Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Resolution 14-09 - (Oil FEIR Certification)P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 14-9 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL (1) CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR), AND (2) CONFIRM THE LANGUAGE IN THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION TO BE PRESENTED TO THE VOTERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PROPOSED OIL DRILLING AND PRODUCTION PROJECT AT 555 6TH STREET, HERMOSA BEACH AND THE CORRESPONDING CITY YARD RELOCATION AT 1315 VALLEY DRIVE AND 552 11TH PLACE IN HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA (E&B OIL PROJECT). The Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach hereby resolves as follows: SECTION 1. On November 14, 2012, E&B Natural Resources Management Corporation (the Applicant) submitted an application for an oil drilling and production project (the "project") at 555 6th Street in Hermosa Beach. The City deemed the application complete on April 18, 2013. SECTION 2. The proposed project application implements a 2012 Settlement Agreement between the City of Hermosa Beach, the Applicant and Macpherson Oil Company (for itself and Windward Associates) to resolve a lawsuit by Macpherson Oil Company against the City regarding oil drilling at the site of the Existing City Maintenance Yard at 555 6th Street in Hermosa Beach (a full description of the project background is found at FEIR 1-15 - 1-17). The litigation stemmed in part from Proposition E, a 1995 decision by the Hermosa Beach voters to restore a ban on oil drilling in the City. This ban is still in effect and can only be lifted by another vote of the elecorate. The Settlement Agreement obligates the City, at the Applicant's request, to ask the voters whether or not to approve an oil production project at this site. SECTION 3. The Applicant proposes to develop the 1.3-acre project site at 555 6th Street, Hermosa Beach, currently used as the City Maintenance Yard, as an onshore oil drilling and production site using directional drilling to access oil and gas reserves in the tidelands and uplands within the Torrance Oil Field, with 30 production wells, 4 water injection wells, liquid and gas separating equipment, and gas processing unit. In addition, the proposed project would result in the installation of offsite underground pipelines for the transportation of the processed crude oil and gas from the Project Site to purchasers, extending through the Cities of Redondo Beach and Torrance. The Applicant proposes a laydown site for supply staging/storage within the basement level of the industrial building at 601 Cypress Avenue during the construction phases. The Applicant also proposes to construct a parking lot at 636 Cypress Avenue for use by some of its construction employees/contractors on weekdays and by the public at other times. The Proposed Oil Project would occur in the following four phases: • Phase 1: Site Preparation, including relocation of the City Maintenance Yard to the temporary facility; • Phase 2: Drilling and Testing of three oil wells and one water disposal/injection well; • Phase 3: Final Design and Construction of both the oil and gas facility and the permanent City Maintenance Yard; and • Phase 4: Development and Operations, including drilling of the remaining wells over 30 months and re -drill of wells periodically through the life of the project. The Applicant proposes a facility designed for a maximum capacity of 8,000 barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil and 2.5 million standard cubic feet per day (scfd) of produced gas at completion of the drilling stage of the proposed Oil Project in Phase 4. SECTION 4. With the concurrence of the applicant, the City elected to undertake environmental review of the proposed project. It circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report for the project for a 30-day period beginning July 11, 2013. Two scoping meetings were held on July 24, 2013, and the City accepted written comments on the Notice of Preparation. The comments received were used to further refine the scope of the analysis and the technical studies in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). A Draft EIR (DEIR) was prepared and circulated for a 60-day public comment period, which closed on April 14, 2014. During the public comment period and in addition to accepting written comments, the City held informational presentations on the DEIR on February 24 and 26, 2014. The City held a drop -in open house for the public to ask questions about the DEIR on March 8, 2014. On April 2 and April 10, 2014, the Planning Commission held public meetings for the public to provide oral comments on the DEIR. On May 10, 2014, the City Council and the Planning Commission held a joint public study session on the DEIR and accepted public comment. SECTION 5. The Final EIR (SCH # 2013071038) was first available to the public on June 10, 2014, which included written responses to all written comments and also to all oral comments provided to the Planning Commission on April 2nd and 10th. All notifications were provided pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21092.5) and all comment letters were incorporated into the Final EIR. The City Council and Planning Commission held a joint public study session on the Final EIR on June 18, 2014. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the certification of the FEIR and other related matters on June 23, 2014, at which time it accepted public comment on the Final EIR and adopted this resolution. At this time, the City Council is scheduled to hold two additional public 2 hearings to consider certification of the Final EIR, placing the project on the ballot and other related matters. SECTION 6. The City prepared the E&B Oil Project EIR as an independent agency and in accordance with requirements of CEQA. Although those requirements may not apply because the City Council does not possess the authority to approve the project for which entitlements have been sought by the applicant and is merely performing the ministerial act of placing an ordinance on the ballot, the City chose to employ these procedures to promote informed decisionmaking by the electorate. The Final EIR consists of the Initial Study, Notice of Preparation, Notice of Availability, Draft EIR, Technical Studies and Appendices, the Responses to Comments, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Hereafter, these documents will be referred to collectively as the "Final EIR." The findings herein are based on the entire record before the Planning Commission, including the Final EIR. SECTION 7. The Planning Commission independently reviewed and analyzed the Final EIR and the administrative record relating to the proposed project. The Final EIR constitutes an accurate and complete statement of the environmental impacts of the proposed project. The Final EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City and the EIR and administrative record has been made available to the public for review and consideration. The Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the facts and analysis in the Final EIR and certify the Final EIR. SECTION 8. Changes or alterations have been required in the project that, to the extent feasible, substantially lessen some of the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. These changes or alterations are included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached hereto as Attachment A and incorporated herein by reference. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council incorporate the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project incorporated herein as Attachment A as part of the Development Agreement for the Project that will be submitted to the voters for approval. SECTION 9. The EIR for this project identifies significant effects on the environment that will result from this project. Notwithstanding implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the project will result in significant effects on the environment in the areas of aesthetics, air quality, biology, hydrology, land use, noise, recreation and safety and risk of upset. For projects subject to CEQA for which significant unavoidable environmental impacts have been identified, a public agency must find that alternatives identified in the EIR are not feasible and that there are overriding benefits that outweigh the impact to the environment. In this instance, the decision to approve or disapprove the project will be made by the voters because the City Council lacks authority to make the discretionary decisions required to allow the project. The ballot measure is requested and initiated by the Applicant as permitted by the zoning ordinance, not by the City Council. Under Proposition E, only the Hermosa Beach voters, not the City Council, can K approve this project. Accordingly, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council place on the ballot the CEQA findings described in Attachment B. SECTION 10. The Hermosa Beach City Clerk is the custodian of the record of the proceedings for this project. The record is available at Hermosa Beach City Hall, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California 90254. SECTION 11. THIS RECOMMENDATION DOES NOT REFLECT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION TO THE PROJECT. APPROVED BY A MOTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THIS 23rd DAY OF JUNE, 2014. VOTE: AYES: Comms.Flaherty, Hoffman, Perrotti,Pizer,Chmn.Allen NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. 14-9 is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, at its special meeting of June 23, 2014. Dent eA t n, Chairman June 23 2014 Date W Vie". ortson, Secretary 9 ATTACHMENT A E&B OIL PROJECT Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program The E&B Oil Project EIR has been prepared to address the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. Where appropriate, the EIR includes recommended mitigation measures to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is designed to monitor implementation of the mitigation measures required for the proposed Project. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program describes the requirements and procedures to be followed by the City of Hermosa Beach to ensure that required mitigation measures adopted as part of the proposed E&B Oil Project will be carried out as described in the EIR. The following table contains a list of these mitigation measures with their associated implementation and monitoring phases, the agency responsible for enforcing the mitigation measure, agency, and a checklist the City can use for verification of compliance. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is set forth in the Final EIR Section 8.0 htt .// .liermosabeh.or /modLiles/showdoct.iment.as 'docui ientid=42g1 ATTACHMENT B E&B OIL PROJECT CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Alternatives: The Development Agreement includes all feasible mitigation measures as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The EIR has also examined alternatives to the proposed Project. Although the No Project/No Development Alternative is considered environmentally superior, the alternative does not achieve any of the Project objectives. Of the other alternatives considered, the next best alternative is the AES Site, which reduces the greatest number of the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts to less than significant with mitigation. Nevertheless, use of the AES site also does not meet most of the Project objectives to the extent the objectives are tailored for the City Yard site and the 1993 Conditional Use Permit for that site and the March 2012 Settlement Agreement. The use of the AES site also has a number of potential legal and land use issues, related to Redondo Beach Charter Article 27 and would most likely require a vote of the people of Redondo Beach and a re -zoning. These issues are similar to those presented by the Proposed Project. The EIR recognizes that while both the Proposed Project and the AES Site Alternative have similar challenges, the Applicant has no control over the AES site and due to these considerations, it cannot be considered a feasible alternative. After examining the alternatives, adoption and implementation of the Proposed Project is the most desirable, feasible, and appropriate action. Statement of Overriding Considerations The Final EIR and the record of proceedings for the Project identify potentially significant and unavoidable environmental impacts from the project in the areas of Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biology, Hydrology, Land Use, Noise, Recreation and Safety and Risk of Upset. The proposed Project would provide public benefits described below. [INSERT PUBLIC BENEFITS LISTED IN FINAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT]. After balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed project, the City of Hermosa Beach has determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified may be considered acceptable in light of the benefits listed above which offset the unavoidable, 0 adverse environmental impacts that will be caused by the Project. Having adopted all feasible mitigation measures and recognized all unavoidable significant impacts, the City finds that each of the separate benefits of the proposed project, as stated herein, is determined to be unto itself an overriding consideration, independent of other benefits, that warrants approval of the proposed project and outweighs and overrides its unavoidable significant effects, and thereby justifies the approval of the E&B Oil Project. Based on the foregoing findings and the information contained in the record, it is hereby determined that: a. All significant Cultural, Energy, Environmental Justice, Fire Protection and Emergency Response, Geology, Noise Impacts During Drilling, Public Services and Transportation effects on the environment due to approval of the Project have been eliminated or substantially lessened where feasible; and b. Any remaining significant Aesthetic, Air Quality, Biology, Hydrology, Land Use, Noise, Recreation and Safety and Risk of Upset effects on the environment found to be unavoidable are acceptable due to the factors described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations above. 7