The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutEQCB Min 1994-09-20 ': I- I , ,. . . . Environmental Quality Control Board Minutes September 20, 1994 I. CALL TO ORDER - 6 34 P m II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL Present Also Present Voce, Hurley, Logan (655), Nakagawa, Hood Barry Curtis, Administrative Assistant (Planning) IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - none V. OLD BUSINESS 1 Minutes of July 19, 1994 MOTION BY HOOD; SECOND BY HURLEY: TO ACCEPT MINUTES OF JULY 19, 1994 AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED: A YES: 4-0 VOCE, HOOD, NAKAGAWA, HURLEY NOES: ABSENT: LOGAN VI. NEW BUSINESS 1. City Response to "Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Proposed Bolsa Chica Project", prepared by the County of Orange, dated August 22,1994. Mr Curtis presented a brief staff report Mr Voce advised the public the City Council will be considering this item on September 26th. Mr Voce expressed displeasure with the short review period allowed for the response He criticized the County Supervisors', F \ IEQBC\MIN94-9 BCC bee EQCB MInutes of September 20, 1994 I> particularly Harriett Weider, decision not to grant an extension for review " . The Board discussed the proposed response letter drafted by staff Mr Curtis indicated the Board should review the letter and make any necessary changes or additions, authorize Chairman Voce to sign the letter and forward it to the City Council Mr Voce questioned the section of the letter on geology and seismicity regarding sand replenishment Mr. Curtis indicated this is not to be interpreted as an endorsement of the project, rather it's added in the event a project is approved to notify the County of our desire for and ability to handle up to 150,000 cubic yards of sand Mr Voce questioned comments made by County staff regarding infeasibility of the previous plan and that they felt one of the proposed plans is still considered viable The Board discussed adding to the letter a clause expressing its displeasure with the short review period Mr. Nakagawa asked whether the Board can recommend preferred alternatives Mr Curtis indicated staff is recommending the City's response letter address those issues which may have a direct result on the City of Seal Beach Mr. Hurley asked whether the letter can indicate a preferred alternative( s) because of their lack of impact on the City of Seal Beach . The Board discussed at length whether its response letter should include the personal views of the Boardmembers Mr Curtis advised this is a decision the Board is entitled to make, however, the letter is also from the City Council and they will review it, including any changes made this evening, before it is forwarded to the County Mr Hurley presented a proposed addendum to the next to last paragraph of page 16 The revised paragraph would read In addition the Environmental Quality Control Board and the City Council of the City of Seal beach consider the Bolsa Chica wetlands to be an invaluable, indeed essential, natural resource in our environment and urge the County of Orange not to approve any version of the proposed Bolsa Chica project unless and until the ecological integrity of the wetlands can be guaranteed In the opinion of the EQCB and the City Council of the City of Seal Beach the only one of the various possible uses being considered for the subject property which meets this test is Alternative B, the biodiversity park. This alternative also appears to have almost the least adverse impact on traffic in Seal Beach second only to the "no project/no development" alternatives. Therefore, we urge the County of Orange to do whatever is necessary to make Alternatil1e B a reality. . The Board discussed at length whether or not to add such wording or whether it is too conclusionary for a project within another jurisdiction Page 2 F \ IEQBClMIN94-9 BCC bcc EQCB MInutes of September 20, 1994 . Mr Nakagawa supported Mr Hurley's proposal, perhaps toned back slightly, indicating the City supports Alternatives B, A or I stating that any of these three meet our concerns over traffic as well as our other concerns. Mr Hurley didn't feel this followed his thought Mr Hood said it could be added to the end of the previous paragraph Mr Hurley felt his proposal is more focused and therefore more forceful. Mr Nakagawa asked whether the Board had to decide on specific verbiage this evening Mr Curtis said yes, however, he has both proposals clear Mr Hurley asked ifboth proposals could be forwarded to the Council for them to choose Mr Curtis said in theory yes, but he recommended the Board limit itself to one recommendation Mr. Hurley indicated Alternative A is unacceptable because it destroys the integrity of the wetlands Mr. Nakagawa said he would settle for Alternatives B and I Mr Hood suggest the wording "we the City of Seal Beach for the benefit of its citizens would prefer an alternative such as the biodiversity park that would a natural area for our citizens to enjoy, however, we do strongly urge that the County consider only such alternatives that would have the least traffic impacts on the citizens of Seal Beach, alternatives such as A, Band I" . Gordon Lebetz instructed the Board the on the CEQA process The Board indicated it understood the process, however, thi~ is a comment letter regarding the DEIR Mr Curtis indicated the Board is discussing a closing paragraph to an extensive letter commenting specifically on the DEIR The Board discussed whether to include any specific alternatives in its recommendation The Board felt the wording Mr Nakagawa and Mr. Hood had most recently discussed was acceptable The Board felt comfortable allowing Mr Curtis to compile the exact wording from the tape Mr Nakagawa felt that discussion should include the issue of increased water and other natural resource consumption The remainder of the Board determined not to include this Issue Gordon Lebetz stated the executive summary is the most important part of the EIR He felt it was highly unrealistic The Board determined to accept the amended proposed by Mr. Hurley as modified by members Nakagawa, Hood and Voce This includes Alternatives A, B and I . The Board asked that staff review the DEIR for adequacy of review on the issue of water Mr Curtis said staff will do that Mr Hurley felt the mitigation measure regarding the flood control channel was questionable He questioned it's adequacy Mr Hood felt the staff comments were adequate since it was based on technical information which was not presented to the Board Mr Hurley mentioned several clerical errors in the DEIR Page 3 F \ IEQBCIM1N94-9 BCC bee EQCB MInutes of September 20, 1994 .' . Mr. Hurley asked why there is no impact number regarding the decrease in traffic on page 6-25, when it's mentioned on page 6-20 Mr Nakagawa spoke regarding the seismic stability offuture road improvements (Warner Avenue bridge, etc.) and whether the new bridge would be as strong as the present bridge He asked if Dennis Jue can follow up on this as well as Figure 49-20 as it appears an inordinate amount of traffic volume is using the beach and Sunset and Surfside properties Mr Nakagawa discussed potential impacts on emergency services during natural disasters Mr Hood felt these issues needn't be included in this letter The matter was opened to public discussion. Gordon Lebetz felt City does not have to restrict its comments to those issues specifically affecting the City This is not a good EIR He felt there will be more. He was concerned with biological impacts. There is very little discussion regarding impacts on wetland creatures Mr Lebetz submitted a letter from the Surfrider Foundation which discussed several perceived shortcomings of the DEIR The Board asked staff to review the items discussed in the Surfriders' letter and to recommend inclusion of those felt appropriate A woman living at 249 5th Street agreed with the Surf riders Public discussion was closed . Brief break taken. Mr. Hood suggested, and the Board agreed to, the addition ofthe following wording " .. the integrity of the wetlands, as well as the entire Bolsa Chica ecosystem, "to the second to last paragraph of the letter MOTION BY HOOD; SECOND BY NAKAGAWA: TO ACCEPT THE LETTER AS AMENDED, INCLUDING THOSE TECHNICAL ITEMS SUGGESTED BY MR. LEBETZ WHICH ARE DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY STAFF, INSTRUCT CHAIRMAN VOCE TO SIGN THE LETTER AND FORWARD IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. MOTION CARRIED: A YES: 5-0 VOCE, LOGAN, NAKAGAWA, HURLEY, HOOD NOES: VII. BOARD CONCERNS . Mr Hood asked that if a portion of an EIR is referenced in a letter that portion can be provided to the Board Mr. Voce thanked Mr Lebetz Mr. Hood indicated he would be Page 4 F \ IEQBCIMIN94-9 BCC bee !'. .' . . . EQCB Minutes of September 20, 1994 leaving on vacation on December 15th He hoped the Board's consideration of Bixby would be completed before then VIII. STAFF CONCERNS Mr Curtis gave a brief status report on the tree ordinance and the leafblower policy statement IX. ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY HOOD; SECOND BY LOGAN: TO ADJOURN THE MEETING TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING. MOTION CARRIED: A YES: 5-0 VOCE, LOGAN, HOOD, HURLEY, NAKAGAWA NOES: The meeting was adjourned at 8.50 p m Respectfully Submitted, Barry C Curtis, Jr. Secretary, Environmental Quality Control Board Page 5 F \ IEQBC\MIN94-9 BCC bee