Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Min 1993-10-20 . . . ~ . , J CITY OF SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES of OCTOBER 20, 1993 Chairman Dahlman called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in City Council Chambers. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was said. ll. ROLL CALL Present: Chairman Dahlman Commissioners Soukup, Law, Sharp, Campbell Also Present: Department of Development Services: Lee Whittenberg, Director Craig Steele, City Attorney's Office Barry Curtis, Administrative Assistant Joan Fillmann, Executive Secretary ill. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of October 6, 1993 (7:32 p.m.) MOTION by Sharp; SECOND Law by to approve the Minutes of October 6, 1993 with the following change: Page 5, line 6: Change "20' below grade" to "less than 20' above grade". MOTION CARRIED: A YES: ABSTAIN: 4-0-1 Sharp, Law, Dahlman, Campbell Soukup IV. SCHEDULED MATTERS 2. Resolutions to be signed: . Resolution #93-46 for CUP #91-14 Spaghettini Rotisserie & Grill . Resolution #93-47 for MPR #93-7 46 Riversea Road * Jack Battersby .~ . .' . Page 2 - Cil1 of SW Beach · Planning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1993 Mr. Whittenberg indicated the signed resolutions will reflect the actual votes from the Minutes of the prior meeting(s). There was no discussion on either resolution. There being no corrections to either resolution, the Chairman signed the resolutions without objection. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. Variance #93-4- Address: Applicants: Property Owners: Request: (7:35 P.M.) A-I04 Surfside Mark and Joke Schubert Mark and Joke Schubert Variance to maintain an outside staircase and deck in conjunction with a proposed remodel to add a bedroom, family room, to enlarge a garage and to enlarge a kitchen. Staff Report Mr. Curtis delivered the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning Department]. Commission Comments on Staff Report The Commission asked for clarification of municipal ~ Section 28-2501. Mr. Steele explained a Variance will be granted only to an individual parcel, not to neighborhoods or more than one parcel. Chairman Dahlman said the staff report indicates the reason for this Variance applies to all residences, particularly on "A" row. He asked if the municipal Code should be amended rather than pass individual Variances on each parcel? Mr. Steele said not all the properties in that area have this same problem and it may be more appropriate to consider individual Variances. Commissioner Sharp noted that flood areas exist in Seal Beach which are not only in Surfside. Public Hearing Joke Schubert * A-I04 Surfside Mrs. Schubert said their home is approximately thirty years old and was originally built with this outside staircase which is the only access to their home. They are planning a two-stage addition, adding onto the garage, adding a family room and a bedroom. Later, they plan to add a third story. The remodeling doesn't affect the entrance into their house. Commissioner Sharp asked Mrs. Schubert if there are plans for a roof deck? Mrs. Schubert said the proposed third floor does not allow a roof deck because it would put the house above the allowed 35' height. The only deck area would . . . Page 3 - City of Seal Beach · Planning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1993 be at the second floor --- there is sufficient space for a small deck where they plan to add their bedroom. Commissioner Soukup asked how long they had lived in this home and if the prior owners had experienced flooding? Mrs. Schubert said they have lived there one year and in 1983 Surfside experienced a big flood. Their neighbor to the North experienced major flooding. She thought her house could have experienced flooding of l' - 2' by the look of the walls inside their garage. No one wished to speak in favor of or in opposition to this application and with no rebuttal the Public Hearing was closed. Commission Comments MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Soukup to approve Variance #93-4 through the adoption of Resolution No. 93-48 and subject to the three (3) Conditions of Approval outlined in the staff report. MOTION CARRIED: A YES: 5-0-0 Sharp, Soukup, Law, Campbell, Dahlman *** 4. Variance #93-1 (jr:45 ".M.) 1"olW1\ued~li' nm~jj.';2211Jl J:.~'!w:..:~...:-..;..:::.W"":-'" ..............-:...-:x 212 Main Street Masonic Lodge Brian Kyle & Jim Klisanin Brian Kyle & Jim Klisanin A request to approve a Development Agreement between the City of Seal Beach and the applicants, Brian Kyle and Jim Klisanin, as a Condition of Approval of Variance #93-1. Address: Business: Applicants: J>>roperty Owners: Request: Staff Report Mr. Whittenberg presented the Development Agreement which was a Condition of Approval for Variance #93-1. [Staff report on file in the Planning Department]. Mr. Whittenberg indicated the Development Agreement was prepared by City staff and was discussed with the applicants. However, the applicants are not in agreement with the terms. The basic issue of contention is the dollar amounts to be paid to the City as part of the parking mitigation fee. The Commission has authority to make changes to the Development Agreement based on testimony received at this Public Hearing. It is necessary for the City . Pagc 4 - City of Seal Beacb · Planning Commission Minulcs of Octobcr 20. 1993 to hold a Public Hearing at the City Council level, and the Council will ultimately approve or deny the Development Agreement. The Commission needs to make a recommendation to the Council. Commission Comments on Staff Report Credits Regarding the parking mitigation fees of $63,000 and subsequent credits, Commissioner Soukup asked if BJ's Pizza's credits were due to their retrofit because this was an obvious benefit to the City? He didn't see the Masonic Lodge issues being equal to the BJ's Pizza issues. Mr. Whittenberg said the BJ's Pizza application received three separate types of credits against the $3,500 per parking space fee --- (1) a credit for the seismic retrofit of the building; (2) a credit for the anticipated increase in sales tax revenue; (3) another credit for anticipated increase in property taxes due to the change in ownership of that building. For the Masonic Lodge, the City applied the same formula --- credits for increased sales and property taxes. No credit was given for a seismic retrofit. . Commissioner Soukup questioned the formula of giving credits for retail sales taxes and then taking the credits back by requiring parking mitigation fees. He felt the City should charge the full amount for parking spaces. Mr. Whittenberg explained the City does not have an AB 1600 analysis, which would ascertain the revenue amounts needed to provide what the City considers the necessary parking to develop along the Main Street corridor. Until the BI's Pizza application was considered, Main Street project approvals, based on inadequate parking, were conditioned by the City. Requiring the developer to enter into an agreement with the City to pay $100 per deficit parking space per year with an understanding that this was an interim fee, until a formal program was developed and implemented by the City. In the BJ's Pizza application, the City maintained an interim agreement but the City used a base dollar amount which the City feels is more representative of the actual costs of providing parking spaces --- $3,500 per parking space. Mr. Whittenberg said that if a particular business were required at this point to pay $3,500 a space when it's short eighteen spaces (the Masonic Lodge) or twenty-one spaces (BI's Pizza) the parking fees would equate to almost as much as the cost of the building itself. The City's position is to increase the parking fee to a more reasonable amount, as an interim measure, have an additional provision in the Development Agreement which still says that once the City adopts a final program, the sites will be responsible to pay whatever the difference is. If the amount equates to less than $3,500 per space, or less than the amount per space than what they have paid under the Agreement, then those funds will be refunded to the developer. The credits for the sales tax and property tax are used to soften the blow on the immediate front end but still requiring a developer to pay the full amount at the back end. The AB 1600 . . Page S - City of Seal Beach · Planning Conunisaion Minutes of October 20, 1993 analysis will be done as a part of the Main Street Specific Plan and will take six to nine months to complete. City Liability Commissioner Campbell, referencing US.1 City Not Liable For Damages, objected to the City's being liable for payment of attorney fees. She wants to see the City not liable for anything. Mr. Steele said ~1S.1 cross references ~20 which provides for payment of attorney fees brought by a party to this Agreement for breach of the Agreement. It would be difficult to contract away either party's right to recover attorney fees against the other for a breach. He explained her concerns were covered by the additional wording in ~ 15.1 II... in accordance with Section 20 below... It. . Adverse Impacts Commissioner Campbell asked what is the potential for adverse impacts to the City in this Agreement? Mr. Steele said the rationale of a Development Agreement is to benefit both sides. The City benefits by locking in particular plans for development and by extracting from the developer the promise to indemnify the City in the case of damages that might occur as a result of the project. The developer benefits by getting a promise that the City will not enact any new, more burdensome, legal requirements before the developer has finished his project. The major detriment of the Agreement is that if the City Council were to enact a more burdensome land use requirement that's not in effect at the time of Agreement approval, that requirement would not apply to this project. Commissioner Campbell Mr. Steele pointed out that because this is a new Public Hearing, Commissioner Campbell's participation is appropriate and welcomed. Public Hearing Chairman Dahlman opened the Public Hearing. . Brian Kyle * 7th Street. Seal Beach Mr. Kyle said that although he met once with City Manager Jerry Bankston, he had no opportunity to negotiate the terms of this Development Agreement. He feels he should not have to pay $36,500 traffic and parking mitigation fees up front and would like to pay $200 or $300 per deficient parking space until the Main Street Specific Plan and AB 1600 assessment are completed and until the other merchants are paying similar fees. Mr. Kyle said the California Coastal Commission says anybody that's received project approval up to this date is not in an in-lieu program period and further felt the Coastal Commission would not approve further intensification of Main Street. Therefore, the City is wasting it's money on the parking study. Mr. Kyle felt the grandfathered privilege for . . . Page 6 - Ci~ of Seal Beach · Planning COllullissioo Minutes of Oc\obcr 20, 1993 parking could be maintained although the use were changed. Mr. Kyle felt he was de-intensifying the use for that site and that the AB 1600 analysis would not apply to him. Agreement Term Commissioner Sharp asked for further clarification on the twenty year term of this Agreement. Mr. Whittenberg explained this is a twenty year time period for the applicants to take advantage of the Agreement's provisions. At the end of twenty years, if he has not taken advantage of it, he has no Agreement and he would have to start over with a new application. Grandfathered Parking Status The Chairman asked Mr. Kyle if he had any opportunity to negotiate the provisions of this Development Agreement? Mr. Kyle said "It's pretty much, like I said, a generic contract. It's basically the same contract ... as BJ's ... I spent a tremendous' amount of money to keep it (the property) under (the) grandfathering clause so it would stay grandfathered. BJ's... (lost) their grandfathering ...". Commissioner Soukup asked Mr. Kyle about his effort to maintain the grandfathering status for his parking situation, noting he would agree with his view point if he had kept the use as the Masonic lodge. Mr. Kyle replied he has a valid business license to operate the building as a hall or lodge. Commissioner Soukup said, in that case, he wouldn't have to sign this Development Agreement and could operate the building as a lodge. Commissioner Soukup explained that when he wanted to change the use from a lodge to retail businesses he had to apply for a Variance and with that he was short parking. Mr. Kyle said "You can change uses and still have grandfathering. That's been done up and down the street". Commissioner Soukup said the City is asking Mr. Kyle to pay $7,300 per year for five year. When the AB 1600 analysis is reviewed Mr. Kyle may find the cost per deficient parking space fees goes to $200 or $500 per parking space. He did not feel Mr. Kyle was being unfairly singled out. There are problems with parking circulation and the Main Street Specific Plan is in the works to solve problems. If Mr. Kyle wants to create retail offices which increase circulation problems he somehow has to participate in solving of these problems. Mr. Kyle disagreed that he is creating circulation problems, noting what could be created there is bigger than what he is proposing. Also, when AB 1600 is read, a burden created must be shown and he is not creating a problem. . Page 7 - City of ScaI Beach · Planning CommissiCll\ Minules of October 20, 1993 Mr. Kyle said his Variance asks him to participate in the City's in-lieu parking program. "That's what I thought I was going into. Now my Development Agreement -- hey I never heard of that. That was all new to me. I agree to it but I'm saying what's this all mean? I get a 26 page Development Agreement to a building's that's there". Can't Compare Masonic Lodge and BI's Pizza Chairman Dahlman said he was not sure the two situations were comparable, noting Mr. Kyle is proposing to change the use and wasn't, but they had a hiatus; these are two different issues. Payment of $36.500 Commissioner Sharp asked about the $36,500 fee. Mr. Whittenberg said it's a one-time fee to be paid over a five-year period of time. Commissioner Sharp said other businesses are subject to new parking fees, Mr. Kyle is not being singled out. Mr. Kyle said he wondered how these business people are going to afford these proposed fees. . Define Ap'pIicant's Wants Mr. Steele said the Commission may want to know what provision the developer wants in this Agreement. Is he asking the Planning Commission to recommend that this initial mitigation fee be waived and that he participate in the in-lieu parking program subsequently? Mr. Kyle said he's requesting "Whatever the in- lieu program is now. Because no matter what happens here tonight, once we go through a Specific Plan ... a number is going to be arrived at the very end of this road, whether I pay it up front tonight or next month or whenever that Specific Plan comes together... I'm just saying... to mitigate a little bit of money that's going out up front right now ... ". Chairman Dahlman said the City actually does not have an in-lieu program now. The City had one in the mid-1980's that was ruled invalid. There are people paying $100 per year for spaces. If this Development Agreement is approved, there will be two Development Agreements in the City that set specific terms. The Main Street Specific Plan will incorporate AB 1600 and that will look at all the available parking in the area and that's the only way to have a true in-lieu program. Because there is no valid in-lieu program, Mr. Kyle cannot participate in it. Mr. Kyle said once fees are collected, the City must state where these funds are pledged. Is the City going to build two-story parking structures at the beach? He doesn't think the City has a major parking problem, noting a survey was done in 1983 that said no problem, another survey in 1987 and said there are no parking problems. "It seems like money is being thrown out until someone says yes, we do (have parking problems). Then the City will have to build massive parking structures. That will bring more people and the City will really have congestion". Mr. Kyle said . . . . PlIlle 8 - Cily of Seal Beach · Planning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1993 he would like to see $200 or $300 per parking space per year until the AB 1600 analysis is completed and a program is developed. David Rosenman * Seal Beach !No Address Givenl Mr. Rosenman suggested the City Council adopted the strategy of a Development Agreement for B]'s Pizza and felt this might be viewed as a precedent by citizens who are watching to see if the City's going to do something about parking problems. He was concerned that if the City starts wavering, it might go back to the $100 per deficient parking space fee and that would be the wrong signal to send. Charles Antos * 328 17th Street. Seal Beach Mr. Antos said pages 4 and 28 were missing from the packet he reviewed; he would like to see these. He asked the following clarifications be placed in the Record: 1. Attachment "A" to Resolution #93-38 should become part of the Development Agreement if this project is approved. 2. Condition #2, page 35: Emphasize that no restaurant uses are permitted for twenty (20) years at 212 Main Street. 3. Condition #9, page 36: The City should guarantee that no City funds are going to be used for any of those improvements. He noted that two properties on Main Street had sidewalk repairs done, benches installed at City expense for the benefit of the property owner that fronts them. 4. Page 16, ~12.3: clarify for the Record that once a permanent parking program is put into place, no matter what the cost is, if this Development Agreement is signed, then the signature is liable for those costs for the spaces that they lack. Mr. Whittenberg said that is the intent of this condition. The City Council will determine that amount from the AB 1600 analysis. Mr. Antos said he is in favor of the Development Agreement. If the developer chooses to not sign this document, after one year the Variance and its conditions are gone and the developer can't do anything with that property other than to continue to use it for the use it is currently used as. . . . Page 9 - Cily of Seal Beach · Planning Conunission Minutes of October 20, 1993 Gordon Shanks * 215 Surf Place. Seal Beach Mr. Shanks said the Masonic Lodge is the only building on Main Street, with the possible exception of the Bay Theater, that is built from property line to property line; there is no parking. There is not even room for a six foot trash enclosure. He felt the following should be considered: 1. The price paid for the Masonic Lodge was lower than it would have been had it had the required parking. 2. Escrow on the Masonic Lodge did not close until after the Development Agreement on BJ's Pizza was signed, so there was some knowledge. 3. Historically you must see where people are coming from. You've had a history of not requiring parking and now new rules are coming into play. It may look like the City is picking on one person. It speaks well of the City and staff that they are finally trying to get a permanent program so a developer will know what the rules are up front and can figure his profit. In the past, the procedure has been what a person can fenagle out of the Planning Commission or City Council. Mr. Shanks said he is in favor of this Development Agreement. The Commission or Council could have required Mr. Kyle to chop off so many feet of the building to provide the required parking or trash cans. Bruce Stark * Seal Beach rNo Address Given] Mr. Stark said the Development Agreement should go back to staff for review and revision because Mr. Kyle had no input in its preparation. Mr. Stark suggested the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council to determine what evidence there is that the City does have a parking problem and to review whether it is reasonable to impose unrealistic parking requirements on the Main Street merchants. He suggested merchants should decide for themselves if they want to locate a business in an area with parking problems because they are the ones who benefit from good business decisions. He sees no benefits to the City residents from this Development Agreement and felt the City should mind its own business. Chairman Dahlman object to Mr. Stark's premise that the City should allow sites with no parking to develop their businesses, and if there's no parking they will suffer the business consequences. The problem is that the neighbors on either . . . P..e 10 - City of Seal Be.ach · PIanniDg CommissiOll Minutes of October 20, 1993 side will suffer those same consequences, even if they do provide their own parking. He said the Planning Commission would deny any unjust Variance. Commissioner Soukup objected to Mr. Stark's comment that in-lieu parking fees were put into the general fund, giving the perception that perhaps these fees are being spent. The fact is that the parking fees are put into an escrow account, in which there is about $72,000. Reva Olsen * Seal Beach [No Address Given 1 Ms. Olsen said the City doesn't know if it has a parking problem because it has not gotten an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) before it started it's in-lieu parking. She said she feels there is an overflow and a parking problem. The uses on Main Street have been intensified and this has detrimentally impacted area residents. She said she is concerned that (1) the taxpayers should subsidize businesses. She asked why a $36,500 credit for this application was made? The residents just got an increase in their utility taxes and they are the highest in Orange County. So much money has been spent on Main Street for studies and still we're not doing it right; (2) the City is provoking litigation from both the residents and the merchants with Agreements like this. She felt this merchant did not know what he was going to pay for or when. She asked what is our Specific Plan going to be like? Where's the parking going to be? Who's going to pay for it? How much will it cost? Ms. Olsen said she had to obtain legal counsel in order to obtain the warrants to ascertain the cost of studies done for Main Street. She suggested the Planning Commission wait for the Specific Plan before going through with this Development Agreement. Rebuttal: Brian Kyle Mr. Kyle said he agreed with the testimony -- a lot of money has been spent on consultants who say there is no parking problem. There are parking problems at certain hours of the day but nothing compared to other cities. His legal, non- conforming building has been there for years and he is downgrading it from a high intensity use to a low intensity use. The City is giving no incentives to make this happen. The businesses on Main Street cannot support the proposed large parking fees. Chairman Dahlman asked Mr. Kyle if his purchase price was discounted, given the fact the buyer and seller both recognized that it would be expensive to finance parking? Mr. Kyle said no. Chairman Dahlman asked Mr. Kyle if he had an opportunity to negotiate the Development Agreement provisions with staff? Mr. Kyle said no. Chairman . . . Page 11 - CiIy of Scal Beach · Plannina Coounission Minutes of October 20, 1993 Dahlman asked Mr. Kyle if he met with Mr. Curtis or Mr. Whittenberg? Mr. Kyle said yes "... we met and ... they basically came back and said that this is the Agreement. I just said well, I'm having a hard time with this Agreement". Mr. Whittenberg said the meetings were held with Mr. Bankston. Mr. Kyle said there was one meeting and he had to call to get it. The Public Hearing was closed. Commission Comments MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Law to approve the Development Agreement for 212 Main Street as presented in the Agenda packet through the adoption of Resolution No. 93-49. The Commission recommended to the City Council that they review the traffic and parking mitigation contribution figures. MOTION CARRIED: 5 - 0 - 0 AYES: Sharp, Law, Dahlman, Campbell, Soukup *** RECESS: At 8:45 P.M. the Chairman declared a ten minute recess. The Planning Commission reconvened at 9:00 P.M., with all members present. 5. Conditional Use Permit #92-7 (9:00 p.m.) Neeative Declaration #93-2 (Revised and Recirculated) '~C,::..':tfbii:aed.trom)'rU~'~ .~2Z ":"I9t3~ ~9.n,[I,...... . . ,41. I~Y<<--...F'd""" . > " ............~.......:.... ................................~.......... Address: 99 Marina Drive Business: Union Oil Company of California Applicant: Union Oil Company of California Property Owner: Exxon Corporation Request: A request to institute operations at the existing, although currently non-operational, Seal Beach on-shore production facility located at 99 Marina Drive, Seal Beach, CA. This on-shore production facility serves Platform &ther, located approximately 1.5 miles south of the City of Seal Beach. Staff Report Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. [Staff report on file in the Planning Department]. . . . Page 12 - City of Seal Beach · Planning Conunission Minullls of October 20, 1993 Commission Comments on Staff Report Processing Capacity Chairman Dahlman asked what is the processing capacity at 99 Marina Drive? Mr. Whittenberg said he did not know the processing capacity but the storage capacity is 9,000 barrels and they are requesting to store 4,500 barrels. The on- site tanks are for storage. Archaeological Monitoring Chairman Dahlman asked how the archaeological provisions would be monitored? Mr. Whittenberg said the archaeologist physically excavated three test pits on site which measured 3'x3' in size to a depth of 5'or 6', at a point where they hit water. Nothing was found to indicate any archaeological significance to the site and no further analysis was recommended. The City's Archaeological Committee fully reviewed all the reports. [Reports on file in the Planning Department]. Emergency Preparedness Chairman Dahlman asked about emergency preparedness for this site. Mr. Whittenberg deferred to the operators of the facility to determine what is an emergency. A rupture of a pipe causing spillage would be an emergency but this is statistically termed an "unlikely event" according to the analysis; one in a million. Unocal to Process Only for Platform Esther Commissioner Law asked if the 99 Marine Drive site processed fluids only for Esther Island? Mr. Whittenberg said yes. If the Exxon facility were to break down, Unocal would have to come back to the City for an amendment to their CUP to process Exxon's fluids. That would require another Public Hearing. Chairman Dahlman said an EIR would be needed because they are very close to the limits for emissions. Commissioner Law asked how the City would know if Unocal were processing someone else's oil? Mr. Whittenberg said right now Exxon is processing for Unocal and they had to go through the Coastal Commission to do that. If something changes, the Coastal Commission might give those companies a difficult time to do something else. He indicated that City staff is in that area fairly regularly and does observe things that go on. Shutting Down 99 Marina Drive Commissioner Law asked when the oil is depleted at Esther Island will this facility be shut down? Mr. Whittenberg said that was his understanding. . . . Page 13 - City of Seal Beach · Planning Conunission Minutes or October 20, 1993 City Liability for Property Devaluation Commissioner Law asked if the City would be liable if surrounding properties are devalued due to this CUP approval? Mr. Steele advised no, not as long as the decision is consistent, as the municipal Code requires, with the General Plan and the property's zoning. Clean Up Exxon's Facility Commissioner Law asked if there were a way to get the Exxon facility cleaned up? Mr. Whittenberg said that if the City proceeds with the General Plan amendment and zone change for the entire area, one of the provisions would be to require those non-conforming properties in the area to come back to the City for a CUP. At that point, the City would be able to deal with Exxon. Violations of Maintenance Commissioner Campbell asked if violations of non-emergency maintenance occur, in what time frame must compliance be accomplished? What remedies does the City have to force compliance? Mr. Steel said the City can enforce the noise ordinance at this facility. Unocal is subject to the criminal penalties the municipal Code imposes for violations. The City can always amend conditions of the CUP to reflect existing situations if the City sees the conditions imposed are not be adhered to. Fence Line Monitoring Commissioner Campbell asked if fence line monitoring will be conducted after the initial 30-day period? Mr. Whittenberg said the initial 30 days would be the only monitoring period, as presently proposed by staff. Public Hearing Robert Province. Landman * Unocal Mr. Province stated Unocal met with area homeowners to discuss their issues and address their concerns. Some concerns were: 1. Processing production at another location. Processing off-shore on Platform Esther would require a Coastal Commission permit to install new facilities on the platform which do not exist now. Unocal has no idea if that permit would ever be secured; they are pursuing this idea. Another alternative would be to process on-shore at another location in this area. To do that U nocal would have to find an existing area operator, install a new pipeline from their existing facility to the other location. Coastal Commission permits would need to be secured and that would be very difficult. Unocal is looking for operators to do this but so far none have . Page 14 - Cily of Sc:a1 Beach · PIaDning Commission Minutes of October 20. 1993 the capacity to process Unoca!'s production. Both alternatives are not viable options at this time. 2. Noise. Unocal completed a noise study at their Ft. Apache facility in Huntington Beach to gather current data showing noise generated from an operating facility in a residential area. Unocal monitored equipment at full capacity and the results indicated the noise levels would not exceed the City of Seal Beach noise ordinance. If there were a nuisance to the general public UnocaI would respond and mitigate the problem. Unocal has not received complaints regarding noise at Ft. Apache. . 3. Aesthetics. In Seal Beach the landscape is sparse, the old fence is unattractive and the three tanks are eyesores. He showed colored drawings of what Unocal proposed. Their plan proposes a ten foot (10') cement block decorative wall surrounding the Unocal facility; it will cut across the Unocal and Exxon facilities. Brick pillars will be installed at 25' intervals to break-up the wall; tile coping will be added on top. Mature, 10' tall, landscaping will be planted. This wall will be surfaced to make graffiti removal easier. In addition, the existing 24' high tanks will be reduced to 12', and painted to match the Exxon facility. Mr. Province said Unocal wants to be a part of the Seal Beach community; they are completely accountable for any activity in that facility. They want to be responsive to any concerns the citizens have. Amortization Commissioner Sharp asked if this staff report contains information on an amortization period? Mr. Whittenberg said no, the CUP is silent on the length of time the CUP is valid for and nothing about amortization is stated in the Conditions of Approval. Once the approval is granted, and as long as all the Conditions are complied with, they would be allowed to operate the facility indefinitely. The staff report discusses a General Plan amendment and zone change to change the designation of the property from Oil Extraction to residential use. The City has indicated that if that change is made to the General Plan, a twenty (20) year amortization schedule be placed at the time the property's zoning is changed. That would require both the Unocal and Exxon facilities to be removed at the twenty year time. This is not part of this CUP, it would considered separately as part of the General Plan amendment and zone change. . CUP/Land Use Entitlement Chairman Dahlman asked if a CUP is an entitlement which runs with the land and any subsequent purchaser? And, if the City should later change the zoning, . . . P.,e 15 - city of Seal Beach · PIanniD,v Commission Minule8 of October 20, 1993 would Unocal or a new owner have to comply with that new zoning? Mr. Steele said yes, Unocal or a new owner would have to comply with any new zoning. The new zoning would provide that all properties which were permitted uses in the zone, under the prior zoning, conform to the new zoning within that specified time period. It would have the effect of eliminating the uses and the CUPs which allowed those uses to exist within that specified time period. City to Pay for Amortization Chairman Dahlman asked if the City would have any financial responsibility pertaining to the amortization? Mr. Steele said staffs preliminary discussions with Unoca1 and Exxon have indicated the life of Platform Esther will run out within the twenty year period and the property owners will have realized their economic value out of the property within that period; the amortization is set at the outside limit. The City avoids the need to pay for any part of that use by allowing the longer amortization period. Procedural Review Commissioner Sharp asked for a procedural review of the Planning Commission's action tonight. Mr. Whittenberg said the Planning Commission's determination on this CUP application is a final determination unless an appeal is filed to the City Council. If the Commission does take action tonight, staff will bring a resolution back to the Commission for formal consideration at their next meeting. When the resolution is adopted, that action would start the ten (10) day appeal period. Processing Capacity Chairman Dahlman asked Mr. Province for Unocal's processing capacity. Mr. Province deferred to Roger Hamson, Production Engineer, Unocal. Mr. Hamson said Unocal anticipates a total of 7,500 barrels per day of gross fluid --- about 2500 barrels of oil plus 5000 barrels of water per day. The water goes into the sewer system and the oil is retained on site. Unocal must make monthly averages on the water discharge into the Orange County Sanitation District lines because they pay a fee for that use. Estimate Pollution emission Chairman Dahlman, talking about air pollution standards, asked how much pollution Unoca1 is estimating. Mr. Hamson said the AQMD figures are based on 4000 barrels of oil. Mr. Hamson said it is difficult to estimate what the oil wells on Esther Island are going to produce because they've been down for ten years but Unocal's best estimate is about 2,500 barrels of oil per day. . . . Page 16 - City of SuI Be.acb · Planning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1993 Unocal Processing Commissioner Law asked ifUnocal would ever process someone else's oil? Mr. Hamson said no. Present Proposal vs. Past Operation Commissioner Campbell said she drove by the site today and spoke with one of the area residents. The resident asked Commissioner Campbell to ask how does the presently proposed operation compare with the operation that existed ten years ago? Mr. Hamson said he could not theorize how Chevron's operation was. He said Unocal's facility will have all electric equipment as opposed to Chevron's gasoline and diesel powered equipment. Unocal's facility should be quieter. The proposed facility will be smaller than the facility was ten years ago. Equate Emission Commissioner Campbell, referencing the estimated project emissions (page 218 of the staff report), noted the reactive organic gas emissions come close to the level Unocal is allowed to emit. She asked if this could be related to something more concrete, like a truck's emissions? Mr. Hamson said he was not qualified to make that estimation but guessed the emissions from Unocal's facility would be the equivalent of one semi truck. Spillage Commissioner Campbell, referencing the effect of a seismic event on fluids contained above ground, asked how much damage would spillage cause and what would the range of contamination be? Mr. Hamson replied the regulations require Unocal to have a containment area large enough to hold 1% times the capacity of its largest tank. Unocal would be able to contain, on site, the entire contents of one tank. There would be no contamination to the surrounding neighborhoods. In order for there to be contamination, there would have to be simultaneous failure of all three tanks. Sabotage Commissioner Campbell said she is concerned about the possibility of a person willfully causing destruction on this site. She asked what is the combustible capacity of this site? Mr. Hamson replied that to do the most damage someone would have to put a bomb on one of the oil tanks; the tanks do not operate full. That person would be setting off 1,000 barrels of crude. The crude is flammable but not explosive, as is gasoline. A tremendous explosion would not be expected but a large fire would be. Commissioner Campbell said she was very concerned about the immediate neighborhoods and the problems with fire and toxic gases. Mr. Hamson said he had no comment on terrorist attacks. . Page 17 - Cily of Seal Beach · Planning Conunissioo Minutes of October 20, 1993 Security Chairman Dahlman asked if the facility would be secured? Mr. Hamson replied yes, they will have the ten foot wall, a ten foot gate with barbed wire. He added that if somebody wants to get in, they can get in. He said Unocal could easily put an alarm system on site. . ~ Chairman Dahlman, referencing odors from the site, asked Mr. Hamson if it felt like you were driving into a residential neighborhood or driving through San Pedro? Mr. Hamson said he would not anticipate you could smell anything. The only fumes will be from the combustion of the natural gas, which is clean natural utility grade gas to heat the emulsion. The only thing you could smell would be exhausts of burned natural gas, which is the same thing you'd smell if you turned on your stove. This is not a refinery and Unoca1's processes are different. Chairman Dahlman said there would be fumes above the crude within the tanks and asked how these will be dealt with? Mr. Hamson said all the tanks are under pressure and have vapor recovery systems approved by AQMD. There will be no emissions from the tanks. The vapors come off the tank, go into a compressor, the compressor pressures up the gas and puts it in a gas transmission line. There will be no vapors from the tanks. Persons Speaking in Favor - No one wished to speak in favor of this application. Persons Speaking in Opposition John O'Neil * 395 Clipper Way. Seal Beach Mr. O'Neil said this facility is a serious threat to the quality of life in Seal Beach. For the last ten years there has been no air pollution coming from the site, but if this application is approved it will add pollution to the air and degrade the neighborhood. Regarding the air pollution tests run by Unoca1 at Ft. Apache in Huntington Beach, the Meredith-Boli study was a short test, completed in three days, which is not enough time. What was not tested were non-routine conditions which actually create the most air pollution. The tests did show elevated levels of increased air pollution. He said he knew of no semi-truck that emits 38,000 pounds per year of air pollution. Not including toxics, the air pollution to the neighborhood is quite serious. He said air resource people say the normal air pollution allowed would be 20 to 40 pounds per day, not 59.62 pounds per day. Unocal gets this figure up to 60 pounds by shutting down another piece of equipment at another site and trading the pollution credits. Exxon has been a nuisance since their inception. He was concerned about coupling the Exxon emissions with the Unocal emissions. The bottom line is to not allow a heavy duty industrial application in the middle of a residential area. . . . . Page 18 - Cily of 8ca1 Beach · P1anniDg Commi88ioo Minulc8 of October 20, 1993 Chairman Dahlman said the standard for requiring an EIR is 75 pounds of emissions per day. He asked if Mr. O'Neil was saying that the Unocal project is under the 75 pounds and the Exxon facility is under 75 pounds, but they should be looked at as one emitting source and consider the total number of pounds emitted by the two facilities. Mr. O'Neil said the credits are traded to control the overall emissions. Sol John * Seal Beach Mr. John said oil facilities should be built elsewhere because their odors spoil the town. Larry Shore * 273 Corsair Avenue. Seal Beach Mr. Shore said this facility scares him because the 1986 environmental checklist submitted for the Exxon facility said "Creation of objectionable odors" and the answer was "Maybe". He said several nights every week there are objectionable odors in the neighborhood from the existing Exxon facility. Two months ago he was forced to call the Fire Department because he was afraid of a hazardous leak. Another question was "Risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances, including ... oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation ..." and the answer was "Yes". Another question was "Potential health hazard" and the answer was "Maybe". That's not a "No". He feared Seal Beach and the area homes would lose value as a result of this facility being at 99 Marina Drive. Mario Voce * Seal Beach fNo Address Givenl Mr. Voce referenced Table III on page 218, and asked what "reactive organic gas" is, as it is the largest emission? Mr. Province did not define "reactive organic gas" but said he spoke with Ben Shaw at AQMD and was told the emission figures are ultra-conservative numbers, 60% to 80% higher than what would be expected from this facility. Mr. Voce indicated there is an information gap on this item, which is the major component of the emissions. He went on record against any increase of air pollution, including asking people to drive less. Mr. Voce suggested the Commission might want to look at Exxon's emission numbers and tack them onto Unocal's. Chairman Dahlman asked if the City's Environmental Quality Control Board had received this Negative Declaration? Mr. Voce said the information passed through the EQCB; they made no decision as they are a recommending committee. Mr. Whittenberg said the AQMD makes their determinations on a facility-by- facility basis. They don't combine one facility adjacent to another. He indicated trading pollution credits was not a sound idea for the Commission to pursue. Discussion ensued on how companies could avoid the EIR process. . Page 19 . c~ of Seal Beach · Planning CommiasiOll Minutes of October 20, 1993 Bill Lazitch * 100 Electric Avenue. Seal Beach Mr. Lazitch said he's been living behind the Exxon facility for years. He bases his analysis and comments on what's been going on at the existing operation. Regarding odors and noise, he said Unoca1 says their emissions will be within certain levels, but the City granted a permit for Exxon to completely revamp their plant two years ago and they said the same things. He guaranteed that doesn't exist today -- that plant emits odors and noise as it always has. The operations are not fool proof. On August 6, 1993 he turned in a complaint on odor to AQMD. The area inspector was on vacation and they couldn't send anybody out for one week. But the time he got there the odor was gone. He went to Exxon and they denied there was any odor. When pressed, Exxon did admit a compressor had gone out but was repaired in two days. The AQMD inspector was Gene Hines at the Long Beach office. In summary, odors and noise from the facility do exist. Regarding the point that the City would be liable to Unoca1 for their equipment if this CUP were denied --- that equipment is close to forty years old and there's no value to it. That factor should not be considered when reviewing this application. . George Irwin * [No Address Given). Seal Beach He suggested the President or the Board of Directors for Unocal be required to live in a residence adjacent to and down wind of this facility. . Hugh Nelson * 314 Spinnaker. Seal Beach Mr. Nelson said he knows that several residents have tried to refinance their homes and the appraisers take note of this processing site. It has interfered with the processing of their loans. There is concern for reduction of property values. Regarding the tests performed at Ft. Apache, he expressed concern that staff did not pick up on the fact that a three day test washes out the highs and the lows, leaving an average for three days only. The Unoca1 testing data does not include a testing situation which involves opening the vats and pipes. This could account for black residue on cars. He asked the Commission to go out to the site and confront the constant hum of machinery on site. After awhile this works on you on the subliminal level --- 24 hours per day, 52 weeks per year for years. After dark you can see a lO'(diameter) heater in place with a large blue flame underneath; it's a large furnace. You can smell this furnace down wind constantly. Unocal talked to the Riverbeach Homeowners Association but although they knew of this meeting they didn't tell the residents. The residents read about it in the newspaper. Unocal pledges to be a good neighbor and to be available to concerns however, an October 8, 1993 Press Telegram article details that Unoca1 was fined $200,000 for their activities in Wilmington regarding hazardous waste, for failing to provide financial responsibility for potential accidents, failing to properly train workers and conduct required facility inspections, and failing to manage hazardous waste containers. He presented a . Page 20 - City of SeaJ J)Qch · Planning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1993 petition noting that homes and oil don't mix. (Attached for the Record). He noted that staff supplied legal precedent that precludes EIR preparation. He hoped the testimony would raise sufficient questions for the Commission to look at this application closely. Jim Bridges * rNo Addressl Huntington Beach Mr. Bridges said he was asked to speak tonight because he was instrumental in Huntington Beach's issues re Unocal's Ft. Apache plant at Huntington Beach. The main difference between Ft. Apache and 99 Marina Drive is that Ft. Apache has operated for thirty years. Unocal had been very cooperative in Huntington Beach up to the point where a report showed a lot more study needed to be done. At that point Unocal cut them off. He mentioned that certain tests show an increase in birth defects, cancers and breathing disorders within a short proximity of Ft. Apache. . Larry Gemberling * 265 Corsair. Seal Beach Mr. Gemberling said his bedroom is the closest to this facility. This summer, at least six times, they had to close their bedroom doors because of the noise. Last night they had to leave their jacuzzi due to the bad smells from that facility. The City should take the money spent on this staff report and get rid of both facilities and make a better use of this land. Gordon Labedz * Surf Rider Foundation Mr. Labedz said he is with the City's Beach Commission and is representing the Surf Rider Foundation. He talked about skirting the law by working the system. To get around an EIR Unocal has separated the off-shore oil drilling from the 99 Marina Drive facility. He said the Planning Commission could deny this application without an EIR. We don't need any more off-shore oil drilling in Seal Beach or California. The California representatives are pushing for sanctuaries, like Monterey Bay. What would more off-shore oil drilling get Seal Beach? It will pollute our ocean and stink up our neighborhoods. He noted the Commission has been brutal on small business owners and could not perceive the Commission's not denying this proposal "with all it's potential environmental dangers". Regarding subsidence, subsidence has been an issue in Huntington Beach and Long Beach. To say that it's "probably" not going to be a problem and therefore we don't need to worry about the impacts of off-shore oil drilling is not true. . David Sutton * 245 ClipJ}er Way. Seal Beach Mr. Sutton said organic reactive gasses are primarily hydrocarbons which have been unreacted. They are not combusted natural gas. If Unocal does operate with electrical equipment with no internal combustion engines and they are only burning natural gas, then the sources of these unreacted hydrocarbons have to be . Page 21 - City of Seal Bach · Planning CommissiOll Minutes of October 20, 1993 . either leaks from the oil (vapors) or uncombusted natural gas (primarily methane). No one wants those drifting around their neighborhood. These are also the primary sources of the odors, not methane. The question of what is the source of the 75 pounds of emissions should be investigated. If these emissions are from leaks, this involves assumptions about leak rates. This usually involves pristine construction, best case operation (not catastrophic or worst case). The issue of "through put" which is determined by the number of compressors/pumps on site; this is noise. "Through put" can also involve the potential maximum leakage. While storage is important, "through put" is also important for those reasons. When Chevron was operating at this site there were smells associated with the operation, also substantial noise, the plant was not manned and when alarms went off no one knew the source of the alarm -- equipment failure, leaks, intrusion. At one time an alarm went off on a Sunday and it rang all day. He called all day and couldn't get anyone to answer so he called City police. The Police Department said they received 50 calls, tried to reach 'Chevron and couldn't reach them either. Eventually, the alarm noise drove them out of their house. Manning is important -- if something goes wrong will someone be there to take care of it? It would be nice to know how long it would take someone to get there if something went wrong. The Chevron wasn't a good deal for the City's residents. Over the last ten years the area residents have come to expect peace and quite and not much air pollution. Their environment will degrade if this is approved, despite what Unocal has promised. Commissioner Law said the staff report says the facility will be manned 24-hours per day and there will be no alarms. Mr. Whittenberg clarified that the Unoca1 facility will not be manned on a regular basis. The facility would operate through control systems to monitor it from their manned off-shore platform, where personnel are on duty 24-hours a day. Emergency response plans are requirements of the Orange County Fire Department. The Fire Department will decide what their response time must be. Mr. Sutton expressed concerns that the City doesn't know what the Fire Department's requirements will be and it's not a subject of this hearing. Mr. Whittenberg said the Orange County Fire Department is an agency of the City and once they've seen the facility and what's proposed will place their conditions. Unoca1 will be required to meet these conditions fully. Chairman Dahlman asked if the rotten odor, hydrogen sulfide, is a reactive organic gas and what is it doing there as it's not on the list of pollutants? Mr. Sutton said it would be classified as a reactive organic gas and noted there are other sulfides which would give off that odor. H2S is one which is highly toxic and on continuous exposure it deadens your sense of smell. . . Page 22 - Ci~ of Seal B~cb · Planning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1993 Bob Ragland * 484 Schooner. Seal Beach Mr. Ragland is a 17 year resident at this address. He moved from 12th Street and Electric A venue to avoid the noise there. When he moved to Bridgeport there was a City Yard facility near 99 Marina Drive, and the oil facility but it was well isolated from the rest of the neighborhood. Since that time about fifty (50) houses have been built in what was the City Yard (Riverbeach). Because the oil separation facility has been unused for ten years he feels the facility is abandoned. The people who were using it for economic gain have not used it. In those ten years the neighborhood has changed drastically. He said that the oil facility was a "pig in a poke" but now it's a "pig in the parlor" and no amount of cosmetic mitigation will make it anything but a "pig in the parlor". Lastly, he voiced concerns about truck traffic going in and out of the facility. There is not much traffic in that area as it's a residential area. . Ron Jessner * 1704 Bayou Way. Seal Beach Mr. Jessner introduced himself as a resident of Seal Beach and a former Planning Commissioner who was on the Commission when the CUP was heard for Chevron. At that time Unocal came with Chevron to the Planning Commission hearing. Chevron said they would be wonderful neighbors and Unocal said they were sorry their facility looks like a mess but they've spent time and money cleaning it up and would take of their facility. If anyone has gone by their facility recently they will note it's not well maintained. The lengthy hearings and testimony demonstrated there's a potential for explosions, the noise, the fumes are the same issues that are brought up tonight. The Commission's findings were that it is an incompatible use because of the surrounding residential uses. While the oil separation facility has been there a long time, the residential uses have also been building up around it over a long period of time and the oil separation facility is no longer compatible. At that time the Planning Commission denied the CUP for Chevron and Chevron went away. During those hearings, the question was asked could Chevron pipe their oil some place else? Chevron said yes. Therefore, Seal Beach is not the only place the oil from Platform Esther can be separated. It could be sent to Wilmington or any place else they want to send lines to. "This isn't a do or die situation". He stated he is opposed to this application and was opposed to the Chevron application because it's an incompatible and unsafe use. . Carla Watson * 1635 Catalina Avenue. Seal Beach Mrs. Watson is a 30-year Seal Beach resident and owned her first home in Bridgeport. As property owners she and her husband are very concerned about the environment of Seal Beach and Bridgeport. As a Parks and Recreation Commissioner she is concerned about the welfare of the children and adults who use City parks. The City has just rebuilt and rededicated a beautiful facility at Marina Park, adjacent to 99 Marina Drive. Hundred of children play there daily. . . . Page 23 - City of Seal Beacb · PIIumiJJg Commissioo Minulr.9 of October 20, 1993 The City's Recreation Department provides a full activity agenda for adults and children which includes all week day care, babysitting, exercise classes, tennis lessons, tai chi etc. She asked how much money coming to the City is worth anyone's lungs or breathing and air quality? Government is here to fill a void and to protect our health and welfare. Craif: Steele said any evidence or indication of inside fact gathering by Planning Commissioners should be so stated for the Record. Commissioner Sharp said he drove by the site but did not contact anyone. Commissioner Campbell's comments were noted previously. Rebuttal * Robert Province Mr. Province said incorrect information has been presented. Unocal does not trade pollution credits. Unocal is not Exxon or Chevron. They have a local office in Santa Fe Springs. The odor problem can be attributed to the production from Exxon as the fault Exxon produces from has H2S gas in it. The structure and fault that Unocal produces from does not have H2S gas in it, so there would not be any rotten egg odors. If there odor concerns occur, Unocal will respond to that, as they have in the past. "Our track record speaks for itself". Facility Manninf: Commissioner Law asked how the facility at 99 Marine Drive would be manned? Mr. Province said there will always be a foreman at the facility during regular business hours. Regarding the 24-hour manning, the 99 Marina Drive facility is manned by controls. If there's any problem, a silent alarm will call the appropriate personnel on Platform Esther, which is ten (10) minutes away from 99 Marina Drive, and the Platform Esther personnel would send somebody from the platform to 99 Marina Drive. Commissioner Law asked if there was someone available 24-hours per day at the Santa Fe Springs office? Mr. Province said Unocal does have a Hot Line to call and there would be somebody there to respond to your call. During normal hours (6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) you would talk to a Unocal employee. At midnight someone would answer your call and your message would be forwarded to a chain-of-command of individuals to assist. This number is not posted at the dormant facility but it can easily be posted. Pipinf: Elsewhere Commissioner Sharp asked if Unocal has any facilities that the oil could be piped to without having to lay a new pipeline? Mr. Province said Unocal doesn't have any other facility in the area. . . . Page 24 - City of Seal Beach · Planning CommissiOll Minutes of October 20, 1993 Testing Procedures Chairman Dahlman asked for further clarification on testing procedures, specifically the noise level testing done at Ft. Apache with everything turned on. Mr. Province said that at Ft. Apache the equipment was purposely turned on abnormally to get the worst case scenario. Commissioner Sharp said the oil separation facility is operated as a water heater would be, with the burners on thermostats to keep the fluids at a certain temperature. The burners are operated automatically when needed. Height of Wall Commissioner Soukup asked if Unocal would be opposed to building a 12' wall versus a 10' wall for noise abatement? Mr. Province said no. Mr. Whittenberg said that through the CUP process a 12' wall could be required. There is a high water table in that area which might not accommodate a 12' wall, the foundation might float. Craig Steele asked Mr. Province the following questions: 1. Is there any air pollution off-set or reclamation program that's enabling Unocal to meet certain emission standards at the facility or are those the numbers that are actually be emitted from the facility? Mr. Hamson said U.nocal was not off-setting any emissions with any other facility. No trading of emissions to get this permitted by AQMD. 2. Regarding the difference in the product produced by the Exxon facility and the Unocal facility, is there a difference in the technology between the proposed facility and Exxon and also the proposed facility and Ft. Apache? Mr. Hamson said the Exxon facility does use a different process that Unocal uses but the Ft. Apache facility will be very similar to 99 Marina Drive. 3. Regarding a testing situation to where multiple lines or tanks are open, such as occurs at the Rossmoor facility (a power plant), is that a type of test that would occur at the Unocal facility at 99 Marina Drive? Mr. Hamson said the Unocal facility at 99 Marina Drive is totally different. Unocal wouldn't do any kind of testing that would cause black, sooty-type emissions. There is no open line testing. . . . Plge 2S - Ci~ of Seal BAch · Planning Conunission Minules of October 20, 1993 Mr. Hamson said Unocal does have AQMD permits for the proposed facility at 99 Marina Drive. Unocal's facility will have no H2S gas, and H2S is not an organic reactive gas, not a hydrocarbon. Unocal will be more responsive than Exxon in addressing any problems. Regarding a 10' diameter flame at Exxon, he believed Exxon has an open flame water heater but Unocal's water heater will be completely enclosed. Regarding oil drilling and subsidence, this project has nothing to do with oil drilling per se, no drilling is planned off Platform Esther. There will be no subsidence, none of the wells are under the City of Seal Beach. Regarding truck traffic, Unocal does not plan to truck out any oil, they have a direct connection on-site to Chevron pipelines. The Public Hearing was closed. Commission Comments Commissioner Sharp clarified Mr. lessner's comment regarding the Planning Commission's having denied Chevron's CUP. Mr. Whittenberg explained the circumstances, saying that the application was denied by the Planning Commission without prejudice because Chevron did not have the requested EIR prepared. The denial without prejudice allowed Chevron to file the same application within a one year time period; they didn't refile. The City did not take an action to deny the application based on the merits of the application but upon the fact an EIR was not prepared. Chairman Dahlman noted a conflict between the statements of former Commissioner Jessner and Commissioner Sharp. Mr. Whittenberg said the Minutes of the November 19, 1986 meeting are in this staff report. Commissioner Sharp said the oil separation facility have been there a long time. The residents came in afterward. He noted that both he and Mr. Jessner were on the Planning Commission when Mr. Watson applied to build the four homes on First Street. He said "We tried every way in the world to discourage the houses from going in there because of the Exxon being right next to it but the builder and so forth felt there was no reason, anyone that bought there knew they were there. So, to me, they have absolutely no right to come in and complain against them ... we have to give this plant a chance to operate. It means quite a bit to the City financially. If it doesn't operate, Exxon is going to operate right next to it anyway. But this plant is going to have all brand new, up to the last minute equipment and it's going to be a much better operation than we have ever had as far as an oil extraction". He felt the City should place restrictions on the facility and should grant the application. Commissioner Soukup said that after listening to all the testimony, he was inclined to be sympathetic to area residents and was yet impressed by Unocal's . . . Page 26 - City of Sea) Beach · PJannm, Commission MinuleS of Oclobcr 20. 1993 effort. Regarding health, safety and odor issues, he felt the Unocal facility is separate and distinct from the Exxon facility; all the complaints appear to be generated about the Exxon facility. He didn't share the area resident's mistrust regarding this project. Regarding the money being generated in Seal Beach, it is equivalent to approximately twenty or thirty Main Streets, in the congestion, noise and pollution and the type of industry the City could get to create 20 Main Streets vs. a project that takes up two acres in an area where residents fully knew the site existed. In comparison of the greater benefit to the entire City -- he fell on the side of the previous argument. Thirdly, the zoning will ultimately change and this use will be legally amortized in twenty years. He was on record for being in favor of this project. Commissioner Campbell said she has concerns with Exxon operating at that site. She stated the two sites are not compatible with the existing neighborhoods. She had serious reservations about continuing the use that close to homes. Commissioner Law said she was torn, noting everyone burns gasoline but hoped alternate fuels would be developed. She said she was in favor of this project. Chairman Dahlman said any endeavor to make money involves taking some risk. A question is, are you taking too much risk for the amount of money received? This risk is significant from a safety standpoint, the risk is not justified. He felt the Planning Commission should not look at the financial aspects of land use. But should, instead, look at the way land is employed. His main concern was the need for the preparation of an EIR. Referencing the table on page 218 of the staff report, he felt the preparer could not have meant to allow Exxon to produce "X" amount of emissions and Unocal to produce "X" amount of emissions, thus far exceeding the allowable amount, but at the same time neither facility exceeding their allowance, thus negating the need for an EIR. Referencing the Negative Declaration he cited: "Human Health. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard, excluding mental health". Answer: ~aybe. "Exposure of people to potential health hazards". Answer: Maybe. He felt there is inadequate mitigation for those "Maybe" answers and that an EIR is required. There is enough weighty evidence to demonstrate the need for additional environmental review. He stated he could not approve this project with the present Negative Declaration. Craig Steele advised the Commission needs to take two actions, first on the Negative Declaration and second on the CUP. . . . Page T1 - City of Seal &.ch · PlaDning CclmmiuiOll Minutes of October 20, 1993 MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Law to approve Negative Declaration #93-2. Discussion Commissioner Soukup said he did not believe Negative Declaration #93-2 was significantly different that the preparation of an EIR, other than the comment period length. Chairman Dahlman stated he felt this matter requires an EIR because, if approved, there would be two facilities doing the same thing in virtually the same space and would be in excess of 75 pounds of organic hydrocarbons. Commissioner Sharp said that argument is like comparing two neighbors, one having a 1929 diesel without a muffler and the other having a new car giving off new emissions. The new car owner shouldn't be given a ticket because the other guy is throwing out the emissions. Chairman Dahlman agreed but said in this case the people who wrote that rule did not intend for the property owner to be able to sublet the property to a second operator, thereby getting around the fact that the site is producing 100 pounds per day of emissions. MOTION CARRIES: A YES: NOES: 3-2-0 Sharp, Law, Soukup Dahlman, Campbell *** MOTION by Sharp; SECOND by Law to approve Conditional Use Permit #92-7. Chairman Dahlman suggested two additional conditions of approval: 1. A security device be installed. 2. A 24-hour response capability be required. Commissioner Sharp said he would agree to the first suggested condition but not to the second because the applicant has already addressed the 24-hour response issue. Chairman Dahlman voiced concerns that people on Platform Esther could not reach the City in ten minutes as stated by Unocal. 3. Mr. Whittenberg said the emergency response plan is to be approved by the Fire Department. The Commission could require . . . Page 28 - City of Seal Beacb · Planning Conunission Minutes of October 20, 1993 review of the emergency response plan prior to issuance of building permits. Commissioner Sharp agreed. Commissioner Soukup suggested one additional condition of approval: 4. Unocal is to provide continuous and proper maintenance of all landscaped areas as shown on the plan, as well as other areas of the facility, for the life of its operation. Should the maintenance not be performed, the City shall have the right to perform such maintenance as it deems appropriate to preserve the health, safety and welfare of the surrounding residents and all such costs shall be reimbursable by Unocal within thirty (30) days of receipt of an accounting of such costs by the City of Seal Beach. Commissioners Sharp and Law said they had no objections to this condition. The applicant said they do not object to these conditions. MOTION CARRIED: A YES: NOES: 3-2-0 Sharp, Law, Soukup Dahlman, Campbell Mr. Whittenberg said a resolution will be brought back to the Commission at the November 3rd meeting. It will reflect the additional conditions proposed this evening. Once a final action is taken on this resolution, that would start the appeal time period running. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS David Rosenman * Seal Beach stated the Press Telegram newspaper printed its crime report for October 10, 1993, Sunday and the report stated an assault took place at the SeaSide Grill at 8:47 p.m. VU. STAFF CONCERNS There were no staff concerns. VIn. COMMISSION CONCERNS Commissioner Sharp noted the submission deadline for the December 22nd meeting is November 17th. He suggested staff steer applications away from December 22nd as it would be three days before Christmas. Mr. Whittenberg said staff normally attempts to do that unless there is a major emergency on something. . . . Page 29 - Cily of Seal Beach · Planning Conunission Minutes of October 20, 1993 Commissioner Soukup indicated trailers are parked in a fenced lot at 16th Street by Electric A venue. He was not sure if people are living in those trailers. Commissioner Soukup referenced a bootleg apartment on 16th Street. Mr. Whittenberg asked him to call and give the actual address to staff. IX. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Dahlman adjourned the meeting at 11:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, $)~~~ Joan Fillmann Recording Secretary APPROV AL: The Planning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1993 were approved by the Commission on November ..3.., 1993. ~ .. . G(. :. . . q c~~s;~ ~ IXl#W. 0 ~u ~ ~IW ~~.~~~-~ ~~ @.~~~~ - -- -- --- ----- ----- -- --- --- - Cit of Seal Beach Planning Commission Y SUBMITTED FOR RECORD ";) 10 - ao -,a By 'D. l'\osenmq,!},Date... , 10 ,'. a6f~~~ (OI1i'1f ~ 0 ~D ~~ ~IW ~~.~~IIP:l_~ ~(DJD a.~m -WILl..MOTON " : - -,:~->'--;~)' '. .. . W #....' ............"". ....." ~'. ~:_.t: .. ':.:,-::::-"t ',-.' ... ~UD8eaJ to" :$200'000 ',., Ulij :.: .... '. .' . '- . .~..~ ........,..... .~ - , lor 'Iumirdoas WlstlfYlolalloDS ~<~.: .' , $~~~to~tt~hf:Js~~" .. ., . ardous waste violations at its' Wil- . ! ., mington oil r~fmery, the p.S. Environ- I mental Protection AgenCy announced .' I ".Thursday I ';. ._ >:. '; ,"\' .--. "'As part oi' the 'agreement~- Un~c~ fY) has also permanently removed from " service a crude oil processing unit that '-l' generated benzene-contaminated ~ water, said Jeff Zelikson, director of "" :'~ha~dous waste ~anagemen~ for ~~~ ;', \1.Y 'EPA s western reglonal office. :;;"'_:':;'';';;'" .;::: .:, .:, ccThis order should serve as .,a ~. " ~~reminder to industrial 'and.. commer-: ~r:. .: -:'ciallUilidlers of oil and cherirlcals'th8f~:L ..it is"their responsibility to be aware:of "~:' i ,ha1.ardoUs waste'reirulations arid' com: '.~:. - I ;.pl:y- with ~em/': Z~~~n s~d. ::, ;.~:'~<~ :. ~ : ,~~,::~The 'vlolatlons,:,whlCh mvolv~d;,a... , . ;~;:iS'te:JY.~t~j,;' ~ete~ti~n::PQ4~ L~j;/..tJ1e . .'~ . . ~ftTa]iIit- :~if1clude~'7fail~' ~~~.jj.r9yj,de: i; . '~~~clal :i:esPonSibility~~for :pot~~t~al .,! .. _ . , .taccidents 'or . for the.:pond's'.,ultiiiiate ~'i":" ':,.;,::~: ~ ':Y losUre-'=fal1in..t'~fu""'ro"-erl":tram'.Work:'~:::' '.; \-...: ! :~rer.:anatcon3uctP:r!.tli~eQ ~fa~iI'it.~~~. ~ ":'.~-" i ~~:j#specti()'nij.)~nd 'fBil~gY',to ~'picW:~rl~~'~!~' . '. ~ : :~~~~n8-' e. ~ar~f>~~_W~~~J~~~ts4!~~rs::::::~;/ .~:'-':~'~,. ,;.:...,!'~.N~ ~8!1.ardo~ yvaste w~ r~l~~ed..~ :;:. -r ~ : " fth<<ftenvironment, ':an:d tU nocalllias.li.~ ~ .,,~ ~~eaa ~'ooiTectecfthe'Vio18tions :!Zelik~ ~ -'-;;"'" -~.--....'""" . ':f..d --fc,. ,-""~,,,,:::,:;,''''';ii'Wt:.H..&1ft;CG'7~il~~;r.t~.. ~7!: . - ":sonS81 . '::~l~..... "_-.'r:O;,r...i;.."';'..:..t:..t.,. i.ir...-,.."t~.~ "~~~.":..:_:' .: .-- ..... . I.... . rTft6~'~'" A...,,,l......4~~-!.~:!!!O. ~'''''..t. .~.:,-:.~,.. ..4.... _."'_...._".h.. L_ ..._~Il:.t~~~.-:....:::r &.t"... .>'':.>&m:...:\~<"f;..:.- . :.. ;,-._'::. From staff and Wlre1i!Ports :.' ." .... '.}':" . '.:- ,"?- ~:!:: ,-=-~':'1,: L ..-.,,, p_1:,P:,;, '.' !-: ,:'" ... .:'.:.W.;~~~ 'j~' . ,~~ _: :'. . . -~ ',- 'I I LILY Oi ~eal i3eacn I"ianning CommlS~lvll SUBMITTED FOR RECORD Date, 10 - ~o -~.3 . Bl I I ,I ..-.....-. " SEAL BEACH QUALITY OF LIFE INITIATIVE City of Seal Beach Planning Commission SUBMITTED FOR RECORD Date It>-GlO -~3 By Homes and oil don't mix . We the undersigned are opposed to the reactiviation of the oil processing facility at 99 Marina Drive Sianature Name (Printed) Address Phone ~ ~ I /U'M r~ ~ ~ ~./)-7;;~ J-lhI~/", ttcYJ :91- -"- l\.<A, t$'"9 1>- ~ /?.Jl. ~ .... t9'fj I~ j RNJ J/J },'A/(J// t?q~ ~ "A~ L. J_ - tf/(;i) ("f4 - 9C;.,o q- /'1-7 - ~ \. 7,iidl L'-'t 'kI1!.~ 1 ?tr t'1L j ~I..I uiW (:nO) 5'i4-WSCi I '1~', I~-J, J~ ,I. ~ JELI:.lur."lo 1.dI<PI~ ,.. n _~S\n Fu;.c..-rR~ ~ A...,}f~ { (S(t) )43( -4.27 Y I J I (!(~ (fE~ tl n I ,j' I.. I Qed 7~Je. h l"'{\u"\J~e 1I<r-.?1 pr~,... ct\, ..... (~ta )L(3h-l.uy~ S I UJ)-l,-~~- -!.,'.~.' L. !nLJ" . .....C\WA~T ~~iJ ~J.. 'NI(J~ AVE'(3,oL"-9J.--4~(j.:r i- -:J.P/./)/I')...../--;,..._I~-W. S,. -r :::v..... '/l.",AIIG (3ItJ).~i4!)8-4;gCJS- ~;;J; 77!#:.. 1r.P F 4~, C. J/L'" J I. ~ 70 c.C1'Z.<,,n~' J W~" (.:111)) .~-t:i~_ L.cY'ij '''(7'1. ._~.~ ~~ J ~. 7 A ._1 ~. , ;;J. "q Cn (~ ilh.\ ( ).... ~.. ~J ( I ~~:' IIJ J,i2YLJ ~ . I!. n4'''l4lh&.:'~A.1J. hli..?__,l:l.'3o CN'.... - '. ... '.J (.?/RJ) /.1"7 J_ n Q"J" I fir _ / / ;"_ L1J1> ~ (1___ J_ L....~ .1,,- J 1/ ,/ (.t? (7/n) t./";L I"J~/~ 1T./4 .r;)7/ ~ 71. -: II ~. - It - "? '/} f/,) /' _-.. ~ _ .;~_ "....,d (~l 0) "'" J - 0 P- I tr') I ~ 1. /~.if ~" II ._.J ~ 7 ~f) r, - ~ ,\./ ,..P~ J (J ( ~ 11.7 ) 1-12/ 1'1'1" IlY '! ~ ~ J.J /f IA A~. Jd.A i.uj)JL ;:~'AJAN&e z... .2 9 7 (Jb'ld~JtlJf1 ~/" (3'0) 43 i - ,,77 I ! ~~_/.""7t ".LilA " D()v() C,^ t/ ~.t~IJI.l.u ~q,? f,tJV<A. i r~ (JIO) (/3/- 11'7 t/ ~Z /./~ __ ~l~ KoM~~7 1_ C'-J/;r~'- II I, , (J'IO) y~ I -, 17 if r I~ JI' I \/}~ .A -~\tt. ,: - I,," 'l ~-=l-:t=) (',\ im~ \\ \~ (~O ) 4 ~; - R( D I ^ - f7J '-' / '-" f'/L~.1 A /:J~'/'" I~I/ I:, /J;("it-11A ~(/,' I'///Jh~ u/~,~ (lltJ) ~4L/ ~J7/tI ~ ""-"f" -~ ~ J ~ It 10 So..Se.p)[ I~:o t 1 t ( (3/0) Cl-3o ,3'1 C:. 0 .M lJiP~ /IJKl1li/Ji, <:;;,/),/ Jh 0K..PnIJ l~qo /'!/io/J; (UJdL. l~l") 19q l\ fA! '-/ 'LIt-? 1J'11Jf {/'11 ,.~1~1.7t 7i')J irA, '/ 1rt"2f<D r4iJT/~../ J.I)&ivJ (~)V) ~7-b:fh'/l j'L..i.~/ ~~~_-' -,i-!....../, i 1!';JhLfi:.~ .i70I";~1/J.,..1' rvdV ('~i<J)Ll7J- <~/i d/ , .. ,\ ~Ii ~~\ -r. ",on.\/A\ ~~/']~{~ f\~ ~kAA (~\f\) -~!i.~ ..~~ Cl~ t:- ~ "" l.l;~ ~ f", '.N ~'H\CI --r ~~ e. r go-v no.., /;~J1' . l-0 tv( (3''') <J '"1,) .'tfS1'j -rr 'Jl/J~.-t r 12 lAfP'1' :3")-0 C.1i/~UJlUt.tPttJ (3'0) 41^ ~C{, .I l. - e 'A. c ,71. lJa 'v: JI#' (;.. ~~-fn..... 11.Js- C 1,"J)Dl'A lAA v' (3JO) sr'J-q I~I T , I I . , . SEAL BEACH QUALITY OF LIFE INITIATIVE ~ . Homes and oil don't mix We the undersigned are opposed to the reactivlation of the oil processing facility at 99 Marina Drivt Signature Name (Printed) Address Phone /"r~II71,/)I/.JIl"")1 If'i=LIACJLSaN J~!'Jr. ;'I.7A/ tV~ (~JlJ)S99'-.s;'1~ \~ AII..oJ- j~ ..6l.- .... ^ ,r tv'\~ ~I~..s '2.. (8 ~4-t\. ~Ir. gJl>, (~l D) 5~Co ~,~7 /U~0. .l7Y.f~I,I' Ir=A)J.E ):.,;:-"'.r' ?/A f.'rVtt{J-; ~'A .~/t)) 91h\.2)/.-=1? (/(1.u~;., 1/ULiY'; \. 7U1t~ //:'e e.- -- /11Z"S A~ t;h,.1.c;~( ~t1) ~/ -.~~ 7/J ~. L#~;:'-~ Lu...///?, ~"A /7.L.~~~~1~~ '(5/0) 4/?/-'t~-:; 7i ......,/Irr."""'d~ .lItt.. L.-.1 ,..._.. !Z'J (.'r::JtU"'J[.,.~:I'_ (:JlO) $'9(,/-"" . Ai. ~ (iu(,,' ..\'''IJ () CuI' I' ~.l ~ -CI/l./1 $/ .s~.t (~~) Sq 9- q(111 '-tr1:i ,{j).J-J.- 1Jk.L..e.JJ S'. !~-,~H"" tr'i>~'" ," .5:'~.... ~ 7?lM (5'0) J/d I. 'l/a l.f~ . . / OPI'I~ LV.Qdt1A- & Lt.AAi W)>/J'TJ;Au. d_ " . "'^AaLJ:-..?i;." (liD) 1L.~/-/..I._~tLtr ,lVtA,QJI IE, WAR ",'op ~ (J:J/I/. /t J L /, )/n.. . J 7,J./ 1. . - __,1 g p~ ("310) 4-11'J"7 r J iL A, II (Jl I. 'H 'H n 11 f&,;1'~ ;r ..tJ::/sJ;Jl.fl!:. S I ~ 7Z '5 A-I 1-1... .J1. J,,11tJ; G r 0) Lf q :3 II t t lei.dM ~f!. -d[-t<JA:h ..-/r:L...A,v /J 8. RSoA/' 116,l>1-~ ~ /ocl/'o ('lId) t-f.;>o -11J.q-"2.. ~ -\. . ~JU1lJ~1\,... I\l-t "tCA G:wOt'\2.4k:? ~~ \ D'!..~ ?~ (~a.) ) 43 '-'~~l A BA1/'.LA ~ ..) NIMIC y tEBNex. 7030 CMJ9.L.lAJA- S~ (a/o ) q~/-<j7 140 ( ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) . . I I d SEAL BEACH QUALITY OF LIFE INITIATIVE . Homes and oil don It mix We the undersigned are opposed to the reactiviation of the oil processing facility at 99 Marina Drive r . .. .,' SEAL BEACH QUALITY OF LIFE INITIATIVE 'If . Homes and oil don't mix We the undersigned are opposed to the reactiviation of the oil processing facility at 99 Marina DrivE IG"Cu (CihlJJev oV'i' . . S l f'r ~t- ( ( ( ( ( ( ) ) ) . .. . . , SEAL BEACH QUALITY OF LIFE INITIATIVE r- ~ . Homes and oil don't mix We the undersigned are opposed to the reactiviation of the oil processing facility at 99 Marina Drive S' N (P . t d) Add Ph Ignature J ame fin e ress one I.... ~.-. cL ~_AAShA" Ja.n I Ge... HanS011 ~ 0 <t (P.Jj;. s+ S.B, (30) '1qq-q~or:;- - If--- -( /-. ~ '//1..e,L/./ _-rI1A Jt/ J= h//JL 1= J;.J..T 10/ .~~ Jt.~ S~ (:U/)) ,6- 9f/ - F: J../ 'I ~- r J-l', r1 ~ -I' Q)) 1;, () n I\\\L-to\i C>v So"", Lo I~or f.lt( Ii .t&-E r c?B (~Tv) S-q G .- C, O'S~ ( ) ( ) ( ) , ( ) ( ) - ( ) : ( ) I ~ ( ) , ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) I ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( . ) ( ) ( ) ( ) . .. . .' SEAL BEACH QUALITY OF LIFE INITIATIVE - ( . Homes and oil don't mix We the undersigned are opposed to the reactlvlatlon of the 011 processing facility at 99 Marina Drivl ~'at~~ ~/ Name lPrinted) Address Phone ( !HAn (J/~/:J1i1~/ '.--JL) >II. - (3 rrl-f_./ d::l5 ~, ',1.' 1.' <}#/r ($'6) *5.3 ~7' 7/~ -7/ (/ v '/ ( ) ~;~~ /_- /tl.~.. 7- c: L,l:1ttYAl~~ ..J~ ItJ a~Lt!F~ /;Ie '...-210.~..,::. .~ _u-;;- ; L't7V ~ .-.~ ~ r, (;, "" ~ 7~ T fJ ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) . ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) . . ........ ~ , . .." .. ........., - ..-....,..-'"OI'--V'.....'r..~--y.... .__.. .. SEAL BEACH a.U.ALITY OF LIFE INITIATI.VE..... Homes and oil don It mix We the undersigned are opposed to the reactiviation of the oil processing facility at 99 Marina Drive Sic nature Name (Printed) Address Phone '1/- J ((' . ,"J Le (~_ /-lA ( .A., Jv<- 4",1 ~/t/ 5' O""",,!c-r:." sa (ile) ~-f R :;0:" y ('./J)Jj,1li11t.1....,la~'\. C/1Ylsltne /\/e/~(;JI\. .31{(<:"J1/I1!'\Cc.kfr.S~ (j'c).s 9~-'1()iJt..1 ~'/>J/~ .....'1.. ..4. -L_ -;--/t L? /)/'.: '-342 ~,. - ~~tfJ...... "'/~) ~f - t?"':"'- ~ '(~W..t~t\q Jftr(:._.. -. 1lt'1b61:~1~. Ai,L.(rhlJ 31~S~~/~INA ~R \&lA-t (;tiC)~ ~o -Cj/S-'7 IF .A. . # ~ LP tf /~.;~ & /In /t!' P A f/")",,,/ _:r /..2. c:~/~.fl<<,,t!.er . (,c;/;t., (t::?/O) t/Jer 9/.s'7 ..~.?IA. d'ft. ----(.1.:'77 ~ .,51,f;=:e..eL'?''.( .:-.1/~t1'tJ\1.k gr~ SA'': "ER I. u! (310) LJ-~o -971>) ~--;;r~ "\ ~ / I -7~- Aru.,l./lt-- /JlhfJJc-x'I/vrn- .3Jo $AA..1I~JG 1l//1, ( 3/c)) 59"';' 9 3,..(.:5 tif~~:..-... ~. ~ /.J. ~ J lJH-f1~ f<Jlft'c,;(,' u/~ 7.7- ~.t1,'U l~n/fr f.iA ("]IO) ~?y- ~ q tf.b ~7r1I J.J Y....-j 'J .I/JA .~~~..1.-'}+- (P t:J-'~" I( I 1'( /( '1) It /( --;I\~ -- -v ,- ...J/ I _ 'I'J:' ~ 7J:"' lo.. r.. - "-- Lc....A '" L'HJ5 ~ t\. .""{ 'h'/ c::. -. I .....,. ~6"" Wc.J t1/{.;') LJ. 'fo - ., <,,'1 '7 .- - I /"'"""'1 ~ ':JU1S (hV <' - I . t.atv f'LJvI 32- c.f "~':'" / I')" (3 ,(')) 4' =?o ., ~"'"7 ~- (rl..../11 L ".. ..::7~JI ~/ DA- /li;1A.J~ Y:J& r__ .~~ 1/tI; (j'/C7) tf31J ~ 7.;t..2 Y /7 ./ ~ ,lIP. / / I .67:i. J~ ).h'!A.11.. " /''f ,I (~ ) h h 1..(\fd\n/l\('ftJtJlall _311 <;t\n. t\.)(j\)Qk 330 SD,nI'.AYvf/'11..J11)f (3J~) Ytt.l-l//t/.-'-f ~l'h'_'(~'~'1 ~t,.....:'r.AQJ.\", 13'0 <J),,,,,,,O\tq.,,\A,~.1 (310)4~D-bYh1 :~~Pr.rJ - Jetfl.t'll. /I /u-,..It'h f.?).. ,-,' . ~~r 'lJII (JII> ) I.jJ~ ~/nUJ..J lJ .~/\.Al _AJI-;('" ~ \-\.'~6=rt~c,..t~~~~rJl1 ?~IC,rl"ftJ!\J!t::f?~/~" (~/r7) S-9b-2-oI0 F I.JI 'Il. - ~ 8- t1 I.t:;-~.A/uel? J!/i:.JI/f.~1j~tJrJ 33jSfi:flA/#~-'c;i! ty~y (3'/0) S?'4- DlC?/ZJ l ~.::t-:.._ 4nA. k! 1 J:1. U C c, J. 1? -:Z-'Z.. ~ Q.,' ~.> ~ /t..- , I~. .... t..Jt. (, J ()) ..u q1. .... ~ "7 .z .<.- ~~ ~/(j~J~~i 11 I~' (A@(" oM ~ <;'H1/771 3i~,cu;. k -~ (#d )~- J;"~(p&, '~(J,ho--rIL=J44r-_b<' I RpT}( T~ ) Apnks '>?5:<rhnnnUt>f (1/[))~.?i').~q?,F; .1 ,. ./ (14/' ~ ~',....:. r-' ~,l~r"., f-Jt iP i:- Lt'JcaCt:::;i 'JL\:: p ~ rr-. c..\(-(C (J)-o) 'S'1}.y.rl.1...c, 1" 1 r.,.1/.,.1L-}9i{, -Car" 7.,...~ ,I \<eih \ H:1' ,G'\J .L'P'IT A -r, 3Zt ~:^"2 VI:'\. (~/(;)) SCU.p-/~"'t C, jf"' tn! tItt~ ICI~ Nt ~It ~~, ; PW,.,A IC'rlt. (?/u )It. '11- Q'i7 8 ::x w....-:f. ~ K.Mt..u.,.. M.-V~ 4 ~f ( ~t) ~ ~1.1, 0%00 /( If/l [; $ A- 81l.A OJ ~ ." I.. 1&-; /I- nil- ( " ) 5 'll!.:- "1 c> <;; b .. SEAL BEACH QUALITY OF LIFE INITIATIVE Homes and oil don't mix We the undersigned are opposed to the reactiviation of the oil processing facility at 99 Marina Drive SignatLJ.Ftr- /1 Name (Printed) Address Phone 0}. ~r h I.I?-U: Bl.DbfVJ 5DS:~"'NrHf.8!. (3/~).578- 0/0.9 /)' ,~~.. ~p, /1/8# tLl " ), J~ ,3.;1..1/ ~~d-/f /i/f-JIJ:o ~Q "!:>--tJ? -$ () Y ~11~~fl-c1' A rh~~fJ;~A-L ;/- -A/I 3~~ -~~~~7'IC3ItJ) 1'13 ~7L/ ... ~, 0'" /h ,;~ I '7k,/J'L~M,<jtl IA!;JUtJ/:- dg5 ~ rfC r..,L- / ~(f/rJ )\.5'9'1 537 7 --. ntJ'l,A ~(~~ 6~()tV LA,f2,f!.!\Z TIc, f, 1t"Y/c [Ji;;: (1/^ ) fftK oaatJ ' <;b~~(j~~_,{~_} IS\.....o...rcr.-. \ ~ l- ""53'1- f1~CL~J~~ (S(c) L(i 3--(c'Gc) C+-.. ~ 1~/'1 -:;V.t;11~~-'L <~~ IJ,,~-l~ 7. L: r?fr) )~~t;A1\ I' /{{J{'f(J-( ~ ~ /2..4Il.L 1 .{2.~tl'(l,fI:flA- ~~ P&&.~ (A4k,,7 (~iO) 'I9~"O=;9/ 1\ ..<\d-1.~ jt-~,. f-./ 1{~u.L (,vc>"~h ~AI' 3~ (-{,.tU; () l-m tJ~ (::.I() )t\31-1 ~4-7- GiJi.JdoYJ,/.C-1Jh/J/L__ {--huLA.. UhRsha/Vl 3~(1i R~C.A HA lU!A' (-3'0) 413 -L/t.:2 if ~~ )j.,tJUA. LI.IIJJ1e J<'~.tUJt. 26J.5' AJeiu:la. LLJr.tJ (3/0) ~~ --7'1StLJ //1 '~v 'jO ,-/_ '"J6U,.I"J'", ,AI\4, L-t;"" ']1.( u'b--~~T1..4 V~' ( f fa ) L(Cj J'- o-o.,? t '~L-'/ / /l!,~ - ,/ ~f2'i?#"1 t?,. ~~. '/1;;/. <? r~ Pe.~ MTT,t 'LA:? (;1 0) >'9~. R 03>> ft.:. _~. ... _ / " /~#' p" or -_ ( ) b.rtv;cl UcVU,Li.O-... 1> A-if.t.)) (glb~U.~ 3.f7 fl.fC/tfT/J- ~ ()/O) l(~1-g~6 V ~k::u" IUA \)~ C ~ascY ~ ~~a\a W~ (310) ~13-1.eo7 ~'- (J N.A~'" ~A-~/;-'r' 3(j~~-"'1-;n-; 0..1__ (3".1) '/'i3-Z-Tt'J"J ,-."',7 v I;:: ,IT . ~ ..? ~ "r.'B --."l.c..\..)... ,t>.. E.U:;i'\tI..\t"\R. ",-,-"".-su:\ 30L ~.-.... )..)1\-" (:3\0) ~6-~c"9 ;;:.k;JICdJ7, A. -AU ~ ,(lrr~t/.~ IW~<: /V~,AI Q ~aQ;', AMuaz:""H1 t}.4. (:;/'4)) <14? -~ ~(lt.: - II' r/ . .~;h /'J I . ~ - I . . ('tfAft'j-., ~ fl .-.....-,_ LAIf...I;~Jlt~ It'kri1:/~l'r ~'''v ~_"". IM/.'V,,/(,,~t,.AI ( ) II I I /-/ .fA L ~ ~~. H?I.;/v/<. /11/.*9...<:0. ';38 f'p,M/VAI<-l:..~ ( ) Cl..:~ .i~ . ,,if, 4yv.. 711=r/{i<,_' A !J C~ f5/Jf}.P, 333 tR 6 ":AT,A.. f UA-{ (~/O) 1- Jb Y ~ 7b ~'ftut~"'i\dJn ATvZ,3"-Lr:A-- ~-h-rl\'.l:\.h ~~, RefA,-f.f . .L'A.1(3l()) '+3\ \ l 7 ') \~~~~ ~"".. ~c', \l'f\\ ~~ l\'^.~~C?-~ y -sz.C; 9:-- ~~ "'J~ ~ \"\)l:.('_::~- 1~~ If;z/."AfJf -t1.e~:vjLl SUZAJ'VJJE. L')lJFF 8f')Cf J.:.'J~/fTT~ \ (3/()) ~ql/. - <./D74- ~.u.(~r.(I.i J,-rhGIIt<)) I1t"H6/4 ~3l1 12.E'~-I/TrlJ- C?(IJ )S'1J-7/Lf! J . .. -- _._--.-~ --...-- -.-..-....-- --..--.-.......- -- J . . . " . SEAL BEACH QUALITY OF LIFE INITIATIVE Homes and oil don It mix We the undersigned are opposed to the reactiviation of the oil processing facility at 99 Marina Drive SiQr;l"ature Name (Printed) Address Phone ), '/..Jtr? 'I1AIt-1A"" 7EFFt;it.S 3Jt./ Y<a.'rc& lUf.l-Y (~io) Sib' 7/'f/ :trra-'1^~-, /Re=NE vtz,.y( 3~a"~.J,/I'7""'~~+ ) -:j/~~-- ,f$ .I:f7..kb~ A_ -g,"J#':r /I, 1';fp,,~~~;w ~7--~ S!;../f.-')t4 RtVLU./'k.. (J(./ ) s~ 6 -l'r7b IA"fA' \J'J.J,vfJ'L ~Ja{)(,_~ S/f..'(51~y _1/Cj.<)1J//JIl~/cer f (1#))'-I~:j-3Y'3('\ ( ,A ~...' ll1..1l1/ \L"tJ, J.-~i,....T'\P~ ...":</..::Jk:ocJ'" LLl (-3ll'iL4..,-~clh;;..fS (~/ ~J;1)../~~4 j./ R,;'A' V d-fRlrkR07iJ .:311.:=J RtttG,4 77.4 Ml/XI {J/o) #.30 -tff'-!It! :.--- 'L' /J / \ I .. ~ ..C ~~ S'"LI.P"A... 3ft...> 5/Ju.J..Jw'-tc:1A. ('SIo ) Lf'1( - J/:?r CA(~/J.~;Jlt; ~~ T\v/~Go: /l 3,).-.? r?c -I-L ~I""" (3(0 )'-On (/lG- S7; ~_~/. ~ fi<;)G J //2.{S'~.fT 3~.r- ~jf~ ~o. ~/G) <..tsG 6 ~.:r=b ..,)YVlCCL UJ,J/rt,/( DAvIt? "1Cl.U(iIY'l-I ~ZO ePli~T7'A (A_ J (~(O )4<1{- loq.l I { ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) -. i , . ~ . , . SEAL BEACH QUALITY OF LIFE INITIATIVE .. . Homes and oil don It mix We the undersigned are opposed to the reactiviation of the oil processing facility at 99 Marina Drive ( I . Sea. ( lSea..c( Ptc:!J .6rrJ4tP -. -- ..-....-- ---..-'":""~-