Loading...
CC - Item 5B - Gold Line Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project - SR 60 Coalition Funding RequestROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: JEFF ALLRED, CITY MANAGER DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2014 SUBJECT: GOLD LINE EASTSIDE TRANSIT CORRIDOR PHASE 2 PROJECT — SR 60 COALITION FUNDING REQUEST SUMMARY The City Council will discuss Metro's recent release of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Gold Line Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Project that includes an alternative route along the SR 60 Freeway corridor. This alternative route would run through Rosemead along the 60 Freeway with a proposed transit station near the Shops at Montebello mall. The City is a member of the SR 60 Coalition that is advocating for construction of the Gold Line Transit line along the 60 Freeway corridor. The SR 60 Coalition, which includes the cities of South El Monte, Rosemead, Montebello and Industry, is requesting a financial contribution of $18,750 for legal review and analysis of the lengthy technical environmental documents. Rosemead City Council representatives to the SR 60 Coalition, Mayor Alarcon and Council Member Ly, recommend that the City Council: 1. Reaffirm its strong support of the Gold Line Eastside Transit Corridor Project along the SR 60 Freeway corridor as the locally preferred alternative , and 2. Authorize the expenditure of $18,750 to the SR 60 Coalition for legal services for review and analysis of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Environmental Impact Study (EIS). BACKGROUND Over the past several years, Rosemead has been an active member of the SR 60 Coalition formed in conjunction with neighboring cities to advocate for construction of the Gold Line light rail transit project through Rosemead along the 60 Freeway corridor. ITEMNO. �r City Council Meeting September 27,2011 Page 2 of 2 This potential route for the light transit rail project has been selected by Metro as one of two alternative routes for this multi - billion dollar project. If the SR 60 Freeway route is selected as the locally preferred alternative, a light rail station would be constructed near the Shops at Montebello mall near businesses and hotels in Rosemead. A transit station at that location would provide residents of this community and neighboring cities with ready accessibility to light rail transportation. On August 22, 2014, Metro released the long awaited Draft EIR /EIS for this project, which includes the SR 60 Freeway corridor as an alternative route. The Draft EIR /EIS consists of a 670 page main document and 40 appendices that are 7,735 pages in length. The 60 -day review period for this document will end on October 21, 2014. To assist in the review and analysis of the EIR /EIS, the SR 60 Coalition has engaged the firm of Manatt, Phelps and Phillips which has extensive experience in this area of the law. Rosemead's share of the $75,000 costs for this review and analysis is $18,750. The City possesses sufficient resources in Measure R Funds to cover this proposed expenditure. Attached is a letter from the City of South El Monte, which serves as the lead agency for the SR 60 Coalition, requesting this contribution. Attachment ��EL J� � O� p �i IY N � ts1 August 27, 2014 Mayor Bill Alarcon and Honorable Councilmembers City of Rosemead 8838 East Valley Boulevard Rosemead, CA 91770 RE: Legal Counsel Participation 71 CITY OF SOUTH EL MONTE ALL AMERICA CITY 1415 N. SANTA ANITA AVENUE SOUTH EL MONTE, CALIFORNIA 91733 (626) 579 -6540 • FAX (626) 579 -2167 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: As you all already know, on August 22, 2014, Metro released the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Eastside Gold Line Corridor Phase 2 project. The 60 day review period has commenced and will end on October 21, 2014 at 5 pm. The Draft EIR /EIS consists of a 670 page main document, and 40 appendices that are 7,735 pages long. We appreciate your commitment in reviewing the documents and providing feedback to Metro pertaining to the contents within. The Coalition Cities have agreed that it is of vital importance that the contents of this document be thoroughly scrutinize to ensure that adherence to the CEQA and NEPA guidelines were used in the development of the analysis. With that said, the Coalition has received a proposal from Manatt, Phelps and Phillips to dissect the document and provide a position letter that would address the issues within the document. Manatt, Phelps and Phillips has extensive experience with both preparing and challenging environmental documents prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CE0I and the National Environmental Policy Act ( "NEPA" ), as well as our deep political expertise at the local, state, and national levels, and are uniquely well - positioned to help bring about this positive result for the Coalition. We have attached the proposal which outlines the scope of work as well as a maximum expenditure of $75,000.00 and a 15% discount on their rates. The total amount that we would are seeking for your City to contribute is $18,750.00 to engage the firm immediately. As of today, we have verbal commitments to contribute from Montebello, City of Industry and South El Monte and each City will be placing this item on their next council agenda for formal approval. Lastly, based on the article published in the SGV Tribune on Saturday, August 23, 2014, the Whittier Coalition has already engaged a legal team to review the document on their behalf. We are confident with your support and our mutual collaboration we can emerge as the Locally Preferred Alternative. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 626 -579 -6540. Sincerely, ��- " Anthony R.Y rr!t/ /,7/�/ City Manager City of South El Monte Attachment: Proposal for Legal Services manatt manatt I phelps I ph lips August 22, 2014 BY EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL SR -60 Coalition c/o Anthony R. Ybarra City Manager City of South El Monte 1415 Santa Anita Avenue South El Monte, CA 91733 Victor De la Cruz Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP Direct Dial (310) 3124305 E -mail. VDela Cfuz @Mana¢.com Re: Eastside Transit Corridor Phase SR -60 Alignment — Proposal for Logal Services Dear Mr. Ybarra: It is my pleasure to provide the SR -60 Coalition ( "Coalition ") with this proposal for legal services in connection with the preparation of a comment letter to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority ( "Metro") regarding the draft environmental impact statementtenvironmental impact report (`Draft EIS/EIR ") for the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 project (the "Project" ). As you know, the Draft EIS /EIR analyzes both the SR -60 alignment and the Washington Boulevard alignment for the Project. I am very much aware of the Transform rtive effects that would be realized by the Coalition's member jurisdictions should Metro select the SR -60 alignment for the Project. Given our extensive experience with both preparing and challenging environmental documents prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the National Environmental Policy Act (" NEPA "), as well as our deep political expertise at the local, state, and national levels, Manatt is uniquely well- positioned to help bring about this positive result for the Coalition. Proposed Goals of the Comment Letter Manatt would prepare a Draft EIS /EIR comment letter on behalf of the Coalition that would have dual purposes — first, the letter would identify and publicize methodological, analytical, and legal flaws in Metro's assessment of the Washington Boulevard alignment's anticipated environmental impacts. While the Draft EIS/EIR currently identifies certain significant environmental impacts for the Washington Boulevard alignment, our comment letter will seek to identify additional impacts, and would also seek to demonstrate that the already identified impacts are in fact more severe than the Draft EIS/EIR currently concludes. By successfully identifying new significant impacts, or increases in the severity of already - identified 11355 West Olympic Boulevard, Las Angeles, California 90064 -1614 Telephone 310.312 4000 Fax 310.3124224 Albany I Los Angeles I New York I Orange County I Palo Alta I Sacramento I San Francisco I Washington, D.C. manatt manatt i phe•ps i pnlPips Anthony R. Ybar, a August 22, 2014 Page 2 slanifieant impacts, we hope to be able to compel Metro to choose the SR -60 alignment. Alternatively, if Metro does not initially choose the SR -60 alignment, our goal would be to compel Metro to perform additional technical studies regarding Washington Boulevard alignment impacts and to force Metro into recirculating the Draft EIS /EIR with additional analysis demonstrating that the Washington Boulevard alignment creates more, and more severe, impacts than originally believed. The second goal of the comment letter is to identify and further reinforce the positive characteristics of the SR -60 alignment in order to enhance the narrative surrounding this Draft EIS/EIR alternative. For example, Metro anticipates higher ridership along the Washington Boulevard alignment. However, the Washington Boulevard alignment does not have anywhere near the growth opportunities that the SR -60 alignment has, and the Draft EIS/EIR comment letter presents an excellent opportunity to describe to Metro and other parties the anticipated population and ridership growth that will result from transit- oriented development proposed to be built along the SR -60 alignment. Furthermore, when commenting upon the traffic impacts and hazards created by the Washington Boulevard alignment's at -grade street crossings, our letter will be able portray the SR -60 alignment's separation from both cars and pedestrians as a tremendous Project benefit, as it minimizes, if not eliminates, these impacts and hazards. Proposed Scope of Work In order to write a detailed, forceful comment letter that accomplishes the goals described above, we would undertake a broad range of tasks, which include, but are not limited to: • Reading and analyzing each section of the Draft EIS/E1R, in order w fully understand the document's assumptions, methodologies, and conclusions, and to identify where our legal challenges will he most effective. • Reading and analyzing the 7,500 pages of appendices to the Draft EIS /EIR, which contain the technical analyses upon which the Draft EIS/E'IR's conclusions are based. Some of our strongest arguments against the Washington Boulevard alignment will likely be based upon an understanding of the minutiae of the Project's traffic or noise analyses. • Conducting site visits to observe affected communities, street crossings and station locations along the Washington Boulevard alignment, in order to identify potential additional impacts at these intersections and affected communities, as well as potential additional sensitive receptors for construction /operational noise. We would also conduct visits of anticipated transit- oriented development sites along the SR -60 alignment, in order to describe in our comment letter the manatt manatt l pneips I ph hips Anthony R. Ybarra Auaust 22, 2014 Page 3 anticipated population growth and ridership demand at these locations in our letter. • Analyzing technical studies prepared separately Gom the Draft EIS /EIR. Some of these studies, such as the Compass Blueprint SR -60 Coalition Gold Line Corridor Study, would be used to support the comment letter's analysis regarding population growth and anticipated ridership growth along the SR -60 alignment, Other studies, such as traffic impact analyses prepared for other projects in the vicinity, would be used to identify potential methodological discrepancies with certain of the Draft EIS/EIR's impacts analysis (e.g., a previously adopted traffic report's cumulative growth assumption may be higher than the Draft EIS /EIR's. creating an argument that the Draft EIS/EIR under- reports future cumulative traffic impacts and therefore requires additional analysis). • In order to develop additional arguments as to why the Draft EIS /EIR under- reports likely significant impacts along the Washington Boulevard alignment, analyzing the planning documents, including general plans and master plans, of the jurisdictions along the Washington Boulevard alignment to understand population growth projections, traffic growth projections, and infrastructure improvement projections,. For example, if the general plan of the City of Santa Fe Springs calls for specific street infrastructure improvements along the proposed Washington Boulevard alignment, the impacts of these improvements, and any potential mitigation measures. may need to be analyzed in the Draft EISBIR. • Writing the draft comment letter itself, including drafting detailed analytical and legal challenges upon the Draft EIS /EIR's findings regarding key impact areas, including but not limited to the following: Traffic: Due to its at -grade crossings and alignment along existing city streets, the Washington Boulevard alignment will likely create significant impacts along these street segments, as well as a decreased level of service at multiple key intersections. In addition, given both the complexity and a Project completion well off in the future, there will likely be many methodological problems in the Draft EIS /EIR's traffic analysis (e.g., improperly chosen baselines, conflicting ambient growth assumptions, etc.) that we can challenge. o Noise: Many environmental documents contain weak analyses of noise impacts, because noise is often dismissed as a temporary impact that does manatt manatt I ➢helps I phillips Anthony R. Ybarra August 22, 2014 Page 4 not rise to a level of significance, and often is thought to disappear after a project is completed. Here, however, the Washington Boulevard alignment would travel directly through residential neighborhoods, creating permanent operational noise impacts. This is a perfect area to identify new and greater significant impacts, especially upon sensitive receptors that exist in proximity to this alignment. Aesthetics. Land Use and Population: Employment and housing projections utilized in the Draft EIS/EIR likely do not capture the anticipated growth resulting from transit - oriented development along the SR -60 alignment. Accordingly, the Draft EIS/EIR's projected ridership numbers can be challenged as being artificially low, especially for a transit project that is expected to be completed more than 15 years in the future, In addition, an at -grade light rail line will physically divide several communities, and in the case of the Washington Boulevard alignment's above -grade section through Montebello, will create very severe aesthetic impacts. • Coordination with the Coalition throughout our analysis and drafting work, to assure that the arguments made in the letter fully support the goals of the Coalition and its members. Fee Proposal I would lead the Manatt team responsible for drafting the comment letter, with assistance from my colleagues Brady McShane and Todd Nelson. My standard billing rate is 5625 per hour, while Brady and Todd's rates are $645 and $485 per hour, respectively. I have received authorization from firm management to offer the Coalition a 15 percent discount from these hourly rates. With this 15 percent discount in place, I believe it would be feasible to prepare a comment letter for $75,000. That $75,000 would be comprised of the following tasks: review and analysis of the Draft EHUEIS (approximately $20,000); coordination with Coalition agency staff, review of planning documents, studies, and agency thresholds, etc. (approximately $20,000); and drafting of the letter itself (approximately S35,000). The specific work that needs to be performed in order to fully analyze the Draft EIS /EIR to identify its weaknesses, compile the best evidence for identifying new and greater significant impacts for the Washington Boulevard alignment, draft the letter itself, and coordinate efforts with the Coalition members, is described above in detail. This work will obviously require a significant number of hours invested by our team to draft a letter that will most effectively advance the Coalition's goals. manatt manatt I phelpe I phillips Anthony R. Ybarra August 22, 2014 Page 5 I would be happy to discuss this proposal with you at your convenience. We are very excited about the possibility of working with the Coalition on this project. Very truly yours, i Victor De la Cruz Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP cc : Omar Hernandez., Arroyo Consulting Group