Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2011-04-11 #G AGENDA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 11, 2011 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: Jill R. Ingram, Acting City Manager FROM: Mark Persico, AICP, Director of Development Services SUBJECT: RATIFY THE AMENDED COMMENT LETTERS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL BOARD (EQCB) SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Ratify the amended comment letters from the Environmental Quality Control Board (EQCB) regarding the potential environmental impacts of two projects: 2nd Street + PCH (Pacific Coast Highway) in the City of Long Beach and the JTFB (Joint Forces Training Base) Black Hawk Project in the City of Los Alamitos. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: The Environmental Quality Control Board has reviewed two projects and is recommending that the City Council ratify the attached letters as amended. 2nd Street + PCH Project (City of Lonq Beach) The current project includes: 191,475 square feet of retail uses; 325 residential units; and a 100 -room hotel. This is at least the third Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for this site. The issues, however, for all projects have been similar: traffic, air quality, on -site open space, and impacts to the Los Cerritos Wetlands. The City sent comments to Long Beach on June 2, 2010, addressing the last project. Staff received a copy of the re- circulated Draft EIR on March 11 and the EQCB considered the matter on March 30. At the direction of EQCB, staff has added comments related to the potential conflicts created between construction of the proposed project and the Seal Beach Boulevard bridge reconstruction. Agenda Item G Page 2 JFTB — Black Hawk Project The JFTB circulated an Environmental Assessment and Draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) on March 16, 2011, for the proposed Black Hawk Helicopter Company project. The project involves relocating a unit from Victorville to Los Alamitos. The unit is an 87- member aviation company consisting of 29 full - time personnel and 58 part -time reserve soldiers on the Base. It also includes 8 Black Hawk helicopters, and associated support equipment, but there is no new construction proposed as part of the project. EQCB considered the matter on March 30. During the EQCB meeting issues were raised about the adequacy of the noise study and the fact that pilots were not following the prescribed flight plan. Staff has added those comments to the revised comment letter. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorizes the Mayor to sign the two attached comment letters and forward to the appropriate Lead Agencies. SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED: Mark H. Persico, Al oir R. Ingram, Director of Development Services Acting City Manag - r Attachment A. Comment Letter — 2 + PCH Project B. Comment Letter — JFTB Black Hawk Project ATTACHMENT "A" COMMENT LETTER - 2 ND + PCH PROJECT 0 S E (A B ` oQOpa F 9 C � Ci 0 l c eak � C �� ^ C ITY HALL 211 EIGHTH STREL1 SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90740 (5631 43 1 -2527 • ∎N%yv, Liseal boaL11.La uti April 11, 2011 Mr. Craig Chalfant City of Long Beach Department of Development Services 333 W. Ocean Boulevard, 5 Floor Long Beach, CA 90802 SUBJECT: City of Seal Beach Comments re: Recirculated Draft EIR "Second + PCH Development' Dear Mr. Chalfant: The City of Seal Beach has reviewed the above referenced Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report ( "Recirculated DEIR "). The City of Seal Beach submitted comments on the previous DEIR in June 2010. We appreciate the fact that the City of Long Beach has chosen to recirculate the DEIR, but we continue to have significant concerns regarding this proposed project and have several comments and observations relative to the document. In submitting the following comments, Seal Beach is not asserting overall opposition to the proposed project, but seeks to forcefully convey to the City of Long Beach and to other cooperating and responsible agencies, that the current environmental analysis document is deficient and must be revised and corrected to comply with the full disclosure requirements of CEQA. Further, based on what we still consider to be insufficient analysis contained within the recirculated document, impacts associated with the proposed project are unacceptable to Seal Beach, absent complete and thorough environmental analysis and imposition of appropriate mitigation measures that are enforceable and which adequately respond to the adverse environmental impacts that are addressed with the applicable mitigation measures. Seal Beach believes that a properly prepared environmental document will clearly describe feasible solutions that would reduce project- related impacts upon the environment to an acceptable level. As required under CEQA, "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible altematives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects" (Section 21002, CEQA) and "each public agency shall mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment of projects that it carries out or approves whenever it is feasible to do so" (Section 21002.1(b), (CEQA). 1 DRAFT -- DRAFT Seal Beach believes that the project's objectives can be met while avoiding, or at least further reducing, significant impacts upon Seal Beach. The failure to pursue those alternative actions or reduced project scope constitutes a violation of CEQA. The following are issue areas that the City of Seal Beach believes are still not adequately addressed within the Recirculated DEIR: A. Traffic Projections: Basing future traffic predictions on 2009 count data could be understating future traffic volumes, as volumes during the current recession are often less than they were four to five years ago. While a growth rate of 1% per year is reasonable, using 2009 as a base year may seriously understate future traffic. It may be more appropriate to use counts from the pre- recession time frame (2005/2006) as the base year to determine future traffic. Such data is readily available (see previous 2nd Street/PCH and Home Depot at Studebaker Road /Loynes Drive traffic studies). B. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Study Methodology: On page IV.L -19 it states: Caltrans "endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" on State highway facilities "; it does not require that LOS "D" [shall] be maintained. However, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not always be feasible and recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS. For the purposes of this analysis, LOS D is the target level of service standard and will be utilized to assess the project impacts at the State - controlled study intersections. Did the City of Long Beach consult with Caltrans regarding State intersections to determine the appropriate target LOS, and did Caltrans agree that LOS "D" (s 35.0 seconds of delay per vehicle) rather than the transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" (s 25.0 seconds of delay per vehicle) is appropriate at unsignalized intersections? Likewise, for signalized intersections, did Caltrans agree that LOS "D" (s 55.0 seconds of delay per vehicle) rather than the transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" (s 35.0 seconds of delay per vehicle) is appropriate? C. Lack of Detailed Traffic Impact "Fair Share" Calculation of All Identified Project and Cumulative Proiect Impacts to Identified Intersections: Seal Beach continues to believe that the City of Long Beach has. the discretion to impose, and must impose as a mitigation measure in the certified environmental document, a "Project- Related Fair Share Contribution" to begin the process of accumulating the necessary funds to address the existing deficiencies at all "choke - points" that would be impacted within the regional transportation system, in coordination and cooperation with the Califomia Department of Transportation. It is also our position that projects such as the Second + PCH development, and other future projects should be required to provide this type of contribution to address the cumulative impacts of these projects upon the regional transportation system. When the Boeing Integrated Defense Systems ( "BIDS ") Specific Plan area (the business/ light industrial park located just east of the Island Village (Long Beach) neighborhood was proposed in 2003, the traffic impact analysis that was part of the 2 DRAFT -- DRAFT required environmental review included a discussion of "Project- Related Fair Share Contribution" on pages 74 and 75. This discussion addressed the net traffic impacts of the BIDS project to the intersections of Pacific Coast Highway/Westminster Avenue (now 2 Street) and Westminster Avenue (now 2 Street) and Studebaker Road. A "fair - share" calculation was prepared and a "fair- share" dollar contribution to the City of Long Beach was identified and paid to the City of Long Beach by the Boeing Corporation after the completion of the project. The "fair- share" calculation should include the following major cost categories, including the appropriate cost assumptions, as those identified in the Linscott, Law & Greenspan traffic analysis for the BIDS Specific Plan EIR: ❑ A detailed description of improvement(s); ❑ Area of improvement; ❑ Cost per square foot of street widening; ❑ Number of signal corners; ❑ Construction cost estimate; ❑ Construction cost estimate with 25% contingency; ❑ Cost of Rights -of -Way; ❑ Construction cost with Right -of -Way acquisition; and ❑ Project Fair Share percent D. Lack of Discussion as to Potential Transportation Impacts to Seal Beach and Inadequate Mitigation Measures: Given that traffic impacts for PCH intersections at 2nd Street and Studebaker Road are unmitigatable, Marina Drive could become a heavily used access route for destinations to the south such as Seal Beach, Sunset Beach, Huntington Beach, etc. Therefore, the intersection of Marina Drive at 1 Street in Seal Beach should be evaluated. Likewise, given that Seal Beach Boulevard will be a major access route to 1-405 southbound, and that Bolsa Avenue is a "shortcut" for accessing 1 -405 via Seal Beach Boulevard, the intersection of Bolsa Avenue and Seal Beach Boulevard should be evaluated. Additionally, the traffic impacts on Bolsa Avenue itself, a two lane roadway with bike lanes and multiple stop controlled intersections that provides access to McGaugh Elementary School, should also be evaluated. Under the related projects section of the DEIR, there is no discussion of the major freeway improvements being undertaken as part of the West County Connectors project and its impacts to local traffic. Traffic will be diverted onto local streets for up to four years while the interchange and the Seal Beach Boulevard Bridge are being improved. The traffic study fails to account for the traffic impacts. The City of Seal Beach is still very much concerned that adequate measures have not been proposed as "mitigation measures" by Long Beach to address the potential project traffic impacts at College Park Drive and the SR -22 Westbound /Studebaker Road on -off ramps. We have commented on this concern since 2004 in regards to the previously proposed "Home Depot" project; the previously proposed "Lennar /Sea Port Marina" project; and the original DEIR for the "Second + PCH" project. While the proposed improvements to the existing Studebaker Road at SR -22 Westbound Ramps included in the Recirculated DEIR may help alleviate the traffic impact of the 3 DRAFT -- DRAFT proposed project at that particular intersection, the City of Seal Beach wishes to, again, reiterate comments that have previously been made regarding the safety and visibility issues that exist at the intersection of College Park Drive and the SR -22 Westbound /Studebaker Road on -off ramps that were provided to Long Beach as part of the comments on the "Home Depot EIR" (June 2005); the "Lennar /Sea Port Marina DEIR" (September 2006); and the original "Second + PCH Development DEIR" (June 2010). Those comments are still applicable to this project, even with the proposed mitigation at this intersection, as the City of Seal Beach continues to believe that adverse impacts will continue at this intersection. The City of Seal Beach continues to strongly encourage the City of Long Beach to implement intersection improvements, detailed as part of a traffic study prepared by Willdan Engineering in March 2010, that would help alleviate the traffic impacts at the College Park Drive and the SR -22 Westbound/Studebaker Road intersection, a situation that the City of Seal Beach believes will only be exacerbated by implementation of the proposed project. (See attachment — Traffic Study Report from Wi lldan Engineering, March 2010) E. Request for Additional Information Regarding the Proposed Traffic and Circulation Mitigation Measure 'L -10'; and the Imposition of Proiect - Related Traffic Impact Fees for Identified Impacts at Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard and Potentially Other Identified Intersections Within the City of Seal Beach: The project analysis indicates that Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard will experience significant impacts requiring mitigation during the A.M. peak hour and Saturday midday hours due to the proposed project. Mitigation Measure 'L -10' (Page IV.L -70) states that converting the westbound right tum lane into a third westbound through lane and widening the intersection to allow for an exclusive right -tum lane would completely offset the impact of the proposed project on this intersection. The measure further states that installation of this mitigation measure is subject to the approval of the City of Seal Beach and /or the State of California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS). The City of Seal Beach continues to believe that this proposed intersection improvement and right -of -way acquisition will not be feasible, and requests that additional information with regard to specific mitigation measures be included in the Final EIR that address the following: ❑ A detailed description of all intersection improvement(s); ❑ Area of Improvement, including necessary Rights -of -Way acquisitions; ❑ Projected costs and potential impacts of Rights -of -Way acquisitions; ❑ Construction cost estimate; ❑ Construction cost estimate with 25% contingency; ❑ Construction cost with Rights -of -Way acquisition; and ❑ Project Fair Share percent Additionally, column 5 of Table IV.L -13 ( "Existing Plus Project With Shuttle Service Traffic Conditions ") appears to show that a potential shuttle service running along Second Street between Belmont Shore and the project site would potentially reduce the project traffic impact at the Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard intersection, during the A.M. peak hour and Saturday midday hours, from an LOS "E" to an LOS "D ". The City of Seal Beach requests that additional information be provided as to how a shuttle service, running in an opposite direction to the project site and approximately 1.5 miles from the Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard intersection, will alleviate project traffic impacts to this intersection. 4 DRAFT - DRAFT F. Request that the Analysis of Aesthetics and Views Analyze Light and Glare Impacts, Upon All Residences That Abut Gum Grove Park; the Heron Pointe Subdivision: the westernmost portions of the 'Old Town' neighborhood: Seal Beach Shores: and the Oakwood Apartments within the City of Seal Beach: The existing two -story buildings that presently occupy approximately 30 percent of the project site are proposed to be replaced with buildings up to 12 stories (approximately 150 feet with rooftop structural components and emergency helipad) occupying a much greater footprint across the project site. While the City of Seal Beach is pleased to see that the Recirculated DEIR has taken into account the City's previous comments regarding the failure of the original DEIR to evaluate daytime aesthetics and views, the City of Seal Beach has concerns that the Recirculated DEIR still does not take into account the potentially substantial, adverse light and glare impacts, upon all residences that abut Gum Grove Park, the Heron Pointe Subdivision, the westernmost portions of the 'Old Town' neighborhood, Seal Beach Shores, and the Oakwood Apartments within the City of Seal Beach. It is requested that the Final EIR include nighttime view simulations from various points within these affected areas of Seal Beach, depicting the mass, height, and bulk of the proposed project, as well as its relation, and potential incompatibility, with surrounding development. Additionally, because of the proposed mass and height of several structures that will be visible from residential areas of Seal Beach, the City of Seal Beach continues to request that a lumen study /dark sky analysis be performed to quantify the proposed project's light impacts, as well as detail on the type of exterior materials to be used on the tower element, to determine any potential glare impacts to nearby residential areas and wetland areas within the City of Seal Beach. G. Request that a More Thorough Analysis of Potential Impacts to Biological Resources and the Adjacent Los Cerritos Wetlands Be Performed: The Recirculated DEIR does not properly identify the biological setting of the proposed project and dismisses the existence of nearby potentially sensitive habitats, some of which could be adversely affected by increased traffic, illumination, noise, and air pollution from the proposed project. The City of Seal Beach, in conjunction with the State of California, The Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority, and the City of Long Beach, has worked for years to protect and preserve significant portions of the Los Cerritos Wetlands /Hellman Wetlands areas from development and to provide for the restoration of these areas. The City of Seal beach believes that the Recirculated DEIR gives a very summary treatment to the substantial amount of biological resources and wildlife that exist within the Los Cerritos Wetlands and fails to mention that there are, in fact, fish and wildlife corridors within a 500 -foot radius of the project site which support marine, terrestrial, and avian wildlife, as well as numerous plant species, and the intensification of development, as well as the resulting increase in traffic, along sites that abut or are in close proximity to these corridors may have a detrimental effect on these areas. The Recirculated DEIR's own Biological Resource Assessment (Appendix C) states that several sensitive plant and wildlife species exist within proximity of the project site, but dismisses any potential impacts to these species since none of these species, according the Recirculated DEIR, actually exist within the project site. 5 DRAFT -- DRAFT The Los Cerritos Wetlands is part of the Pacific Flyway and provides a rare resting place for migratory birds on their transcontinental flights. Many of the efforts that have gone into the preservation and restoration of portions of these adjacent wetlands that provide this habitat may be at risk if the project is implemented as proposed. Furthermore, the Recirculated DEIR fails to mention the fact that the Los Cerritos Wetlands is one of a small number of tidal salt marshes remaining in Southern Califomia and does not mention any of the numerous plant and invertebrate species existing within the wetlands that may or may not be affected by intensified development at the project site, but only makes note of three special status bird species existing within the wetlands. The City of Seal Beach requests that a more thorough biological analysis be performed to assess the potential adverse impact to plant, invertebrate, and avian species within the wetlands area, resulting from increased traffic and air pollution associated with the project. H. Additional Comments Regarding the Current DEIR Document: 1.) Concern over the ability of the project to comply with the goals of the City of Long Beach's "Local Coastal Program: The City of Seal Beach believes that the proposed project raises a substantial issue regarding consistency with the City's adopted Local Coastal Program policies. Specifically, the adopted policy provisions regarding "adequate open spaces is preserved ", "improved local circulation ", "improving traffic flow on PCH and Studebaker Road", "controlling the number of dwelling units so as to minimize traffic impact" and "improve access to the downtown area and coastline" all seem to be discounted in the proposed project. The project, as proposed: ❑ Does not ensure that "adequate open space is preserved" since the proposed building footprints will be substantially greater than the existing footprints and existing open space will be reduced; ❑ Does not result in "improved local circulation" since there remain intersections within the project study area that will experience significant and unmitigated traffic impacts; ❑ Does not result in "improving traffic flow on PCH and Studebaker Road" since there remain intersections along both of these thoroughfares that will experience significant and unmitigated traffic impacts; ❑ Does not result in "controlling the number of dwelling units so as to minimize traffic impact" since the proposal is to add 325 dwelling units, which will further impact intersections that already operate at LOS "F ", creating additional delays and congestion; ❑ Does not result in "improve(d) access to the downtown area and coastline" since there remain intersections that will experience significant and unmitigated impacts. 2.) Concern that impacts to other roadway intersections within the City of Long Beach will adversely impact City of Seal Beach residents: While the City of Seal Beach does not have direct control over intersections that lie outside of the City's jurisdictional boundaries, specifically: the intersections of Studebaker Road/2 " Street; PCH /2 " Street; Studebaker Road /PCH; and Studebaker Road/Loynes Drive, we are strongly concerned that impacts to some of these intersections will adversely affect many Seal Beach residents. The City of Seal Beach requests that Long Beach coordinate 6 DRAFT -- DRAFT with the City throughout the entitlement process to ensure that roadway improvements, signal timing, and other areas of concern take into account traffic flows between both cities. The City of Seal Beach requests that the Recirculated DEIR be revised to address the concems listed above so that the public and decision makers will be better informed of all potential environmental impacts. Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Please contact Mr. Jerry Olivera, AICP, Senior Planner - Department of Development Services, City Hall, 211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, 90740, telephone (562) 431 -2527, x. 1316, if you have any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Michael P. Levitt, Mayor City of Seal Beach Attachment: Traffic Study Report by Willdan Engineering — March 2010 7 ATTACHMENT "B" COMMENT LETTER - JFTB BLACK HAWK PROJECT >a 4 � , � . � • ,,. ' '` y ", ^ • 6.. :i . ,.a p,,'' a ;;.: .: Yy t !' V. ' ' • .9.∎, ,, a ? ,' w ° t q + ` i, �' ' • te a - y 1., .4 • : R• -:- 1 4 v - � :Y • • . •� t a • . r -4 ." ' ! N �: ai• A. R . , ' y� SFIAtRyih' 4 • -, • � ., X ; , f✓n .'•s y i ` .tre7 -, s 3•+ = ' ` h�. :1,1 1,. v {. 1 �F „ -� ;a •'r • ' • , .N ; '`:1 f 2 +• 4;�• ' r �i•+ e.• N ,a. k' r R 9 t ° ,�' ri Z' r ` N,���' .y :yr ;;:- -1- V. .� 5 r '' sIN :x.1 J .• i „• 1 s l i t.1 E1 ' a .h ,-,: 4Z%• ' r r e. "; . j, It S j e•. 5. - t • Y fi 4 - , , k ,,Y i ,. .i a k4, , A, i � ¢ ` .,)rN • • .7r y ` , :4i � - 1 1 4.- o' ry, ® 4` f ! ; s * � I "0" 2 y ' • . , . , , � j ,;e Y .4 %Y .• i ,,, ` �•+• • , •' r > J O} � -.. ''� : 1 0 9-% , . 0 "0")' 73 G I 1 s t v ` G i� �.`: q < .�,' y � . ��,�.+� r , • ,, r ' : " _ , � CO `MG? -� "' . >. s • f" . ," . , • "d.r ystl . .,. a'A` Y 9J �, i.,,.,..,....•=, e:• N Y a' sea t h 'q{1C ,4 .,(� s t!a'0ii• e . � : .' , p3'� r: .� . r .... 5A'' -,. ,,,,V1-..--1."'s I'+r • .�'yw ,itfi ; ., ' a t , r W 1J �, fi 4 4 r s �- M , ° " /,'' ; 3: , fs , r '"'? l ✓' § ',/ t ' O ! ,'L , 14., :;. „ r • T f 1'S CREE i, . y ' • ' ,,M - TT i , v . � � C IrI S ' I I l [C H . a *`: ' n.. , .,.�, � , ' a y J i }� G C�' :;,%1,''''''''' .�.+ [ 31 fA(rll- CaI'I1C`)RNIA`) J r J ;.:T ix L i S; r..Rty' -A .-r• iii ,� � .8 „ ;J' 4• $4,4 ' t , : ▪ .F ' ; ' . . • ' M +* ..� t . o • •M " , t . • . 'f • '" 4 e , ,F ,:' en , .1 :4 .k fr 4 ;:,.c . ,..: .d . 3, y a y Y: v , ; (fib J 1 : = • ci. bl'ach.la.II' April 11, 2011 Ms. Carmen Cali 63d Regional Support Command, Directorate of Public Works, Environmental Branch P.O. Box 63 Moffett Field, California 94035 - Dear Ms. Call, SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment and Draft Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FNSI) Black Hawk Helicopter Company at Joint Forces Training Base, Los Alamitos, California Thank you for the opportunity to provide input regarding the EA/Draft FNSI for the above referenced project. The EA/Draft FNSI outlines a series of project components related to noise that limit flight patterns to existing routes and limit hours of operation for the additional aircraft. According to the EA these standards are supposed to be in effect currently, but they are routinely violated. Section 3.9 (Noise) discusses a Noise Abatement Program that must be strictly followed. It further states that violating the Program may lead to suspension of use of the airfield. We are gravely concerned about the effectiveness of the current program. Based upon existing violations, the City seeks additional noise analysis as follows: 1. A complete update to the noise study and noise contour maps; 2. Specific information on pilot infractions of the Noise Abatement Program and 3. Designation of a contact person and phone number if violations are observed. We look forward to having our issues addressed before the project is approved. If you have any questions please contact Mark Persico, AICP, Director of Development Services, at (562) 431 -2527, x. 1313, or mpersico@sealbeachca.00v. Sincerely, Michael P. Levitt, Mayor City of Seal Beach