(Sept. 22, 2003) -- LB City Hall has issued a "Notice of Preparation" detailing its proposed LB Airport terminal facilities expansion plan, and listing the impacts it proposes to include, and not include, in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) it must prepare to pursue the project.

LBReport.com posts the Notice of Preparation verbatim on a link below along with salient portions below.

The Notice of Preparation for what City Hall calls the "Airport Terminal Improvement Project" begins the process in which members of the public can be heard on what significant impacts they want City Hall to evaluate in its EIR. Those impacts become the basis of an EIR on which the public can comment and the Council must vote before the project proceeds.

If a court later decides City Hall failed to examine adequately and respond properly to significant impacts of the permanent Airport facilities expansion, a court can require City Hall to properly address the impacts and in some cases effectively mitigate them before proceeding.

The Notice of Preparation indicates the current schedule anticipates a draft EIR available for public review in late June 2004, followed by a 45-day public review period, then hearings on the project in January 2005 with the City Council taking action on the project shortly thereafter.

The document says that based on its Initial Study, City Hall has specifically identified the following specific topics as requiring detailed EIR analysis: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Public Services and Transportation

It says the proposed project would not result in "any potentially significant effects with the following areas, and they do not require further analysis in the EIR": Agriculture, Mineral Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, Population and Housing, Recreation, Utilities and Service Systems

We provide excerpts of some noteworthy portions of the Notice of Preparation below:

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND EXPLANATION OF CHECKLIST RESPONSES

...

III. Air Quality -- Would the project:

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

The proposed project would result in the construction of terminal area improvements. These activities may result in emissions that exceed the standards established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. To fully address the potential impacts, the EIR will:

Determine existing ambient air quality in the vicinity of the Airport

Quantify existing emissions at the Airport

Predict future emissions and ambient air quality concentrations with the project and its alternatives, and the associated air quality impacts regionally and in the vicinity of the Airport

Determine consistency of the project with applicable air quality plans and policies

Propose mitigation measures to reduce the potential impacts associated with the project, if necessary...

...

VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials -- Would the project:

a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

The project would not result in a significant hazard from the transport of hazardous materials. The project does not propose the alteration of airport practices regarding the handling of hazardous materials, fueling, or other maintenance or operational procedures. The project would not require the routine transport of any hazardous materials. During construction materials identified as having a hazardous component, such as paints and other construction materials, would be brought to the site; however, handling of these materials in compliance with existing regulations would provide a sufficient safeguard to public safety. No further discussion of this issue will be contained in the EIR.

b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

Hazardous materials have been located and used on the project site and surrounding uses. The EIR will review and summarize the findings of a hazardous materials government records search identifying location of past spills, leaking tanks, or other potential safety risks. The records search is a radius search of governmental records for Phase I preliminary site assessments. Maps and site-specific detail information identify risk sites by their distance from the project site will be incorporated. Available information on methane gas and subsoil materials will be incorporated into the EIR.

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter-mile of an existing or proposed school?

The project site is not within a quarter-mile of any existing or proposed schools. This issue will not be further discussed in the EIR.

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in a project area?

The project is located at an airport. The project is consistent with the provisions of the airport land use plan, in that it is providing facilities to support the ongoing airport operations. The project does not propose any changes in the number of flights, the flight patterns or the operational procedures at the airport that would result in increased safety hazards offsite. The EIR will not address these safety issues.

...

g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

The project would not alter or interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Improvements would be limited to on-airport property and would not alter the access. Access to the project site is off of Lakewood Avenue, which is not designated as an evacuation route. No further discussion of emergency evacuation or response plans will be in the EIR...

...

...XI. Noise -- Would the project result in:

a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

The proposed project would not be expected to have a significant impact on the noise environment because it does not propose changes in the number of flights, the type of aircraft used, or the operational procedures at the airport. However, EIR will document the existing noise environment and the future noise environment with and without the project. This analysis will use noise data collected at the LGB noise monitoring stations to establish existing cumulative CNEL noise levels and representative single event noise levels. The evaluation will also utilize the maximum CNEL contours permitted by current City regulations. The EIR will explain the noise budget that operates at LGB. The EIR will also address short-term construction noise associated with the proposed improvements. The LGB noise budget serves as a mitigation measure.

b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

The project does not propose changes to the operations at LGB; therefore, it would not result in excessive groundborne vibration during operation. However, there is the potential for construction noise and vibration. The project is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. As indicated above, the EIR will address the noise environment surrounding the airport facility.

...

XII. Population and Housing -- Would the project:

a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

The Project would not result in substantial growth inducing impacts or result in changes in population projections for the project study area. The improvements proposed at LGB are designed to serve the approved flight levels at the airport. It would not result in increased flight levels or employment levels that would result in an increased demand for housing in the area. Improvements would occur on airport property so there would not be any displacement of existing housing to permit the terminal area improvements. Therefore, there would be no need for construction of replacement housing. Additionally, the project would not change the noise budget for LGB resulting in potential displacement of housing to achieve noise/land use compatibility. No further discussion of population or housing is proposed in the SEIR.

XIII. Public Services

Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Other public facilities?

The project would not be expected to substantially increase the demand for fire and police services. However, this issue will be addressed in the EIR. The EIR will document the anticipated change in emergency response times and need for additional services as a result of the proposed terminal improvements.

The project would result in additional maintenance responsibilities for the airport because of the increased size of the facilities; however, this would not be expected to be a significant increase and the additional cost associated with maintenance would be covered through the use of airport fees. City General Funds would not be used to provide maintenance of airport facilities. No further discussion of increased maintenance demand will be addressed in the EIR.

Schools?
Parks?

The proposed terminal improvements would not result in an increase in demand for schools and parks. The project would not result in an increase in population or other characteristics that would increase the demand for these facilities. Since the project would not change the number of flights, the type of aircraft, or the operational procedures at the airport, there would not be any increase in noise from the airport and the associated indirect impact to parks and schools.

XIV. Recreation

a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

The project would not generate any increase in population or provide development that would result in increased usage of existing neighborhood and regional parks. There would not be any physical deterioration to existing recreation facilities due to the project. This issue will not be discussed in the EIR.

XV. Transportation/Traffic -- Would the project:

a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?

The EIR will address the potential traffic impacts associated with the project. The evaluation will compare existing and future conditions with and without the terminal improvements. The analysis will include peak hour trip distribution patterns of the proposed airport terminal improvements project based on likely origins and destinations of passengers and employees. The evaluation will also include a freeway link analysis. Additionally, the future conditions evaluation will take into consideration traffic generated by other proposed projects in the study area.

The EIR will include an evaluation of parking requirements and how the project and alternatives address them. Zoning will be the basis for determining the applicable parking requirements...

...

Mandatory Findings of Significance

a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

The project has the potential of having significant effects directly and indirectly on human beings. It is anticipated that there would be significant construction air quality impacts. The EIR will evaluate the potential cumulative impacts associated with other projects in the study area.

LBReport.com has posted the Notice of Preparation in its entirely iu pdf format at: . City Hall has also posted the document on its web site, www.longbeach.gov, in the Planning & Building Dept section.

City Hall will receive comments, testimony and materials in response to its Notice of Preparation as follows: