HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2011-02-14 #M AGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: February 14, 2011
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: Patrick P. Importuna, City Manager
FROM: Mark Persico, AICP, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: RIVER'S END STAGING AREA AND SAN GABRIEL
RIVER BIKEWAY ENHANCEMENT PLAN
(SCH #2010021026) AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION WITH APPENDIX
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
That the Council conduct a public hearing, allow public testimony, and, at the
conclusion of the hearing, consider all testimony, comments and evidence, adopt
the resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration as revised by the
Appendix (2011 MND), approve the River's End Staging Area and San Gabriel
River Bike Trail project ( "Project"), and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (SCH# 2010021026).
BACKGROUND:
The City has received a grant for approximately $2,000,000 from the Rivers and
Mountains Conservancy for the Project. The River's End Staging Area ( "RESA ")
presently includes: paved surface parking spaces, a restaurant facility, and a
City -owned maintenance structure. The San Gabriel River Bikeway Trail ( "Trail ")
is a paved regional recreational trail along the eastern boundary of the San
Gabriel River between the cities of Azusa and Seal Beach.
The City, acting as the Lead Agency, hired RBF Consulting (RBF) to prepare a
draft MND for the Project. The document was prepared pursuant to
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA
Guidelines.
The document was circulated for public review and comment from February 5,
2010 through March 5, 2010. Copies of the MND were delivered to members of
the City Council, Planning Commission, Environmental Quality Control Board
(EQCB), affected agencies and interested parties. EQCB reviewed the MND on
February 24, 2010 provided comments to staff, and recommended adoption of
Agenda Item M
Page 2
the MND. On March 18, 2010, the Planning Commission also held a public
hearing to consider adoption of the MND.
The City received four comment letters during the circulation period: Southern
California Gas Company (February 10, 2010), California Department of
Transportation (March 1, 2010), Bay City Partners (March 5, 2010) and California
Department of Transportation (March 9, 2010). CEQA does not require a lead
agency to prepare written responses to comments received (see CEQA
Guidelines Section 15088). However, the City's independent consultant RBF
voluntarily prepared written responses to the four comment letters timely
submitted (See "Responses to Comments and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program" dated March 2010 ( "Responses ")). After the conclusion of
the circulation period, Bay City Partners submitted a second letter, dated March
18, 2010, during the Planning Commission hearing. Once again, although under
no legal obligation to respond to the tardy submittal, Staff responded to the
March 18 letter at the hearing, and addressed such letter later in the April 26,
2010 staff report. The April 26, 2010 staff report, including its findings as to the
Project and all attachments, is hereby incorporated by this reference.
On April 26, 2010, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5995 thereby
adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project. Resolution No. 5995
and the Mitigated Negative Declaration are hereby incorporated by this
reference. Thereafter, Bay City Partners ( "BCP ") filed a challenge under CEQA.
BCP argued that the City engaged in improper piecemealing by conducting two
separate environmental reviews: one for BCP's development project on its
property; and a second one for the Project. BCP also contended that the Project
would have potential adverse impacts, and therefore the City should prepare an
environmental impact report. Specifically, BCP argued that by repaving the
parking lot and bike trail, more people will visit the site thus creating more traffic.
In the subsequent CEQA lawsuit, the court rejected all of BCP's contentions
except the narrow argument relating to site control issues pertaining to portions
of the Trail on property owned by BCP. BCP represented in court that it may not
continue to provide permission to the public to use portions of the Project located
on its property. Based upon such representations, the Orange County Superior
Court vacated the City's approval of the Project and directed the City to disclose
that a portion of the existing San Gabriel River Bikeway Trail bikeway ('Trail ")
crosses over property owned by BCP, and to study whether there are any
impacts on the environment if BCP prevents the public's continuing use of the
Trail on its property.
The City. commissioned RBF to study whether there are any impacts on the
environment if BCP prevents the public's continuing use of the Trail on its
property. RBF prepared an Appendix that discloses that a portion of the Trail
crosses over property owned by BCP and studies whether there are any impacts
on the environment if BCP prevents the public's continuing use of the Trail on its
property.
Page 3
On January 13, 2011, the City issued a Notice of Availability for the MND and the
Appendix, and circulated the Appendix from January 14, 2011 through February
14, 2011 for review and comment to more than 30 persons and entities, plus
each member of the EQCB, Planning Commission, and City Council. As of
February 7, 2011, no comments have been received by the City. In addition, the
City provided the public three additional opportunities to present comments on
the Project: January 26, 2011, before the EQCB; February 2, 2011, before the
Planning Commission; and tonight before the City Council. No comments were
received during the EQCB or Planning Commission meetings.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project will be funded through the proceeds of the grant from the Rivers and
Mountains Conservancy.
FACTS AND ANALYSIS:
The Project
Currently, the RESA is approximately 2.70 acres in size. The existing parking lot
would be repaved in some areas and restriped. Two new stone informational
kiosks would be constructed at the two southern corners of the parking lot.
Windsurf Park, located along the eastern boundary of the site, would be
expanded to include additional turf, picnic tables, benches, trash receptacles,
and signage improvements. This area would also include windsurfer board racks
and rinse facilities.
The Project also includes native landscaping improvements along the southern
and western boundaries of this area, in addition to a block wall along the eastern
boundary. A new tubular steel fence and gate would be installed along the
southern portion of the facility. In total, the Project would add 0.61 -acre to the
existing RESA, for a proposed total of 3.31 acres. The expanded area — 0.61
acres — is currently sand along the southeast and southwest edge of the RESA
that will be incorporated into the windsurf rigging area and picnic area.
The San Gabriel River Bikeway Trail improvements consist of repaving the trail
along its 3.4 miles length from 1 -405 to its southern terminus, construction of a
small seating area, and minor landscape and signage improvements.
MND and Appendix
The MND is analyzed in the April 26, 2010 staff report.
Page 4
Pursuant to the court's ruling, RBF prepared an Appendix to the MND disclosing
that a portion of the existing Trail crosses over property owned by BCP, and
analyzing whether there are any impacts on the environment if BCP prevents the
public's continuing use of the Trail on its property. The Appendix is hereby
incorporated by this reference. The Appendix concludes that if BCP were to
obtain permission from the California Coastal Commission to close the Trail on
its property, Trail users seeing access to the beach/RESA via the Trail would
proceed east on Marina Drive, turn right onto 1st Street, and continue on 1st
Street to the access road to the 1st Street Parking lot, instead of proceeding
further south on the Trail to reach the barrier and retracing their steps to return to
Marina Drive. No improvements to Marina Drive, 1st Street, or the access road
are required to accommodate additional pedestrians or cyclists. If BCP does not
allow the City to install any improvements on its property, any corresponding
impacts on the environment are reduced because there will be less construction
on the Trail. Likewise, if BCP prevents the public's continued use of the Trail on
its property, no changes are necessary because users seeking to reach the
beach /RESA would utilize existing public roadways.
As outlined in the February 2010 IS /MND, the Project proposes to improve
approximately 3.4 miles of the existing Trail from Pacific Coast Highway to the
RESA. A portion of the Trail south of Marina Drive crosses private property for
approximately 800 linear feet. The overall Trail south of Marina Drive is
approximately 1125 linear feet (less than 1 /4 mile) until it reaches the City owned
property that includes the RESA. Although a majority of the 800 feet is within
public easements, two small portions are outside the boundaries of the
easements. The proposed improvements outside the easements are limited to
the addition of two inches of asphalt over the existing asphalt and painting of a
centerline stripe. Proposed improvements within the easement areas are new
asphalt, striping, concrete benches, signage, and a viewing area.
Currently, cyclists and pedestrians using the Trail must exit the Trail at Marina
Drive (north of BCP's property) because the Trail is at grade and there is no
street undercrossing underneath Marina Drive. Once users are at Marina Drive
they have two options for accessing the beach: (1) proceed east on Marina Drive,
turn right onto 1 Street, and continue on 1st Street to the access road to the 1st
Street Parking lot; (2) exit Marina Drive via a maintenance passageway south of
Marina Drive and proceed to where the Trail resumes in the public easement.
Marina Drive is fully improved with curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and bike lanes on
each side of the road. Recently the City repaved 1 Street, a fully improved street
with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Vehicles and cyclists currently share 1st
Street.
Before closing the Trail BCP would need to obtain permission from the California
Coastal Commission. Upon closure of the Trail, users wishing to access the
beach would encounter a barrier and would be forced to turn back and use
Marina Drive and 1 Street to access the beach.
Page 5
The Trail closure would reduce the scope of the Project because the
improvements proposed for the portions of the Trail located on BCP's property
would be eliminated from the Project. As indicated in the MND, there are very
few impacts associated with the improvements proposed for the Trail.
Nevertheless, eliminating the improvements located on BCP's property in the
Project will eliminate all impacts that would have resulted from those
improvements. For instance due to a smaller construction impact area, impacts
would be reduced with regard to air quality (less dust and construction equipment
emissions), water quality (reduced erosion potential during construction), and
noise (shorter construction duration in the vicinity).
Further, in the event BCP were to prevent Trail users on its property, those
potential users seeking access to the beach /RESA via the Trail would instead
reach their destination by utilizing Marina Drive, 1 Street, and the access road to
the 1 Street parking lot. No improvements to Marina Drive, 1 Street, or the
access road are required to accommodate additional pedestrians or cyclists.
In sum, if BCP does not allow the City to install any improvements on its
property, any corresponding impacts on the environment are reduced because
there will be Tess construction on the Trail. Likewise, if BCP prevents the public's
continued use of the Trail on its property, no changes to the Project are
necessary because users seeking to reach the beach /RESA would utilize
existing public roadways.
The Appendix analyzes potential effects in each of the subject areas, as outlined
in the CEQA Initial Study. The Appendix concludes all direct, indirect, and
cumulative environmental effects would be less than significant for the Project.
No revised or new mitigation measures are required; therefore, the City finds that
the Appendix to the IS /MND adequately studies and addresses all impacts
created by the Project.
Documents for Council Consideration
The City Council previously received copies of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Appendix, and all documents incorporated by reference in this
staff report. Attached hereto as Attachment A is a draft Resolution for Council
review and consideration.
Conclusion `
This Project has been analyzed pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.
With the mitigation measures incorporated, all potential impacts have been
reduced to a level of less than significant. The draft MND fully and substantially
complies with all requirements under CEQA.
Page 6
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 6111 adopting the Mitigated Negative
Declaration as revised by the Appendix and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program for the River's End Staging Area (RESA)
and the San Gabriel River Bikeway Enhancement Plan (SCH#
2010021026).
2. Approve the construction and landscape improvement project
pursuant to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated
mitigation measures.
3. Approve the Project for the Rivers End Staging Area and San
Gabriel River Bikeway Enhancement Plan.
4. Direct staff to file the appropriate CEQA forms with the County
Clerk.
5. Direct staff to proceed with all steps necessary to implement the
Project after the City has demonstrated to the court its compliance
with the mandates of CEQA and the writ issued by the court.
SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED:
Mark H. Persico, AICP Patrick P. Import a
Director of Development Services City Manager
Attachments:
A. Resolution No. 6111
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS HAVE ALREADY BEEN PROVIDED
TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND PUBLIC
1. Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration for improvements to the Rivers End Staging
Area and San Gabriel River Bikeway Enhancement Plan, February 2010.
2. Appendix to the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration for improvements to the
Rivers End Staging Area and San Gabriel River Bikeway Enhancement Plan, January 14,
2011.
RESOLUTION NUMBER 6111
A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL
ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
APPENDIX IN CONNECTION WITH THE RIVERS END STAGING
AREA AND SAN GABRIEL RIVER BIKEWAY ENHANCEMENT
PLAN PROJECT AND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM,
APPROVING THE PROJECT AND INSTRUCTING STAFF TO
FILE APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION WITH THE COUNTY
OF ORANGE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE, FIND, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. On April 26, 2010, the City Council adopted Resolution No.
5995 thereby adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rivers End Staging
Area ( "RESA ") and the San Gabriel River Bikeway Trail Enhancement Plan
( "Project"). Thereafter, Bay City Partners ( "BCP ") filed a challenge under the
California Environmental Quality Act and represented in court that it may not
continue to provide permission to the public to use portions of the Project located
on its property. Based upon such representations, the Orange County Superior
Court vacated the City's approval of the Project and directed the City to disclose
that a portion of the existing San Gabriel River Bikeway Trail ('Trail ") crosses
over property owned by BCP, and to study whether there are any impacts on the
environment if BCP prevents the public's continuing use of the Trail on its
property.
Section 2. The RESA presently includes: a paved surface parking lot, a
restaurant facility, and a City -owned maintenance structure. The City proposes to:
add landscaping and associated irrigation facilities; repave the existing parking lot
in some areas with asphalt; restripe the lot to create five ADA- compliant parking
spaces and add one parking space; install two new stone informational kiosks at
the two southem corners of the parking lot; install a stone entry monument sign and
entry gate at the First Street entrance; renovate and add sidewalks; add signs and
lighting; and add a series of seat walls to block wind -blown sand from reaching the
RESA. Windsurf Park, located along the eastern boundary of the site, would be
expanded to include additional turf, picnic tables, benches, trash receptacles, and
signage improvements. This area would also include windsurfer board racks and
rinse facilities. The Project also includes native landscaping improvements along
the southem and western boundaries of this area, in addition to a block wall along
the eastern boundary. A new tubular steel fence and gate would be installed along
the southem portion of the facility. In total, the Project would add 0.61 -acre to the
existing RESA, for a proposed total of 3.31 acres.
Section 3. The Trail is a paved regional recreational trail along the
eastem boundary of the San Gabriel River between the cities of Azusa and Seal
Beach and is used by pedestrians and cyclists. The City proposes to improve
approximately 3.4 miles of the Trail, from 1 -405 to the northern boundary of the
Rivers End parking lot. Proposed improvements to the Trail are: resurfacing and
restriping of the existing trail; planting of native landscaping; installation of signage;
installation of a decorative concrete area with a cobblestone kiosk featuring a trail
map and interpretive sign, a drinking fountain, a concrete seat wall, and bicycle
racks at the southern terminus; installation of a viewing node containing concrete
benches, trash receptacles and native landscaping; and replacement of exotic
landscaping with native plantings. A portion of the Trail is south of Marina Drive.
That portion is approximately 1125 linear feet (less than 1/4 mile) until it reaches
the City -owned property that includes the RESA. Within this 1125 linear feet
portion of the Trail, approximately 800 linear feet crosses BCP property.
Although a majority of the 800 feet is within public easements, two small portions
are outside the boundaries of the easements. The proposed improvements
outside the easements are limited to the addition of two inches of asphalt over
Resolution Number 6111
the existing asphalt and painting of a centerline stripe. Proposed improvements
within the easement areas are new asphalt, striping, concrete benches, signage
and a viewing area.
Section 4. The Project has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to
the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources
Code Sections 21000, et seq. ( "CEQA ")), and the State CEQA Guidelines
(California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.). The City
engaged the services of the independent environmental consulting firm of RBF
Consulting ( "RBF'). RBF prepared an initial study pursuant to State CEQA
Guidelines § 15025(a). Based on the information contained in the initial study,
RBF concluded that the Project could have a significant effect on the
environment, but that mitigation measures could be implemented to reduce such
impacts to a less than significant level. Based upon this determination, RBF
prepared a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration ( "MND ") in accordance with
CEQA Section 21080(c) and Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Notice of the preparation of the MND was posted and circulated for public review
and comment from February 5, 2010 through March 5, 2010. Copies of the MND
were delivered to members of the City Council, Planning Commission,
Environmental Quality Control Board ( "EQCB "), affected agencies and interested
parties. EQCB held a hearing on February 24, 2010 and recommended adoption
of the MND. On March 18, 2010, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
to consider the MND and four comment letters received by the City during the
circulation period from: Southern California Gas Company (February 10, 2010),
California Department of Transportation (March 1, 2010), Bay City Partners
(March 5, 2010) and California Department of Transportation (March 9, 2010).
Although CEQA does not require a lead agency to prepare written responses to
comments received (see CEQA Section 21091(d) and CEQA Guidelines Section
15088), the City elected to prepare written responses to the four comment letters
timely submitted. On March 18, 2010, after the conclusion of the circulation
period, Bay City Partners submitted a second comment during the Planning
Commission hearing. Once again, although under no legal obligation to respond
to the tardy submittal, Staff responded to the second comment letter at the
hearing, and the staff report for the Council public hearing likewise addresses the
letter. BCP argued that the City engaged in improper piecemealing by
conducting two separate environmental reviews for the development project on
its property and for the City's Project. BCP also contended that the City's Project
would have potential adverse impacts, and therefore the City should prepare an
environmental impact report. Specifically, BCP argued that by repaving the
parking lot and bike trail, more people will visit the site thus creating more traffic.
In the subsequent CEQA lawsuit, the court rejected all of BCP's contentions
except the narrow argument relating to site control issues pertaining to portions
of the Trail on property owned by BCP.
Section 5. Pursuant to the court's ruling, RBF prepared an Appendix to
the MND disclosing that a portion of the existing Trail crosses over property
owned by BCP, and analyzing whether there are any impacts on the environment
if BCP prevents the public's continuing use of the Trail on its property. The
Appendix concludes that if BCP were to obtain permission from the California
Coastal Commission to close the Trail on its property, Trail users seeing access
to the beach /RESA via the Trail would proceed east on Marina Drive, turn right
onto 1st Street, and continue on 1st Street to the access road to the 1st Street
Parking lot, instead of proceeding further south on the Trail to reach BCP's
property and retracing their steps to return to Marina Drive. No improvements to
Marina Drive, 1st Street, or the access road are required to accommodate
additional pedestrians or cyclists. If BCP does not allow the City to install any
improvements on its property, any corresponding impacts on the environment are
reduced because there will be less construction on the Trail. Likewise, if BCP
prevents the public's continued use of the Trail on its property, no changes are
necessary because users seeking to reach the beach /RESA would utilize
existing public roadways.
Resolution Number 6111
Section 6. On January 13, 2011, the City issued a Notice of Availability
for the MND and the Appendix, and circulated the Appendix from January 14,
2011 through February 14, 2011 for review and comment to more than 30
persons and entities, plus each member of the EQCB, Planning Commission,
and City Council. In addition, the City provided the public three additional
opportunities to present comments on the Project January 26, 2011, before the
EQCB; February 2, 2011, before the Planning Commission; and February 14, 2011
before the City Council. No comments were received during the EQCB or Planning
Commission meetings.
Section 7. On February 14, 2011, the City Council considered the
Project at a duly noticed public hearing. The City Council entered into the record
the Initial Study, the MND as revised by the Appendix, the comments on the
MND, the responses to the comments on the MND, written and oral staff reports,
correspondence, public testimony, and all exhibits attached to the staff report.
Section 8. Pursuant to Section 15074(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines,
the City Council independently reviewed and considered the contents of the
Initial Study, the MND as revised by the Appendix, the comments on the MND,
the responses to the comments on the MND, written and oral staff reports,
correspondence, and public testimony (collectively, the "Environmental
Documentation ") prior to deciding whether to approve the Project. Based on the
Environmental Documentation, and the whole record before the City Council, the
City Council hereby finds that the MND and the Appendix prepared for the
Project reflect the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council and
that there is no substantial evidence that the approval of the Project, as
mitigated, will have any significant environmental impact. The City has
addressed each of the identified concerns within the Environmental
Documentation. Moreover, although CEQA does not require responses to
comments concerning a mitigated negative declaration, the City responded in
writing to comments received.
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing, and based upon substantial
evidence in the record before the City Council, the Council exercising its
independent judgment and analysis hereby finds:
1. Approval of the Project, with mitigation, will not result in a significant
effect on the environment.
2. This Project involves no potential for adverse effects, either
individually or cumulatively, on wildlife resources and will not have an adverse
impact on fish and wildlife.
3. There is not substantial evidence to suggest that the Project will
result in inadequate parking capacity or adverse traffic impacts. Because the
number of parking spaces will increase by one with Project implementation, and
because the improvements to the facilities are not expected to substantially
change the number of persons coming to the area for recreational purposes, the
Project will not have significant traffic or parking impacts. In the event that BCP
prevents the public's continued use of the Trail on its property, there is no
potential for adverse traffic impacts because Marina Drive, 1st Street and the
access road to the 1 Street parking lot can fully accommodate additional
pedestrians or cyclists that may be created by such action by BCP.
4. The proposed Project will not necessitate any physical changes to
the City's maintenance structure and storage yard or the adjacent privately -
owned oil facility, and as such does not have the potential to cause any adverse
impacts to the environment from any release of hazardous materials associated
with these existing facilities.
5. There is no evidence that climate change will cause short-term
flooding impacts on any component of the Project, and unsubstantiated and
Resolution Number 6111
speculative opinions or narratives in the record do not constitute evidence that
such impacts could occur. The evidence in the record supports a conclusion that
no impacts in this regard will occur in the foreseeable future.
6. If BCP prevents the public's continued use of the Trail on its
property, no changes to the Project or its implementation are necessary because
users seeking to reach the beach /RESA would utilize existing public roadways.
Section 10. The foregoing findings are based on substantial evidence in
the record, including, without limitation, the Initial Study, the draft MND as revised
by the Appendix, staff reports and exhibits, and both oral and written testimony.
The documents that comprise the record of the proceedings are on file with the
Department of Development Services, 211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach. The
custodian of said records is the Director of Development Services.
Section 11. The City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative
Declaration, as revised by the Appendix, and approves the Project.
Section 12. The City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by
this reference, and imposes each mitigation measure as a condition of the
Project's approval. City staff shall be responsible for implementation and
monitoring the mitigation measures as described in Exhibit A.
Section 13. The Council hereby instructs the Director of Development
Services to file a notice of determination with the County of Orange. The Council
further authorizes staff to proceed with all steps necessary to implement the
Project after the City has demonstrated to the court its compliance with the
mandates of CEQA and the writ issued by the court.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Seal Beach City Council at a
regular meeting held on the 14th day of February , 2011 by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members
NOES: Council Members
ABSENT: Council Members
ABSTAIN: Council Members
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH }
1, Linda Devine, City Clerk of the City of Seal Beach, do hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number 6111 on file in
the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the Seal Beach
City Council at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of February , 2011.
City Clerk