Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEQCB Min 1995-01-17 . . . i ' Environmental Quality Control Board Minutes JANUARY 17,1995 Call to Order at 6:30 p.m. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Voce, Logan, Nakagawa Hood, Hurley Barry Curtis, Administrative Assistant (planning) There being no objections, Chairman Voce excused the absence of both Mr. Hood and Mr. Hurley. III. ApPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Nakagawa requested certain Board Concerns be reworded. Mr. Nakagawa indicated he wants the Agenda wording to be specifically worded, because he is unhappy with noting the specifics in the Minutes and having the specific wording in the action itself. Mr. Curtis indicated the specific wording in the action is what dictates the action and the Agenda may not reflect the specific action, particularly if the Board makes changes through its consideration of a matter. Mr. Nakagawa indicated he is not happy with this process and wants to light a fire under staff so things get done. Mr. Nakagawa addressed item number 6 indicating he didn't want to be limited to staff trying to set up a meeting and if they couldn't let this matter go. He envisioned his request to be an opening of an ongoing dialog between the City and EP A. Mr. Curtis indicated he felt the wording under Agenda item 6 would allow this and when the item came up the Board could make a specific recommendation such as a letter to EP A requesting inclusion in its mailing lists for items which will or could affect Seal Beach. Mr. Nakagawa said he felt that was fine. He wants to see a letter for each of these items so he can see it in hard form. MOTION BY LOGAN; SECONDBYNAKAGAWA: TOAPPROVETHE AGENDA. 1=\ I,I;;QCIN1IN9.., BCCk . . . Environmental Quality Control Board Minutes of January 17, 1995 MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: 3-0 VOCE, NAKAGAWA, LOGAN NONE IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - none. V. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of November 29, 1994 2. Minutes of December 13, 1994 MOTION BY NAKAGAWA; SECOND BY LOGAN: TO CONTINUE THE CONSENT CALENDAR TO THE NEXT MEETING TO ALLOW ABSENT MEMBERS TO REVIEW THE MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: 3-0 VOCE, NAKAGAWA, LOGAN NONE VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS VII. STAFF CONCERNS 3. Review of Draft EA/IS - Los Alamitos AFRC JP-8 Fuel Storage Facility Mr. Curtis presented the staff report. Mr. Nakagawa asked that this matter be continued to the next meeting so Mr. Hood could participate. Mr. Curtis indicated there was a timing conflict and waiting for Mr. Hood's return would not allow the City Council to consider this item nor would it allow the City to respond within the comment period. Mr. Nakagawa asked if staff had just been sitting on this matter. Mr. Curtis indicated the Department of Development Services has had this since about the first of the year, but there is no received date on it. The maximum time the City has to review and respond to a matter of this nature is 45 days. This includes staff review and preparation of reports, scheduling of meetings before the EQCB and City Council and postage time both coming and going. If City staff sat on an item like this for more than a couple of days the City would not be able to comment. Chairman Voce indicated if the Board doesn't act tonight they will need to hold a special meeting. Mr. Nakagawa indicated he felt more comfortable with Mr. Hood's analytical capabilities in leading the Board's decision. Page 2 1= \ 1,I;;QC1N11N9.., BCC be. Environmental Quality Control Board Minutes of January 17, 1995 . Chairman Voce discussed concerns regarding spacing from the school, crash danger and risk of upset, does CaIlEPA have any comments, when were the Notices of Violation dated. Who are they from? Are there any others? Mr. Nakagawa indicated he would like to see in the staff reports whether they are just barely meeting applicable standards or they are easily meeting them. Mr. Curtis indicated staffwill attempt to, but indicated uses are required to meet appropriate environmental, air quality, etc. standards which are presumably set up so that even minimum attainment will not have significant impacts. Mr. Nakagawa asked how old the old tanks are? Mr. Logan indicated the report says 1958. Mr. Nakagawa wondered if these tanks will really be state-of-the-art technology or is the military trying to save money. Mr. Curtis indicated this is basically state-of-the-art and it will be required to meet SCAQMD standards as well as CEQAlNEPA requirements. Mr. Nakagawa indicated he knows this will meet standards, but ifit's close, maybe the Board's comments could give the military impetus to meet the standards by a wide margIn. Mr. Nakagawa indicated he's willing to let this go this time. He would like to see future staff reports address how close these items are to the standards. . Mr. Nakagawa indicated he would like a City Engineer to review this type of item. He, as an engineer, could do this type of work in about four (4) hours. Mr. Curtis indicated the City doesn't have a full time City Engineer at this time and even if the background work could be done in four hours the City would need to hire someone for four hours. Mr. Logan asked why the existing tanks can't just be cleaned up to meet current standards. Mr. Curtis indicated the current tanks don't meet current standards. Mr. Nakagawa asked what the existing Notices of Violation were for and who they were from. Mr. Curtis indicated he was unaware of who or when the violations were from. Mr. Nakagawa indicated he wants a technical-oriented person to come before the Board and say, on a scale of 1 to 10, where a report stood. He needs a 1 to 10 summary to make a decision on this type of request. The Board discussed the merits of placing the tanks below grade as opposed to a double wall tank above ground. Particularly the Board discussed the different dangers associated with the two approaches. Mr. Curtis indicated the proposed locations are not located within a crash zone. Mr. Nakagawa specifically requested the City hire an engineer to provide the Board with a 1 to 10 rating of environmental projects that come before the Board. Mr. Nakagawa also asked that staff contact CallEP A to determine whether they have any formal written concerns regarding this matter that the City could consider. Mr. Nakagawa indicated the outstanding notices of violation are like a criminal trying to hide its criminal record. . Page 3 1=\ I,I;;QCIN1INQ", BeCbe. Environmental Quality Control Board Minutes of January 17, 1995 . Mr. Curtis reminded the Board this is an initial study, not a negative declaration or EIR and additional review will take place. MOTIONBYLOGAN; SECONDBYNAKAGAWA: TO FORWARD THIS MATTER TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE PROPOSED RESPONSE LETTER SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: CONCERNS REGARDING SPACING FROM THE ADJACENT SCHOOL WHETHER ADDITIONAL SPACING FROM THE SCHOOL WAS POSSffiLE CONCERNS WITH CRASH DANGER I RISK OF UPSET MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: 3-0 VOCE, NAKAGAWA, LOGAN NONE Mr. Curtis indicated staffwiII contact Call EPA for comments and attempt to determine what the outstanding notices of violation are for. . 4. Review of Draft EIR - Queensway Bay Master Plan - City of Long Beach Mr. Curtis presented the staff report. The Board discussed the specifics of the proposed project. Chairman Voce noted the staffs concern with traffic impacts, specifically regarding impacts crossing the county line. Chairman Voce concurred this should be discussed in more depth. Chairman Voce also discussed the potential of wetlands restoration funds arising from this project. If so, the City should express an interest in such funds. Mr. Curtis indicated the DEIR does discuss wetlands restoration and it appears that most of it will be contained on the site. However, the City could add a paragraph to the letter indicating that if there is excess wetlands mitigation required or excess sand produced we are in a position to accept it. Mr. Nakagawa expressed concern with negative impacts on Seal Beach's water quality. Mr. Curtis indicated staffhad concerns regarding this matter as well. MOTIONBYNAKAGAWA; SECOND BY LOGAN: TOFORWARD THIS MA ITER TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE PROPOSED RESPONSE LETTER SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS: . Page 4 1= \ 1,I;;QC1N11N9.., BCC be. Environmental Quality Control Board Minutes of January 17, 1995 '. THE CITY COULD POTENTIALLY USE EXCESS SAND AND/OR WETLAND RESTORATION IF IT CANNOT BE COMPLETED ON SITE FURTHER DISCUSSION ON WATER QUALITY AND IMPACTS ON LOCAL WATER QUALITY FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EFFLUENT GENERA TED BY THE PROJECT MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: 3-0 VOCE, NAKAGAWA, LOGAN NONE 5. Receive and File Letter Re: Discharge of Groundwater and Decontamination/Storm Water to Bolsa Bay, Naval Weapons Station Tabled to future meeting before complete Board. VIII. BOARD CONCERNS 6. Request Invitation of Staff Mem ber of California EP A as a Guest Speaker (Nakagawa) . Mr. Nakagawa indicated he wishes this to be the beginning of an open dialog between the City and Call EP A. He is requesting staff schedule a presentation before the Board by a member of Call EPA1. Mr. Nakagawa asked that the Call EPA representative discuss, among other items, AFRC's JP-4 violations, the Exxon oil spill and, any toxic waste on the Navy site. Further, Mr. Nakagawa wants to know if Call EP A can provide engineering support or funds and can the City be included on their mailing list. This would be done in the form of a letter of request which would go before the City Council. A second letter would be a request to the City Council for staff funding to investigate past criminal records of such agencies as the Navy and AFRC2. 7. Recommendation for Additional Traffic Engineering Review to City Council (Nakagawa) . Mr. Nakagawa felt the technical traffic portion of the Bixby project was deficient. He would like for the City Council to hire a traffic engineer who is better qualified to assure the City gets good numbers. He is looking at future projects as well. This traffic engineer would review traffic numbers for EIR's like Bixby before the EIR comes out. Mr. Curtis indicated the City Council selected the current traffic consultants and they are the one's who prepared the numbers. Mr. Nakagawa indicated he wanted a letter to the City Council asking for funds to hire a traffic engineer to look at the issues of trips per day and traffic distribution and any other discrepancies in the EIR. Mr. Curtis indicated the City of Seal Beach is a small city with limited funds. What Mr. Nakagawa is recommending is similar to preparing a second EIR. If the Board or the City Council is unhappy with an EIR prepared by a City-hired consultant the City needs to do a better job hiring its Page 5 1=\ I,I;;QCffiMINo.., BeCbe. Environmental Quality Control Board Minutes of January 17,1995 . consultants. Mr. Nakagawa feels the City should have a City Engineer who can be expert in each of these matters. If the City Engineer is not an expert in a certain field he can call friends who are expert in the other areas and they will provide him the expert information. Mr. Curtis indicated the City doesn't have a City Engineer at this time and its unknown when we will. Additionally, Mr. Curtis indicated that a City Engineer's friends are a not likely to work for free in providing their expert information. Mr. Nakagawa asked who picks the consultants. Mr. Curtis indicated it's the City Council and some other people, generally Board and Commission members, hand-picked by the Council. Mr. Nakagawa indicated he was not happy with the traffic consultant. He didn't feel the consultant knew where his information came from and he disputed Mr. Nakagawa's request to use local numbers. He felt it was technically poor and the presentation was poor. Maybe the City Council doesn't know who or how to choose a consultant. An expert City Engineer could help the City Council make a better decision. Mr. Curtis agreed the EIR presentation was lacking, however, he felt that technically the traffic portion was adequate. Mr. Nakagawa felt the Council could use tutoring on hiring experts, since they aren't experts, they don't know what to look for. Perhaps the City could have a fund like the "Save Our Pier" fund where the citizens donate money to be used to hire an expert. Mr. Nakagawa suggested the City Council get a tutorial on how to pick a good engineering firm to do a traffic study. After a while we can trust a certain engineering firm to do our analysis. If an EIR comes about from another agency we can call this expert up and pay him to review the other report. Mr. Curtis indicated the process of hiring such a person is a time consuming process and would not be done for some time. Mr. Nakagawa indicated the City should tell DKS they are unhappy with the poor job they did on the traffic impact portion. Mr. Nakagawa said he wanted a letter to the Council prepared to start the process of hiring a traffic expert. . MOTION BY LOGAN; SECOND BY NAKAGAWA: TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A LETTER TO THE CITY COUNCIL SUGGESTING THE COUNCIL HIRE A TRAFFIC ENGINEERING EXPERT TO ASSIST THE CITY IN REVIEWING TRAFFIC IMPACTS FOR EIR'S, INCLUDING EIR'S FROM OTHER AGENCIES. THE LETTER SHALL INCLUDE THE EQCB'S DISPLEASURE WITH THE WORK DONE BY DKS ASSOCIATES ON THE BIXBY EIR3. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: 3-0 VOCE, NAKAGAWA, LOGAN NONE 8. Request Staff Obtain a Copy of Navy Facility Drawing No. 6035152 for Board Review. (Nakagawa) Mr. Curtis indicated he will provide a copy of this map to the Board. 9. Status of Noise Presentation by Brown-Buntin Associates (Nakagawa) . Page 6 1=\ I,I;;QCIN1INo.., BCCbe. Environmental Quality Control Board Minutes of January 17, 1995 . Mr. Nakagawa felt the Board has received no presentation on the noise and the safety. For instance, he doesn't feel it would be that difficult to color the contours and cross-hatch where the contours are crossing sensitive areas. He indicated he would like to reiterate what he said regarding traffic. He wonders why Aries didn't make the Board a presentation and why Aries' report wasn't really included in the EIR. Mr. Curtis indicated it is, it's a technical appendix to the EIR. Mr. Voce indicated it wasn't included in the bibliography. Mr. Nakagawa expressed concern that the City's numbers are not as well represented as the numbers provided by Bixby's consultants. He wanted the Aries document to be included into the summary table. Mr. Nakagawa felt the EIR places a lot more weight on Bixby's numbers than Aries' numbers. He would like to see Aries come up with a summary to the EIR. If the EIR doesn't have an adequate summary that he can read it doesn't meet CEQA and Board will deny it. He further asks the Aries report be referenced in the bibliography. The bottom line is he wants the City's consultant to have full fUn ofwhat's included in the EIR, rather than Bixby's. He would like to see a summary, contours, crash risks (in layman's terms: visually, verbally and in the summary), a letter to the Planning Commission and the City Council that the Board would like to see those presentations at those meeting, including sound. This would include noise demonstrations. . MOTION BY LOGAN; SECOND BY NAKAGAWA: TO PREPARE A LETTER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE STATUS OF THE NOISE PRESENTATION BY BROWN-BUNTIN AND THE A VIA TION IMPACT REPORT BY ARIES4. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: 3-0 VOCE, NAKAGAWA, LOGAN NONE 10. Message to City Manager from EQCB (Nakagawa) Mr. Nakagawa presented an outline of a letter from the EQCB to the City Manager (attached). Mr. Nakagawa indicated if these items were not met the Board will deny the EIR as inadequate. Mr. Curtis indicated he didn't believe the EQCB had the authority to deny the EIR. The Board is not the ultimate decision making body, but rather an advisory committee. He felt the Board was limited to passing a recommendation, either regarding the adequacy or inadequacy of the EIR, to the Planning Commission and ultimately City Council. Mr. Curtis indicated he would forward Mr. Nakagawa's letter to the City Manager in the form ofa memorandum from the Board if that is the wish of the Board. Mr. Nakagawa indicated the AICUZ study had noise contours. These should be considered as well. Mr. Nakagawa indicated he was not pleased with the presentations. Reading the summary was boring and put the audience to sleep. He holds staff directly responsible for this. . Page 7 1=\ 1,I;;QCB\M1N9.., BCCbe. . . . Environmental Quality Control Board Minutes of January 17, 1995 MOTION BY LOGAN; SECONDBYNAKAGAWA: TOFORWARDA MEMORANDUM TO THE CITY MANAGER, CARBONED TO THE CITY COUNCIL, AS PRESENTED BY MR NAKAGA WAs. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: 3-0 VOCE, NAKAGAWA, LOGAN NONE Chairman Voce indicated the Press Telegram is interested in receiving a copy of the agenda. Mr. Curtis indicated they need only contact staffand staffwill provide one. IX. ADJOURNMENT MOTION BY LOGAN; SECOND BY NAKAGAWA: TO ADJOURN. MOTION CARRIED: AYES: NOES: The meeting was adjourned at 8:48 P.M. 1= \ I,I;;QClN1lNos.' BCC be. 3-0 VOCE, NAKAGAWA, LOGAN NONE Page 8 . Board Requests/Directions Schedule Call EP A staff person for presentation before Board. To include: 1. AFRC's JP-4 violations 2. Exxon Oil Spill 3. Any toxic Waste on Navy base 4. Can EPA provide engineering support or funds to City 5. Can City be included on Mailing list Environmental Quality Control Board Minutes of January 17, 1995 2 Letter to City Council seeking funds to investigate past violations by Navy and AFRC. 3 Letter to City Council suggesting the Council hire a traffic engineering expert to assist City. This letter should include EQCB's displeasure with DKS Associates work on Bixby EIR. 4 Letter to Planning Commission and City Council re: status of noise presentation and Aviation Impact Report. Specifically, the Board wants the PC & CC to have these presentations at their meetings. s Forward Memo provided by Nakagawa to City Manager, CC to CC. . . Page 9 1=\ 1,I;;QCB\M1N9.., BCCbe.