Legislation Details

File #: HIST-8800    Version: 1 Subject:
Type: Historical Status: Action Item
In control: City Council Meeting Agenda
On agenda: 7/14/2008 Final action: 7/14/2008
Title: Discussion of: 1) the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated June 2008, for the Baldwin Hills Community Standards District and Potential Formulation of Initial Comments Thereon; and 2) the “12-Point” Memo Submitted to the City Council from the Greater Baldwin Hills Alliance.
Attachments: 1. Discussion of: 1) the Draft Environmental Impact - A-1__08-07-14 SR PXP DEIR Review - FINAL.doc, 2. Discussion of: 1) the Draft Environmental Impact - A-1__PXP DEIR.pdf
City of Culver City, California City Council Agenda Item Report RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council discuss: 1) the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the proposed Community Standards District (CSD) to establish oil drilling regulations for a portion the Inglewood Oil Field located in the unincorporated Baldwin Hills area; and 2) the “12-Point” memo submitted to the City Council by the Greater Baldwin Hills Alliance (GBHA). BACKGROUND: Draft EIR: The County of Los Angeles (County) has prepared and circulated a DEIR, dated June 2008, to assess potential environmental impacts associated with potential future oil and gas production activities at the Inglewood Oil Field over the next 20 years. The County is the “Lead Agency” and the project applicant is Plains Exploration & Production Company (PXP). The City received the DEIR on June 19, 2008 and immediately distributed the document to City Departments and the City Council for review. The County established a 60-day review and comment period that ends on August 19, 2008. The City Council requested the County extend the comment period by an additional 30 days. Such request was denied by the County (Attachment No. 1). Meeting Date: 07/14/08 Item Number: A-1 AGENDA ITEM: Discussion of: 1) the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated June 2008, for the Baldwin Hills Community Standards District and Potential Formulation of Initial Comments Thereon; and 2) the “12-Point” Memo Submitted to the City Council from the Greater Baldwin Hills Alliance. Contact Person/Dept.: Sherry Jordan / CDD Phone Number: (310) 253-5746 Fiscal Impact: Yes [] No [X] General Fund: Yes [] No [X] Public Hearing: [] Action Item: [X] Attachments: [X] Public Notification: Posted on Culver City web page on 7/2/08; mailed notices (20,950) on 7/3/08 to various public agencies, Culver City property owners and residents, and interested parties; emailed to the Master E-Mail Notification List on 7/9/08; published in the Culver City News on 7/10/08, and placed on the cable crawler. Department Approval: Sol Blumenfeld (07/08/08) City Attorney Approval: Carol Schwab (by H. Baker) (07/09/08) Chief Financial Officer Approval: Jeff Muir (by N. Kimball)(07/08/08) City Manager Approval: Jerry B. Fulwood (07/09/08) City of Culver City, California City Council Agenda Item Report Because of the technical nature of the information and the short time frame for review, the City Council on June 23 rd authorized a contract with Aspen Environmental Group to assist the City in commenting on the proposed CSD and DEIR, and with the review and revisions to the City’s current oil well regulations and oil drilling permit application submittal requirements. “12-Point” Memo: On June 23, 2008 the City Council received a memorandum from the GBHA outlining 12 points for Council consideration. Attachment No. 2 contains the memorandum with staff’s response to each point attached. DISCUSSION: PXP, the operator of the Inglewood Oil Field, has submitted an application to the County to establish a CSD (attachment to the Executive Summary in the DEIR). The CSD is a supplemental district used to address special issues that are unique to certain geographic areas within the unincorporated areas of the County. The CSD would establish permanent development standards, operating requirements and procedures for the portions of the Inglewood Oil Field that are within the County. The CSD would provide a means for implementing enhanced regulations to address the unique compatibility concerns associated with operating an oil field in the midst of urban development. There are three main goals associated with the development of the DEIR, which include: 1. To provide the public and decision makers with detailed information about the current and future operations at the Inglewood Oil Field. 2. To determine what types of environmental impacts could result from future oil field development activities. 3. To determine if the CSD as proposed by PXP has the necessary development standards, operating requirements and procedures to mitigate the potential environmental impacts of future oil field development activities. A typical DEIR would evaluate the environmental impacts of a proposed development project. In this case the proposed project is a CSD, which in itself would not directly result in any physical change to the environment, but would serve to reduce environmental impacts of future development at the Inglewood Oil Field through the establishment of permanent development standards, operating requirements and procedures. City of Culver City, California City Council Agenda Item Report To accomplish Goal Number 3 listed above, an environmental impact analysis was conducted on a Potential Future Oil Field Development Scenario. This scenario looked at the maximum development that could occur over the next twenty years. There are no current applications for oil drilling. Based upon the environmental impact analysis of the Potential Future Oil Field Development Scenario, the DEIR identified a number of measures to mitigate the identified impacts (Table ES-1, Page ES-25) of future oil drilling. The development standards, operating requirements and procedures in the PXP proposed CSD were then compared with the identified measures to determine areas where the proposed CSD could be enhanced. The recommended modifications to the proposed CSD are discussed in Table ES-2 (Page ES-15) in the DEIR. The only impact that could not be mitigated to a less than significant level in the Potential Future Oil Field Development Scenario was earthquake-related hazards, such as ground rupture, ground acceleration, and ground shaking common to the Los Angeles region (Impact No. GR.3, Page 4.4-23). Because the southeast portion of the oil field is underlain by the active Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone, there is a greater than average risk of seismic impacts. Therefore, seismic related impacts are significant. However, mitigation measures are proposed that would require measures such as not allowing certain types of new facilities within 50 feet of a known active fault. The County will use the mitigation measures identified in the DEIR as well as an analysis of the CSD in developing recommendations for modification to the proposed CSD. City Staff and our consultant, Aspen Environmental Group, are currently analyzing the DEIR and will be formulating detailed comments for Council’s consideration. Because of the relatively short time period since receipt of the document and the voluminous nature of the DEIR, staff has not concluded its review of the DEIR. However, because of the potential impacts of the CSD and future oil drilling operations contemplated therein, staff wanted to provide the City Council and community with an opportunity to provide input on the document in two stages: this evening (where the Council and community can provide initial comments and primary areas of concern) and at a second public meeting which will be held before the City Council on August 13, 2008 to consider finalizing the City’s comments and consideration by the City Council of a formal resolution transmitting those final comments to the County. City of Culver City, California City Council Agenda Item Report Important Future Dates July 17 County EIR Public workshop July 22 County EIR Public workshop Aug. 2 County Regional Planning Commission public hearing Aug. 13 City Council reviews final proposed comments and authorizes their submission Aug. 19 Comment period ends and final comments are submitted to County Aug. 27 County Regional Planning Commission public hearing FISCAL IMPACT For the Council’s information, the City-wide public notification was produced at a direct cost of $14,637.08 (which amount was taken from appropriated reserves) and the contract amount approved by City Council for Aspen Environmental to assist staff with the review of the DEIR is $148,770. ATTACHMENTS: 1. July 1, 2008, letter from Supervisor Yvonne B. Burke to Mayor Malsin 2. Response to GBHA 12-Point Memorandum Received by City Council on June 23, 2008 3. Public Draft Environmental Impact Report Baldwin Hills Community Standards District, June 2008 – delivered to the City Council on June 23, 2008. MOTION: That the City Council: 1. Discuss the June 2008 Draft EIR for the Baldwin Hills Community Standards District and provide initial comments as deemed appropriate; and 2. Discuss the 12-point memorandum submitted by the GBHA and provide direction to staff as deemed appropriate. MEETING DATE: 07/14/2008 AGENDA ITEM: Discussion of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated June 2008, for the Baldwin Hills Community Standards District. ATTACHMENTS Pages 1. July 1, 2008, letter from Supervisor Yvonne B. Burke to Mayor Malsin 1-2 2. Response to Kenneth L. Kutcher 12-Point Memorandum Received by City Council on June 23, 2008 3-6 2. Public Draft Environmental Impact Report Baldwin Hills Community Standards District — delivered to City Council On 6/23/08- Attachment No. 1 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 5013 WEST TEMPLE STREET, 866 KENNETH HAHN HALL OF ADMIN/STRATION Los ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90012 (213) 974-2222 / FAX (213) 680-3283 YVONNE E. BURKE CHAIR OF THE BOARD SUPERvlsog, SECOND DISTRICT July 1, 2008 MEMBERS OF 1HE BOARD GLORIA MOLINA WONNE B. BUR* ZEV YAROSLAVSKY PON MARE I-11044EL DANTONOVICH The . Hottorablell Scott Ma!sin Mayor of Culver City 9770 Culver Boulevard Cu War City, California 90232 RE: COMMENT PERIOD FOR DRAFT EIR PORI:MI-DAM H1LLS COMMUNITY STANDARDS DISTRICT Dear MayorMaisin: This letter responds to your correspondence to me dated June 26, 2008 requesting an extension on the comment period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the ,applicant-proposed Baldwin Hills Community Standards District :Man The County- recognizesinat the EIR is a technical document for an important Project. For that reason, the County established the initial review period at 60 days, which is:16days more thekrequiredbY the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and its Guideilhes. In cases such as this one in which the EIR is sent to the State Clearinghouse, under CEQA Guideline 15105, the Mirlirntini review period is 45 days. The CEQA Guidelines also provide that, in Most cases, the review period should not exceed 60 days. iCEOA Guideline 151051 In consultation with the Department of Regional Planning, the County believes thatS0 days is enough time to review the Draft EIR ,and provide cogent thoughtful comments. With respect to your concern about the summer holidays, the only holiday during the review period is the Fourth Of July. Almost any 60-day Period will-include a holiday, yet CSOA still establishes 60 days as exceeding the norm for an E1R review period, Moreover, we believe extending the deadline is not only unnecessary but counterproductive. As you Militated, a Baldwin Hills CSD, which will establish regulations and controls for the Baldwin Hills oilfields, is a very important project It is critical to put such co/lin:rig-in:place as soon as possible. The urgency ordinance which prohibited drilling of new wells expired on June 28, 2008 and, Under state law, cannot be further extended. As a result, I want to keep the project on track and Moving forward. Additionally, PM :. has agreed that they will not file any new drilling applications before October 21, 2008; Therefore, the County piens to stay with its 60- day review period. With respect to your concerns about attendance at the Regional Planning Commission rCommissiorl meeting scheduled for August 27 at the Commission's usual meeting time and place downtown, the County is taking extra steps to ensure community input. In addition to the August 27 date, a hearing is already scheduled in the community for August 2, which is aThe Honorable D. Scoft Malsin July 1, 2008 Page Two Saturday. Also, at its next meeting, the Commission plans to consider scheduling a third hearing in the community, As indicated above, the County wants to keep this project moving forward. Accordingly, we plan to maintain the August 27th Commission hearing date. We believe there will be sufficient opportunity for all who wish to provide input on the proposed CSD and comment on the Draft ER to do so. want to stress that the County placed high priority on public participation in this process as reflected by past outreach efforts to the community and those planned in the future. We have taken numerous steps to keep community groups and community residents advised and updated. In 2007, County planning staff attended or coordinated nine or ten meetings or presentations in the community to, among other things, present background information on the CSD and ER process and focus on concerns and issues raised by community residents associated with oil field operations. Four additional meetings were held earlier this year with several community-based organizations. Four more neighborhood meetings hosted by resident volunteers are scheduled this month with planning department staff and the ER consultant to facilitate detailed discussion about the proposed CSD and the Draft ER. Those meetings will be held in Culver City, Ladera Heights, Windsor Hills and the last hosted by the Community Health Councils. Two additional community workshops are scheduled in July at Culver City Veteran's Hall and Knox Church, again to hear comments and answer questions about the 'proposed CSD and the Draft EIR. Various mailers throughout the process have been sent and input solicited. All of these efforts are outside of the upcoming public hearings in August before the Commission in sum, in my view, the County's public outreach efforts on this project have been and continue to be extraordinary. To develop the best and most appropriate CSD, we appreciate the input from the communities surrounding the oil field and look forward to continue working with those in the community, including Culver City, to facilitate the process. Sincerely, ie NE B. BURKE ir of the Board YBB:IVISB:nra c: Assembly Speaker Karen Bass Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas Each Culver City Council Member City Manager, City of Culver City City Attorney, City of Culver City3 (310) 451-3669 kutcher@hlmlaw.corn 10715 Lugo Way Culver City, CA 90230 Attachment No. 2 CULVER CITY - CITY COUNCIL JUNE 23, 2008 AGENDA ITEM A-3 INGLEWOOD OIL FIELD EIR & REGULATIONS 1. The City should prepare and submit written comments on the Draft EIR a. City Council should approve hiring one of the recommended consultants to assist City Staff in preparing the comment letter b. Direct City Staff to make sure that the consultants are strategically informed of the purpose of the comment letter -- i.e., to achieve a CSD that is protective of the community and the natural environment 2. The City should prepare and submit written comments on PXP's draft CSD 3. The City should review and support GBHA draft CSD -- either in whole or in concept 4. The City Council should direct its staff to contact County Planning Staff and engage in substantive discussions about contents of the County's CSD before the County releasesits recommended CSD 5. The City Council should plan to attend the public hearings on the CSD/E1R a. County Planning Commission hearings: i. Sat., August 2 @ West LA College (12 noon) ii. Wed., Aug. 27 @ County offices in downtown LA (9 am) b. Board of Supervisors hearing 6. The City should assume the County will not be active in community outreach in Culver City and should therefore publicize in various forms of media -- including cable tv, city website, newspaper ads, and direct mail -- the upcoming public forums and encourage community participation: a. July 17 workshop @ 7 pm at Veterans Hall b. Aug 2 Planning Commission hearing @ West LA College at 12 noon c. Aug 19 close of public comments on EIR d. Aug 27 Planning Commission hearing in downtown LA at 9 am e. Board of Supervisors hearing(s) [TBD] KENNETH L. KUTCHER7. The City should join our request to extend the DR comment period to September 8 (i.e., after the end of summer vacations) a. The ElR is 1400 pages long b. The EIR is full of technical data and analysis. 8. The City should join our request to re-schedule the August 27 Planning Commission hearing a. Aug 27th is the worst possible date this summer to hold such a hearing b. At this hearing, the Planning Commission will adopt its official recommendation to the Board of Supervisors concerning the draft CSD c. This hearing should be postponed to September d. This hearing should be held locally like the August 2 hearing 9. If there will only be one local hearing, the 2 County Planning Commission hearing now scheduled for Aug 2 should be moved to a date and time when more than three Commissioners are available a. Only 3 of the 5 Planning Commissioners are planning to attend the Aug 2 hearing b. Aug 2 is the only hearing scheduled in the impacted neighborhood c. If the hearing is re-scheduled, it needs to be moved to a weekend or evening when residents have a reasonable opportunity to attend 10. The City Council should adopt a resolution urging PXP to voluntarily abide by the County moratorium that will be expiring on June 29th until a new CSD has been adopted a. The County's two year moratorium is expiring b. State law prevents the County from extending the moratorium beyond two years c. Prior to the moratorium the County had insufficient regulations to control new drilling d. PXP wants to drill more than 1000 new wells over the next 20 years e. PXP should wait until the new regulations are in place 11. Consider immediately forming an Inglewood Oil Field Residents Task Force to make recommendations to the City Council concerning the CSD and ElR 12. Appoint a City Councilmember to communicate with individual County Supervisors on these issues KENNETH L. KUTCHER 10715 Lugo Way (310) 451-3669 Culver City, CA 90230 kutcher@hlmlaw.comRESPONSE TO KENNETH L. KUTHCER 12-POINT MEMORANDUM RECEIVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON JUNE 23, 2008 The following numbered responses refer directly to the numbered items in the memorandum. 1. Staff is preparing written comments on the Draft EIR and will transmit them to Council for the August 13th Council meeting. On June 23 rd the Council approved a professional services agreement with Aspen Environmental Group to assist staff in reviewing the Draft EIR and preparing a response. Aspen Environmental Group has been informed that the goal of a Community Standard District (CSD) is to protect the surrounding community and natural environment. 2. Staff will be presenting comments on the proposed CSD along with the comments on the Draft DIR. 3. Staff is reviewing the Greater Baldwin Hills Alliance's draft CSD and will make recommendations to the City Council. 4. Staff is in contact with County staff and will be meeting to discuss the County's final recommendations on the proposed CSD. 5. The dates of the County workshops and Planning Commission hearings have been transmitted to the Council. Staff will inform the Council as additional dates are established. 6. Information on the Draft EIR and upcoming public meetings have been publicized by Culver City in the following manner: City web page, mailed notices to various public agencies, Culver City property owners and residents, and interested parties, emailed to the Master Notification list, published in the Culver City news, and run on the cable channel crawler. 7. On June 26th the Mayor sent a letter to Supervisor Burke requesting a 30-day extension of the Draft EIR review period. On July 1 st the Supervisor responded with a letter explaining that the review period would not be extended. 8. The June 26th letter to Supervisor Burke also expressed concern about the August 27 th County Planning Commission hearing. The Supervisor's July 1 st letter explained that there is scheduled a meeting for August 2 nd in Culver City and that the Planning Commission is considering have a third hearing in the community. Consideration of this additional meeting is on the July 16 th County Planning Commission meeting.Response to Kenneth L. Kutcher 6/23/08 memo Page 2 9. As stated above the County Planning Commission will consider scheduling a third meeting at their July 16 th meeting. 10. In a letter dated July 1, 2008, to Supervisor Burke, Plains Exploration and Production Company (PXP) state that they will not make any new applications for new drilling through October 21, 2008. At the meeting of July 7th the Council will consider a resolution urging PXP to voluntarily abide by the terms of the expired Los Angeles County moratorium on the drilling of new oil wells or the deepening of existing oil wells. 11. Staff is not recommending that the Council establish a citizen's task force. With the limited amount of time that the city has to analyze and respond to the Draft EIR and proposed CSD, we feel that it would be more productive for the community to use the multiple opportunities available to submit comments to the County. 12. The Council has established a subcommittee to specifically address PXP's proposal and oil drilling. Councilmen Silbiger and Weissman meet with staff regularly. Staff is setting up meetings as directed by the subcommittee. e