Item 25 - Draft EIR for Proposed WYROC, Inc. Quarry/Asphalt Plant OperationAGENDA REPORT of Q
'CITY'OF POA'
t
TO-: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:,James L.-Bowersox, City Mana
INITIATED BY Reba W. Touw,: Director of Planning Services z;e-
James R. Nessel,, Associate Planner
DATE: September 2, 1986
SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Proposed
WYROC, Inc'. Quare fAs halt Plant Operation
BACKGROUND
As Council. is aware, the Planning Services Department.has been
tracking the proposed project since the spring of 1985.. The City
has corresponded with the County on several occasions in order to
identify Poway's concerns regarding the project. Attachments 2. 3,
4, and ` 5 contain the subject correspondence. It should be noted
that abouttwo thirds of the project area is within Poway°'s adopted
Sphere of influence, and the balance is within a. LAFCO-designated
special study area at this time' (See Attachment 1) . The City° of
Powa 's adopted land use and
y p pre-zoning for the sphere: area is
Rural Residential AAI DU/4, 8 20, or 40 net acres).
Staff has reviewed the project's Draftr EIR and has 'prepared a
number of comments for Council's consideration.. The official com-
ments from; Poway are due to the County by Thursday, September 110,
1986.
PROJECT'DESCRIPTION
The: proposed. _project will be located on a 237-acre parcel. It. con.--
sis s of an original 143 acres where the asphalt plant operation
and, quarrying will take .place, and 94 acres on the west, which are
being added as a buffer and source of additional water.; The site
is situated on the west side of Highway 67, approximately 1.5 miles
south of the intersection of Highway 67` and Poway Road.; It fronts
the highway for approximately 1,300 feet.. The project requires the
approval of the Mayor Use!Permit and. Reclamation Plan.
®■®
SER 2 1986 ITEM 25 )j
Agenda Report
September 2, 1986
nage 2
The project proponent proposes to operate a borrow pit operation
for commercial purposes The objective is to mine approximately
four (4) million cubic yards of material highly suitable for use in
construction quality materials such as asphalt, concrete, base, and
other rock products }
The project would be in operation for approximately 25 years,- upon 3
completion oftheproject, the site would be ready for development
in accordance with existing zoning and land use requla:tions. The.
County's land use under the Lakeside Community Plan is (18)
Multiple -Rural Residential (I DU/4, 8, or 20 acres)
_SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSEDPROJECT/STAFF'S
DRAFT COMMENTS
Visual Impacts
The project site varies in elevation from approximately 1,320 feet
along the eastern boundary at Route 67, to about 1,687 feet in the
central portion of the property.. This represents an elevational
'relief of nearly 370 feet..' The property is presently viewed
directly from 12 existing homes located on the east side of Route
67 and situated at an equal or higher elevation than the project
site:
The subject property contains five; significant knolls which range
in elevation from 1,506 feet to 1,687 feet. These natural
topographical features, as a result of the proposed proj.ect,� would
be topped and lowered a distance of. between 100 and 20`0 feet. The
proposed operation would topographically alter more than 60 acres'
of the: project site.. Proposed excavation not only calls for the
removal.of the existing knolls, but also the creation of
manufactured. -fill slopes which would completely encompass the
impacted area. The proj;ec�t' s end. result would appear like Aman-
made mesa surrounded by natural topographic features,
Draft Comment
The City of Poway is extremely concerned about: the significant
..visual impacts the proposed project would have on existing.and
planned rural residential. land-usessurrounding the project
site, and: from Highway 67 The proposed project is not con-
sistent with the current and future land use and character of the
surrounding properties_. It would result in a significantly
altered landform which appears extremely unnatural amidst the
natural topographic features in the area.
The Draft EIR concludes that the project would result in visual
impacts which are significant and cannot be mitigated.,
2 of 21 x
SSP 2 1986 ITEM.
25
i.
=r
1
Agenda Report
September 2r 1986
Page 3
In addition to the grading activities, the sight of large.
amounts of construction-related equipment stored and moving on
site, will impact the site's visual quality over the 25-year
life of the project. While the visual aspects of the proposed
project are significant and'unmitigable,"the project would also
cause irreversible landform alteration.
The City of Poway requests that the. Draft EIR be modified to
include a thorough discussionof the potential adverse affects:
of landform alteration. The proposed project could cause
significant adverse impacts on surrounding properties for the
life of the project and. beyond. Environmental. effects in the
areas of surface drainage/run-off, erosion/siltation,,
downstream sedimentation,. and affects on local groundwater
quality should be more adequately addressed, and appropriate:
mitigation measures identified.
Biological Resources
The proposed project would result in the direct loss of existing
vegetation and wildlife habitat over 61 acmes of the 237-acre pro-
ject site (nearly a 25 percent loss) vegetation types consist of
chaparral, grassland, sage scrub>r and oak woodland. The.oak
woodland occupies about two acres of the site and extends to the
north of theproject site into the riparian habitat of
Penasquitos/Poway Creek. The lossi of wildlife, including mammals,
reptiles, sensitive birds, and several raptor species, would result
directly from the removal of vegetation and rocky hillside
environments.
Mitigation measures include: the development of a revegetation plan,-
-the stock piling of native top-soil, and the avoidance of impacts
to off-site canyons (especially Penasquitos Creek) -Even with the -
proposed mitigation measure, wildlife in the area would either not'
survive or have to relocate because of the presence of noise
(.vehicles, machinery, blasting, etc.), and dust over a period of 25
years..
Draft Comment
The proposed mitigation measures to reduce the impacts to
existing 'biological resources to a level of insignificance
would not, in the City's opinion, lessen the cumulative impacts`
to biological resources.
A n SEP 2 1986 ITEM 25
Agenda Report
September 2, 1986
Page 4
r
The "no pro7ect" alternative would result in rural residential
development of four -acre minimum lot sizes. Therefore, this
x alternative provides the highest level, of protection to the
resources in question. The Biological Report in the appendix
concludes that the project would result in a negative -biologi-
cal impact, even with the mitigation measures identified.
The City of Poway recommends that a discussion of the cumula-
tive biological effects of the proposed -project be included in
the Draft EIR. This is believed to be especially significant
because of the long duration of the proposed projects
Water Supplies
The 237 -acre site is not served by a water district, and therefore,
will be dependent on.on.-site water r s.our. es forplant opera tion. a
I
The project, when in full operation, will use approximately 1,650
gallons per day for operational needs including dust control. As
originallyproposed, the project -included the production of
concrete and would have required five times as much water.. The
concrete plant,, according to the Count has: been deleted ;from the
� P g y.
project. A test well was established near the southwestern corner`
of :the project. Test data contained in the appendix to the DEIR
indicates that the well yielded 30 gallons per minute, and this is
sufficient,to supply the needs of the proposed project. Existing
off-site wells, east of Highway 67' were monitored for drawdown
conditions. A total of three off-site wells; were accessible and
were observed. The observations indicated that the three wells .did
not reveal negative drawdown conditions. The testing did not,
however, take into account other existing wells in the area whish
are either in use or not at the present time. Future groundwater
demands of surrounding undeveloped properties are not discussed.
Draft Comment
The DEIR states that the water demands of the proposed project
would not have a.signifi.cant impact on the existing off-site
wells. However, the drawdown observations were limited to
three existing wells in the area which are currently in use,
and did not include all other wells in the area which serve
both the domestic and irrigation needs of the residents east of
Highway 67. In addition, the statement of 1°adequate" water
supply for the project is based on an annual recharge rate and
does not consider the non -rainy season or even dry years.
Adjacent planned rural residential properties will also place
additional demands on groundwater resources, since it is
unlikely that water service will be extended to these areas in
the future,
A n SEP 2 1986 ITEM 25
Agenda Report
September 2, 1986
Page 5
The City believes that the DEIR does not adequately address the
existing and long-term demands for groundwater in the subject
area both east and.west of Highway, 67. Cumulative impacts to
this resource should be discussed in terms of the ultimate
growth in the area and the availability of water. supplies. The
25-year duration of the project could result in insufficient
water supply for other planned residential land uses in the
project area..
Traffic Impacts
The proposed project-would generate 2.65 trip ends (round trips) for
the first two years of operation, and increasing to 345 round trips
for the succeeding years of the quarry operation. These trips
would consist of product sales (loaded trucks leaving and empty
trucks returning), employee traffic, and miscellaneous deliveries:.
The sales (truck) traffic would equal 200 round trips for the first
two-years and increasing to 280 thereafter.
It is projected that 70 percent of the total truck traffic will go
north of the project, and 30 percent south. Nearly 80 percent of
the northbound traffic is projected to travel to and from westerly
destinations via Poway Road. During the first two years, truck
traffic added. to Poway Road would equal 120 round trips per day,
and would increase to 157 round trips thereafter. This truck
traffic would impact Poway Road at peak hours since the quarry,
would operate.between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. daily.
The DEIR states that this traffic would only incrementally increase
the existing total volumes on Route 67` near Poway Road. It does
not however, adequately discuss the actual increase or percentage
of "truck"traffic on the subject highway and Poway Grade, in the
foreseeable future.
Draft Comment
The DEIR. states that no significant adverse traffic impacts
have been.identified a result of the project. The City
strongly urges County staff to reassess, the issue of traffic
impacts on regional roads, especially Poway Road and Route 67.
The addition of up to 1.60 truck trips (round. trips) per day on
Poway Road alone is a significant impact, considering that
loaded trucks would be using Poway Grade during morning peak
hours when traffic congestion :and safety is already a sign.i.fi
cant problem,
}
SEP 2 1986 ITEM 25
Agenda Report
September 2, 1986
Page 6
The. City recommends that the DEIR be supplemented with addi
tional. information which clearly identifies the potential truck
traffic impacts of the proposed project. This critical infor-
mation should be focused on the following areas:
` 1. Actual Increase in Truck Traffic
The truck traffic generated from the proposed WYROC pro-
f°
ject represents a significant increase in the present
volume of truck traffic on. Highway 67 in the vicinity of
Poway Road. Traffic counts produced by CalTrans'in 1984
on Route 67 south of Poway Roadi indicate: that nearly 600
truck trips per day exis already near, that major inter-
section. Of these 600 -daily trips, nearly 100 consist. of
trucks of four axles,, and up to _ five axles or more . - `- The
i
DEIR, should include a thorough analysis of the: actual
increase in truck traffic and associated impacts. Also,
the DEIR states that the necessary Route 6T highway impro-
vements have to be approved by CalTrans The DEIR should j
include correspondence from CalTrans which confirms the
F timing and feasibility of the required improvements.
The Draft EIR should provide an analysis of horizon -year
traffic volumes on Route: 67 and Poway Road. The analysisj
should discuss the level of service (LOS) at the intersec-
tion of Highway 67and Poway Road, and. the percent of
truck traffic should be emphasized (at horizon -year)
Since the truck traffic would also pass through the City
of Poway enroute to Interstate 15, the significantI
i`ncr.ease in truck not a would greatly impa°sresi
ct Poway`
dential areas Of paramount importance, the curve design,
safe -speed limit, grade, and physical conditon of Poway
Grade should be highlighted.
The horizon -year traffic analysis should accurately
address the future capacity and timing of regional road
improvements, including a discussion of the status of
Poway Grade widening, State Route 125, the South Poway
Arterial, and the ultimate improvement to Highway 67. The
25 -year duration of the project warrants this analysis
The environmental consultant that prepared the traffic
impact analysis of the project failed to contact the City
of Poway fon information regarding the long-term regional
traffic: circulation impacts of the 'project and the timing
of regional road improvements.
The D'EIR should include a statement from the City of Poway
which clarifies the: status and timing of the regional road
improvements which, would be necessary to serve the project
for its duration.
SEP 2 1986 ITEM 25
3
Agenda Report f
tit September 2, 1986
Page 7
2 Site Visibility
The traffic study in the appendix of the DRIR states that;
no significant impacts would result -from the project.
This assumes that adequate site distance is provided at 3
the project entrance for both trucks and vehicular access.
Also, this assumes that Highway 67into
be widened to pro-
vide a southbound right-turnla a the project, and
northbound left -turn lane into the site:. The DEIR states
that the 660 feet of site distance is ade
quate, but this
does not seem to take into consideration heavily laden
a
trucks which start from the site's entrances cross the
highway, and proceed north on the uphill grade of Route 67
to the Poway Road intersection. -
The statement regarding 50 mile -per -hour traffic ontoute
1
6.7 during peak hours is not accurate. An actual traffic
speed analysis should be performed and included in the
DEIR. Slow moving trucks on highway 67 during morning
peak hours would decrease road capacity by increasing
congestion
3.. Traffic Safety
Both Route 67 and Poway Grade: have a. history of serious
injury accidents involving trucks and other vehicles. The
increased truck traffic generated by the proposed project
could jeopardize the traffic safety of motorists traveling
these roads. The Draft 'EIR does not address this issue...
The City recommend tkat-the DEIR include a discussion of .
this issue. Statistical data, such as'accident records
from at least the past five years, should,be provided as
well.
Emissions
Emissions consisting of dust, truck diesel -fuel exhaust, noise
(emitted from machinery, and vehicular and truck traffic),, and
blasting operations would be generated by the proposed project. `
Draft Comment
The DEIR states that the noise emissions. from the project would,
be significant based on the proximity of existing and future
residences. The City recommends that the project emissions,
includirig noise, dust, blasting vibrations, and fumes be ana-
lyzed in terms of direct and cumulative impacts. These effects
should be quantified for the duration of the project, and
should be based on ultimate residential growth in the area.
I '
SEP 2 1986 ITEM. 25
i ..r ��
L
Agenda Report`
September 2, 1986
Page
,
,8
i- Archaeological Resources
The DEIR indicates that no significant archaeological resources
were identified on the site based on a surficial investigation.-
Draft Comment
r_ _
C `While the DEIR states that no significant resources have been
. identifiedfrom an initial surface investigation., it is recom-
mended that mitigation measures for the project include the
following:
In the event that a resource of archaeological. signifi-
cance is unearthed or otherwise discovered during grubbing
or grading operations of the proposed project, such
resources should be professionally analyzed for their
significance prior to the continuance of grading opera-
tions.
:Emergency Medical/Safety Services
The Draft EIR does not address the provision of safety services
including fire, police, and paramedic service.
i
Draft Comment
The Draft RIR does not provide information regarding the provi-
sion of emergency medical/safety Services including: fire pro"
tection, police, and paramedic service. The City recommends
that these crucial services be identified and that: information
regarding the service agency, level of service, and emergency
response times to the project site,be discussed in detail.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City .Council accept this report and
direct Staff to prepare official comments as discussed ,herein 'on
the subject Draft EIR.
JLBRWT:.JRN:pn
Attachments:
1. Project Site/Adopted Poway Sphere of Influence
1'
2. Correspondence- to -Supervisor George Bailey
3. Correspondence to County Board of Supervisors
4. Correspondence to Director of Planning and Land Use
5. Correspondence to County Environmental Staff
SEP 2 1986 ITEM : 25
k
8 of -21
r
k '
2 tWAl— R0
-.•moi. :$•:l${':{'•>i: i{:Y....Te: Y
. .- i rq.• Y-.� L `' ':;:;{cry:,
All
'� ':{\]:i:'•? L yti{iii -L
!-. .,....L.j::i"'r:}ii •"''=�=:ir•.:vi•T s fi
XX
_ G TY O POvt/AY
.r'i��iii i� �E.ft i�dlE _ # �f ik#1�tlF'�iT•1fi13
r
z
..;::.:•:::::ii{•ii.?�:z;.: =•
•it
:T::v.:•ii:•:{S':i:t.,: ..A...
...,y,
W{•�':v :;•,vti�:titivi };lti{i.}ti ••TA•: v.Y
PRD
$jtitiryr ..;
.:ti••:. ,Y...:: A.; w• . .YA}•.pi •: r., ., :Ti}7:{ �::;r?-}}i:if .
i Yom:•
Y::4.{°•:fi'i-{•T}Tr:..... Yh!..::ti•}:•i}:Y r•;'i�7r}' t
....•�.:•, ,•.... ...•.....•A.•: v:::A.. .:::Y.;•..: .}.:•:.: .x..:..Y. r{::-:>v:.}>A...T:.:.::•::.}.n.Rv.:.w...;.,.:{...Y.{,.:..i.:...w;.::...,i.:i.••.v.:.r:.::r.::.:.y•.•?:.:.•Y.-.,
..:...:.n..;.A..r..,.:..:.:.Y.:....:.:.i...-...:•w:.i:.?:..v::.•.?:.:.T.A.-:..-•:....::...-YT:.,..:!:..•.,..{:.YY.{..-. ..v.,v:Y.:A::;•.:..:..:T....::.,•�ai.vv.::.::.:wt?{.:{•:.T}•{:•.ii•::.A:T:.•.TsvAA.:i•:i,T}.,::Y.::r{.v.•:{:.•::4tr:.•.. }T:.A::T. •::.Y.:.•::.,•vi:.•T::4v,.A•A:}.i}:.,:{?{.:•T.:.•:•:.:•.:.T .,.•�. �t .•.iT}:s.T,'rA.
i..i:A..:x:..Til..ivi.,ii�..s:v:v.•iQh.•...,'.::.:
:.• Y...:.:.:.:::A: Y••ix}.}i:ti:;r?:•:{.i,i:•:•i:{::r{!i•••.•Y•Yi:T:?X.: ::
{:it:,s•{T::,.:.i,::•.i:.i.-•.:i.i••:...:i.
A}i...•T:r:..
it•:.t?:.ii.`...}..}:.......: :
{>
.:::::}:i}
•::.:?pa:rt}:•:v:::
,5 r
�'�_..r�•-s �•�
p
.Y.y:....... ....... yv:: r:. ,... .. ..: • ...: YYY:•
....)::l:v:: A•: s::•.:...-: •:::: r: •::::: wA•.....:,:v:},•:A:•:rx:::...,.:::.............:J::::::.•h...;...L.....w::: rTyhy)•.}:T
f
.,.. v : .:...... ..... ..:..:::: :. .. •..., ......... ::•v.........\..,....r •:?::.•::::::::
•�1-..... L -n::•: -v.....::.. r{Y. .: x..•.i•T:: -:i•:•}:• � "•'{4::{i•. ..:�;•TTi'• 3
.Y.::h:.:,::::::.Yi :: .. . , �•J .Y:.Y: • •.vY.: ......., :: A,Yr.•: A•.•.•,: A:Y:. ': N:: S:. : {{t..M. .....,:::: r:.. ,.:.Yti .
::..:.L..:: J:::: •: •:.•Y:,..•A•.ti J... .......,, LY:: rT...............: Y•,Y:.:.: y..•: :.::.-.. :......:. :•. +
....., .....:., ...............•::•:•::A•.:...., ...... ...::::.A......,...-tYTisf:.;::•rii:y..;.,:::::J{�.y-:•::i,h:\: •:: ri::,•;i'':•{{•;•:. {:iT?i:•:• �'�•..
•:i •A•:'•::::: •:.y:: r.. ': •�: �:•i'•}:{t:::Y.. :, .... A:.:•: R.:.... -,•,LL,{.;•}};: },T ,•:r::::: •.:ti -Y.• A:•::: y v .L•::::1 •i Ti iY: .
....:::i•................y:.Y::T:>:::Y. •.�r....y:•.Y:Y:A.Y..::T,::.+,::•:...Y::::{.::::.••T::_t.,.;;r:T::y,Y:;=•r.�:,:h,Y
i RR-A
vet.
k.
{: r
R n
w
•i r:<
�.Y
Av: ••
�. pg
�A i
` r
F
•::lift'•:
t
:IWYy}Y
{.rc.
4
fi
vtii•
0 h.,•...
yri
'. •E -.:Y
K.
:{•:i?:it ?
: iSY'tii 2:i
S{ r
:j'r •.
:tivv}T:v. ..::}:: w.,fi::.Y.::.::.T:•.v.;::{r.}h:•T:i�.i ;T.}.::::.:........... .}Y ::::-.: •:'{4:•}v :: •....
...-..:....-n A...::.v •:::...L.... :• ..............n...
•T.}.:.{l..v.T}.:.S:Y,v.:ss:v:.•{v. v,:v\4Y:::,v:AY:.:Y:.v:lri/•Y•h.
X. $? Lti:rT ..J>
..:..;Li::::v:::.A:.5
li i{:.:sw:w:n:.:n:v:v::Y.:::.:A-:•,..•:...l... :.- {Y...{.
.4LiAs
.,
- {
�.
♦�.
r!{�• may¢ - .,
{if:ti?moi'-:�:TTllti'• {v�.
'vii?i: •. ..
.??.}x�:�:>.i,•::,•:::i•'.,-•:.{•.:•.a:;•`.::•..:.i4}.L.i••wLi>x... .<, .Y.Ti•::..:..-ftw•;+......+..,;;.T:�x•T. ............
aiw•.••:..iT:t:•:.:?:a>isiYe:::Y>}ii•:T:-}x:;�:��:::+ o:=2J
r'ii3:i•`.•:v:•ii:.iti}. •A \::::Y:::A:YA..... :..r: •:::•i{••-"
,v{�iKit�ii;::•:;:;T::tit ��•
J•
>? +
i
t
"'
:.�:ti:`'.L:'{?�;:{i::?$:_}�i{-}Y.};.:;r•:::.Y:::. •.F1iiGe.' _}: yv.:v,lL..
os
CITE'OF
ITEM,v/
to
{ A SP TITLE A-
wf%-Igoc A/c
SCALE ATTACHMENT
Saar, i T c A
CITY OF POWA'"'Y OFPQ,
FCARLRUSE.Mavor
EPARDSON. Decutr MavorARZY.
Councumember
LINDA ORAVEC. Counctimember \ -�
BOB EMERY. Councilmember
July 28, 1986
x
George. F. Bailey, Second. District Supervisor
San Diego County Board of Supervisors
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92123
s
Subject: Proposed Material Extraction Project Located Along the
t
Highway 67 Corridor, Wyroco, Inc.
;II
Dear Mr. Bailey: .
=i
-
n behalf of the members of the Cit Council of the City of Poway,
0 Y Y
please accept this letter as the City's position paper in regard to
the subject matter.
Since the Spring of 19850, we have been aware of the subjectproject
which is proposed for establishment along the Highway 67 corridor,
between.the cities of Poway and Santee. This project is currently
being processed by the Department of Planning and Land. Use. were
understand that the project requires the preparation of an environmen-
tal impact report aid approval of a major use permit and reclamation
plan. We also understand, from our review of available project
information, that a project of this type has the potential to cause
adverse environmental impacts in the following areas
o utilities and public services
o- land. use and planning considerations
o water quality/groundwater resources
o agricultural resources
-
o land form alteration/visual~ aesthetics
y o downstream sedimentation
o, archaeology resources
o- truck traffic-and noise impacts
While it is generally the attempt of the lead agency to impose miti-
gation measures which reduce these potentialimpacts to a level of
insignificance, there is substantial evidence throughout the County of
i
San Diego that projects of this type cannot be fully-mitigated. Most
material extraction operations which exist today are large in magni-
I
tude and long in. duration.
ATTACBNM l
..City Hall Located at .13325 Civic Center Drive
`-ling Address: P.O. Box 789, Poway,: California 92064 ' (619) 748-660 _p♦W` } J?&,4
r
{
George F. Bailey
July 28 1986
t Page 2
Amon .
g the impacts mentioned above, the City of Poway is extremely con
cerned about the ultimate effects on local land use planning, and
truck traffic and noise generated from the subject project.
Approximately.two-thirds of the Wyroc project.area is within'
adopted Sphere of Influence and is generally Poway's
9 Y Planned for resi-
dential use under the Poway General Plan. It is conceivable that the
balance of the project site could be added to our sphere pending the
outccaYe of the LAFCO-designated "special study area" between
Santee. Poway and
The City of Poway is geographically situated between the Highway 67
corridor and the rapidly developing Interstate 'I5 corridor a Poway is
traversed by a three. and one-half mile: segment of Route .67 It is
obvs.ous, based on the existing regional transportation network, that
truck traffic originating on the Highway 67 corridor would utilize
Poway Road enroute west to I-15. It is the City of Poway's contention
that the truck traffic generated from the proposed and future extrac
,tion projects utilizing the subject corridor would adversely impact
the physical integrity and traffic safety conditions of Poway Road and
Highway 67. In addition, the increased. truck traffic and associated
noise would also exasperate: the existing traffic conditions on Poway
Road as it traverses the City's business and residential areas,
e
As you know, the City of Poway, following its incorporation in 1980,
assumed the maintenance responsibility from the County for the segment
of Poway Road between Espola.Road and Highway 67. Prior to this
assumption, that road segment commonly referred to as "Poway Grade"
was neither designed or built to County road standards, and as a City -
maintained road, it still remains inadequate by City standards.
Originally intended as a truck pass route, the grade was first
constructed using unsatisfactory structural standards and grade and
curve design. Over the years the grade has been thinly resurfaced,
patched, and repaired from damage caused by erosion and poor road bed
composition. Over the past -five years, Poway has expended con-
siderable funds to keepthe grade in
s
passable e
P� condition.. At peak
a.m./p.m. hours the two-lane gradeis heavily congested, and it is not
proposed to be improved to its ultimate width and alignment in the
foreseeable future. Any increase in heavy truck traffic on the sub-
ject grade would cause further degradation of the road and would have
a substantial adverse effect on traffic safety as well. For these
reasons, the City has considered closing the grade to all truck traf-
fic due to its poor condition.
George F. Bailey
July 28, 1986
Page 3
In terms of land use and planning considerations, the: City of Poway
strongly supports the recently approved recommendations of the SAMAG
r Board of Directors in regard to the region's Development Strategy,
Relative to the subject matteri, the ` SANDAG Board , at its November 1985
} meeting, endorsed the strategy. It is SANDAG's recamiendation that
the rural area located between the Cities of Santee and Poway, and
west of San Vicente Reservoir to the San Diego corporate boundary be
maintained in its present rural state for the foreseeable future.
This support for maintaining the subject rural area is in recognition
of the development pressures similar to those which presently exist in
the San.Dieguito Valley, which could occur in the near future between
Poway and Santee, _
It is our belief that material extraction projects proposed along the
Highway 67 corridor would only speedup, the process by negating other.
viable planning considerations and by`causing the land to be prema-
turely converted or reclaimed for other -than -present adopted land
uses. The potential truck traffic alone would impact the subject
corridor in the sante manner as if the corridor was in a development
made.
In conclusion, the City of Poway is strongly opposed to projects of
r
this type proposed.for location along the Highway 67 corridor, as they
would -result in unmitigable environmental impacts to Poway and other
communities which are common to the Poway highway. The Cit Council,
Y �''
f. therefore, urges your office to strongly consider the 'long-term
impactsassociated with this project, and to investigate other areas
f within ,the County for the establishment of material extraction
operations.
S
cerely,
41,
Carl R. Kruse
'
Mayor
,a
CRK : mn
SEP 2 1986 ITEM..
25
12 of 21
eiwN
`,ITY OF POWA.
CARL R. KRUSE, Mayor
MARY SHEPARDSON, Deputy Mayor
BRUCE TARZY, Councilmember
LINDA ORAVEC, Councilmember
BOB EMERY, CounciImember
December 10, 1985
Walter C. Ladwig, Director
County of San Diego
Department of Planning and Land Use
5201 Ruffin Road, Suite
San Diego, CA 92.123.-1665
1 CP r'- a
OF PO ip
Subject: Proposed Material Extraction Projects Located
East of the City of Poway
(Wyroc, Inc. and Woodward Sand and Material Co.
Applicants)
/T
IN
THE
c
Dear Mr. Ladwig:
On behalf of the members of the City Council of the City of
Poway, please accept this letter as the City's firm oppositon to
the subject proposed projects.
The City has maintained close contact with your Staff for the
past several months_ in regard to these projects. Pursuant to our
request, all available project -related information, to date, has
been provided for our review. Based upon our review of the
Project applications, and supportive planning and environmental
documentation prepared by. your. .Staff thus far, the City of Poway
believes that these projects, if authorized, would cause
long-term adverse environmental impacts. These impacts would not
_manly be deleterious to the neighboring communities of Ramona and
Lakeside, but would'be significantly more detrimental to Poway's
resources, facilities, and residents.
The following paragraphs discuss the obvious adverse effects
which`would occur as a result of the proposed projects.
1. Wyroc Inc. Application (P85-049 and RP85-05)
This project proposes quarry, asphalt plant, and concrete
plant operations which would ultimately impact approximately
240 acres of land for a period of 25 years.
City Hall Located at 13325 Civic Center Drive ATTACHMENT 2
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 789, Poway, California 92064 • (619) 748-6600, (619) 695.1400
ern 9.tsar ITFM
i
Mr. Walter C. Ladwig
December 10, 1985 A
Page 2
The subject land, located about one-half mile south of
Poway's corporate boundary on Highway 67, is almost entirely
within Poway's adopted Sphere of Influence. The balance of
the project area, or the easterly one third of the site, is
currently under special study by LAFCO' It is conceivable
'=
that Poway's sphere would be revised by LAFCO to include the
entire project site. Since annexation of these lands to the
City of Poway could ultimately occur, the City desires to
F
see the property maintained in its present rural natural
state. It should be noted that both the Poway Comprehensive
Plan and the Lakeside Community Plan designate the property
for "Rural Residential" land use. This obvious consistency
of the planning objectives of the involved jurisidictions
further supports the retention of the site in its natural
state for future rural residential development,
The City is well aware of the adverse environmental impacts
which a project of this magnitude would result in of major
concern to Poway are the _impacts of land form alteration,
and heavy truck noise and traffic on Poway Road and Highway
67. The project proposes the extraction of 45 million
cubic -yards of material and the on-site production of
asphalt and concrete. The construction materials produced
by the project, in the 'City's opinion, would most likely be
4
transported to the rapidly developing 1-15 corridor just
west of Poway. It is apparent that the only available
transportation route in the foreseeable future: would- be
Poway Road.. This heavy truck traffic would not only have a
negative impact on the physical integrity and traffic safety
of Poway Grade, but would also exasperate the existing
traffic conditions on Poway Road as it traverses the City's
business and residential areas. To further compound this
impact, the project is proposed for a duration of 25 years,
and would operate daily (exceptSunday) from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m.
2. Woodward Sand and Material Co.- Application (P85-042 and RP85-04)
This project proposes the extraction of about 450,000 cubic
yards of material from the floodplain of the Santa Maria
Creek. While this project is physically located within the
Ramona Community Planning area, and not within the Sphere of
Poway, the project's operation would result in significant
traffic impacts which would affect the City of Poway for the
project's proposed duration of five years. Specifically,
the proposedproject would generate a minimum of 28 heavy
^s;
truck trips (round trips) per day. These trips would be
between the project site in Ramona and the applicant's
processing plant located in Lakeside.
a
SEP 1986 ITE
25
4fz
Mr. Walter C. Ladwig
December 10, 1985
Page 3
The 28 round trips would represent an average of 56
additional trucks using Highway 67 eight hours each day for
six days per week. This activity would continue for a
period of five years.
As you know, Route 67 is a difficult roadway to negotiate,
especially by trucks heavily laden with extracted material.
Recent traffic studies indicate that Route 67 is already
reaching congestion during peak hours. Accident' statistics
for Highway 67 wouldprovide evidence of existing unsafe
conditions for motorists. Additional truck traffic on this
route would substantially worsen these conditions.
We understand that the project would create three sizable
borrow pits affecting approximately sixteen acres of
floodplain area. Excavation of this magnitude in the
proposed location could result -in long-term sedimentation
and drainage problems on downstream properties.
In summary, the City believes that the subject projects would
cause substantial degradation to the natural resources in the
project areas, and would also result in unmitigable traffic
impacts on Highway 67 and Poway Road.
The City of Poway respectfully requests the Department of
Planning and Land Use to consider the long-term adverse impacts
associated with these projects and to recommend that the
applications be denied.
rely,.
Carl R, Kruse
Mayor
CRK: js
15of21`
SEP 2 1986 ITEM
}¢ NI.ITY OF owl y
CARL R. KRUSE, Mayor G
MARY SHEPARDSON, Deputy Mayor
BRUCE TARZY, Councilmember
LINDA ORAVEC, Councilmember
BOB EMERY, Councilmember �y
c
January 22, 1986
Honorable Chairman and Members of the
San Diego County Board of Supervisors.
1600 Pacific Highway
San Diego, California 92123
E
Subject: Proposed Material Extraction Projects Located Along the
Highway 67 Corridor
Dear Mr. Chairman:
rman
On behalf of the members of the City Council of the City of Pray, please
accept this letter as the City's position paperin regard to the subject
ratter.
For the past several months we have been aware of at least two such projects
which are proposed for establishment along the Highway 67 corridor, between
the cities of Poway and Santee and the community of Ramona. These projects
f
(WYROC INC. and Woodward Sand and Material Co., applicants),,, are currently �z
beingprocessed P by the Department of Planning and Land Use. Both projects,
} as we understand, require the preparation of an environmental impact report
t and approval of a major use permit and reclamation plan as. prerequisites to
commencing operations. We also understand, from our review of available
project information, that projects of this type have the potential to cause
adverse environmental impacts in the following areas
E
i o utilities and public services
j o land use and planning considerations
o water quality/groundwater resources
o agricultural resources
, -
o land form alteration/visual aesthetics
o downstream sedimentation
o archaeology resources
o truck traffic and 'noise. impacts
Vile it is generally he attempt of the affected jurisdiction or lead
agency to rose mitigation measures which reduce these impacts to a level
of insignificance, there is substantial evidence throughout the County of
San Diego that projects of this type cannot be fully mitigated. Most
material extraction operations which exist today are large in magnitude
and long in duration.
AThAG 1V= 3
City Hall Located at 13325 Civic Center Drive
R-:�ing Address: P.O. Box 789, Poway, California 92064 ' (619) 748.6600, (619) 695-1400
16of, 21 -
SEP 2 986 t T EM 25 _
San Diego County Board of Supervisors
January 22, 1986
Page Two
Among the inpacts mentioned above, the City of Poway is extremely concerned
about the ultimate effects on local land use planning, and truck traffic and
noise generated from such projects. Approximately two thirds of the
project area is within Poway's adopted Sphere of Influence and is generally
planned for rural residential use. It is conceivable that the balance of
the project site could be added to our sphere pending the outcome of the
1AFC4-designated "special study area" between Poway and Santee. Zhe
Woodward project, while not within the sphere of Poway, would result in a
substantial increase of heavy truck traffic on Highway 67. The combined
adverse effects of these projects would not only be deleterious to the
neighboring communities of Ramcna, Lakeside, and Santee, but would be
significantly more detrimental to Poway's resources, public facilities,
and residents.
7he City of Poway is geographically situated between .the Highway 67 corridor
and the rapidly developing Interstate 15 corridor: Poway is traversed by a
three and one-half mile ` segment of Route 67. It is obvious based on the #.
existing regional transportation network, that truck traffic originating on x,
the Highway 67 corridor would utilize Poway Road enroute west to I-15.
It is the City of Poway's contention that the truck traffic generated from
the proposed and future extraction projects utilizing the subject corridor
would adversely -impact the physical integrity and traffic safety oanditions
of Poway Road and Highway 67. In addition, the increased truck traffic and
associated noise would also exasperate the existing traffic conditions on
Poway Road as it traverses the City's business and residential areas.
As you know, the City of Poway, following its incorporation in 1980,
assumed the ce responsibility from the County for the segment of
Poway Road between Espola Road and Highway 67. Prior to this assumption,
that road segment-comnnly referred to as "Poway Grade" was neither de-
signed nor built to County road standards, and as a City -maintained road,
it still remains inadequate by City standards
Originally intended as a truck pass route, the grade was first constructed
using unsatisfactory structural. standards and grade and curve design. Over
the years the grade has been thinly resurfaced, patched, and repaired from
damage caused by erosion and poor road bed composition. over the past five
years, Poway has expended considerable funds to keep the grade in passable fi
condition. At peak a.m./p.m. hours the two-lane grade is heavily congested,
and it is not proposed to be firproved to its q1timate width and alignment in
the foreseeable future. Any increase in heavy truck traffic on the subject r
grade would cause further degradation of the road and would have a substan-
tial adverse effect on traffic safety as well. For these reasons, the City n:
has considered closing the grade to all truck traffic due to its poor
}
condition.
17 of 21
F
SEP 2. 1986 ITEM' 25
San Diego County Board of Supervisors
January 22, 1986
Page Three
In terns of land use and planning considerations, the City of Poway strongly
supports the recently approved recommendations of the SANDAG Board of
Directors in regard to the Region's Development Strategy. Relative to the
subject natter, the SANDAG Board, at its November 1985 meeting, endorsed the
strategy. It is SAN AG`S recommendation that the rural area located between
the Cities of Santee and Poway, and west of San Vicente Reservoir to the San
Diego corporate boundary, be maintained in its present rural state for the
foreseeable future. This support for maintaining the subject rural area is
in recognition of the development pressures similar to those which presently
exist in the San Dieguito Valley, which will probably occur in the near
future between Poway and Santee.
It is our belief that material extraction projects proposed along the
Highway 67 corridor would only speed up the process by negating other viable
planning considerations and by causing the land to be prematurely converted.'
or reclaimed for other -than --present adopted land uses. The potential truck
traffic alone would impact the subject corridor in the same manner, as if the
corridor was in a development mode.
In conclusion, the City of Poway is strongly opposed to projects of this
type proposed for location along.the Highway 67 corridor, as they would
result in unmitigable environmental impacts to Poway and other coranunities
which are commonto the highway. The Poway City Council, therefore, urges
the Board of Supervisors to strongly consider the long-term impacts asso-
ciated with these projects on the Highway 67 corridor, ; and to investigate
oth- areas within the County for the establishment of material extraction.
tions.
18
i
j
a
CITY OF POWAY OF 1
i
rBO. EMERY, Mayor
L CRUSE.Deputy Ma or u
t.
BRUCE TARZY, Councilmember
t _
LINDA QPAVEC, Councilmember
MARY SHEPARDSON, Councilmember
� } 11. THF Co
August 26, 1985
_s
Mr. Charles Lough
County of San Diego
Department of Planning and
Land Use
5201 Ruffin Read, Suite B
San Diego, CA 92123-1566 _
SUBJECT: Environmental Review of P85-049 and RP85-05,
EAD Log 85-14-51 (WYROC Inc.)
Dear Mr. Lough:
:I
YOU 9 �s Y y Poway regard Thank ou for sending the maternal requested b the Cit of Pawn an r and to
the environmental review of the subject Major Use Permit and Reclamation Plan.
While the City of Poway Was not initially sent the Notice of Intent to Pxepare
a Draft Environmental fact Report for the proposed project, we appreciate the
opportunity to now review the proposal and to respond to our concerns prior to
the August 29, 1985 hearing before the Planning and Environmental Review Board.
The attached map depicts the property which is the subject of the current propo-
sal. Please notice that the westerly, approximately ane half of the site is j
within he City of Poway °s adopted Sphere of Influence. The balance of the
Property is within an. area designated by IMCO as a "Special. Study Area.n
Because the subject area could someday be eligible for annexation to the City of
Poway, the City is extremely concerned about the project and its potential
adverse environmental impacts. The attached letter of June 27, 1985 to the prof-
ect proponent, in which the concerns of the County were enumerated, covered -'
several areas of environmental impact which the City of Poway is in complete
concurrence with
r
The project is significant in that its effects will impact surrounding land uses
for a protracted period. of time. For instance, the, adjacent lands within the
Sphere of Poway are presently planned for rural residential use. Therefore, we
are concerned about present and future impacts on surrounding land uses, as well
as the proposed reclamation program over the next 25 Bears.
Insummary, the City of Poway co.ncurs. with all. of the County's environmental .
{ concerns, but requests that the Draft Ehvirotal impact Report also addresses
the following additional topics:
1. Geological Makeup of the Site
.� 2 Hydrology, Water Quality, and Groundwater Resources
3. Land Use: and Planning Considerations
4. Utilities and Public Services
City Hall Located at 13325 Civic Center Drive ATMaD= 4
` ring Address::'.?. Vin;: 789. Poway, California 9246 (619) 748- 2(61 .69.��IaR i5
2 of 2
Mr.: Charles Lough
August 26, 1985
Page 2
In closing, we respectfully request that a copy of the subject project's Draft
EIR is made 'available to us during the public review period, and that we are
notified of future actions by the County inregard to this project.
Please feel free to contact rre. if you wish to further discuss this matter.
Sir1cerely,
It
•
ing Services
BKH JRN:is
cc: Walter C. Ladwig, Director
Sonja P. Itson, Chief of Regulatory Planning
James L. Bowersox, City Manager
John. D. Fitch, Assistant City Manager
SEP 2 1986 ITEM -.R
r
FF.