79 mgd, a decrease of 15 percent from
the 1997 Master Plan Update projection of 17.5 mgd. This 15 percent decrease results from
changing land uses within the District and the availability of more detailed land use information,
which has enabled projections to be made more accurately.
Proposed wastewater and reclaimed water projects contained in the 2002 Master Plan Update
include gravity sewers, force mains, and lift stations. The 2002 Master Plan Update identifies a
larger potential reclaimed water market than can be served with existing reclaimed water
capacities. Projected users include golf courses, agricultural operations, parks, and other large
landscaped areas. However, because the District has no plans to construct another water
reclamation facility, the plan evaluated in the 2004 SEIR does not include a new plant and limits
reclaimed water production to the capacity of the MWRF, which will be 5.0 mgd after its current
expansion is completed. Expansion of the MWRF is being addressed in a separate Mitigated
Negative Declaration. .
1.4 Guidelines for Project-Specific Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program
In accordance with Section 21081.6 of CEQA, as amended by Assembly Bill (AB) 3180, the
District is required to adopt an MMRP for monitoring and reporting all mitigation measures that
are identified in EIRs or in Mitigated Negative Declarations prepared by the District.
In order to monitor the implementation of mitigation measures identified in the EIRs, the District
will first identify a Mitigation Compliance Coordinator (MCC) who will be responsible for
overseeing the District's MMRP. This person will ensure and verify in writing that the
recommended mitigation measures contained in the 1991 PEIR, 1997 SEIR, and 2004 SEIR are
incorporated into project plans and associated CECA analysis and documentation for individual
Master Plan projects.
Mitigation measures thus far identified at the program level of detail are limited to
recommendations for focused technical studies for subsequent projects and typical mitigation
measures to be considered by the District in preparing project-specific CECA documentation.
As such, mitigation monitoring for the Master Plan Update does not involve specific measures
for field monitoring during and following project construction; the District would institute these
specific measures in conjunction with project-specific MMRPs. Instead, the District will review
future project development plans in light of the recommendations contained in the PEIR and
SEIRs.
The District will comply with this MMRP by completing all required technical studies based on
project-specific development plans, incorporating mitigation recommendations contained in
VaJ/ecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
:n""'1)\C.M<lr.~r.a;;Iil!r,I"nl<lppendl'tmlT\l1lt)..14,O,~_d6.-;
Page 3
Resolution No. 1248
Page 10
these technical studies into project-specific CEQA documentation, and preparing and
implementing mitigation monitoring activities for all Master Plan projects, as required by CECA.
The District will develop and utilize a checklist to be placed in each project file to document
compliance with the MMRP.
In conjunction with either the Initial Study or Draft EIR for a project, the District will conduct
studies in all technical areas where the potential for significant impacts exist (e.g., land use,
biological resources, cultural resources, air quality, visual quality, noise, traffic/circulation,
geology and soils, and hydrology/water quality). The studies will include mitigation measures to
offset identified significant impacts, and these measures will include those measures contained
in the respective technical sections of the PEIR and SEIRs.
Project-specific MMRPs wili summarize the project description and the specific impacts and
mitigation measures contained within the CECA documentation. The MMRP will also describe
the specific planning activities, field monitoring, and reporting procedures that must be
conducted by the District during project implementation, Typically, the District will identify a
MCC to oversee the monitoring and reporting activities related to each project. The MCC will
ensure that all identified mitigation measures are successfully implemented and that
documentation verifying this implementation is prepared and filed with the District. The
individual may be the same as the one selected to oversee the overall MMRP, or may be
specific to an individual project.
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
m:'\.';nk;Gbd\)C~n,)sW'rIM!,'IPp<:lndl,_b m'nrp 5-14-1J5dtx: '
Page 4
Resolution No. 1248
Page 11
Section 2: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
This section outlines the MMRP for the Vallecitos Water District Water, Wastewater, and Water
Reclamation Master Plan Update.
2.1 Master Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
The 2002 Master Plan Update identified the need for new facilities and modifications that were
not addressed in the 1991 Master Plan or the 1997 Master Plan Update. The 2004 SEIR
maximizes the use of the 1991 PEIR and 1997 SEIR for those projects that remain unchanged
and for presenting environmental considerations that have not changed since 1991 and/or 1997.
The 2004 SEIR focuses primarily on the environmental impacts of new or modified projects, as
reflected in the 2002 Master Plan Update. However, implementation of projects proposed in the
2002 Master Plan Update might differ from the assumptions of the 1991 PEIR and 1997 SEIR to
the extent that some environmental baseline conditions might have changed since the
documents were certified. Therefore, the 1997 SEIR and the 2004 SEIR are focused on the
environmental topics for which new impacts might occur due to changes in baseline conditions.
Potential impacts and mitigation measures were identified in the following resource areas:
. Land Use
. Biological Resources
. Cultural Resources
The 1991 PEIR identified potential impacts and mitigation measures in the following additional
resource areas:
. Air Cuality
. Visual Resources
. Noise
. Traffic/Circulation
. Geology/Soils
. HydrologylWater Cuality
2.2 Mitigation Measures and Monitoring Strategies
The following sections describe the mitigation measures from the PEIR and SEIRs and present
the monitoring strategies to be employed in ensuring that the mitigation measures are
implemented. Mitigation measures have been divided into two categories depending upon
when they would be implemented: during design or construction. This determines how the
mitigation measure will be monitored. A checklist for siting and design mitigation is included as
Attachment A.
Valleeitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
1l1:\WP~:l\bdOCiln,);;\f)lplan\1lppen!JI,.tlmm(p\J'.14.1)5dllr:
Page 5
Resolution No. 1248
Page 12
2.2.1
Land Use
2.2.1.1 Summary of Impacts
The 2002 Master Plan Update would not have a potentially significant impact on land use.
Because of their short duration, no construction projects would cause significant short-term
impacts to adjacent land uses. New pressure reducing stations, pump stations, lift stations, and
reservoirs would have less than significant long-term land use impacts because they would be
situated in areas compatible with existing and projected land uses; they would conform to
applicable land use policies for local jurisdictions, including guidelines for community character
and zoning; they would not divide any community or permanently preclude other future uses;
and they would be generally small facilities that generate little to no noise or odors that would
affect surrounding areas. New transmission pipelines and sewer mains would also have less
than significant long-term impacts on land use because the pipelines would be installed below
ground and would be located under existing streets so they would not affect adjacent land uses.
2.2.1.2 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during siting and design:
. Adequate buffers such as setbacks, berms, walls, and landscaping shall be incorporated
into site design.
. Projects shall be located in areas of compatible land use in order to avoid operational
conflicts, such as noise, odors, and toxic materials.
. Where possible, the siting of permanent aboveground facilities on important or prime
agricultural lands shall be avoided.
. Where possible, siting of permanent aboveground facilities on preserved agricultural
lands or protected open space areas not planned for urbanization shall be avoided.
. Unutilized graded areas in naturally vegetated locations shall be revegetated with native
California plant species that provide habitat and are fire resistant, drought tolerant, and
common to the area. '
. When possible, facilities shall be constructed immediately prior to development and shall
be coordinated with the construction of related infrastructure improvement (e.g.,
roadways, electrical lines).
No mitigation measures specific to construction have been identified for land use. Mitigation
measures, such as those for air quality, noise, and traffic, that may also impact land use are
described under those individual issue areas.
2.2.1.3 Mitigation Monitoring
The MCC will be responsible for completing the Siting and Design Mitigation Checklist in
Attachment A. The checklist will be incorporated into the CECA documentation prepared for the
project.
Valleeitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
rr;\;'i:)',::Mi)G~r!a;;t;)frIHn\appe~jji, J: mrnip 1j..14.U5 doc
Page 6
l
Resolution No. 1248
Page 13
2.2.2
Biological Resources
2.2.2.1 Summary of Impacts
Portions of the District contain significant biological resources that could be affected by
implementation of the 2002 Master Plan Update, and significant impacts could occur. Specific
resource values include sensitive riparian, marsh, sage scrub, and oak woodland habitats, as
well as a number of rare floral and faunal species. All potential impacts to these resources will
be addressed during site-specific review of individual projects. General mitigation measures are
provided in this SEIR with detailed mitigation to be provided after site-specific review.
In addition to potentially significant biological resource impacts, the Master Plan has the
potential to cause potentially significant cumulative impacts in conjunction with past, present,
and future projects in and around the District service area. To reduce those impacts to less
than significant levels, it is assumed that the mitigation measures described would be
implemented for these cumulative projects. The District does not have the jurisdiction or
responsibility to implement these mitigation measures for non-District projects. The mitigation
measures would be implemented by the project proponent and monitoring would be required as
directed by the appropriate responsible agencies.
2.2.2.2 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during siting and design:
. While designing projects and during construction of a project, existing roadways,
pipelines, and other disturbed rights-of-way shall be utilized to the maximum extent
feasible. .
. Biological surveys shall be conducted in detail prior to implementation of individual
projects that have potentially significant impacts on native vegetation, wildlife habitats, or
any sensitive plant or animal species. The purpose of the surveys is to confirm the
presence or absence of sensitive species, determine the potential for significant impacts
on native vegetation, wildlife habitats, or any sensitive plant or animai species, and to
identify specific mitigation measures, as appropriate, for the potentially impacted
resource. All surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist holding an appropriate
Recovery Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). All surveys shall be
conducted at the times designated in the survey protocols and under suitable weather
conditions. Surveys for rare and narrow endemic plants shall be conducted during the
appropriate season to determine the presence or absence of these species. Specific
survey protocols listed below shall be used if suitable habitat is found for the following
species:
California gnatcatcher: Three surveys, a minimum of one week apart.
Least bell's vireo: Eight surveys, ten days apart during the breeding season
(approximately March 15 until July 1).
Southwestern willow flycatcher: Three surveys (Survey 1 between May 15 and
31; Survey 2 between June 1 and 21, Survey 3 between June 22 and July 10).
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
m:\W).i',:5N.v.;'~rta';li)lpl"n\E~pen.:lI'.b mmfJl tJ..14.05 ct.x.
Page 7
Resolution No. 1248
Page 14
Successive surveys must be at least five days apart.
Arroyo toad: At least six surveys during the breeding season (March 15 through
July 1), with at least seven days between surveys. At least one survey shall be
conducted during April, May, and June, with both daytime and nighttime
components during the same 24-hour period.
Quino checkerspot butterfly: not required at this time. If it is determined in the
future that the butterfly's distribution has changed and surveys are warranted, one
survey would be conducted during each week of the flight season, as determined
by the USFWS.
. Any projects proposed within or adjacent to any preserve areas designated in the North
County draft and adopted subarea plans shall incorporate adjacency guidelines to
minimize the project's potential impacts from increased noise, light, drainage, invasive
species, and human intrusion.
. Siting review conducted during the early stages of design shall include input from a
qualified biologist in order to avoid known areas of sensitive species, plant communities,
or wildlife habitats to the maximum extent possible.
The following mitigation measures would be implemented during construction:
. Construction activities and disturbance shall be avoided in bird nesting habitats during
the nesting season.
. Topsoil shall be salvaged when trenching is conducted in vegetated areas and shall be
replaced on top of excavated material, as required.
. Native plant materials shall be used for revegetation that are appropriate for the native
habitat. The revegetation should reflect as nearly as possible the species makeup of the
disturbed or surrounding vegetation, with modifications made by a qualified biologist for
drought tolerance, flammability, or other concerns. All revegetation plans shall
incorporate a 5-year monitoring and maintenance program.
Mitigation measures specific to individual vegetation or habitat types are listed below.
. Chaparral:
Impacts to mafic mixed chaparral, mafic chamise chaparral, or to southern
maritime chaparral shall be avoided to the maximum extent feasible. Where
impacts cannot be avoided, mitigation shall be provided at a ratio .of 1: 1 to 3: 1,
and may include on-site preservation or off-site habitat acquisition. Off-site
mitigation should be within a designated preserve area or a designated mitigation
bank accepted by the resource agencies.
Impacts to mixed chaparral and chamise chaparral shall be mitigated at a ratio of
0.5: 1 to 1: 1 either on- or off-site.
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
ni!wP~::,bd'l'l:lm;'l,>trn~l:m"3"pIlMI._b rr;n!\) ,). 14.0~.:}:x;
Page 8
Resolution No. 1248
Page 15
. Coastal Sage Scrub:
Impacts to undisturbed sage scrub vegetation shall be avoided to the maximum
extent feasible. Mitigation shall be provided at a ratio ranging from 1: 1 to 2: 1,
either on- or off-site.
Where there will be a loss of coastal sage scrub in an area not currently covered
under an approved, adopted subarea plan, a Habitat Loss Permit (HLP) will be
required under Interim Rule 4d of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Interim
Rule 4d allows for the loss of 5 percent of a given jurisdiction's total coastal sage
scrub habitat, provided the loss is mitigated. For losses of coastal sage scrub
under 1 acre and not occupied by California Gnatcatchers, "de minim us" findings
can be made with the approval of the USFWS and California Department of Fish
and Game (CDFG).
Any temporarily disturbed area shall be re-seeded with a seed mix that will reflect,
as nearly as possible, the species makeup of the original vegetation. If feasible,
native seed from the site should be collected prior to clearing and grubbing.
California Gnatcatcher populations shall be avoided to the maximum extent
possible.
. Riparian Habitats (including freshwater marsh and oak woodlands):
Wetland delineations and jurisdictional determinations shall be conducted, as
required, to identify the areas that are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Section 404 of the Clean Water Act) andlor CDFG (Section
1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code), and the County's Resource
Protection Ordinance (RPO).
All riparian habitats shall be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. If
impacts cannot be avoided, mitigation shall be required at a ratio ranging from 1:1
to 3:1 to achieve a no-net-Ioss of habitat, and shall involve a habitat creation
component. In accordance with CDFG guidelines, mitigation plans for wetland
habitat restoration. will be developed. This will include a 5-year monitoring and
maintenance program.
Habitats that are suitable or occupied by sensitive riparian birds such as Least
Bell's Vireo or others shall be avoided when appropriate.
Construction through oak woodlands will be avoided as much as possible. Fifty-
foot buffers will be maintained between oak woodland drip lines and construction
activity. The drip line represents the outermost reaches of the oak woodland
canopy.
Pruning shall be performed prior to construction activity if low branches could
potentially be damaged during construction.
If roots are disturbed, cuts will be cleanly trimmed immediately and painted with
an approved sealant.
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
",::",vulXloemaste;rL'm\af'pendl..t,mllUfJ!J..14.05.dc<:
Page 9
\
Resolution No. 1248
Page 16
. Vernal Pools:
Direct impacts to vernal pools shall be avoided to the maximum extent feasible.
All indirect impacts to vernal pOOls and their watersheds (e.g., manipulation of the
natural drainage systems in the vicinity of the pools) shall also be avoided. Any
impacts to vernal pools will require mitigation at a 3:1 ratio and would require
habitat creation to achieve a no-net-Ioss of vernal pool habitat.
Sensitive areas, including the pool watershed, shall be fenced to prohibit damage
from construction machinery or personnel if vernal pools occur in the vicinity of
construction.
. Perennial Grasslands:
Impacts to native grasslands shall be avoided to the extent practicable. Impacts
to these habitats shall require mitigation at a ratio ranging from1:1 to 3:1, either
on- or off-site.
Construction shall be limited to the summer season when the Nasella grasses are
in a dormant stage.
. Annual Grasslands:
Impacts to annual grasslands shall be mitigated at a 0.5:1 ratio, either on- or off-
site.
2.2.2.3 Mitigation Monitoring
A qualified biologist will perform further review of the site and will provide detailed site-specific
mitigation recommendations and the MCC will be responsible for completing the Siting and
Design Mitigation Checklist in Appendix A. The checklist will be incorporated into the CEQA
documentation prepared for the project.
Prior to final design and implementation of individual Master Plan projects that affect biological
resources, a qualified biologist shall conduct a site-specific analysis. The above mitigation
measures shall be incorporated into all contract specifications, as appropriate. The MCC shall
verify that the mitigation measures are incorporated into the project design prior to the start of
construction. The MCC shall inspect the construction site on a weekly basis, or as otherwise
appropriate, to ensure that mitigation measures designed to preclude or reduce impacts on
biological resources are being followed.
2.2.3 Cultural Resources
2.2.3.1 Summary of Impacts
The 2002 Master Plan Update includes projects that involve ground disturbance in areas that
may contain previously unrecorded archaeological and historic resources. These projects have
the potential to cause significant impacts to cultural resources. Site-specific surveys and
Valfecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
r;:.',i;:;\('5M")I:'~n'l;;t,)lpl:ln''''rp~~ill' J' mn'lI1J .j, I 4, OS,doc:
Page 10
Resolution No. 1248
Page 17
testing, if necessary, must be conducted for all Master Plan projects. Mitigation can typically be
accomplished through site avoidance, data recovery, and monitoring.
In addition to potentially significant cultural resource impacts, the Master Plan has the potential
to cause potentially significant cumulative impacts in conjunction with past, present, and future
projects in and around the District service area. To r_educe those impacts to less than significant
levels, it is assumed that the mitigation measures described would be implemented for these
cumulative projects. The District does not have the jurisdiction or responsibility to implement
these mitigation measures for non-District projects. The mitigation measures would be
implemented by the project proponent and monitoring would be required as directed by the
appropriate responsible agencies.
2.2.3.2
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during siting and design if the project
would be located in previously undisturbed areas:
. A cultural survey for known nearby cultural sites shall be conducted. This information
shall be used for preliminary planning for placement of new facilities such as mains,
reservoirs, and pump stations in order to avoid known sites, where feasible. Cultural
resource surveys and evaluations on a project-specific basis shall be required for Master
Plan facilities that are not sited on graded building pads or roadways placed in bedrock
cuts. These surveys shall be conducted by a qualified professional archaeologist. As
necessary and appropriate for the nature of cultural resources known to be present,
these surveys and evaluations shall include the following:
. Walkover survey of the facility location and ancillary facilities.
. Identification and recording of any cultural resources.
. Consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission and appropriate tribal
representatives for important Native American sites, including, but not limited to,
ceremonial, religious, or burial sites.
. Limited testing of each cultural resource, as necessary, to determine its extent, the
content of the site, and the significance of the site under Appendix K of CEQA.
. Preparation of a report that details the survey methodology and findings, a
description of any historic and prehistoric cultural resources, recommendations to
determine the significance of the resource, an evaluation of the resource
significance, and recommended mitigation measures.
. During the project siting process, sensitive cultural resource sites shall be avoided. This
can be accomplished by such measures as rerouting a pipeline or siting a structure,
such as a pump station or aboveground reservoir, in a manner that excludes the site
from the area of direct impact.
. Cultural resources studies for projects that affect Native American resources shall also
include consultation with the Native American community to determine the cultural
Val/ecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
r.i:',>\'j)\r;sl:::lx~il..<;t')p!:m'alI'tXI'.P mmrp 5-14.0!',dx
Page 11
Resolution No. 1248
Page 18
heritage value of sites separate from their archaeological significance. For these
projects, the Native American community shall be involved in the planning process
during the early stages, so that potential concerns can be adequately addressed.
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction if the project would
be located in previously undisturbed areas:
. If avoidance is not feasible, mitigation of impacts shall be achieved through development
and implementation of a data recovery excavation program, guided by a research
design. Data recovery programs shall include cataloging and analysis of recovered
cultural material, a comprehensive report of the methods and results of the data
recovery excavation, and curation of recovered cultural material at an appropriate
repository, such as the San Diego Archaeological Center.
. Preservation measures can be implemented to protect the resources from direct project-
related impacts or from indirect impacts. This can include placing an archaeological site
in a fenced area or setting it aside from future studies by placing it in an open space
easement. In some cases, sites can be preserved through capping of significant
deposits so that they would not be disturbed by construction. Often, buildings can be
reused and incorporated into facility design. .
2.2.3.3 Mitigation Monitoring
Prior to final design and implementation of individual Master Plan projects, a qualified
archaeologist shall conduct a site-specific analysis of cultural resources, if appropriate. The
mitigation measures suggested by this study shall be incorporated into all contract
specifications, as appropriate. The MCC shall verify that the mitigation measures are
incorporated into the project design prior to the start of construction. The MCC shall inspect the
construction site on a weekly basis, or as otherwise appropriate, to ensure that mitigation
measures designed to preclude or reduce impacts to cultural resources are being followed.
2.2.4
Air Quality
2.2.4.1 Summary of Impacts
The San Diego Air Basin (SDAB) as a whole is considered for the evaluation of cumulative air
quality impacts. Because the SDAB is a non-attainment area for ozone and PM10, the
incremental increase in air pollutants contributed by the 2002 Master Plan Update would be a
significant cumulative impact. Mitigation measures involve the San Diego Air Pollution Control
District's (APCD's) implementation of regulatory standards to achieve basin-wide attainment of
air quality objectives. Because these measures would not eliminate emissions of ozone or
particulates in a region designated nonattainment for these pollutants, the incremental effect of
the 2002 Master Plan Update in combination with other listed projects could be cumulatively
considerable, and cumulative impacts to air quality would be significant.
In addition to potentially significant air quality impacts, the Master Plan has the potential to
cause potentially significant cumulative impacts in conjunction with past, present, and future
projects in and around the District service area. To reduce those impacts to less than significant
Val/ecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
in:\I'l1\',;sb,:fm:~ili;tmpl\lr.\;wp~Mi,.b mrr'l) i;.I~,05,1o(;
Page 12
Resolution No. 1248
Page 19
levels, it is assumed that the mitigation measures described would be implemented for these
cumulative projects. The District does not have the jurisdiction or responsibility to implement
these mitigation measures for non-District projects. The mitigation measures would be
implemented by the project proponent and monitoring would be required as directed by the
appropriate responsible agencies.
2.2.4.2 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction:
. Adequate water and/or other dust palliatives shall be used on disturbed areas.
. Street washing and/or sweeping shall be employed along access roads to remove soil
carried from the site to the street and prevent vehicles from pulverizing soil into tine
particles.
. Soil excavation, clearing, or grading shall be terminated when wind speeds exceed an
hourly average of 25 mph.
. All vehicles hauling soil on publiC roadways shall be covered or tarped to prevent
airborne dust generation.
. Bonding shall be required to ensure proper operational performance with respect to air
quality under penalty of forfeiture.
. Low NOx emission tune-ups shall be required for all on-site construction equipment at a
minimum interval of every 90 days.
. Rideshare or transit incentives shall be provided for construction personnel.
. Obstruction of through traffic lanes from construction equipment or activities shall be
minimized.
. Engine idling shall be prohibited while waiting to load or unload if the expected wait time
exceeds 10 minutes.
. Operations affecting roadways shall be scheduled during off-peak traffic hours.
2.2.4.3 Mitigation Monitoring
Following the completion of a site-specific air quality evaluation, the above mitigation measures
will be incorporated into the contract specifications, as appropriate. The MCC or a qualified air
quality specialist will inspect the site on a regular basis to determine if the air quality mitigation
measures are being followed and are effective. .
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
rr!'\''ip\f.5~dOl;\111,)!;lt')lpl:ln\;)PI''(>n;II,:J,mmrptl,.14,O!idor.
Page 13
Resolution No. 1248
Page 20
2.2.5
Visual Quality
2.2.5.1 Summary of Impacts
The Master Plan could potentially result in significant impacts related to visual resources. It is
expected that design and mitigation measures could reduce these impacts below levels of
significance, although this assumption will require verification during site-specific CECA review.
The Master Plan has the potential to cause potentially significant cumulative visual quality
impacts in conjunction with past, present, and future projects in and around the District service
area. To reduce those impacts to less than significant levels, it is assumed that the mitigation
measures described would be implemented for these cumulative projects. The District does not
have the jurisdiction or responsibility to implement these mitigation measures for non-District
projects. The mitigation measures would be implemented by the project proponent and
monitoring would be required as directed by the appropriate responsible agencies.
2.2.5.2 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during siting and design:
. Prior to the implementation of Master Plan projects, a site-specific review of visual
resource impacts shall be conducted. Standard mitigation measures, such as
landscaping, visual screening, and height restrictions, will be incorporated into project
design and implementation.
2.2.5.3 Mitigation Monitoring
Should the site-specific visual quality evaluation indicate that it is necessary, the District will hire
a revegetation specialist or registered landscape architect to develop and implement a
landscape plan. The revegetation specialist or landscape architect will be responsible for
monitoring the successful implementation of the landscape plan. The MCC is responsible for
coordination with the revegetation specialist or the registered landscape architect in the
preparation of a suitable landscaping plan. The MCC will examine project design plans prior to
the start of construction to ensure that aboveground facilities will be landscaped andlor
enclosed, as required. The MCC will inspect the site after construction is completed to ensure
that those plans were carried out. One year after the construction of the project is completed,
the MCC will Inspect the site to determine the success of the landscaping.
2.2.6
Noise
2.2.6.1 Summary of Impacts
Implementation of the Master Plan will result in construction and operation-related Impacts.
Mitigation measures consist of time constraints and distance buffers to maintain acceptable
levels of noise exposure. It is anticipated that all noise impacts will be reduced to below a level
of significance, although this assumption will require verification during site-specific CECA
review.
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
'!i:';~Vc,l>ar~na5til1p,a~\ilt'pefl~I' ._b rronrp iJ.14.C5.:b;;
Page 14
Resolution No. 1248
Page 21
In addition to potentially significant noise impacts, the Master Plan has the potential to cause
potentially significant cumulative impacts in conjunction with past, present, and future projects in
and around the District service area. To reduce those impacts to less than significant levels, it
is assumed that the mitigation measures described would be implemented for these cumulative
projects. The District does not have the jurisdiction or responsibility to implement these
mitigation measures for non-District projects. The mitigation measures would be implemented
by the project proponent and monitoring would be required as directed by the appropriate
responsible agencies.
2.2.6.2 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during siting and design:
. A site-specific evaluation by a qualified noise specialist of potential noise impacts shall
be required for individual projects. Depending on the nature, location, and design of
specific projects, a number of mitigation measures may be recommended.
. Pump stations shall be enclosed within block wall structures, pursuant to direction by a
qualified noise specialist. If siting within 100 feet of residential structures is unavoidable,
analysis shall be performed to ensure that noise levels conform to the appropriate
regulatory guidelines at any affected residence.
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction:
. Mobile equipment shall not be operated within 50 feet of any residence.
. Partly mobile or stationary equipment shall not be operated within 100 feet during the
day or 300 feet at night of any residence, unless appropriate noise buffers (e.g., berms
or walls) are utilized to shield line-of-sight propagation (pursuant to direction by a
qualified noise specialist).
2.2.6.3 Mitigation Monitoring
The MCC will be responsible for completing the Siting and Design Mitigation Checklist in
Attachment A. The checklist will be incorporated into the CECA documentation prepared for the
project.
Following completion of an acoustical investigation by a qualified noise specialist, the
appropriate recommendations shall be incorporated into the construction and operation of a
project. The MCC will ensure that these recommendations are incorporated into the
construction operating procedures before construction begins. The MCC or noise specialist will
make weekly, or as otherwise necessary, inspections of the project site to ensure that the
recommended measures are being implemented. The noise specialist will report hislher
findings to the MCC on a monthly basis or as otherwise appropriate. Area residents potentially
impacted by project noise will be informed of the hours of construction and the name and
telephone number of a contact person to whom they may lodge complaints. The MCC will be
responsible for investigating complaints received, or dispatching a qualified noise specialist to
investigate any complaints.
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
,~::'"!'v~:~ll,jD::',M,,t>Jl pI:JIl\t,pperhli, .,b MIl'll)) e., i4.1l5.d,ll;
Page 15
Resolution No. 1248
Page 22
2.2.7
Traffic/Circulation
2.2.7.1 Summary of Impacts
Potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed Master Plan are limited to short-term
construction effects, that are not considered significant. This conclusion would be subject to
verification, however, during site-specific environmental review. In addition, work restrictions
are recommended during peak periods to reduce effects on local traffic flows.
In addition to potentially significant traffic/circulation impacts, the Master Plan has the potential
to cause potentially significant cumulative impacts in conjunction with past, present, and future
projects in and around the District service area. To reduce those impacts to less than significant
levels, it is assumed that the mitigation measures described would be implemented for these
cumulative projects. The District does not have the jurisdiction or responsibility to implement
these mitigation measures for non-District projects. The mitigation measures would be
implemented by the project proponent and monitoring would be required as directed by the
appropriate responsible agencies.
2.2.7.2 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during siting and design:
. Project-specific traffic evaluations shall be conducted for individual Master Plan facilities
prior to project implementation. All design and mitigation measures recommended in the
evaluation shall be incorporated into final project design and/or construction
specifications, as appropriate.
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction:
. Construction activities shall be scheduled during non-peak hours as much as possible in
order to avoid congestion. Peak hours are generally defined as the periods between
7 a.m. and 9 a.m., and 4 p.m. and 6 p.m.
. Construction activities shall be conducted so as to maintain through traffic and local
access and parking pursuant to the requirements of local regulatory jurisdictions.
. Traffic safety shall be maintained through the use of specific construction traffic routes,
crossing points, speed limits, flag people, and warning devices pursuant to the
requirements of local regulatory jurisdictions.
2.2.7.3 Mitigation Monitoring
The MCC will be responsible for completing the Siting and Design Mitigation Checklist in
Attachment A. The checklist will be incorporated into the CEQA documentation prepared for the
project.
During construction, the MCC will conduct periodic site inspections .to ensure that the
recommended mitigation measures are being enforced. It should be noted that the combined
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SE/R
m:;'\1i";G~:1\ll:'una~\i)r plap,\app~n!Jr, ,b mil'lrl! j)..14.0S.<Joc
Page 16
Resolution No. 1248
Page 23
intent of the noise and traffic mitigation is to minimize truck traffic associated with individual
projects from the local roadways before 9 a.m.
2.2.8
Geology and Soils
2.2.8.1 Summary of Impacts
The Master Plan facilities have the potential to cause impacts to, or be affected by, geologic
resources. Issues include the loss of Prime Farmland, seismic hazards, soil instability, shallow
bedrock and groundwater, and the disposal of excess or oversize material. All potential impacts
must be addressed during site-specific project review. Numerous mitigation measures are
recommended in 1991 PEIR to avoid impacts or reduce them below levels of significance.
In addition to potentially significant geology and soils impacts, the Master Plan has the potential
to cause potentially significant cumulative impacts in conjunction with past, present, and future
projects in and around the District service area. To reduce those impacts to less than significant
levels, it is assumed that the mitigation measures described would be implemented for these
cumulative projects. The District does not have the jurisdiction or responsibility to implement
these mitigation measures for non-District projects. The mitigation measures would be
implemented by the project proponent and monitoring would be required as directed by the
appropriate responsible agencies.
2.2.8.2 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during siting and design:
. Detailed geotechnical investigations shall be conducted by a qualified geologist prior to
implementation of the proposed Master Plan projects. These investigations shall include
evaluation of the geologic and seismic environment, including potential effects
associated with liquefaction, ground acceleration, landsliding, seiches, expansive and
reactive soils, compaction, erosion, and final project design, including all measures
identified to reduce or preclude impacts.
. Landscape plans shall be prepared for appropriate areas pursuant to direction by a
qualified botanist or landscape architect. These plans shall utilize native drought-
tolerant vegetation to the maximum extent feasible, and shall be implemented as soon
as possible after completion of grading operations to reduce potential erosion effects.
. All slope designs, cuts, fills, erosion control, surface and subsurface drainage, and
foundation and retaining wall design shall conform to the recommendations of a qualified
geologist.
. Material disposal methods, locations, and haul routes shall be designated as part of
specific project design, and shall include coordination with, and approval by, appropriate
regulatory agencies.
. Appropriate grading and construction measures shall be utilized to accommodate
seismic loading, pursuant to direction by a qualified geologist.
Val/eeitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
"1::wp~;"l;.drX;~T;a;;lm ~IHn\appeniJI'J~ fl1mlll f}. 14. f)S d...,
Page 17
Resolution No. 1248
Page 24
· Proposed design, grading, and construction activities shall conform to pertinent
requirements of the Uniform Building Code, California Division of Dam Safety, and local
ordinances, where appropriate.
. Grading plans shall be reviewed prior to finalization to determine the need for additional
comments, recommendation, and/or analysis pursuant to direction by a qualified
geologist.
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction:
. Unsuitable base materials shall be excavated and replaced with approved and properly
compacted structural fill. Unsuitable base materials may include deposits subject to
liquefaction, expansion, differential or excessive compaction and reactivity.
. Appropriate measures shall be used to control expansive soils (e.g., moisture control or
addition of chemical stabilizers) or reactive soils (e.g., use of corrosion-resistant steel
and concrete) in areas where complete removal is impractical.
. Erosion-controlling and slope stabilization measures shall be employed both during and
after completion of construction activities. These may include methods such as
revegetation, detention structures, retaining walls, temporary siopes or buttressing, brow
ditches, and work restrictions during inclement weather.
. Compacted areas shall be treated (e.g., by scarification) to facilitate revegetation and
reduce erosion potential.
. Surficial materials, including alluvium, fill, and topsoils, shall be excavated to firm natural
ground and either replaced with approved fill or recompacted, depending on direction
from a qualified geologist.
. All fill materials used for proposed grading and construction activities shail meet the
specification of a qualified geologist in terms of composition, size distribution, moisture
content, compaction, depth, and application methodology.
. The use and/or disposal of oversize rock material shall be in accordance with direction
by a qualified geologist. Generally, this would entail methods such as offsite disposal,
placement in deeper on-site fills, crushing, or use in landscaping efforts of ail rock
exceeding approximately 24 inches in diameter.
. Ail areas to be paved shail incorporate subsurface materials that meet the composition
and compacting requirements of a qualified geologist. This wiil likely involve 90 percent
relative compaction to a minimum depth of 12 inches and the use of granular non-
expansive fiil.
. Cut and fill transition zones associated with overlying structures shall be designed
pursuant to direction by a qualified geologist.
. All cut slopes and trenches shall be observed during grading pursuant to direction by a
qualified geologist to ensure conformity with anticipated subsurface conditions.
Val/eeitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
Page 18
.1!:\Wl)\(:;;t:d')c'.11~,tllpl:m\:]ppenci; _D rJ\!l1m 6-.14-05.d,'1(:
Resolution No. 1248
Page 25
· Inspections and testing of all grading materials and procedures shall be conducted as
directed by a qualified geologist.
. All drainage facilities owned and maintained by the District shall be regularly inspected
and properly maintained to ensure proper working order.
· If explosives are necessary for excavation activities, their use shall conform to all
appropriate state and local guidelines. These would include measures to safeguard
explosives in approved storage facilities, ensure safe operation and handling by trained
personnel, and protect sensitive receptors (if any) from potential noise and vibration
effects,
. Disposal of groundwater from dewatering operations shall be coordinated with the
RWQCB.
2.2.8.3 Mitigation Monitoring
The District will hire a qualified geologist to oversee/perform the necessary analysis of the
chosen site. The MCC and the qualified geologist will review project design plans prior to the
start of construction to confirm that potential impacts from geotechnical constraints have been
sufficiently mitigated. Throughout the course of construction, the MCC will periodically monitor
construction to verify that design measures intended to mitigate geology/soils constraints are
being implemented. The MCC may require that the qualified geologist perform site inspections
during construction to assist the MCC in confirming the implementation of geotechnical
mitigation measures.
2.2.9
Hydrology/Water Quality
2.2.9.1 Summary of Impacts
The Master Plan has the potential to cause significant impacts in the areas of surface water
quality during construction as a result of erosion, increased runoff, flooding and leaks or spills
from transmission or storage facilities. Shallow groundwater can present a problem during
construction and the use of groundwater could cause the overdrafting of aquifers. The
application of reclaimed water for irrigation also has both surface and groundwater quality
implications. Numerous technical and other environmental studies must be conducted prior to
implementation of Master Plan projects. Mitigation measures are recommended in the 1991
PEIR to avoid impacts or reduce them below levels of significance.
In addition to potentially significant hydrology/water quality impacts, the Master Plan has the
potential to cause potentially significant cumulative impacts in conjunction with past, present,
and future projects in and around the District service area. To reduce those impacts to less
than significant levels, it is assumed that the mitigation measures described would be
implemented for these cumulative projects. The District does not have the jurisdiction or
responsibility to implement these mitigation measures for non-District projects. The mitigation
measures would be implemented by the project proponent and monitoring would be required as
directed by the appropriate responsible agencies.
Vallecitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SE/R
m:\~'liV.:r,b0;~na;:lm r!,lI\\~rpeO!li, . b mmrp G.- 14.05.00.::
Page 19
Resolution No. 1248
Page 26
2.2.9.2 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during siting and design:
. Detailed hydrologic analyses shall be conducted by a qualified hydrologist and/or civil
engineer prior to implementation of proposed Master Plan actions. Such investigation
shall include evaluation of the surface hydrological environment to determine site-
specific effects related to runoff volumes and velocities, flooding (both on- and off-site),
drainage alteration, and erosion. The results of these investigations would be used in
the development of final project design, including all measures identified to reduce' or
preclude impacts.
. Drainage design shall be coordinated with local engineering and/or flood control
departments, where appropriate.
. Surface drainages shall be designed to collect and move runoff into appropriate
drainage courses or structures. This would involve preserving existing drainage patterns
to the maximum extent feasible and utilizing appropriate improvements (crossing
structures, etc.) to maintain existing flow volumes and velocities.
. The design and placement of subdrains under all fills located in drainage courses shall
be conducted in accordance with the direction of the hydrologist and/or civil engineer.
. All project-related facilities shall be designed to accommodate projected 100-year storm
fiows. .
. All facilities subject to flooding damage shall be located outside of mapped 100-year
floodplains, or protected per direction of the project civil engineers, geologists, and
hydrologists. Protective measures may include berms, dikes, reinforcing materials, or
elevation above mapped flood elevations.
. Pervious materials shall be used for access roads, parking areas, etc. wherever feasible,
to increase infiltration and decrease surface runoff.
. Detailed design analysis for major water transmission or storage facilities shall include
contingency plans regarding potential spills or leaks and associated flooding and erosion
hazards. Where appropriate, this shall include the submission of facility design data to
the California Division of Safety of Dams for review and approval.
. Short- and long-term erosion control measures shall be implemented as appropriate to
preclude significant surface water quality degradation. Such measures would be
determined by qualified hydrologists, civil engineers and/or landscape architects, with
typical methods outlined above in this section under surface water.
The fOllowing mitigation measures shall be implemented during construction:
. All District owned and maintained drainages and erosion control facilities shall be
regularly maintained to ensure proper working condition.
Valleeitos Water District, Administrative Draft Master Plan SEIR
Page 20
rr::\~'V\"(;b(!ilr;\;,,,~;:teli"I"~~rp...n(J!ii Jl mmrp t).. 14.0r,.doe:;
Resolution No. 1248
Page 27
· Blockage and damage of graded berms, swales, area drains, and slopes shall be
avoided.
. Water ponding in roadways and runoff down graded or natural slopes shall be
eliminated.
. Sandbags, hay bales, mulches, matting, or similar devices shall be used along all
graded roadways, slopes, and pads to minimize sediment transport in the short term.
The exact nature and location of such facilities shall be determined by a hydrologist or
civil engineer.
. All graded slopes shall be temporarily hydroseeded to provide interim stability.
. Native vegetation shall be preserved, wherever feasible, and all disturbed areas shall be
reclaimed as soon as possible after the completion of grading.
. Where appropriate, runoff devices (e.g., inlet pipes and brow ditches) shall be used to
preclude runoff from graded slopes.
. Energy dissipating structures (e.g., detention ponds, drop structures, or riprap blankets)
shall be used downstream of all culverts, storm drains, and brow ditches to reduce
velocity and prevent erosion.
. Pre-development runoff volumes shall be preserved to the maximum extent feasible and
detention or energy-dissipation structures shall be used to prevent damage to
downstream drainage facilities and improvements.
. Grading and other surface-disturbing activities shall be restricted during inclement
weather.
. Appropriate compacted areas shall be scarified to induce runoff infiltration and
revegetation.
. Removal and disposal of groundwater (if any) encountered during construction activities
shall be coordinated with the local RWCCB to ensure proper disposal methods and
locations.
2.2.9.3 Mitigation Monitoring
Prior to the final design and implementation, a qualified hydrologist or civil engineer shall
conduct an analysis of hydrology and water quality. The mitigation measures suggested by this
study shall be incorporated into the contract specifications, as appropriate. The MCC shall
verify that the mitigation measures are incorporated into the project design prior to the start of
construction. The MCC shall inspect the construction site on a weekly basis, or as otherwise
appropriate, to ensure that mitigation measures designed to preclude or reduce water quality
impacts are being followed, including the provision that potentially hazardous materials are
properly disposed.
Val/eeitos Water District, Administrative Draft MasterPlan SEIR
IH:\'\l:'a,lx1l)c\ma~~)!i'I..~'''''r,pl:~,dl' .,b Il'llnnl ij..14. %di)(~
Page 21