Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEQCB Min 2009-05-27 CITY OF SEAL BEACH 1 Environmental Quality Control Board 2 3 Minutes of May 27, 2009 4 5 6 7 Chairperson Voce called the meeting of the Environmental Quality Control Board 8 (EQCB) to order at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, May 27, 2009. The meeting was held in 1 9 City Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag. 10 I Roll Call 11 12 13 Present: Chairperson Voce, Members Barton, Cummings, Hurley, and Navarro 14 15 Also 16 Present: Department of Development Services 17 Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services 18 19 Absent: None 20 21 Chairperson Voce noted for the record that all members are present. 22 II Approval of Agenda 23 24 25 MOTION by Hurley; SECOND by Barton to approve the Agenda as presented. 26 MOTION CARRIED: 5 – 0 27 AYES: Voce, Barton, Cummings, Hurley, and Navarro 28 NOES: None 29 ABSENT: None 30 31 III Oral Communications 32 33 34 Chairperson Voce opened oral communications. 35 36 Roger West expressed his adamant opposition to having a convenience store at the 37 Chevron station at 1300 Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). He stated that the Draft 38 Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) should not be adopted as it would have a 39 significant impact on the environment and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) should 40 be required. He noted that his wife has also written a letter in opposition, which he has 41 provided to the EQCB. He then proceeded to read from this letter. 42 1 These Minutes were transcribed from an audiotape of the meeting. 1 of 12 City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 1 There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairperson Voce closed oral 2 communications. 3 IV Consent Calendar 4 5 6 1. Receive and File – Memorandum Re: Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station – 7 Installation Restoration Program – Status Report Re: RAB Project Update, 8 Dated May 5, 2009. 9 10 2. Receive and File – Staff Report Re: Receive and File – Proposed CEQA 11 Guideline Amendments Transmittal to the California Natural Resources Agency, 12 Dated May 27, 2009. 13 14 3. Receive and File - Staff Report Re: City Response Letter to Notice of 15 Preparation – Haynes Generating Station Repowering Project, Long Beach, Los 16 Angeles Department of Water and Power, Long Beach 17 18 MOTION by Hurley; SECOND by Barton to approve the Consent Calendar as 19 presented. 20 MOTION CARRIED: 5 – 0 21 AYES: Voce, Barton, Cummings, Hurley, and Navarro 22 NOES: None 23 ABSENT: None 24 25 26 Member Navarro commented that Item 3 has to do with CEQA Guideline Amendments 27 and there are federal and state governing documents that the City regularly receives on 28 NEPA and the City must ensure that it is following all CEQA and NEPA regulations. 29 V Scheduled Matters 30 31 32 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – April 29, 2009. 33 34 Recommendation: Approve Minutes subject to any corrections determined 35 appropriate. 36 37 MOTION by Navarro; SECOND by Cummings to approve the Meeting Minutes of April 38 29, 2009 as presented. 39 MOTION CARRIED: 5 – 0 40 AYES: Voce, Barton, Cummings, Hurley, and Navarro 41 NOES: None 42 ABSENT: None 43 44 45 5. Review of Document and Provisions of Comments - Draft Mitigated Negative 46 Declaration 09-2, 1300 Pacific Coast Highway Project. 2 of 12 City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 1 Recommendation: Receive presentation from Staff regarding the 2 proposed project and the environmental review process. Receive comments 3 from the public and provide any Board comments regarding proposed 4 Mitigated Negative Declaration 09-2. Receive and File Staff Report. 5 6 Mr. Whittenberg delivered the staff report. (Staff Report is on file for inspection in the 7 He provided some background information on this item and noted Planning Department.) 8 that the purpose of this discussion is to receive comments on the required 9 environmental review document prepared by the City. He indicated that the document 10 was prepared by Staff and is currently in its public review and comment period, which 11 ends tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. He invited comments from the EQCB and the public and 12 noted that once these comments are received, Staff will prepare a Responses to 13 Comments document that will be forwarded to the Planning Commission (PC) for 14 consideration of approval or denial of the project entitlements requested. He indicated 15 that the EQCB does not have authority to approve or deny a project, but will only 16 provide comments related to the adequacy of the evaluations in the document. He 17 noted that if after reviewing comments, Staff feels that the document must be revised 18 and/or re-circulated, this will be done. If Staff feels that an EIR is required, they will then 19 prepare this document, which will begin another environmental review process and 20 public comment period. Mr. Whittenberg explained that the main difference between an 21 MND and an EIR is that under an MND the City will have determined that there are 22 potential impacts that could be significant unless they can be mitigated to a level that is 23 less than significant, and this MND does address a number of issues that can be 24 mitigated to a less than significant category. He continued by stating that the City must 25 prepare an EIR when an impact is identified that cannot be mitigated to a less than 26 significant level. If this finding cannot be made, the City must go through the EIR 27 process, and if the decision makers for the project, whether it be the PC or City Council, 28 determine to approve the project with impacts that cannot be mitigated to less than 29 significant criteria, then that body must approve a “Statement of Overriding 30 Considerations,” which essentially states that the City has evaluated the project and 31 understands there may be potential adverse impacts, but due to other considerations 32 outside the realm of environmental issues, the City has decided to approve the project. 33 The Director of Development Services stated that whether or not this will occur with this 34 project is unknown at this point, because the public hearing process has not yet 35 commenced, and probably won’t begin for another 2 months. He indicated that Staff 36 has already received a number of comments on the document and the Responses to 37 Comments document will address all of these. He noted that the document will come 38 back before the EQCB at least 10 days prior to being presented before the PC and all 39 individuals providing comments will also be mailed a copy of the document. 40 41 Mr. Whittenberg then briefly described the project as a proposal to take an existing self- 42 service station, which currently has land use authority for 24-hour operation, and add a 43 convenience market on a vacant parking lot area immediately south of the current 44 service station operation. He indicated that in order to do this, the applicant has 45 submitted a request for a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and a Zone Change (ZC), as 46 that parking area is currently zoned as a residential zone. He explained that the City 3 of 12 City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 1 has certain development standards for service stations and Variances have been 2 requested in relation to the overall size of the property and the street dimensions on the 3 public streets, as it does not meet these standards, and will not meet them even with 4 the additional lot gain. He added that also there is a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 5 being requested for the off-premise sale of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with the 6 convenience market. He then provided a brief review of the contents of the MND, 7 noting that 7 areas of potential impacts are identified, as follows: 8 9 Aesthetics Hazards & Hazardous Materials ?? 10 Air Quality Hydrology & Water Quality ?? 11 Cultural Resources Noise ?? 12 Geology & Soils ? 13 14 Mr. Whittenberg noted that in these 7 areas there are a total of 26 separate proposed 15 mitigation measures 16 17 Member Hurley stated that he believes public comments should be taken prior to having 18 the Board provide comments. 19 20 Public Comments 21 22 Chairperson Voce opened for comments from the public. 23 24 Teresa Tamas, 1310 Crystal Cove Way, stated that she lives directly across PCH from 25 the Chevron station and due to noise from the highway and gas station she had to have 26 double-paned windows installed to help block some of the noise. This has helped, but 27 in the summer she is not able to open her windows at night because of noise from 28 delivery trucks and customer activity at the service station. She noted that having a 29 24-hr. convenience store that sells alcohol will only create more noise, as there would 30 be more delivery trucks arriving to deliver merchandise. She stated that there is no 31 need for a 24-hr. convenience store, as 7-Eleven and CVS are open 24 hours and both 32 are located within one block. She said that this location has residential units in front and 33 behind that do not need more noise or a 24-hr. convenience store. 34 th 35 Richard Moody, 312 13 Street, stated that there are a number of problems with this 36 proposed project and he doesn’t think it should go any further. He stated that the 37 Variance for 8,700 sq. ft. should not be entertained and noted that surrounding 38 residents experience a lot of noise at this 24-hr. service station from delivery trucks, 39 customers who leave their radios blaring while pumping fuel, and are also impacted by th 40 the glare from the bright lights at the station. He indicated that home owners on 13 41 Street also have to contend with patrons of the businesses fronting PCH parking along th 42 13 Street creating parking problems for residents. He added that his application for a 43 Variance of 1 foot for his garage was denied, and he does not believe that an 8,700 sq. 44 ft. Variance should even be considered, but should be stopped right now. He also 45 noted that 7-Eleven is only 50 steps from this service station. 46 4 of 12 City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 1 Ed Tamas, 1310 Crystal Cove Way, also cited issues with noise, particularly noise from 2 motorcycles leaving the station after fueling. He commented on the 7-Eleven parking 3 lot, which is usually littered with trash, and noted that this is what will occur if another 4 convenience store is permitted at the service station. 5 th 6 Erin Moody, 312 13 Street, stated that she had written a letter to the Director of 7 Development Services expressing her concerns about MND 09-2 addressing the 8 projected impacts and the mitigation measures, but she noted that not being a resident th 9 on 13 Street or Crystal Cove Way, Mr. Whittenberg did not really understand the full 10 scope of the project. She said that there are still issues that must be addressed in 11 terms of traffic, aesthetics, and pollution from this business. Ms. Moody stated that until th 12 recently residents of 13 Street were not aware of how much pollution they were 13 receiving in groundwater from this company. She added that this company has been 14 under environmental review for well over 10 years and has not yet completely 15 remediated the pollution. She stated that the City needs to study how to keep residents 16 aware of pollution issues and how pollution is being remedied. She said she was very 17 disappointed to find out how much residents do not know. Ms. Moody also noted that 18 noise is a problem and aesthetically these “cookie cutter type” structures do not fit in 19 with Seal Beach and the fact that this convenience store is going to be built on a th 20 residential lot makes it even worse. She then indicated that the alley between 13 and th 21 14 Streets gets heavy traffic use from the gas station alone, and also from cars trying thth 22 to beat the traffic light at 12 Street to get into town. She stated that 13 Street has a 23 big population of children, with many under the age of 6, who play in the alleyways and 24 on sidewalks, and there is a problem with cars speeding down the alleyways and 25 streets. She noted that as proposed, the project would have a new driveway 26 feet 26 further into the residential area than the existing driveway, and there are already th 27 problems with cars exiting the gas station going the wrong way down 13 Street to 28 PCH. Ms. Moody then commented that there is also no mention of the noise, crime, 29 loitering, and vagrancy that regularly occurs at the 7-Eleven convenience store. 30 31 Theresa Miller-Harkins, 355 13th Street, stated that her home is adjacent to the service 32 station and when notice first appeared regarding this project, she found that the Local 33 Oversight Program on environmental help was appointed to look into some of the 34 environmental issues. She noted that her proximity to the gas station allows her to 35 observe that environmental agency vehicles are regularly at the gas station and there 36 are 10 or more wells in this area, with one located in front of her home that is used to 37 test groundwater that has been contaminated. She cited the findings of groundwater 38 testing reports and noted that pollution has been an ongoing problem. Ms. Miller- 39 Harkins then stated that they have recently completed a costly remodel of their home 40 along with landscaping designed to block the view and glare from the gas station, and if 41 the project is approved and the service station expanded, then they will have wasted 42 their money in attempting to screen their view of the gas station. She also noted that 43 her double-paned windows are usually closed due to noise from late night deliveries 44 and traffic and glare from lighting is also a problem. She also cited an incident this past 45 summer when her windows were open she was able to call 911 after hearing the gas 5 of 12 City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 1 station attendant being robbed. She also agreed that there is no need for another 2 convenience store. 3 4 Twila Mandella, 1220 Crystal Cove, spoke about problems with “soot,” noise from traffic, 5 particularly motorcycles, and deliveries to the service station. She indicated that the 6 gas station awnings are cleaned with power sprayers late at night and stated that a 7 convenience store would do nothing but add to the existing congestion and crime. 8 9 Dave Mandella, 1220 Crystal Cove, also cited the problem with motorcycles arriving and 10 leaving the gas station and 3-5 delivery trucks arriving each night. He note that from 11 midnight to 6:00 a.m. the steel plates continually bang on the ground creating a lot of 12 noise, and a 24-hour convenience store is just going to add to the existing noise 13 problem. He also noted that within the last 3-4 years there has been a great impact with 14 crime increasing and this project will just add to it. 15 th 16 Tom Heatherington, 319 14 Street, stated that his greatest concern is the impact of 17 traffic in the alleys. He noted that many residents have children and grandchildren who 18 play in the alleyways and he and his wife have almost gotten run down when out 19 walking their dogs. He stated that traffic speeds through the alleys at 2:00 or 3:00 a.m. 20 setting off car alarms, etc. He said if this project is approved, it should require that 21 speed bumps be installed in the alley to protect residents from speeding cars. He said 22 that he would like to see this project “tabled.” 23 24 Board Comments 25 26 Member Barton stated that she was happy to see residents coming out to speak on this 27 item and thanked the members of the public for their attendance tonight. She stated 28 that this service station is frequented by many residents and does need to be cleaned 29 up, but it is too close to the 7-Eleven and would be no need for another convenience 30 store. She noted that convenience stores don’t need to be open 24/7 and asked how 31 many police calls are generated at the 7-Eleven Market. She recommended that the 32 Planning Commission (PC) and City Council (CC) review the City’s Noise Ordinance to 33 consider restricting the hours of operation for these uses. She stated that the Chevron 34 station should be put on notice to clean up the area, not put in a convenience store, and 35 be more considerate of surrounding residents. 36 37 Member Cummings stated that having a one-way street adjacent to this property will 38 compound the problems if traffic is increased at this site by having a wider entry/exit 39 driveway, particularly since several residents have spoken about the existing traffic 40 problems already. She noted that she does not believe traffic issues were addressed in 41 the mitigation measures. 42 43 Member Navarro stated that although not within the purview of the EQCB to make an 44 assessment of the value a 24-hour convenience store would bring to the quality of life in 45 the community, it is not clear to her what value this would have versus all of the 46 negative impacts that it would have on surrounding residents and the entire community. 6 of 12 City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 1 She said that the nightly news regularly presents reports showing security camera video 2 of a robbery taking place at a 24-hour convenience store, and the community does not 3 need any more of these stores. Aside from that there are many things that have not 4 been addressed in the MND such as traffic impacts, proximity of alcohol sales to a 5 residential area, and noise impacts. She stated that noise levels on a decibel basis 6 should be provided for public information, and the City ordinances for both noise and 7 lighting should be reviewed in evaluating the impacts from this project. She 8 emphasized that her greatest concern is the property that is currently zoned for 9 residential and to make an alteration to the City’s General Plan (GP) can open up the 10 City to lots of other liabilities, such a low to moderate income ratios, etc. She stated that 11 she would not recommend approval by the PC. 12 13 Member Hurley said he would restrict his comments to MND 09-2 and presented the 14 following revisions: 15 16 Page No.: 17 18 5.3-5 Para. 1, Sentence 2 – This statement is based on an unsupported 19 assumption that currently operation activities are emitting pollutants at a level 20 below the threshold in Table 5.3-1. These activities involve transferring 21 gasoline from storage tanks to auto tanks, a potentially high polluting action. 22 The ordinary reader deserves to be told how you know this statement is true. 23 24 5.11-2 Para. 2 - Discussion of Noise attenuation rates is good as far as it goes, but 25 it is incomplete. For mobile source noise no examples are given for 26 intervening objects, such as brick walls, large trees, or houses, and how 27 much they affect the attenuation. For stationary source noise no explanation 28 or example of the rate spread is given. 29 30 5.11-3 “State of California” Sentence 4 – The subjects of sentences are irrelevant to 31 this project, as it is in an urban area, and this relates to non-urban areas. If 32 this sentence is to remain, please clarify the following sentence by changing it 33 to read “reduced by as much as 5 dBA CNEL to 10 dBA CNEL in order to . . .” 34 st 35 5.11-7 1 Sentence, Para. 2, 3, and 4 – The first sentence of each paragraph refers 36 to the period of site preparation and grading, but none of them give a 37 numerical estimate of the number of weeks this will take. This phase is when 38 the biggest noise is created and the impact has not been completely 39 described. 40 41 5.12-1 Table indicates “Less than significant impact,” but supporting text states “no 42 impact will occur.” There is no explanation for this discrepancy. 43 44 5.13-1 Same comment as for 5.12-1. 45 46 5.15-1 Same comment as for 5.12-1 47 7 of 12 City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 1 5.17-1 Same comment as for 5.12-1. 2 3 5.5-1 thru 5.5-4 Why are specialists not to do test drills to locate or eliminate the 4 cultural resources in this project? 5 6 Are Monitors to be present when the grading equipment is being 7 used or are equipment operators to be trained in recognizing cultural 8 items so that they can call the experts? This should be discussed in 9 MND 09-2. 10 11 5.3-9 Law AB-32 reflects two different versions of what must occur between now 12 and the year 2050. “Regulation and Significance Criteria” bullet 3 states 13 “2050: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels,” 14 and elsewhere it states “80 percent of the 1990 levels,” which is a different 15 thing. Should state as “below” or “less than” 1990 levels. 16 17 5.3-12 Para. 2 – Discusses Mitigation Measure AQ-2 and there is no AQ-2. 18 19 5.3-8 Para. 1, Line 2 – Should read “complaining party” rather than reporting party. 20 21 5.7-2 Last line – Should read “. . . operation would not result . . .” 22 th 23 Chairperson Voce stated that he had formerly resided at 317 14 Street and is very 24 sensitive to the issues presented tonight. He stated that all members of the public and 25 the Board had spoken very well regarding this project. 26 27 Mr. Whittenberg then stated he would now respond to some of the questions presented 28 tonight and began by stating the City does have a Noise Ordinance, and he is not 29 certain why the Seal Beach Police Department (SBPD) was not aware of this. He 30 explained that the ordinance does have provisions for noise levels and also includes 31 any short-term exceedences above levels permitted. He noted that short-term noise 32 disturbances can be difficult to enforce and unless someone is present with a noise 33 monitor, it would be difficult to determine whether it is in violation of the standards. He 34 stated that the City does have noise consultants on call to perform noise monitoring, 35 and Staff will contact them tomorrow to begin installation of noise meters on 36 surrounding properties to measure the noise impacts from the service station. 37 38 With regard to City standards related to distances of alcohol sales from residences, the 39 City does not have provisions for this. Discretionary review by the Planning 40 Commission (PC) for any alcohol sales is required through the Conditional Use Permit 41 (CUP) process and the PC looks at compatibility issues when making its determination. 42 43 The Director of Development Services then explained that for General Plan 44 Amendments (GPA) there is a whole range of laws and law suits that have been filed 45 over the years on GPAs, but the issue of low-moderate income housing usually comes 46 into the picture when it relates to large residential developments, so for this project this 8 of 12 City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 1 issue would probably not arise. He indicated that the GPA, Zone Change, and all 2 discretionary approvals will come before the PC for review. 3 4 Mr. Whittenberg then reiterated that all comments received tonight from the public and 5 the Board, as well as any other written or e-mail comments will be included in the 6 Responses to Comments document, and each person contributing will receive a copy of 7 this document, as well as any revisions made to MND 09-2. He stated that should Staff 8 determine that a different type of environmental document is required all persons 9 contributing comments will be advised of this. He noted that every property owner and 10 occupant within 300 feet of the project site will receive notice of any action to be taken. 11 He then thanked the public and the Board for their comments. 12 13 Chairperson Voce asked when a petroleum truck is making a delivery at a service 14 station, should the truck engine be turned off or should it be left to idle. Mr. Whittenberg 15 stated he is certain this is controlled by the South Coast Air Quality Management District 16 (SCAQMD), but Staff will look into this. He noted that the SCAQMD would preempt any 17 City regulations of this kind. 18 19 6. Continued Discussion Matter – Residential Wood Fireplace Emission 20 Regulations 21 22 Recommendation: After discussion by Board, provide any direction to staff as 23 the Board may determine to be appropriate. 24 25 Chairperson Voce stated that this discussion was previously tabled meanwhile Staff 26 received a response from the SCAQMD. Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff has still had 27 no response. He indicated that Staff would continue to pursue a response and will 28 return with an update at the next Board meeting. Chairperson Voce commented that he 29 was hoping to have guidelines to present to City Council (CC) during the summer 30 months, prior to the fall season when residents begin using their fireplaces. He 31 indicated that currently the fire department does not have the ability to prevent burning 32 that is creating a nuisance, other than burning trash, and until they have specific 33 guidelines they cannot prevent anyone from burning in an outdoor fire pit or indoor 34 fireplace. Member Hurley stated that assuming that SCAQMD may not respond, would 35 it be possible for Staff to come up with a Plan B to present at the next meeting, such as 36 what the cost would be to mail out 4,500 notices with the utility bills. Chairperson Voce 37 noted that a brief message could be printed on the utility bill itself saving the cost of an 38 additional notice. He indicated that if there were no objections from the Board, he 39 wished to table this item and wait for one more month to see if Staff receives a 40 response from the SCAQMD. 41 42 7. Consideration of City Response Letter Re: “Draft Winter 2008/2009 43 Semiannual Post-Closure Inspection and Maintenance Report,” Installation 44 Restoration Program Site 7 (Station Landfill), Naval Weapons Station 45 9 of 12 City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 1 Recommendation: Authorize approval of response letter with any 2 modifications determined appropriate, instruct Chairperson to sign proposed 3 Response Letter. Receive and File Staff Report. 4 5 Staff Report 6 7 Mr. Whittenberg explained that Site 7 is an old landfill site on the Naval Weapons 8 Station (NWS) on which the Navy has been conducting a site remediation project for 9 approximately 12-15 years. All of the remediation work is now complete and the Navy 10 has “capped” the site with new soil and planted native plants over that area to 11 re-vegetate the site, as it is immediately adjacent to the National Wildlife Refuge. He 12 stated that the report indicates that some of that re-vegetation has not taken and 13 additional replanting and monitoring is to be done. He indicated that the response letter 14 expresses the City’s support of these efforts and for the continuation of the replanting 15 and monitoring. 16 17 Member Hurley referred to Paragraph 3 of the response letter and recommended that it 18 be revised to read “If you have any questions or for further information . . .,” and also 19 that the phrase “at your earliest convenience,” be eliminated. Chairperson Voce stated 20 he was fine with the letter as presented. Member Hurley polled the Board to determine 21 whether any other member was opposed to his suggestion. Member Barton stated she 22 approved of the letter as written. Mr. Whittenberg then confirmed that the motion would 23 be to approve the letter as presented. Chairperson Voce confirmed that this was 24 correct. 25 26 MOTION by Barton; SECOND by Navarro to approve the response letter as presented 27 and authorize Chairperson to sign the response letter. Receive and File Staff Report. 28 MOTION CARRIED: 4 – 0 – 1 29 AYES: Voce, Barton, Cummings, and Navarro 30 NOES: Hurley 31 ABSENT: None 32 33 VI Staff Concerns 34 35 36 Mr. Whittenberg reported that at present there are no items for review at the June 2009 37 meeting, but Staff would inform the Board if the meeting is to be cancelled. Chairperson 38 Voce requested that should SCAQMC respond to Staff’s request, that this information 39 be provided to the Board Members as soon as received. Mr. Whittenberg indicated that 40 should Staff receive a response, it would be posted on the agenda for a June meeting. 41 VII Board Concerns 42 43 44 Member Navarro reported on the Joint Forces Training Base (JFTB) pilot project for 45 green waste composting, noting that no environmental or traffic studies were done prior 46 to commencing this project. She indicated that this project would create a “huge 10 of 12 City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 1 impact” from large 18-wheel trucks transporting green waste material from Lampson 2 Avenue up Seal Beach Blvd. to the Naval Weapons Station (NWS). She noted that this 3 would greatly impact Lampson Avenue and stated that after meeting with City of Seal 4 Beach officials and attending an information meeting conducted by the base General, 5 she was told that JTFB must receive a written request from the City for provision of 6 environmental and/or traffic studies completed for this project. She stated that she has 7 received a copy of this information and requested that copies be prepared for City 8 Council and the EQCB. Ms Navarro noted that at present the base is looking at a huge 9 revenue shortfall and this project is a business enterprise that the base General has 10 entered into with the Rainbow Disposal Company and Agromin to transport processed 11 green waste for composting, not to the NWS, but from areas within southern Orange 12 County to the JFTB. She said that this project falls under NEPA authority and is de 13 minimus, which does not require a NEPA study because of the size, never to exceed 14 12, 500 sq. ft.; however, no traffic study was completed. She stated that Mayor Shanks 15 has requested that the City not provide funding for street improvement to Lampson 16 Avenue, particularly since the City is to receive no benefit from this project. She 17 encouraged the Board members to review the document so that they can forward their 18 recommendations to City Council. Ms. Navarro then commented that she does believe 19 composting is a good idea, and this project will provide funding for our troops, but it will 20 cause significant traffic impacts to the City of Seal Beach. She requested that this item 21 be included on the June agenda. 22 23 Mr. Whittenberg stated that Staff is aware of the issue and will provide copies of the 24 document to the Board Members. He cautioned that this matter is already scheduled 25 for discussion at the June 8, 2009 City Council meeting and they may take action that 26 would preclude the Board from doing anything. He indicated that Staff would keep 27 Board members apprised of any action taken by City Council. Member Navarro stated 28 that the EQCB represents the various districts within the City of Seal Beach, which is a 29 small town, and the interest of one group should be of interest to all groups. She 30 emphasized that the impact from these trucks coming off the freeways and onto the 31 local streets will be significant, particularly along Lampson Avenue. She noted that the 32 report made no mention of the trucks traveling along Lampson. She stated that there is 33 a lot to be studied related to traffic impacts and she encouraged the Board members to 34 contact their respective council members. 35 36 Member Hurley asked if the City were going to request more studies than what was 37 provided, and will this have some legal standing. Member Navarro stated that this is th 38 probably going to be discussed by City Council at the June 8 meeting. Mr. 39 Whittenberg cautioned that this item is not on the agenda, so this discussion should be 40 reserved for another meeting date. 41 VIII Adjournment 42 43 44 There being no objections, Chairperson Voce adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m. 45 46 11 of 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Respectfully Submitted, 0~~ "~A ~~~ Carmen Alvarez, Executive Assistant Department of Development Services City of Seal Beach Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting Minutes of May 27, 2009 The Board on June 24, 2009, approved the Minutes of the Environmental Quality Control Board of Wednesday, May 27,2009. ~. 12 of 12