Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEQCB Min 1989-04-18 . ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING APRIL l8, 1989 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Fortner called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. in the City's Council Chambers. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Don Eisenberg. ROLL CAT.T. 3. Present: Ray Fortner, Chairman, District One Gayle Knapp, District Three Don Eisenberg, District Four Staff Present: Ed Knight, Director, Development Services Dept. Absent: Lowell Kolb, District Two Stephen Gavlick, District Five . 4. DISCUSSION OF SUPPLEMENTAL EIR FOR THE HELLMAN SPECIFIC PLAN Ed Knight delivered the staff report. Staff's recommendation is to receive and file the Supplemental EIR and to provide input to the City Council regarding the document. Mr. Knight noted representati ves from LSA and Michael Brandman Associates (MBA) were present to answer questions tonight. LSA worked on the wetlands and traffic issues for the EIR and MBA was' the lead agency in preparation of the supplemental EIR. Mr. Knight said that Mola's proposed alternatives were studied in the Supplemental EIR. The City did certify the EIR and approved a project. That project did not include any on-site wetlands restoration. Subsequently, Mola (thru LSA) did additional work on the wetlands issue and met with Corps of Engineers, CA Dept. of Fish & Game, u.s. Fish & Wildlife Service. The tentative conclusion was that on-site restoration would be a requirement. At that point Mola came back with their tentative tract map plus an amendment to add twenty acres of wetlands. LSA found there may be additional wetlands out there --- in addition to the twenty acres identified in the Subsequent EIR; that might require additional wetlands mitigation to the proposed project. . . Page 2 - Minutes of EQCB Meeting on April l8, 1989 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Kirk Evans * Nola Development Corporation Mr. Evans, replying to Mr. Fortner's question about another Mola alternative not covered in the Supplemental EIR, said Mola has had further meetings with various community groups within the City, City staff, Fish & Game, National Marine Fisheries, Fish & Wildlife services, Corps of Engineers, EPA, and the Coastal Commission. As a result of those meetings, Mola further massaged alternative liB" which resulted in an alternative to liB" termed in these Minutes as "B.l". Mr. Evans said Mola does not look at this as a separate al ternati ve but as a change to al ternati ve liB" . Mola would like to have this plan considered in the comments to the Supplemental EIR tonight. Mr. Evans posted a map of alternative B.1, which shows: Reduction of 433 units to 412 units (21 units reduced). Relocation of some single family homes which have been replaced with l2 townhomes near Gum Grove Park. This has opened up a much larger area for potential wetlands restoration. . The community park has been expanded from 3.5 acres to 6 acres. This is at 40.4 acres of wetlands. There will be less traffic. Ms. Knapp asked who hired LSA? Mr. Evans replied MBA hired LSA as their sub-consultant. The City hired MBA. Mr. Knight stated staff's approach to alternative "B.1" would be to advise MBA that the City wants liB .l" examined under the mitigation measures thru alternative "B". . Walton Wright * Consultant for the Wetlands Restoration Society Mr. Wright stated the Wetlands Restoration Society'S position on the proposed Mola alternatives is still the same as their position on the original Mola proposal --- they are still looking at the historic wetlands on the site and restoration of wetlands. He submitted, for the Record, two maps he prepared. One map is marked "1894 U.S. Geological Survey Topo(graphical) Survey" map and shows channels cutting across the site, tidal channels on- site, histor~c channel of the San Gabriel River, a ten-foot contour interval. The second map reflects a development area, if there should be any development on this site, showing 79 units in a shaded area with adequate buffers for a restored wetlands area. (Both maps are marked Tentative Parcel Map No. 86-349 in the City of Seal Beach in the upper right hand corner). . Page 3 - Minutes of EQCB Meeting on April l8, 1989 Anything below the ten foot area reflects historic wetlands. These maps are in addition to the Wetlands Restoration Society map which shows existing wetlands on the site; the City already has a copy of this map. Ms. Knapp said the consultants apparently didn't have this map information when they prepared the EIR; they went from aerial views going back to 1980. Mr. Wright said there has not been an adequate analysis of the historic wetlands on the Hellman property. Ms. Knapp asked Mr. Wright if there were some reason MBA didn't have this information and he said "No. These maps are around". Mr. wright stated also that degraded wetlands can be restored and that the subject property presents a good opportuni ty for wetlands restoration because there are no oil wells or major development on the property. Ms. Knapp asked Mr. Wright what the value his maps are for a lay person trying to decide if that's the map they should go by instead of the 1980 aerial maps, how valid are these maps, where did he get these maps? Mr. Wright said the aerial photos show much more wetlands in the 1920's. He said it may not have been in MBA's interest to describe what the historic wetlands were. There has never been an acknowledgement that 105 acres of historic wetlands were ever on this site. The 105 acres has aprox. 20 acres of a buffer zone around it --- the bluffs that border this area also have Gum Grove Park on them. . Mr. Eisenberg asked Mr. Wright if his group had considered whether it's feasible to restore the wetlands if there isn't a development of some kind in the Hellman Ranch property? Mr. Wright said yes, it's possible. He said that in talking to the Harbor authorities, under their 20/20 plan, they will spend up to $80,000 per" acre for restoration of wetlands. Proposition 70 passed which obtains money for acquiring and working on open space areas. state license plate funds has money for habitat and habitat restoration and enhancement. Galen ~mhrose * Wetlands Restoration Society Mr. Ambrose said his group is going to submit a complete package on the Supplemental EIR on April 24, 1989. He said the species list within the Supplemental EIR is not complete. He also spoke on Walter Wright's qualifications. Sally Hirsch * l325 Crestview * Save Gum Grove Park GrOUD Ms. Hirsch spoke on the "B.1 " al ternati ve and said she was pleased with the lO.4 acres for Gum Grove, the 6 acre additional park, the trail system, fewer homes that will be two stories, reduced traffic (from 6210 to 3800 trips), a thirty foot buffer zone. She'd like to see a wetlands plan before building began. . . Page 4 - Minutes of EQCB Meeting of April 18, 1989 Laird Mueller * 142 1lth street Mr. Mueller stated he wants Seal Beach to stay as it is. If that's not possible he wants building to have minimum impact. Mitzie Horton * 153 13th street Ms. Morton favors alternative restoration plan in place. Forty nothing has been definitely planned liB" but wants a wetlands acres will be set aside but to restore them. Mr. Knight noted the Hellman property contains severely degraded wetlands with very little biological value and virtually no wildlife value. Problems on those wetlands include dredge spoil which was brought on the site 20 years ago arid elevated the site above what would normally be functional as a salt water wetlands, tidal action is represented in fractions of an inch. Regarding wetlands restoration, Mr. Knight said wetlands restoration depends on how certain Federal and State agencies view this site. The Corps of Engineer'S Clean Water Act of 1972, Section 404.bl talks about avoidance of existing wetlands. Avoiding existing wetlands is the goal of the Corps of Engineers, the California Department of Fish & Game and CA Coastal Commission thru their various codes and statutes. . Mr. Knight said further that Mola alternatives "A" and liB" avoid disruption of the wetlands; neither the Corps of Engineers nor National Fish & wildlife require any restorations to "preserved in place" wetlands. Mola is working with the Port of Long Beach to bring about a restoration plan but it hasn't been approved to date. The Port of Long Beach has just started their own process and they have not identified what their budget is, they have no idea what kind of mitigation potential they can get out of this. It might be awhile before the City can find out if the Port is interested in restoring the Hellman wetlands. If the City of Seal Beach wants the Hellman wetlands restored the city will have to depend on another agency financially to restore these wetlands --- not the City of Seal Beach, not Mola Development. A restoration project like this carries a $2 - $3 million price tag; about $80,000 per acre. For example, there's one culvert serving that site now. To provide adequate flushing two or three pipes might be needed under the cooling channel into the San Gabriel in order to provide an adequate tidal fluctuation. Removing the dredge spoil would require testing and would be expensive to do. Mr. Eisenberg asked about alternative "C". Mr. Knight explained that Mola would restore 25 wetlands acres. Again, it's a question whether this plan would be acceptable to the Corps of . . Page 5 - Minutes of EQCB Meeting of April 18, 1989 Engineers. They'd completely destroy the wetlands on site and relocate the restored wetlands elsewhere on the site. Mola would do the restoration and therefore they would approach the other agencies to get the required permits. Rob Schoenhultz * LSA Associates * Consultant to Nola Alternative "B.l" represents a refinement of alternative liB" and this would create the opportunity for a better restored wetlands in the biological sense than alternative "B". Absent participation by the Port authorities, there would be restoration of approximately four (4) acres of wetlands on-site by Mola. This would be their proportional share to the amount of wetlands that would be impacted by al ternati ve liB .l". It would be impossible to say exactly what the Coastal Commission would require. LSA is working jointly with the Ports in looking at ways to do a joint restoration in here. . Based on LSA's experience in wetlands restoration the Coastal Act puts strict requirements on leaving wetlands alone but there is some relaxation of rules in the case of a severely degraded wetlands. He said he thinks the Coastal Commission would prefer to see the existing wetlands left alone to maximize future potential for wetland restoration on this site. The EQCB asked what's the environmental impact to the City of Seal Beach versus leaving it in its present degraded state? wildlife values would go up which is what the Coastal Commission and the Federal agencies would like as the ultimate end. Mr. Schoenhul tz said he thought there are about 105 acres of historic wetlands. However, the reason LSA went back to 1969 is both the Coastal Act and the Corps of Engineers program considered the existing resource; this area has been so degraded for so long that that is the time those programs went into effect. Anything that happened before that was "grandfathered". There's been so much dredge soil placed on this site that the bulk of this area is not wetlands and has not been wetlands for twenty plus years. Removing five to ten feet of fill from this site would cost $80,000 to $100,000 per acre. This would get the elevations down to where you could restore the tidal salt marsh. This doesn't include new siphons and other work necessary to restore wetlands. The restoration would be so expensive it would be beyond the means of the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. Mario Voche * 730 Catalina Avenue Mr. Voche wanted to know if there requirements for a scoping session before the preparation of this Supplemental EIR? . . Page 6 - Minutes of EQCB Meeting of April l8, 1989 Mr. Knight said there was no legal requirements for this plus there were no new impacts involved in this Supplemental EIR. There are still opportunities for citizens and agencys to respond to this EIR and have their comments included in the Response to Comments. Walt Wriqht Mr. Wright said the Port Authority looks to $80,000 per acre to do restoration. The Port's 20/20 plan requires restoration of acreage that mitigates for open water habitat loss. The restoration here is salt marsh vegetation. We could pull in open water habitat but the maximum credit received is for .. in kind" restorations. It would be better to do the restoration in a package. . It was explained that on a 4 acre parcel of wetlands it could fall under the Army Corps of Engineers definition of a "nation- wide permit", thus not requiring any further action from the Army Corps of Engineers. Regarding wetlands restoration, the Army Corps of Engineers has the least stringent regulations, the Fish and Game Department more stringent and the EPA the most stringent requirements. The Port does not restore other peoples liabilities; they work only on their projects. The opportunity footprints for the Port Authority are the same opportunity impacts for Mola Development for not impacting wetlands. If we have development there we severely tie up the ability to do restoration in the future. We could get a fully functioning salt marsh out of it. Kirk Evans * Kola Development Mr. Evans clarified the alternative "B.l" plan. There are 328 single family homes and 84 townhomes, making a total of 412. EOCB Comments Gayle Knap'p Ms. Knapp had comments on the following issues: GUM GROVE PARK - She's very pleased Gum Grove Park will remain at 10.4 acres. HOUSES - She's concerned that 412 housing units may be too many houses. Traffic and noise elements are her main concerns. EARTHOUAKE - She's extremely concerned that these houses are too close to the fault line even though setbacks have been provided. . NOISE - Pumps on the oil wells will be changed from gas to electric to keep noise down. Will a masonry , . . Page 7 - Minutes of EQCB Meeting of April 18, 1989 wall of 8' or 10' mitigate the noise? will a masonry wall reduce the dog barking noise for these homes near the animal shelter? Don't put houses that close. GOLF COURSE - She wants a regulation nine-hole golf course. She wants Kola to contact Ben Brown in Laguna Beach re his experience in this area. Also, night lighting is not opposed by the EQCB. WATER - There may not be enough water for this development. Mr. Knight said the EIR was technically ,correct but doesn't look at the whole picture for a reserve that the City needs. A master plan is to be done and funded by the developer to look at the water needs of the whole community as it would be impacted by this project. If there is a requirement for addi tional water facilities they would be funded at the developer's expense. police, fire and other services are examined in the EIR. Mr. Knight said a Mello Roos district would be formed to meet the $70,000 to $90,000 deficit. . Don Eisenberg Mr. Eisenberg said he didn't understand the wetlands restoration issue as any of the people has discussed it. He thinks it has a negative economic impact to Mola potentially in selling units if it remains degraded wetlands. He thinks it's an issue of the economics of development versus the economics of restoration. He'd like to see as much restoration as possible. Ray Fortner Mr. Fortner stated his concerns re updated traffic study figures and levels of service at various intersections that were not addressed in the Supplemental EIR. He said he favored alternative "C" because of developer restoration. . Ray Mull * LSA Associates Traffic count figures are based on the 1987 study so LSA has used the original EIR base. They have compared the differential of the 760 dwelling unit counts to the "A", liB" and "C" alternatives. Alternative "C" does include the golf cour~e ~nd the trips generated in association with that. Alternative "C" itself has about 3300 daily trips out of which 750 of those are associated with the golf course itself. The difference between the studies is the differential in the original alternative ... indicated that there were 6200 daily trips ... alternative "B" generates about 3800 and "B.1" is about 3700 trips. The impacts to the roadway systems are unchanged regardless of which alternative ... given the volume of traffic on major arterials, this is a relatively small project. The same basic mitigation measures apply to all alternatives. The threshold has been met . . . . . Page 8 - Minutes of EQCB Meeting of April 18, 1989 at Pacific Coast Highway and westminster ... it's already at capacity right now. The mitigation measure of a left turn lane will help ... it significantly offset the contribution that the project itself will add to the "over capacity situation" existing right now. MOTION by Knapp: SECOND by Eisenberg to receive and file the Supplemental EIR and that the secretary and Director of Development Services are instructed to transmit all comments received here tonight to the City Council (as part of the environmental process) and that we strongly urge that the City Council require, as a condition to certification of the EIR, or specifically address within the EIR, the following issues: 1. RESTORATION - A mitiqation measure for a restoration plan be a component of the EIR. 2. TRAFFIC - That numbers be updated from 1987 or that it is shown they are sufficient to still be used for this EIR. We will look at one or two representative intersections to see what, if anything, new impact from 1987 might be upon that and what this new information may have on this project ... raising "DRs to "E"s. 3. NOISE - Primarily the housing units adjacent to the oil wells on Seal Beach Blvd. and those adjacent to the City'S Animal Shelter. will the use of masonry walls mitigate the noise? 4. ALTERNATIVE C - This alternative includes the golf course. This committee wants Nola Development to contact Ben Brown in Laguna Beach and look at the he's done as a possible model toward a nine-hole course alternative. Also, night lighting is approved of by the EQCB. work golf not 5. STUDY ON FOOTPRINT ANALYSIS and STUDY ON WATER 6. EARTHOUAKE The Committee had no specific recommendations but emphasized their concerns of houses being built so close to the Newport-Inglewood earthquake fault. VOTE: 3 - o. . ' t · . . . Page 9 - Minutes of EQCB Meeting of April l8, 1989 5. BOARD CONCERNS There were no EQCB concerns. 6. STAFF CONCERNS There were no staff concerns. 7. ADJOURNKENT Chairman Fortner adjourned the meeting at 10:07 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, ~~ ~--=--, - ~- Joan Fillmann Secretary Department of Development Services City of Seal Beach THESE MINUTES ARE TENTATIVE AND SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE EQCB. MINUTES OF APRIL l8, 1989 EQCB MEETING APPROVED 1989 Copy Distribution: Council Members: victor Grgas Edna Wilson Joyce Risner Frank Laszlo Joe Hunt EQCB Members: Ray Fortner Gayle Knapp Don Eisenberg Lowell Kolb Stephen Gavlick By Request: Ray Fortner