March 2010 Archives

Six candidates will seek five director seats tonight on the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust board.

Balloting begins at 7, but the candidates will make a brief statement about their credentials before votes are cast.

Their profiles, posted on the Land Trust's website, are featured below.

Stephanie Loftin
Stephanie is an attorney admitted to the California bar, and in 1997 was named Pro Bono lawyer of the year for this area. After settling in Long Beach, Stephanie was in the first graduating class of the Long Beach Citizens Police Academy. Since that time, she has been involved in many local issues. Stephanie has taught battered women at Rainbow Services in San Pedro how to legally protect themselves and their children; she has mediated disputes between neighbors and has worked with the Long Beach Police Chief's task force to ensure fairness to gays and lesbians.

Phil Lohman, Ph.D., MBA
Phil is a learning and development consultant for Kaiser Permanente and was, for more than 20 years, a management consultant and executive with a multinational consulting firm. In his other life, Phil has been a lifelong outdoorsman and environmental activist, beginning with the Sierra Club's campaign to save Mineral King in 1969. He has served the Sierra Club as a public speaker, was one of the founders of Long Beach Cyclists and, as a rescue-certified Scuba diver, has participated in REEF and other oceanconservation projects. He is a member of El Dorado Audubon and has been an activist and supporter of the Los Cerritos Wetlands since the late 1980s. Phil was a board member of the LCWLT in the early 1990s.

Steve McCord
Steve was instrumental, in partnership with Eric White, in redesigning the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust website, which was launched in September 2005. Steve has lived adjacent to the Los Cerritos Wetlands since 2003 and has been a Long Beach resident since 1983 (except for a four-year residence in Lakewood from 1988-1992).
Steve and his wife Angie helped rally opposition to the proposed Home Depot on Studebaker by preparing and distributing letters to all the residents of the Belmont Shores Mobile Estates community as well as the legislature. Steve has been an El Dorado Nature Center volunteer since 2005 and has participated in the Discovering a Sense of Place, Choices for Sustainable Living, Exploring Deep Ecology and Menu for the Future reading circles. For many years Steve has been a supporter of The Nature Conservancy of California, the Trust for Public Land, Northwest Earth Institute, League of Conservation Voters, Environmental Defense Fund, California Wilderness Coalition, Corporate Accountability International, Water-keepers Alliance, and the Tree People.

Jericho Poppler
Jericho has been a Long Beach resident her whole life. She lives with her husband and five children in the Naples area. Jericho is a former world champion surfer, one of the original founders of Surfrider Foundation and a long-time advocate for environmental causes, especially coastal protection. In addition to her passion for protecting the environment, Jericho is an advocate for kids and founded "Kids for Clean Waves" to help raise awareness in children, their parents, and the general public of the importance of ocean water cleanliness off our coast. Jericho is currently an LCWLT Board member.

Janice Dahl
Was a founding member of Los Cerritos Wetlands Task Force in 1995 and a founding member of Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust. She organized and hosted community outreach for public awareness and Los Cerritos Wetlands purchase, protection and restoration. In 1999, Janice created and produced the award winning video The Lost Jewel of Coast, Los Cerritos Wetlands, which has been used extensively to educate lawmakers and continues to be used in schools and colleges. She and others successfully stopped the city from allowing the Bixby Company to dump illegally on the open-space property adjacent to Belmont Shores Mobile Estates. In 2002, she was instrumental, along with Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust founder Don May, in securing $14,000,000 from the State of California for the purchase of Los Cerritos Wetlands. In 2004 Janice created the Stop Home Depot campaign, organized the community and collected hundreds of signatures to keep Home Depot from being built across from the wetlands. Janice was the original plaintiff that retained the law firm of Chatten-Brown and Carstens and filed suit to fight the City of Long Beach, Studebaker LLC (Tom Dean, et al) and Home Depot. This led to her becoming President of University Park Estates Neighborhood Assn. (UPENA) for two terms (four years). She brought UPENA and Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust together to sign onto the lawsuit to stop Home Depot, and in 2008 these organizations won the suit. Janice ran fundraising campaigns to help pay for legal costs. She states that in 2010 she will continue her efforts supporting the acquisition, protection and restoration of Los Cerritos Wetlands.

Tom Marchese
Tom Marchese is a product of Long Beach-he grew up in a neighborhood adjacent to the wetlands-he attended Hill, Wilson, Cal State, and Western State University College of Law.
Currently serving as director on the Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust Board as well as serving as Vice President on the University Park Estates Board, Tom has been a steward of wetlands for over 30 years. He was a member of the SEADIP study group (alternating with Janice Dahl). His concerns and actions regarding the wetlands have resulted in stopping Home Depot, exposing the City's land swap "deal" with his public records request, and he has always been a vigilant observer in protection of our wetlands. Tom is a supporter of SEADIP, the California Coastal Commission, the League of Conservation Voters, the Trust of Public Land, the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy as well as many other environmental groups. Tom is "watchdog" for the environment, not a "lapdog" for unfettered

Los Angeles has the greatest number of energy efficient buildings that merited the EPA's Energy Star in 2009, according to the federal Environmental Protection Agency list.

The nation's second largest city is followed by Washington, D.C., San Francisco, Denver, Chicago, Houston, Lakeland, Dallas-Fort Worth, Atlanta and New York.

Energy efficiency saves building owners money and has less impacts on climate change.

The list of approximately 296 Southern California energy efficient buildings includes the Arena Corporate Center in Anaheim, Maguire Properties Lantana West in Santa Monica, Legacy Oceangate Tower in Long Beach, the office building located at 501 W. Broadway in San Diego, and the Trident Center in Los Angeles. The complete list is available at energystar.gov/buildinglist

"These cities see the importance of taking action on climate change," <CF11>said Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Air and Radiation.</CF> "Communities from Los Angeles to Louisville are reducing greenhouse gases and cutting energy bills with buildings that have earned EPA's Energy Star," Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Air and Radiation, said in a prepared statement.

EPA first issued its ranking of cities with the most Energy Star labeled buildings last year. This year, Los Angeles remains in first place; the District of Columbia picks up second; Denver and Chicago move into the top five; and Lakeland and New York City are new to the top 10.

Continuing the impressive growth of the past several years, in 2009 nearly 3,900 commercial buildings earned the Energy Star, representing annual savings of more than $900 million in utility bills and cutting more than 4.7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions.

Since EPA awarded the first Energy Star to a building in 1999, nearly 9,000 buildings across the U.S. have earned the Energy Star as of the end of 2009, representing more than a 40 percent increase over last year's total.

Overall annual utility savings have climbed to nearly $1.6 billion and greenhouse gas emissions equal to the emissions of more than 1 million homes a year have been prevented.

Energy use in commercial buildings accounts for 17 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions at a cost of over $100 billion per year. EPA awards the Energy Star to commercial buildings that perform in the top 25 percent of buildings nationwide compared to similar buildings, agency officials said.

Thirteen types of buildings can earn the Energy Star, including schools, hospitals, office buildings, retail stores and supermarkets.

View a list of the Top 25 Cities in 2009 with Energy Star labeled buildings: http://energystar.gov/TopCities

Access EPA's real-time registry of all Energy Star labeled buildings 1999-present: http://energystar.gov/buildinglist

Learn more about earning the Energy Star for commercial buildings:
http://energystar.gov/labeledbuildings

Orance County Health Care Agency officials will accept public comments March 18 on the preliminary corrective action plan for ARCO station on Pacific Coast Highway.

Fuel leaking at the station -- at Fifth Street and PCH -- has resulted in the inspection of about 50 Bridgeport homes -- some are on Schooner Way. More serious plumes of fuel contamination  seem to be "hopscotching" around the area, according to City Manager David Carmany.

Health officials are concerned about the possible link of benzene, a known carcinogen, to a particular type of leukemia.

The scheduled 7 p.m. March 18 meeting will be at the Marina Community Center, 151 Marina Drive.

 There will be presentations by the Bridgeport Technical Advisory Committee and by Seal Beach officials.

The public may provide verbal comments at 8 p.m.

 Written comments may also be sent until March 31 to OCHCA's contact: Anthony Martinez, 1241 E. Dyer Road, Suite 120, Santa Ana, CA 92705 or by e-mail: amartinez@ochca.com
<CF12>
Site Name: ARCO #6066
Site Address: 490 Pacific Coast Highway
City, Zip Seal Beach, CA 90740
Site Case #: 86UT206

On Feb. 23, the OCHCA officials provided public notice of proposed cleanup activities at the the site, where a hazardous materials release occurred from an underground storage tank system.

A site investigation was conducted to determine the actual or potential effects of this release. Using the information obtained during the probe, a preliminary corrective action plan (CAP) to abate the effects of the leak was prepared by ARCO, ubmitted to OCHCA for review and approval prior to its implementation.

OCHCA officials are reviewing the preliminary CAP, and is accepting comments from the public until March 31.

The state Coastal Commission has found substantial issues on the city's approval of a permit for restoration of the graded area near Los Cerritos Wetlands.

It approved a new hearing on the issue during a hearing in Santa Cruz.

Critics of the controversial permit, including several commissioners, contend the city's approval of the local coastal development permit -- without a detailed habitat restoration plan -- "does not conform with or carry out the goals and policies for the project site as set forth by the City of Long Beach certified Local Coastal Program (LCP)."

According to a commission staff report: "The certified Long Beach LCP sets forth the following land use policy for the project site, which is Subarea 23 of SEADIP (Southeast Area Development and Improvement Plan):

"a. The two wetland concepts generally outlined shall include a 8.3 acre brackish pond on Area 23 provided that the Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission determines (i) in addition to the setback for buffer, the elevation and setbacks between development and wetland edge shall be sufficient to ensure stability during liquefaction events caused by the maximum credible earthquake; (ii) that the location and operation of the proposed wetland are acceptable to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the State Department of Health and to the Local Mosquito Abatement District.

"b. If approval from these agencies results in reductions to the net size of the proposed wetland, restoration at this site shall only occur if the remaining area is sufficient to create a wetland at least the same size as the existing brackish pond at the Marketplace.

"The city's approval of the local coastal development permit also does not conform with or carry out the following goals and policies contained in the Open Space Element, which are equally weighted policies of the Land Use Plan (LUP) portion of the city's LCP:

"1. Goals: Open Space - Preservation of Natural Resources

"b. To preserve and enhance the open space opportunities offered by the inland waterways of the city through improved access and beautification.

"g. To preserve areas which serve as natural habitats for fish and wildlife species and which can be used for ecologic, scientific, and educational purposes.

"h. To locate, define, and protect other beneficial natural habitats in and about the city.

"5. Goals: Open Space - Shaping Urban Development
a. To maintain and enhance existing and potential open space areas which are important as links, nodes, and edges, or provide relief from urban built-form.

"8. Policies: Open Space Node - Alamitos Bay & Recreation Park Conserve and enhance Alamitos Bay - Recreation Park open space node by:

"e. Improving the quality of the Bay waters by controlling all forms of possible pollution, both in Bay and in tributaries upstream;

"h. Maintaining close surveillance over all proposed projects in the Bay area through the environmental review process;

"i. Exerting design controls on proposed improvements in order to prevent degradation of the aesthetic environment;"

Additional details from the commission report:

"Project Description

"The vacant 9.38-acre project site, situated between Loynes Drive and the north bank of Los Cerritos Channel (Alamitos Bay) in southeast Long Beach, is part of an old landfill operation ... that filled coastal marshland in the 1940s and '50s. The top layer of the landfill was disturbed by unpermitted grading that occurred on March 19 and 20, 2009. That unpermitted grading altered the topography and removed most of the vegetation from the site. Apparently, the grading also exposed the old dump. Commission staff issued an emergency permit on April 9, 2009 to allow the applicant to take immediate action to mitigate elevated methane levels (up to 7700 ppm) detected at the site by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Following the issuance of the emergency permit, the applicant constructed a new cap on the dump using 1,000 cubic yards of imported fill dirt.
"The subject of this appeal, Local Coastal Development Permit No. 0904-15, is an after-the-fact approval for weed abatement and for the import of 1,000 cubic yards of soil to construct a new cap on the surface of the old dump. The project site is Subarea 23 of SEADIP (Southeast Area Development and Improvement Plan), a specific plan that covers the southeast portion of the City of Long Beach.

"B. Factors to be Considered in Substantial Issue Analysis

"Section 30625 of the Coastal Act states that the commission shall hear an appeal of a local government action unless it finds that no substantial issue exists with respect to the grounds on which the appeal has been filed. The term 'substantial issue' is not defined in the Coastal Act or its implementing regulations....

"Even when the commission chooses not to hear an appeal, appellants nevertheless may obtain judicial review of the local government's coastal permit decision by filing petition for a writ of mandate pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.5. Staff is recommending that the commission find that a substantial issue exists for the reasons set forth below.

"C. Substantial Issue Analysis

"... In this case, the local coastal development permit may be appealed to the commission on the grounds that it does not conform to the certified LCP or the public access policies of the Coastal Act....

"In this case, staff recommends that the commission determine that the appeals do raise a substantial issue with respect to the grounds on which the appeals have been filed regarding consistency with the certified City of Long Beach LCP. The certified LCP requires that open space and natural habitat areas shall be preserved and that the waters of Alamitos Bay be protected from polluted runoff. The following goals and policies, contained in the Open Space Element of the City's General Plan, are equally weighted policies of the Land Use Plan (LUP) portion of the City's certified LCP:

"1. Goals: Open Space - Preservation of Natural Resources

"b. To preserve and enhance the open space opportunities offered by the inland waterways of the city through improved access and beautification.

"g. To preserve areas which serve as natural habitats for fish and wildlife species and which can be used for ecologic, scientific, and educational purposes.

"h. To locate, define, and protect other beneficial natural habitats in and about the city.

"5. Goals: Open Space - Shaping Urban Development

"a. To maintain and enhance existing and potential open space areas which are important as links, nodes, and edges, or provide relief from urban built-form.

"8. Policies: Open Space Node - Alamitos Bay & Recreation Park Conserve and enhance Alamitos Bay - Recreation Park open space node by:

"e. Improving the quality of the Bay waters by controlling all forms of possible pollution, both in Bay and in tributaries upstream;

"h. Maintaining close surveillance over all proposed projects in the Bay area through the environmental review process;

"i. Exerting design controls on proposed improvements in order to prevent degradation of the aesthetic environment;

"The appeals contend that the project site should be recognized as containing wetlands and sensitive habitat, and that it is subject to the public trust. These assertions go right to the heart of the matter. The coastal development permit process should identify the impacts of the approved development on coastal resources, and then establish the limits on the scope of the approved development and require specific mitigation measures in order to protect open space and natural habitat as required by the certified LCP. The city's local coastal development permit findings do not acknowledge the proposed project's adverse impacts to coastal resources or attempt to explain how the adverse impacts will be minimized or mitigated. The city's findings also do not provide an adequate degree of factual support for its conclusion that the approved development conforms with the certified LCP and the public access policies of the Coastal Act.

"The project site is open space, and the reports prepared for the applicant and the Los Cerritos Wetlands Trust support the assertion that the site contains wetlands and sensitive habitat. A report1 for the project site submitted by the Los Cerritos Wetlands Trust indicates that the site has significant biological value because of its characteristics and its proximity to the tidal channel and the adjacent salt marshes. The Los Cerritos Wetlands are about 200 feet south of the project site, on the south side of the Los Cerritos Channel. While the project site is primarily upland (about 16 to 20 feet of fill covering former salt marsh), the report states that there are seasonal wetlands (vernal ponds) that form on lower elevations on the western side of the property. Hydric soils and least two species of native plants that are wetland indicators (Polypogon monspeliensis and Lepidium latifolium) have been documented on the site.

"The El Dorado Audubon Society and the report submitted by the Los Cerritos Wetlands Trust state that the open space is an important foraging area and refuge for several species of birds, including raptors, herons and egrets. Wildlife on the site also includes fence lizards and small mammals (squirrels, rabbits and rodents).

"The local coastal development permit authorizes the removal of vegetation and the placement of 1,000 cubic yards of fill on the site, but lacks the provisions necessary to protect habitat and native vegetation on the site. The local coastal development permit also does not include adequate conditions to require the applicant to mitigate and/or restore any habitat destroyed as a result of the approved development. The local coastal development permit does not include any mitigation to protect the adjacent tidal areas from runoff and sediment that may erode from the site subsequent to the vegetation removal and grading. Even though the local coastal development permit contains Condition 10 that requires the applicant to 'comply with a remediation plan to be prepared by staff,' the city has not put forward any such plan. The local coastal development permit's lack of limits on the scope of the approved development and the lack of specific mitigation measures raises a substantial issue with respect to the grounds of the appeals.

"Condition 10 raises a substantial issue as to its conformity with the certified LCP because it is vague and unclear. The condition does not define what needs to be remediated. Is it the dump and the methane gases, or the habitat and vegetation that must be remediated? The condition includes no details, standards or parameters. The condition should, at a minimum, describe what types of native plants must be planted on the site (and when) in order to mitigate....

"Additionally, the local coastal development permit is unclear as to whether the city's approval of weed abatement is solely retroactive, or whether the permit is authorizing future episodes of vegetation removal activities on the site. Either way, the permit does not include the provisions necessary to protect native vegetation, wildlife and water quality from the adverse impacts of vegetation removal. Thus, a finding of substantial issue will help to clarify the scope of the approved development, and whether a coastal development permit must be obtained for any additional vegetation removal.

"Another substantial issue is the conformity of the development with the LCP designation of the property. The certified City of Long Beach LCP designates the project site as a restoration site, specifically an 8.3-acre brackish pond. The project site falls within Subarea 23 of SEADIP (PD-1 - Southeast Area Development and Improvement Plan), a specific plan that covers the southeast portion of the City of Long Beach. ...

"A de novo hearing will scheduled for a future Commission meeting."

Lobster poachers are feeling the pinch in Orange County, as state Department of Fish & Game wardens crack down on illegal activity.

.In the last two months wardens have investigated three cases involving the possession of significant lobster over limits, with the majority of the lobsters undersize, the agency announced.

In one case the suspect was convicted and is serving jail time for commercial sale of sport caught lobster. The two other cases are pending.

"Local lobster populations will suffer severe declines if poaching activity is left unchecked." said Lt. Dan Sforza of DFG's Law Enforcement Division

The following three cases are examples of cases made every day by game wardens.

-- On Feb. 2, a Norwalk man was sentenced to 33 days in jail for selling 22 undersized lobsters for $85. Witnesses at the scene stated he had sold lobsters there many times before.

-- On Jan. 29, A Bloomington resident was found in possession of 39 lobsters, 38 of which were undersized, intended for commercial sale.

-- On Dec. 13, a father and son duo from Dana Point, were found in possession of 22 lobsters, 21 of which were undersized. They were cited for four violations each.

"Regulations regarding sport take of lobsters are designed to allow lobster the chance to reproduce at least once during their lives before they can be taken by an angler," DFG officials noted. "Possession of three times the normal limit of seven lobsters is prima facie evidence they are possessed for the purpose of commercial sale."

Regulations related to lobster fishing can be found on page 57 of the DFG Ocean Fishing Regulations available at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/pdfs/oceanfish2009.pdf.