On Monday, April 26, the Seal Beach City Council unanimously approved the San Gabriel River Bike Trail project.
The council also voted unanimously to reject Bay City Partner’s appeal of the mitigated negative declaration for the project.
The real estate partnership owns some of the land that the bike trail crosses. That property is located near the DWP property. City officials, however, argue the two properties are two different and unrelated issues.
A mitigated negative declaration, also known as an MND, is a document that says the environmental impact of a project can be minimized if the applicant takes specific steps to mitigate the impacts.
Bay City Partners appealed the Planning Commission’s March 18 decision to approve the declaration for the bike trail project, officially known as the River’s End Staging Area and San Gabriel River Bike Trail project.
According to the staff report by Director of Development Services Mark Persico, Seal Beach has received $2 million from the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy to improve the bike trail and the area near River’s End Café.
The so-called staging area is where the San Gabriel River Bike Trail ends.
Persico told the council that the bike trail would be repaired, repainted and have directional signs added to the path.
He said the city had received four letters during the public comment period on the proposed environmental declaration, two of them from Bay City Partners.
He said Bay City had appealed the approval of the declaration on the grounds that Seal Beach had not adequately responded to Bay City’s comments. Persico said the city had responded in writing and staff responded verbally at the March 18 Planning Commission meeting.
In his staff report, Persico wrote that the California Environmental Quality Act requires written responses to comments.
Ed Selich, project manager for Bay City Partners, said he and Bay City’s attorney were there only because the city had filed a lawsuit, an apparent reference to the city’s eminent domain action against a portion of the DWP property.
The eminent domain action is aimed at a parcel of land that is not located on the bike trail. The city asserts the eminent domain action is necessary to ensure access to a sewer line.
Selich argued that part of the bike trail project encroaches on property that belongs to Bay City Partners. He said in the interim, the company would allow city access to the bike trail.
He said all Bay City asked was for the council to reject the mitigated negative declaration and to direct staff to work with Bay City on the environmental review.
Greg Evers, attorney for Bay City Partners, said the project description in the declaration was inadequate.
He said the declaration made no attempt to quantify the potential impact of the project. He said the California Environmental Quality Act required that attempt.
He also raised concerns about traffic impacts and the need to consider alternatives to the plan.
Seal Beach activist Joyce Parque said the project was on private property.
She asked if the city could accept a grant to improve private property.
“The city of Seal Beach had a chance to buy it four or five times,” Parque said, apparently referring to the DWP property.
“This is going to cost the tax payers a lot of money because you can’t sit down and negotiate,” Parque said.
City Attorney Quinn Barrow requested a recess to review the issues raised by Evers.
The council went into recess. Approximately an hour later, the council was back in session.
Persico commented on the issues raised.
Persico said the project description was complete and accurate.
He said the issue of environmental impact was independent of the issue of ownership of the property. He acknowledged there were questions about ownership of part of the bike trail.
Persico said the impact of the bike trail improvement on traffic would be negligible.
Persico also addressed the issue of “piecemealing,” which refers to breaking up a large project into smaller projects in order to circumvent environmental rules.
Bay City Partners raised the issue by mail and at the March 18 Planning Commission meeting.
Selich, Bay City Partners’ project manager, has argued that the bike trail and DWP projects should be considered together in a single environmental document.
In a staff response to Selich’s March 5 letter to Persico, Seal Beach officials argued that the bike trail and River’s End area have operated for years without any development on the DWP site and can continue to operate without any development on the DWP site.
District 1 Councilman Charles Antos said Bay City Partners had an application before the city that had nothing to do with the bike trail project.
He said it was not a good idea to put the two properties together under one environmental document.
District 5 Councilman Michael Levitt agreed with Antos that it would not be wise to address two different properties in one environmental document. That said, he was not happy with the entire process.
“I would like to see their proposal,” Levitt said.
District 3 Councilman Gordon Shanks asked what it would cost Seal Beach to do an environmental impact report.
Persico said it would cost Seal Beach about $200,000 more to do an EIR
