Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 18.78 relating to construction in the vicinity of abandoned oil wells, read and adopt as read.  (Citywide)
Thank you. Let's go ahead. And we have two more audiences to approve. Let's get these approved. First, item 14, please. Item 14 is reported from Development Services. Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to construction in the vicinity of abandoned oil wells read and adopted as read citywide. Okay, I think I can get a motion, please. Councilmember Tharanga, can I get a second? Nothing about council comes from ringgit. Do you have any comments? No, I did that. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. Thank you. I don't know if everyone recognizes the significance of this item. There are properties throughout our community that really could be used for some amazing economic development opportunities. This item started years ago, and through the great work of our economic development department, they have really followed this through to fruition. So years of great work behind this and these are the kinds of things that often go unnoticed. It really can change the future. So we're really appreciative of this. Thank you, Councilwoman. It's really public comment on this. Yes. Our first speaker is Eliot Zimmer. Good evening, city council members. My battery's running low. I just wanted to say that I would like. To see that the City. Council ensures that the companies that have done this. Drilling and have made money from the wells. Are responsible. For closing up this well. And all. Of our wells and making sure that. They are free of. Benzene and any other. Toxins that may still be present on the site. Think your next speaker is Anna Christiansen. I don't 14 will. Okay. Construction on top of abandoned oil wells. Even if they are not shut down in conformance with state standards like building on a volcano. Sierra Club's lo Cerritos, Wetlands Task Force and Provisional Wetlands Protectors request a no vote or a postponement of this second reading. We propose the following changes. Adhere to Collegium Recommendation three Set back for construction year abandoned wells. No construction over abandoned wells, no impracticality or hardship exemptions allowed re approving abandoned wells as is no new construction allowed unless until all abandoned wells including orphaned wells on the project site meet current calcium standards. Regulations for construction on sites with detectable amounts of methane must be consistent. Meet Cal, Jim and L.A. County standards and not tailored to specific projects. The city and its various employees and agents will not be indemnified for issuing project permits or approvals on site with abandoned orphan wells that have not been shut down according to Chaldean standards . In effect, at the time of construction, no low cost or affordable housing projects may be constructed on top of abandoned wells, nor on properties with improperly abandoned orphan wells. This amendment promises equivalent regulations to those of Chaldean what is actually equivocating because it uses ambiguous language so as to conceal the truth. Equivalent means not differing the same words or significance, while claiming to provide, quote, better outcomes for public safety, resulting in a, quote, healthier, cleaner and more viable environment for a Long Beach. The proposed amendment actually eases state environmental protections to the benefit of developers. Constructing buildings over oiled oil wells. Capped or not is, quote, just not a smart thing, according to Chris McCullough, a former Carlton district deputy for Southern California. Quote, Because gases that were naturally venting into the air and dissipating are now potentially getting trapped. If that gas were to build up and ignite, you have a potential for catastrophic damage to structures and life. The Amendments product matic language Collegium recommends that this is your language. The proposed regulations allow construction over wells, including those that have not been safely abandoned or properly closed. Only construction projects involving caregiving facilities, hospitals or schools must continue to meet current standards. That should tell you something if you work. If you want to build a school on it, why build a home on it for wells and not abandon the current accounting standards to the current cultural standards? Claim of impracticality or hardship can be submitted and the development coordinator the authority to approve the well. And I don't know that I thought I'd be able to tell him, but I now I have more additional problematic language. Thank you. Your next speaker is in control. And Cantrell. Our next speaker is carelessly. Carelessly. Hi. This is carelessly broken through. Turns toward what I saw in the PowerPoint presentation. You're talking about reducing the requirement of the calcium program and replacing it with a Long Beach specific set of requirements. The presentation was a little loosey goosey. It basically sounds like we don't want to use Cal Gym requirements. We want something less comprehensive. But we haven't figured that all out yet. My concern is why are we abandoning existing controls before the new process is defined? Well, it doesn't happen often. Nothing. Explosions have occurred as reported in the news. The oil contaminated sites have long been considered unsuitable for development because of environmental and safety issues. However, as I understand it, new products are making it possible to build on these sites. The wording in the PowerPoint presentation made it sound like the new requirements and process that we will use in place of Belgium are not well defined as of yet. The presentation described existing controls where it talks about cement plugs and setbacks. So the idea was to keep humans further away from danger. The Long Beach proposed regulations, the equivalency standards talked about lift cement plugs and then it says or other approach subject to study. So that's a case where we haven't defined it yet. The presentation goes on to say that we should allow development of certain projects over abandoned wells, and that means no setbacks. And it says subject to certain safety provisions. And I didn't see those defined there. Certain process, create a process to locate and examine world conditions. That process should already be defined. Before you approve this, create a process to test and monitor. Well, that seems to be the most important control to have, but this process doesn't appear to have been designed yet. It seems that before you approve anything, those processes should be documented and they should have decision trees in them that go toward more stringent requirements in highly contaminated areas. The PowerPoint presentation said a learn and censor mitigation system can be required if the setbacks are reduced and humans are closer to the contaminated site. It would seem concerns for safety should result in the document saying they will be required. The decision process should be well documented, deciding when to test and monitor well who does it? How often? In a rush to build? Thank you. That concludes public comment for this item. Thank you. Call. Vote, please. Councilwoman Sandy has. I asked one, Alan. Why. Councilwoman Pryce? Councilman Sabino. I. Councilwoman Mongo. City Councilwoman Sara. I can't remember Tauranga. I can swim in Austin. All right. Vice Mayor Richardson? Yes. Bush and Kerry.