Community Orientation Meeting City of Long Beach Dana Branch Library 6:00 p.m. 8:00 p.m. INTRODUCTION On Tuesday, the City of Long Beach, hosted by Councilmember Rae Gabelich, held its fourth and final in a series of community orientation meetings. The meeting took place at Dana Branch Library and fourteen community members attended. Present from the I-710 Project Team were: Devon Cichoski (Metro), Rob McCann (LSA), Jack Waldron (URS), Jerry Wood (Gateway Cities COG), Becky Draper (MIG), Tony Torres (DSO) and Mary Brooks (The Robert Group). The purpose of the meeting was to provide a Project Overview and Update to the community regarding the I-710 Corridor Project EIR/EIS, and to introduce the community participation framework. Becky Draper began the meeting by welcoming those in attendance and introducing Councilmember Gabelich, who gave opening remarks, stressing the importance of community input and encouraging everyone to express their concerns to project staff and spread the word to others in their communities to participate in the process. She handed the floor back to Ms. Draper who proceeded to give a brief overview of the meeting format and agenda followed by introductions of the project team. She then turned the floor over to Devon Cichoski, Metro Community Participation Manager. Ms. Cichoski provided a project status report and overview of the process that has included the project team going out to the 15 cities within the 18-mile project area, forming local advisory committees and seeking community input in an effort to ensure an active community process. She pointed out that the objectives of this phase correspond to the three most important areas of concern arising from the Major Corridor Study that preceded this current project. They are:
1. Improved air quality and public heath 2. Improved mobility 3. Clean environmentally friendly technologies for moving goods out of the port She also noted the Major Corridor Study identified the locally preferred strategy through stakeholder and policymaker consensus, an alternative that includes 10 multi-purpose lanes and a corridor for truck lanes or alternative technologies. Ms. Cichoski concluded her remarks and introduced Jack Waldron of URS Corporation who gave an overview of the environmental and engineering work that would be conducted. He briefly reviewed these areas of assessment to be included in the initial studies: Air quality Health risk LA River impact Noise impacts Visual impact Mr. Waldron went on to review the six (6) alternatives that have been identified for evaluation during the upcoming scoping process: No build Transportation systems management / transportation demand management Goods movement enhancement Arterial highway and congestion relief program Mainline I-710 improvements addition of mixed flow lanes Locally preferred strategy addition of mixed flow lanes, improvements at interchanges and addition of a goods movement corridor He then reported that the work of the technical team has been underway for several months and has included aerial mapping, evaluation of the alignment and locally preferred strategy for improvements to the layout, goods movement study, development of the purpose and need statement and an alternative technology study that has identified 15 companies that are considering moving goods by the use of electrically driven technologies instead of diesel fuel. Page 2 of 6
Mr. Waldron completed his remarks by reviewing the project schedule: Pre-scoping March August 2008 Scoping September 2008 Evaluation of alternatives Preliminary engineering and environmental assessments Draft document Summer 2010 Final document Fall 2011 Ms. Draper then provided the audience with an overview of the framework for the community participation process, emphasizing the recurring opportunities for community input throughout the entire project She reviewed the schedule of meetings that began in May 2008 with local advisory committee (LAC) meetings and will conduct scoping meetings in September 2008 followed by the CAC and subject working group meetings in October 2008. At this time out the project team has met with each LAC at least once. Ms. Draper then explained the community participation framework that enables information to come up from the local communities to the governance levels through the tailored Local Advisory Committee (LAC) approach. Rob McCann was then introduced and distributed the CEQA and NEPA process fact sheets that were developed to provide background for the I-710 EIR/EIS corridor project. Mr. McCann explained the similarities and slight differences for each of these environmental processes. The document contained a step-by-step graphic illustration of the environmental process. Mr. McCann informed the audience that the environmental process examines the scope of the project alternatives and aims to mitigate any impacts to the surrounding community. Through this process the project team seeks to hear from the community about issues to be considered and screens for alternatives that do not meet the project s objectives. After completing a series of technical studies the draft environmental document is circulated for formal public review and from there a preferred alternative will be selected. Jerry Wood of the Gateway Cities COG was introduced to discuss the issues of concern to Long Beach that would be studied in this process: Container volumes from the ports Coordination of projects at Shoemaker Bridge Alternative technology applications at the ports and along I-710 Page 3 of 6
Near-dock rail yard projects I-710/SR-91 connector ramps Traffic projections assuming nighttime operations Air quality action plan Mr. Wood indicated that the locally preferred strategy will be basis for the process. He then returned the floor to Becky Draper who informed the audience that comments can be submitted via the website, telephone/fax or email, and went over the upcoming scoping meeting dates and locations. Ms. Draper then opened the floor to discussion. Points discussed include the following: Consider freeway impacts on the Los Angeles River Look at implications of Mexican port construction Clarify project s potential to improve air quality Explain technology s role in enhancing improvements Demonstrate economic feasibility Specify allowable land uses under the I-710/405 flyover Clarify degree of impacts on neighborhoods west of the freeway Consider negative impacts of construction Confirm future of the docks at the Port of Long Beach Explore connection between traffic mitigation and resulting changes in duration of noise throughout the day Verify whether freeway widening in South Gate would necessitate property takings Investigate whether project goals of relieving congestion and improving air quality are contradictory or complementary Address concerns about emissions from the Alameda Corridor Prioritize mitigation measures near homes & schools early in the process Explore potential of alternative technologies to accommodate changes in elevation Consider partnerships with goods movers in the case of electrical reconstruction Clarify if meetings with school district representatives within the project area are planned Clarify how landscaping might be used in sound mitigation Page 4 of 6
Conclusion Following the discussion period Ms. Draper thanked the participation and repeated that further comments could be submitted via the project website, telephone/fax or email, as well as reminding the participant of the upcoming scoping meeting dates and locations. Page 5 of 6
Long Beach Community Orientation Meeting Dana Branch Library Page 6 of 6