Planning board objects to Palomar College’s draft EIR

The Rancho Bernardo Planning Board is asking Palomar College to do further study on its future campus’ impacts on transportation, traffic and parking.

It also wants guarantees that no construction will occur on the campus at 11111 Rancho Bernardo Road after 7 p.m. or on Sundays in order to not disrupt Westwood residents’ sleep.

The board unanimously voted on Nov. 19 to send a response to the college over its draft environmental impact report. Comments from the community are due Dec. 7. The 628-page draft EIR can be viewed at tinyurl.com/Palomar-RB-EIR and at the Rancho Bernardo Library.

Regarding transportation and traffic, the board took issue with the draft EIR’s traffic analysis, which used the rate of 0.55 trips per student — a factor based on Palomar’s Escondido Education Center.

It objected to this number for two reasons. First, the San Diego Municipal Code Land Development Code Trip Generation Manual and the ITE Technical Council Committee both use a higher number — 1.6 trips per student — as the trip generation rate for a two-year community college. Second, the board disagrees with Palomar’s assessment that the Escondido site and future Rancho Bernardo one are similar enough to use the lower number.

“There is ... a significant difference between the two sites (since) the Escondido Education Center is located along an established bus route ... which has a bus stop located within a walking distance of one minute from the campus. The proposed South Education Center is not located directly adjacent to a bus line and the nearest bus stop is approximately 0.5 miles from the entrance ... As (a) result, the Planning Board believes students would be less likely to choose transit to access the ... center, resulting in a trip generation rate higher than 0.55 trips per student.

“Therefore, the draft EIR does not appear to accurately evaluate the impacts to traffic associated with this proposal,” the board wrote.

It also said the draft EIR did not factor in future higher traffic along Rancho Bernardo Road and West Bernardo Drive once the Sharp Rees-Stealy medical building opens or other future projects on the horizon. To remedy these, the board requested the college “establish convenient access to the regional transit system.”

The board also objected to the draft EIR not discussing parking, even though it requested in a Sept. 17 letter that this topic be studied.

“The absence of parking on the list of impacts in the (CEQA) Guidelines does not mean it is not a physical effect,” the board wrote. It cited a 2013 California appellate court case where “the court disagreed with the assertion that parking can never be a primary physical impact on the environment.”

The board wrote that “the draft EIR should have analyzed the issue and either demonstrated that adequate parking was being provided, or incorporated appropriate mitigation measures to ensure that parking from the project will not overflow into the adjacent residential neighborhood to the north and the surrounding industrial area.”

The board suggested Palomar institute mitigation measures such as free on-site parking for all students and faculty, carpooling incentives and convenient access to the regional transit system.