Recommendation to request City Council to: (1) receive supporting documentation into the record and conduct a public hearing on two appeals of the Board of Harbor Commissioners' certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Pier B On-Dock Rail Support Facility Project filed pursuant to Long Beach Municipal Code Section 21.21.507 by Phillips Steel Company and Superior Electrical Advertising; and (2) adopt resolution denying the appeals and upholding the Board of Harbor Commissioners' certification of the Final EIR for the Project.
And then we'll go into the into the regular agenda, as we always do. And so with that, I do want to begin with our first hearing that we will be hearing this evening, which will which is the hearing related to our the Board of Harbor Commissioners action. And around the port, it's hearing number three. If you can please read this Madam Clerk. Report from. Harbor. Commission recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record and conduct a public hearing on two appeals of the Harbor Commissioners Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the. Pier B. On Dock. Rail Support Facility Project. And adopt a resolution denying the. Appeals. Thank you very much. With that, I'm going to go and turn this over to our assistant city manager who will introduce the item. Or maybe someone else will be introducing the item. What is it? Okay, so we'll we'll have the hour. We'll go and start off with staff that will introduce the item. Okay. Hi. My name is Dawn McIntosh. I'm a deputy city attorney. As you see, the city manager is not here tonight, so I'll be teeing this up for you and filling you in on the process. The appeal. Before you is somewhat unique from the harbor department, so I'm going to go over the. Process. On January 22nd, 2018, the Board of Harbor Commissioners adopted a resolution. Which certified the Environmental Impact. Report for the Pier be on Dock Rail Support Facility. They made some associated findings that are required for that certification. And they approved. That project and issued a permit for development of the project. As you know, under the city. Charter, the Board of Harbor Commissioners has sole jurisdiction over projects in the port, such as this. Pier be on dock rail support facility project. However, under the city's. Municipal code section 21.20 1.507, the environmental determination under the California Environmental Quality Act. Which was made by the board for the project, may be appealed to this body to such appeals were. Filed by Phillip Steel Company and Superior Electric Advertising. And those appeals are before you tonight. And Madam City Attorney, I just want to make sure, just as a reminder for the clerk, before we do need to do so, before we do any sort of comment, we'll do the ask. Thank you very. The scope of the appeals before you tonight. Is quite narrow. The city council's. Jurisdiction is limited to a determination of whether the port's environmental review resulting in the final environmental impact. Report was adequate under the California Environmental Quality Act. The City Council conducts a de novo review, which means that you. Judge the facts presented to you and you make your determination on the evidence without deference to this made by the Board of Harbor Commissioners. It's important to remember. However, that the Council is not considering the merits of the project itself. The only thing before you is the environmental determination. The process for the hearing will be as follows Port staff and appellants will each. Have 20 minutes to present. Port staff will begin. And present the staff report, which will take approximately 10 minutes. After their presentation, the two appellants will have 20 minutes to present their appeals divided among them as they choose. At that time, the port staff. Will respond with their rebuttal for the remainder of their 20 minutes. At this point, you may take public comment and then take it behind the rail. After you've received all the evidence, you have two options. First, you may deny the appeals and. Approve a resolution affirming the second determination made by the Board of Harbor Commissioners. Or you may grant one or both of the appeals, set aside the environmental. Determination, and remand the matter to the Board of Harbor Commissioners for further action. I'd like to introduce additional counsel who are here with me tonight. To my right is David Alvarez. He is also an attorney with the city attorney's office who handles matters for the harbor department. Behind me is Cathy Jensen of Routan and Tucker. She is an attorney who specializes in environmental matters and has been advising the port for some time. Also behind me is Heather Tom. She's the director of environmental planning. She will be presenting the staff report tonight. And next to her is Matt Armes, who is the assistant director of environmental planning. And with that, Mr. Mayor, I will turn it back over to you. Okay. Thank you. The as far as the additional part of the presentation, will you be doing that? I'm assuming the port staff will be doing that right now. Yes. Okay, then. Then if we can just hear from our harbor staff. Thank you. Good evening. Honorable Mayor Garcia, members of the city council, the harbor departments before you this evening to respond to two appeals that have been filed against the environmental impact report for the pier be on dock rail support facility project that was recently certified by the Harbor Commission will present a brief staff report describing the project, a summary of the appeals filed and our responses. Culminating an eight year process where the harbor department responded to over 300 comments on the draft air. Our board held a hearing on January 22nd where they heard presentations, the testimony of 42 public speakers, and they asked numerous questions. The Harbor Commission found the air to be in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, or SEQUA, and approved the proposed project. The project is located in an industrial area southwest of Anaheim Street and the I-70 ten Freeway. Tracks from the facility connect to the iron dock, rail infrastructure in the terminals and trains depart the facility via the Alameda corridor. Rail is the most efficient, economical and least polluting means of moving cargo inland across the country. With the Pier B facility, the port seeks to enhance and expand the existing rail facility at the northern edge of our harbor district. The new facility would provide for longer arrival and departure tracks for today's longer trains. It would increase productivity at our terminals by providing them the ability to build longer trains on dock at their facilities with more storage and staging tracks. The result will be more efficient on dock rail operations to promote the transport of cargo containers on trains versus transport of cargo containers on trucks. To opt out of rail facilities, the project would also improve motorist and rail safety by eliminating an at grade crossing at the Ninth Street and Pico Avenue . The on dock rail support facility would be built in three phases over an estimated seven years. Construction of the project would create more than 1100 jobs. The approved project would expand the existing PRB rail facility from 12 tracks to 48 tracks, providing room to stage trains up to 10,000 feet long. Expanding this rail facility will carry out the goals of the port's master plan and Clean Air Action Plan and will allow more cargo to leave the port complex by rail versus having to go by truck. Currently, about one quarter of the cargo is loaded or unloaded within the port and moved by trains to meet our Clean Air Action Plan goals for improving air quality. Our aim is to increase the use of on dock rail to at least 35%. The potential impacts of the project were analyzed appropriately. Per SICA, using all of the relevant methodologies and all feasible mitigation measures were applied. All potential impacts associated with the project, construction and operation were properly disclosed. Following our board certification of the air. Two appeals were filed to the Long Beach City Council, representing the interests of Phillip Steel Company and superior electrical advertising. This figure shows the location of Phillips and Superior relative to the project site. The three locations owned by Phillips and the property leased by Superior are all located on Anaheim Street outside of the project footprint to the north. None of the properties have been identified for relocation or acquisition. The area where the project is located is zoned industrial, which is specifically slated for heavy industry manufacturing, railyards and port related and maritime industry facilities. The Harbor Department has provided detailed, written responses to each of the grounds for the appeals. I'll provide a summary of the key issues raised by both appellants. First, Phillips argues that various road closures will negatively affect traffic on Anaheim Street, obstruct access to its businesses and result in traffic delays. The air traffic analysis fully assess the operation of Anaheim Street during the peak construction activity and operations of the project did not identify any significant impacts. Phillips Employees and customers will continue to have direct access to each of Phillips facilities. Further, while travel times are not an environmental issue required for analysis and are secure, the estimated travel time delays of approximately 3 minutes are addressed and disclosed in the air. Also, the port is committed to work with businesses and contractors to develop a transportation management plan and will minimize impacts to the community and businesses during construction. Superior Electricals Appeal asserts that the air did not address the issue of train dust because this issue was not previously raised by Superior or any other commenter before or during the proceedings before the Harbor Commission as required under the Long Beach Municipal Code. This issue may not be appealed to the City Council, and the appeal on this ground should be denied. That said, particulate matter impacts associated with fugitive dust during construction and operation were appropriately analyzed in the air quality section of the air and the project will comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District Requirements for dust control. Superior also appeals the determination excuse me, Superior also appeals the determination that the railyard is industrial in nature and that the railyard is compatible with neighboring businesses. The zoning designation in the vicinity of the project is industrial railyards or expressly permitted uses in the General Industrial District and the port related industrial district where the project is located. Ellipse also contends that the significant air quality impacts identified in the air will negatively affect their employees. The air appropriately analyzed the potential health effects of the project and identified that cancer and non-cancer health impacts from the project would be less than significant. Impacts from nitrogen dioxide would be significant and unavoidable, as was appropriately disco disclosed in the air. The area where Phillip's properties are located already experience high background levels of snow too, and the project's contribution is small in comparison to the background conditions. Furthermore, the potential and O2 exceedances at Philips locations are expected to be temporary and occur infrequently during construction. Next. Phillips claims that the scope of the sequence analysis is inadequate and the IIR provides no plan for acquisition, relocation or compensation for adjacent businesses. The air fully analyzed all of the potential environmental impacts in compliance with Sequa and demonstrates that there is no need to relocate or acquire businesses outside of the project footprint. Phillips also identified a comment letter submitted by Caltrans on the Draft de Air, where they recommended the Ninth Street alternative. The air analyzed potential impacts at numerous street intersections and roadway segments and did not identify any significant impacts associated with ground transportation as it relates to public safety. The removal of the A-grade crossing at Ninth Street would result in a public safety improvement. Recently, in a letter to the port. Caltrans expressed support for the project and the Harbor Commission certification of this secret document. Caltrans also stated that the objectives of the Pier B project run in parallel with those of the IE 710 corridor and Shoemaker Bridge projects which overlap with the footprint of this project, especially those objectives which seek to improve efficiency and safety across modes of travel. This letter has been provided in the staff report. Phillips also argues that access to emergency services included at the close, including the closest major hospital, were not sufficiently studied. While emergency response times are not an environmental issue covered by sequa unless new infrastructure is required. The air did describe the locations of emergency responders, which are located near and on all sides of the project. Fire Chief Terry testified at the board hearing that his department reviewed the project and concluded that there would be no significant impact to emergency response capability. Further access routes to the closest hospitals at St Mary Medical Center and Long Beach Memorial would not change as a result of the project. Finally, Phillips states that the air was difficult to follow, should have been recirculated due to a number of changes, and that findings were not supported. The changes that were made from the draft document to the final were appropriate under sequa and served to reduce the potential impacts associated with the project in response to the comments received. Further, the findings offered 65 pages of detailed, factually supported findings, and the appellant did not specifically identify what changes lacked factual support. Neither appellant has identified any flaw in the ER analysis or explained why the board certification of the final air was in error. Therefore, the appeals should be denied this evening as described by the City Attorney's Office and considering the merits of the appeals by Phillips Steel and Superior Electrical City Council as tasked with determining if the Harbor Department certification of the final air is in compliance with the requirements of SEQUA. Thank you. Thank you very much. With that, we're going to hear from the appellants. So we'll put the clock at 20 minutes total. If I can, please have the appellants. You can feel free to use your time however you would like. Can have both. The appellants please come down. And you'll both just use part of the time, I assume? Yes. Okay. Whenever you're ready, sir. Are we good? Yes. Can you please raise your right hand and say I do or I will at the end of the statement to you and each of you solemnly state that the testimony you may give and the calls now in pending before this. Body shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God. I do. Good evening, honorable council members and other officials. My name is Darrell Phillips. I'm the proprietor of Phillips Steel Company here in Long Beach, a company that's been here for over 103 years. I'm no attorney. However, I have two general objections to the ports admitting the admitted rubberstamping approval of the C.A.R.. First, the proposed plan specifically creates unnecessary burdens for the on a number of local businesses to the point of actual destruction of companies, some of which have been pillars in our community and the city of Long Beach for over 100 years. The plan clearly designed to benefit the east side of the city while placing the costs of these benefits on your neighbors to the west side. This is patently unfair. And while the E.R. admits much of this discriminatory treatment, it is deceptive to the point of misleading. In its descriptions. Second, the proposed plan admittedly creates new levels of toxic pollution, health problems and destroys programs within our city that deal with the homeless, mental disorders and residents and others in need. It places the burdens associated with the unfettered expansion on those too poor or too conflicted to capably object. For these reasons, we ask the City Council to reopen the E.R. and request further findings towards mitigation and impact. More details as to these matters is found in the February 5th, 2018 appeal filed by our company, by our Council on behalf of our company, Philip Steel Company. Here are two purpose specific examples of my points. Just one part of the air admits that the project will materially increase nitrogen dioxide emissions. One of the most toxic emissions known demand short term exposure causes asthma, wheezing, hospital admissions and the E.R. visits. Long term exposure, which will admittedly occur with the port's plan, not only affects physical health of the people, but causes hazy air and nutrient pollution in our oceans. In its response, the report states that increases of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide and nitrogen dioxide are, quote, simply unavoidable. The port also concludes that the quote, quote project would also resort result in significant and unavoidable air emissions and health risks impacts on the cumulative impact level, unquote. These admissions occur just before the Port admits that the project will increase greenhouse gases higher than acceptable by the Southern California AQ, M.D.. How can the city knowingly enter into a program designed to generate new and unsafe levels of toxic air and water pollution? Maybe the port has determined this is to be in the best interests of the city and the Treasury. But I can imagine. That the class action lawyers are chomping at the bit. Another victim is the Long Beach Health and Human Services Building, which directly abuts the proposed new rails and my company. I am doubtful it is permitted to object to the project given the inherent conflict of interest. There will be noise, vibration, toxic pollution, interference with school, the homeless and the city's most vulnerable inhabitants. Let's just consider the noise. Noise is measured. Lager. I knew I was going to mess up this word. Lager and mythically. Close enough, for example. Normal conversion. Normal conversation is 60 to 70 decibels. A full blown rock concert is 125 decibels. However, a train horn is 152 decibels, equal to a jet taking off at about 25 meters. At this level. Eardrums burst. We do not see this addressed anywhere in the air. The port claims that we say now, the port claims that nothing we say now can interfere with its move forward. And none of the points we make are technically violations of sequel. For example, Square requires a ten day notice on the adoption of the final EIA. Did we get 11 days to analyze the thousands of pages before the port hearing? No, we got ten. We were supposed to have 90 days to consider the initial EIA, but the hearing was only 30 days after the last publication notice. So did the port technically technically comply? Perhaps, but it did so in a manner least designed to give notice and least designed to provide time to investigate and respond. We do not believe the City Council must simply. Sit back and allow the poor to hide behind technical defenses while its businesses and most vulnerable residential residents are devastated by the willful and knowing acts. Therefore. I ask you, please, to postpone your vote here this evening. Come to the west side. Meet us. Meet the people, meet the business owners, hear our concerns, work with us to formulate equitable and workable plans. If your goal is to disrupt the environment. Disrupt and displace businesses and its employees. If your goal is to cut off the West Side emergency services, if your goal is to impose detrimental health risks to your citizens. If your goal is to have a complaint in mandamus, then congratulations. You have succeeded. Please postpone your vote. Come meet us. Hear our story. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. And next, we'll have the next speaker in the appellant group. Pablo, do you have the remote? Good evening. My name is Stange Anoka, along with my partner, Jim Sterk. We are the owners of superior electrical advertising. Jim and I have worked together for 49 years, two thirds of my lifetime. So this is an emotional issue for me. I started at the bottom in 1969 after getting out of the out of the U.S. Navy. Worked my way up to management, went to school nights. And when the owner passed away in 1998, Jim and I purchased the company. We paid $7.1 million for the company. We borrowed. We mortgaged our houses. We did everything we could because we wanted to keep the business in Long Beach because somebody else wanted to buy the company and move it to Orange County. Superior has 125 employees. Of these 112 125 employees, 43 are Long Beach residents. One third of our workforce are Long Beach residents. I am. I am. I'm a Long Beach resident now. I'm in your district. So when we have an option to hire somebody, if we have equal, you know, equal people we chose, if one lives in Long Beach, we checked we chose the people, though whoever lives in Long Beach, we worked two shifts. We have employees on site inside and outside our building for 22 hours a day. We do over $25 million a year in signs and we pay a lot of taxes. According to the air, my back gate is 125 feet from the first rail track. If you turn around and you look at the picture right behind you, that's how far that's how close the trains are going to be to our business. This is the wrong project for the west side. Remember, the West Side also includes schools and homes east of the L.A. River. These are these homes and these schools will be affected. We are we had breakfast with Mr. Gonzalez last week, and we're talking about the issues of the of the trains. And there was an issue brought up about the train whistles. Mr. Gonzalez noted that she can hear the train whistles in her downtown home. So I'm wondering how loud will the whistle be at Cesar Chavez School and at Edison School when there are ten blocks closer than the downtown area to those rail yards? It's a it's a that L.A. River is not that wide and the tracks are right on the other side of the L.A. River. Let's talk about the west side. The west side industrial area is own I.G. Industrial general. The I.G. Drift District is intended to promote an industrial area where land is preserved, preserved for industry and protect it from non-industrial uses. A rail yard is not industrial use. There are some 300 businesses on the West Side, 2000 workers, 2000 men and women. How will they be protected from a 48 yard rail yard? The rail yard does not fall into the IG classification. It's not right for that area. What does a what does a 48 yard rail yard look like? It looks like that that's what 48 tracks looks like. If you look at the picture behind us, that's that's 48, that's 44, 45 rows. So it's massive. That's going to be in my back yard. Well, let's talk about Superior. We are in the old Coca-Cola bottling building. I invited everyone. I invited all of you to. To come and meet with us. And the only Lena had breakfast wasn't a talked about it, but she's been to our plant many times, and Al Austin sent his deputy down to to meet with us and see what we do. It's hard for you to realize how close and how much the train is going to affect affect us without being there firsthand. And Darrell Phillips was right when he said that you should postpone this and come down and take a look firsthand. We have a 50,000 square foot manufacturing plant and a 50,000 square foot open yard. We work in the open yard and store finish lines in the yard. We manufacture high end signage. Here we are. What are the most expensive flying companies on the West Coast? At any time there can be a half a million dollars worth of product finished science sitting in our yard ready to install. Our clients are businesses like McDonald's, Starbucks, CBS, Disney, Universal, Dunkin Donuts, The Giant, don't it, on Seventh Street and PCH for Dunkin Donuts. We did that, don't it? The the sign you see in front of the Performing Arts Center facing facing Ocean Boulevard. We did that sign, Gladstone's, the Pike Parking Structure. Our signs are in every district in Long Beach and not only in Long Beach, but across the country. So I'm just wondering how we can do business, you know, a stone's throw from our backyard. We're going to have whistles blowing all day long, screeching train wheels, metal on metal, coupling and uncoupling all day long. Especially the crushing sound coupling makes air pollution that wouldn't include dust that will affect the product we have in our yard . And Blythe, tell me how we do, how we entertain clients, clients, many of them looking at finished products in our back yard. How do we protect our products? Signs that are 100,000, $200,000 signs? You know, you can spend an hour and air anywhere you want. Nobody writes or presents a bad idea. According to the air, the port plans to use electric trains in the rail yard, but diesel locomotives will be used to pick up the 10,000 foot long trains. Not one diesel, but four or five diesels, maybe more. I learned yesterday that what's going to happen is that there will be two diesels in the front and two diesels in the rear. That means that diesel engines will have to come from the Wilmington area all the way across the rail yard to the east side, where they will get to that will where they will get on the back of a 10,000 foot train and push the train. So these diesels are going to travel through our backyard. The Earth states that this rail yard meets all Section eight UMD guidelines. But read a couple of lines in the air on page 11 dash tool for the four areas of environmental concern. Noise, vibration, air quality and transportation have been thoroughly evaluated in the draft. EIA only air quality impacts have been determined to be significant. On page 11, Dash 212, after considerable analysis determined there will be less than to say that these will be less than significant. The only exception being air quality impacts, which were determined to be significantly adverse. So air quality will be significantly adverse. If I stay here 125 feet for the rail yard, I will be subjecting my employees to noise and significantly adverse air quality. The first time one of my employees has a breathing issue. I smell a lawsuit. So what can Superior do? Not much. We can close our doors. After 62 years, we can. We can just shut our doors down to. We can move. But moving a company of our size is probably more expensive than we can afford. And move. Where? How do we find a 50,000 square foot building with a 50,000 square foot open yard, which we need? There are no properties in Long Beach that are available at beginning of this presentation. I said it's an emotional issue for me. It's an emotional issue for my partner, too. We've been working together for nearly 50 years and we have many employees that have been there for 20 years, 30 years, and we have our two sons there , my son and my partner's son. They've been with us for over 25 years. Our legacy was to leave the company to our sons one day. Well, that may not happen, you know, or if it does happen, it's going to be very difficult. Approving the railyard in its present format is the wrong decision for the West Side. Because we do not fall in the footprint of the rail yard. The Port of Long Beach position is that we are not directly impacted. Important words directly impacted. I strongly disagree that 125 feet from that yard is directly impacted. The port of Long Beach and the city of Long Beach will be changing the lives of many people. There are studies done by many universities across the country on rail yards, and they all conclude residents and employees near rail yards are expected to suffer asthma, cardiac disease, cancer, premature, premature death and at a higher rate than someone who lives four miles from a rail yard. You can see the trains, but you can't see the air pollution. The rail yard is wrong for superior. It is wrong for Philip Steele. It is wrong for everyone south of Anaheim Street. It is in the wrong. It is it is wrong for the entire West Side. I got it. One minute left. Good. You know, we met with the port yesterday. They came down to our facility. Not the first time. We've met one couple of times. We've met up with them at their office. And, you know, I think the port can see that the up the property south of Anaheim Street between Anaheim and 12th Street are in a zone and everybody in that zone is affected. Everybody in that zone is going to lose business. They're going to be hurt. They're going to be sick. They're just too close to that property. A 12 foot buffer is not enough. So I think you just need to really think of what you're doing to a half a dozen businesses that are in that limbo area. Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. And we're going to go ahead and go back to the hearing order. And we do have now an opportunity for rebuttal from staff. So please. Thank you. Sir. Please, I the it's part of the hearing that will happen. So I will have it handled. So. Thank you, sir. Go ahead. Thank you. The Environmental Impact Report Process, the development of the process for this project has been going on for eight years, and it's been a process that we've taken very seriously. We've done our due diligence and preparing all of the technical analyzes, looking at all of the opportunities to reduce the impacts of the project to the extent feasible, and making sure that we have a robust process. As we went through this, we had numerous meetings in the community with different groups. We also. Had all of the required. Processes under secure with proper notifications, proper review times for the draft document. We're required under Sequoia to have a 45 day review period. When the draft document was released, we extended that comment period to 90 days and we held three public hearings as opposed to the one that's required. We also had the public hearing with our board when they certified the document and we had the documentation out under that, the required times for that. We feel that we've had a very robust process. We've had numerous meetings with the appellants that have presented before you today as well, and we will continue to work with them to address their concerns as the project moves forward through the design, the construction and the operation phases. The project did. Identify the analysis, did identify that there will be significant and unavoidable impacts for nitrogen oxide emissions at the through the analysis near the. Project area. And those impacts will occur during construction and operation. Looking specifically at the locations for the appellants for Philips, there was a receptor that we used for the modeling that identified that the impacts will be infrequent during the construction process and and that the majority of the impacts to NOx are actually coming from the background conditions. And the project contribution adds about a quarter of the the impacts that are seen at that site. But the 75% of the impacts are actually from the background conditions. There were no significant impacts identified from no noise and vibration associated with the project and also for the traffic evaluation. There were no significant traffic impacts from the project and. All of the appropriate sensitive receptors. We did look at residences. We did look at schools for both noise and air quality analyzes, and there all of the potential impacts to sensitive receptors. We're also properly disclosed within the document. The rail yard is an appropriate use for this location. It is located within the port industrial zone and rail yards are explicitly listed and listed as a eligible use. And in that area and building our additional rail infrastructure is consistent with our port master plan and our Clean Air Action Plan . If I may, I would just. Kathy Jensen with the law firm of Ratana Tucker, the city is secure attorney on this project. I would like to point out that secure is a disclosure requirement. It does not preclude the City Council from approving a project or the the Board of Harbor Commissioners from approving a project that has significant impacts. There are requirements to mitigate to the extent possible. There were findings made that this project has mitigated to the extent possible all of the impacts, not any of the appellate issues are saying that there was a disclosure that wasn't made. Instead, they are referring to disclosures that were made in the air. There was a reference to there only being 30 days from the closure of the comment period to the approval of the project. That is incorrect. The comment period closed on March 13, 2017, and the hearing before the board was not until January 12, 2018. And I think that's the only other issue. At this time, I'd also like to conclude with comments from our executive director, Mario Cordero. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor Garcia. And members of the City Council. The Pier B on dock rail support. The City project. It was an essential component to the port's mission of being the green port of the future and furthering our commitment to sustainable development. As you may know, in 2017, the port had its best year, moving 7.5 million containers. Best. In our 107 year history. The Pier B project not only enhances efficient movement of container cargo. But also in addition mitigates potential roadway congestion. And clearly and I will say again and clearly a less polluting freight transport system. You have heard commentary on both sides and both sides admit there's been a lot of dialog. There has been meetings. The port has never been dismissive of the concerns. And we will continue to commit to engage with our stakeholders and engage with those impacted, whether directly or indirectly. And thus, I would respectfully request that the Council confirm and affirm the certification of the final Environment Environmental Impact Report for their Pier B on Dock Rail Facility Project. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Kudo. I appreciate that. We're going to go into public comments. And Madam Clerk, do we need to do an oath for anyone that is going to make public comment and city attorney? We need to do that. Should we do one, one, one Big Arthur? I think. Did the earlier oath handle it for the speakers. Or do you need to do that now? The oath was for the. Speakers, the. Appellants. So no, nothing. If not, no need for public comment. Not for public comment. Okay. So. So now we will. You know, I'm not. Guys, please, no one. No one. Talk from the audience. We've got a handle. Thank you very much. Now we're going to be having public comment on the hearing. So if you're here to comment on the hearing, please come forward. Thank you. Hello. I'm Stephanie Dora, resident of Long Beach and business owner here, who will be very close to the proposed project. Ladies and gentlemen of the Council, I implore you to consider the job you were elected to do to serve this great city and as the people who live in it. Please be mindful that the vote you cast here today has a very real effect on and carries risks for the city of Long Beach and its people. The votes cast today in this room will change the city and its landscape forever. They may very well carry negative effects for Long Beach as citizens and businesses for years to come. Once you cast your votes, there are no do overs, no take backs, and you will be personally responsible beyond the reaches of your time on this council. The proposed pier be on dock rail support facility project is more dangerous than the ER report let on only more in-depth studies and considerations can prove that it will have very little effect on minimizing the number of trucks on the road and will inevitably increase pollution. It will obliterate small businesses on the west side of Long Beach, isolate its inhabitants and limit routes to downtown, thus decreasing access to restaurants, shopping, parks, meeting places and other vital resources, all of which will impact downtown businesses, residents and employees. Past studies following completion. Of other cities rail. Yards have proved that with rail yards come increases in crime, illness, pollution, unemployment and decline in property value. As a business owner and a resident here in this city. I am all too aware of the importance of responsible. Usage of car compliant equipment and the need for improvements in the transportation industry. But more trains so close to schools, houses and our main tourist attractions is not the answer for the city of Long Beach. Unlike other cities such as San Bernardino, L.A. or Oakland, just to name a few, we are a very small city. Our industrial parks are in very close proximity to the rest of our city. The estimated reach of pollutants from trains found in studies from places like London, China and even parts of the US suggest that they reach up to four miles. Ladies and gentlemen. Four miles goes a very long way here in Long Beach. Increases in cancer, asthma. Noise, dust and carbons will be painfully noticeable here in our beloved city. The negative impact on my family's business personally will include but not be limited to increases in noise pollution. Increase air pollution such as carbons and dust affecting myself, my. Indoor and outdoor employees. Increased maintenance costs to equipment such as filters, engine maintenance, upkeep and vehicle security. Decreased terminal access. Decreased access to and from our facility. Decrease in property value, increase in security costs. Potential changes to the heavyweight corridor. Increase in disruption of day to day operations, especially in the office. Thank you. Very much. Thank you. No problem. Next speaker, please. Gavin, your mayor. City council executive staff. My name is National Medrano. I represent the Los. Angeles, an Orange County building and Construction Trades Council, which comprises of 140,000 hardworking men and women in construction. And we're here to support the staff. Recommendation to move forward with construction appear to be the port must remain competitive. Trade moving through the port of Long Beach sustains more than 300,000 jobs in southern the southern California region, including 40,000 jobs in Long Beach. Construction of this. Facility could generate over 1100 jobs. The project would allow the port to move more cargo, more efficiently, continuing to sustain jobs and generate economic. Opportunities while reducing emissions and traffic. Cargo would be moved to and from Pier B only on trains. Each onboard trains saves up to 750 truck trips between the port and half dock rail yards. The proposed project will have a port wide project labor agreement that will support 40% local hire in the Los Angeles and Orange County's 15% disadvantaged worker go 10% of veteran worker go and 30% apprenticeship provision. This will be this will provide for many apprenticeship opportunities for communities, for the young people coming up here in the community. Thank you for your support of working men and women. And again, we urge you to support the staff recommendation. Good evening. Thank you very much. And I am right to your point and just about a minute, 15 seconds. So I appreciate that. So we have a lot we have a long agenda, sir. Obviously, if you are able to to to make the time a little shorter, that helps the process. So thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you. Mayor Garcia and members of the city council. I'm Tiffany Rao, director of government public affairs for Endeavor, speaking on behalf of our terminal and pipeline operator and the Port Tesoro SoCal Pipeline Company, LLC. We support the overall goal goals of the Pier B project, but we share some of the appellants concerns about the project's construction impacts, including potential effects on air quality traffic and circulation, emergency access and business disruption. We are committed to working with the port to resolve our concerns that construction of the project could require removal and or relocation of over 200 utility pipelines, including over 75 oil pipelines. Removal of hundreds of utility lines could result in significant disruption of the port's operations. And these disruptions would also directly affect our operations, our customers, public utilities and numerous other operators at the port. The impacts will disproportionate disproportionately burden to Thora. So Cal Pipeline Company who operates 15 active lines that require relocation. We have spelled out these concerns in our March 13, 2017 letter comments and commenting on the draft e.r. And again in the January 22nd 28 letter. On the final e.r. We have identified a solution that could significantly reduce these potential impacts, minimize disruption and limit unnecessary construction costs by allowing active pipelines to be protected and abandoned in place and safely abandoned. Inactive pipelines using accepted best practices and abandonment activities are strictly regulated by the U.S., D.O.T. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and the California State Fire Marshal that prescribes certain steps for formal abandonment of pipelines, including the disconnection, purging and stealing of abandoned lines left in plant place in addition to regulatory obligations. The owner of an abandoned line continues to have potential liability for any nuisance or hazard that may be created by leaving pipe in the ground. Long Beach's Pipeline Ordinance Section 15.44.150. Provision for abandonment of a facility specifically authorizes abandonment in place when there is no detriment to the public interest. We ask and ever ask the city to consider development of a memorandum of understanding that identifies which pipelines need to be removed, if any, and which can be safely abandoned in place and establish specific timeframes for completion of all necessary relocation. Again, Endeavor supports the port's Pier B on Dock Rail Project, and we ask for your support, support and direction to staff to work with us to achieve a solution. Thank you. And I'm available to answer any questions on this matter. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council Members John Hanna, Governmental Affairs Director for the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters. Happy Nowruz. Council Members Price. I want to also thank the Council, particularly the Mayor and Councilman Nine and Councilwoman Price for your efforts to keep open community hospital of Long Beach. I would say on this the Carpenters strongly support the Pier B project, but I want to remind you what your mission is here tonight. Your charge, it's to deal with the certification of the air so it's not on the substance. So much was discussed on the process and on the process. There's been no evidence tonight that the city failed to comply with the requirements under SEQUA. In fact, they gave additional time, as your deputy city attorney reported, for people to come forward. And in fact, tonight we heard an admission that there was sufficient time by one of the appellants, but not one fact was ever presented that they were unable to produce in that timely manner to justify an extension of time. So I think that the city has the staff has has put it forward. And I think particularly the last item, the deputy city attorney said that 75% of the negative impacts, some of the stuff that was highlighted in one of the appellant's comments in paper is already there in the background. We think on the on the balance, this is a great project. It's not going to mean a lot of jobs for Southwest Carpenters. It will mean some. But for the over 2000 carpenters members and family members who live in the city of Long Beach, it means that this port will continue to be competitive. You've got people in Savannah, you've got people in Canada who want to take this business. This is the engine that drives the city council members. And this project will do two things. It will increase the velocity of moving those those goods, which makes us more competitive. But second, in the keynote for this city is that it's going to do it in a green way, reduce the pollution. That's what makes Long Beach unique. With all the ports, you're the greenest port in the country. Let's keep it that way. Thank you. Mr. Hanna. Next speaker, please. Late evening, Mr. Mayor. Council members and staff. My name is Diego Gomez. I'm a resident of Long Beach. I'm also a 15 year member of the IBEW. Our body is a membership of over 1200 12,000 excuse me, members here in the greater L.A. area. We're here in support of the project for various reasons. And I will be very brief. Pier B on dock projects supports well over 1100 jobs here locally. The potential to save 750 transportation trucks between the dock and the rail station adjacent to us is. A large benefit as. Well. But the most important part is the key infrastructure. That's for improvements for the dock, which will keep it competitive. We support this primarily because of the play components that do encourage local hires not only for veterans but disadvantaged workers as well. It aids in alleviating congestion in our local highways and streets, alleviating a lot of our membership, having to drive out to larger areas of the greater Los Angeles area. We fully support this project and the ability to provide good middle class wages for our membership and others that would benefit directly from the project. In conclusion, we ask that you deny the appeal, as well as urge the full council support in bringing the project forward. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Camilla Khatami. I'm a resident of Long Beach. And here today I'm representing the Hubbard Harbor Association of Industry and Commerce. We urge your support in the 12th Street option of the proposed Pier B rail yard project, which you will be considering as part of your review of the project's final earth. This project is vital to keep the Port of Long Beach competitive and meet the environmental goals outlined in the updated Cap Clean Air Action Plan. With the development of the Pier B rail yard project. Short haul truck trips will be reduced greatly, as will the emissions associated with them. These are factors that our membership considers as necessary to remain competitive in our industry. The Port of Long Beach has a strong track record of supporting their customers and tenants. We are certain that this air has sufficiently address safety, air quality and efficient goods movement. Without the Pier B facility, the port cannot meet their near-term goal of moving 35% of containers via on dock rail or reach the eventual goal of 50%. It is the best option to accommodate future cargo growth and boost the economic activity while sustaining the 30,000 jobs in Long Beach that depend on the city's port. We strongly urge you to vote in favor of it. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Lupe Valdez. I'm with Union Pacific Railroad. I'm the director of public affairs and I'm here in support of the project. We believe any time the ports can do projects of this magnitude that make everything more efficient for us, that's also a reduction in emissions. Any time you can have operations that clearly cut down on drainage, that moves. I have the near dock facility, you pitas and that's a four mile facility. And when you have facilities on dock that don't have rail service, this would provide for some of those smaller, smaller moves to all be connected into one train. I do want to tell you that the previous speaker mentioned about how we accommodate for the engines on a train. A lot of what is happening in terms of that's called distributed power. And what happens is that actually makes the train run more efficient and use less fuel. Even though you see those locomotives, the head locomotive is the one managing that train and it can really help a lot with efficiency in terms of reduction of fuel use. And that's something that's always very important to us. And with that, I thank you very much for allowing me to speak. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello. Good evening, mayor, vice mayor and council members. My name is Elizabeth Warren and I'm the president and CEO of Dialed In Partners. Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening. I'm here as a community stakeholder, business partner with the port. And I want to express my support of the Pier B project. And to urge the. Council to support the staff's. Recommendation for the final. Year. The port staff has done its due diligence over the years and has. Completed the environmental process above and beyond what is required. As you know, I've been a supporter of green growth, an efficient, efficient cargo movement for many years. That is why this added infrastructure is so important in order to move that cargo by rail to. Support the on dock. Marine terminals. It's not only important to our communities to get the containers on rail, we also need to keep our port competitive. The Port of Long Beach is the busiest seaport in the United States. And however, we need. To do everything we. Can. To keep our goods moving. Industry here in Southern California, to keep the cargo in the. Hundreds of thousands of jobs supported by that cargo here and not diverted to other regions or to other countries. Modernizing the port and greening. The port. Go hand-in-hand. This project is. Another example of how the. Port of Long. Beach can modernize and go green. At the same time. It's a key. Component, and it's critical to the future development of the Port of Long Beach. So I again urge the port. Excuse. Me to urge the Council. To approve the final EMR. Thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening. Thanks so much, Nick. Speaker, please. Good evening, Dr. Mayor. Robert Garcia, Vice Mayor Richardson. My name is Jessie Equity with. POTUS. I am representing the Long Beach Chamber Government Affairs Committee with our 800 members. We really, really, really urge you to support this project for reasons you've heard and four reasons you're going to hear. Please support the Harbor Commission's decision, and we thank you for your support. Thank you. Thank you. Everyone's been keeping it under under 10 minutes, so we're going to step. There's not any objection. We're going to go down to 2 minutes. Just set the timer there. We'll continue. Good evening, Mayor. City Council. My name is Thomas Jellinek. I represent. PMC. We represent the marine terminals and ocean carriers that are the customers of the Port of Long Beach. We're here to urge you. This evening to support. The port's decision on certifying the air. This project will do three things. One, improve the port's competitiveness. And as you've already heard, competitiveness is key. To this port and retaining the cargo that flows through these ports. Two, it will benefit the community. It will benefit the community through shifting cargo from trucks, through trains, reducing congestion, and thereby improving the environment. And third, it will create jobs and retain the jobs that this port. Creates in this. Community and throughout the region. For those three reasons, I urge you to support this project and affirm the port of Long. Beach, the port of Long Beach, its decision. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Council members. My name is Mining Premiere. I'm the interim executive director for Future Ports. I am. I'm here tonight on behalf of our 57 member companies, many of whom are based right here in Long Beach, to emphasize our support for the Pier B project and the staff recommendation. During the IR public comment period, we submitted comments in support of the project with requests to ensure that the project coordinate with utilities, some of whom you have heard from tonight, as well as with the Skegg rail yard for future development. And we are confident that as the project moves forward, the port will work closely with stakeholders, including our members. The Pier Beyond Dock Rail Project is vital to keep the Port of Long Beach competitive and meet environmental goals outlined in the 2017 update of the CAP. The project would provide more truck space to connect smaller train segments coming and therefore increase port efficiencies. Future port is dedicated to supporting sustainable growth at the San Pedro Bay Ports complex, and we believe this project is a strong example of a project that provides improved port operations, improved air quality and reduce congestion and will lead to more jobs for Long Beach residents. For those reasons, I urge you to vote to uphold the approval of the air by the Harbor Commission. Thank you. Thank you so much, Nick Speaker. Good evening, Mayor Garcia. Council members, my name is Jessica Alvarenga. I'm with the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association. And I'd like to share our. Support for the Pier B project. It was initially approved by the Harbor Commission in January for its. Benefits in improving port. Competitiveness. And environment. And the environment by adding on dock rail capacity. This project will make. Port operations more efficient. While alleviating future truck. Congestion. Additionally. There will be a smaller. Number of trucks on the road. And the project. Construction will. Create much. Needed jobs in the community. This project will improve efficiency. Without increasing pollution. It will reduce. Truck. Congestion and create jobs. Please support the Pier B here. Thank you. Thanks so much, nick speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and City Councilmembers. My name is Kendall Asuncion, and I'm here on the left on behalf of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce. We are here to express our support for the air for the Port of Long Beach Pier beyond our rail facilities, as needed to move more cargo on dock, which will both improve efficiency and reduce pollution. The improvements will increase track space to connect smaller train segments and connect the cargo terminals, enhancing the system and increasing rail use, which will eliminate truck trips and congestion at the ports and throughout the region. Pier B on dock rail facilities will leverage the port's existing investments in rail, which will continue to have positive ripple effects to the community, including improved air quality, reduce poverty, reduce pollution, decrease congestion and construction, which will generate new jobs in the area. It will also play a key role in meeting the near-term goal of moving 35% of containers via undock rail. Given these useful benefits, the Chamber urges the Council to uphold approval of the EIA for the by the Harbor Commission. Thank you and have a good evening. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and City Council members. My name is Paige Polonius and I am here to speak on behalf of Assemblymember O'Donnell's strong support for the Pier B Project. Pier B expansion will reduce harmful emissions, reduce truck traffic congestion and increase port efficiency. To put it simply, this project will help the port become greener. Leaner and more. Competitive. For these reasons, Assemblymember O'Donnell is in strong. Support of. This project. Thank you. Thank you, Nick. Speaker, please. My name is Paul Collins. I'm an architect in Long Beach in the West Side. I'm here representing the West Side Project Area Committee. We are firmly right now behind the port as far as we want the port to expand and we always try to be on the port side. But the pollution aspect of this has not been looked at carefully at all when I read through the air. And all the items that were checked that there was no significant impact. They weren't certainly talking about the industrial area. The only industrial area where heavy industrial can occur in Long Beach is in the West Side, and the pollution for us is going to be much greater than it is now. Already within a mile of the port, we have cancer rates and asthma rates up to 800% higher than any other part of Long Beach. And the trains are going to indefinitely produce more pollution for us. The trains that leave the port, they go through and they and they go long term. Those were not part of the port's environmental impact study. Those trains are a different type of train, and the port cannot control the people that own those trains and tracks on what kind of engines they burn. We've had we've taken pictures of these trains leaving long term and they have black soot coming out of them and they produce as much, if not more pollution than the trucks would. The businesses in the West Side have had good access for the city and for the to the city and to the port, and that's going to all be cut off. So all the businesses that require access to the port to get their items that they build in West Long Beach out of the port are not going to have the same access that they have now. And some of them have heavy loads and large loads. That hasn't been considered at all because they go up Santa Fe right now and Santa Fe is going to be closed off. And that does not work for several of the larger companies that have many jobs and have many people working for them that won't be able to get their items to the port to get them out of the country. Thank you very much, sir. Good evening, Mayor Garcia Garcia and council members. I'm keep this short. I'm a professional carpenter and I lived in the West Long Beach area all my life. I live two miles away from the project and I am for Pier B project. So I agree. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker. Even Mayor Garcia and council members. And thank you for this time and opportunity. My name is Ted Humanas and I'm a representative with the Southwest Regional Council of the Carpenters. And what I have with me today is carpenters. Stand up, building trades, stand up. These are people here a few and quite a few are outside. And we're here to let you know that we support the project. I'm sure you heard all the details. I'm not going to be redundant. This is about hard work that's going to provide a lot of construction jobs. We're about a middle class living, health care pension with dignity. And whenever that opportunity is available, like you're offering here, we're strong supporters that we represent over 50,000 carpenters just in the southwest, 30,000 carpenters plus here in Southern California, along with the building trades . We urge you to support this project. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker. Good evening, Mayor and city council members. I'm an employee of a heavy industrial. Manufacturing company. In West Side, Long Beach. My understanding is the whole thing of tonight is just. Questioning her. About the environmental impacts are not good publicity. I was just wondering about the vibration impact because that has. A direct impact on precision manufacturing. And the train just in and of itself has an impact. And I don't think that that came up. Definitely things you can do about it. Right. But I don't think that that was brought up in the environmental report. So maybe that's something to look at. As well as the inevitable rerouting of the heavyweight corridor and the associated environmental impact as a current project directly impacts the heavyweight corridor. So I guess the question would be we need to kind of assess how it was evaluated and take a closer look because there's there are things we can do about the impact. Just we need to know what the impact is accurately. Right. But fair consideration, I guess. Thanks so much. Next speaker, please. Thank you, Mayor. City Council. My name is Lee Wilson. I own a piece of property at 1520 West 11th Street that is right underneath the railyard. The building will disappear. We've owned that property since 1965. I have a tenant down there today doing some very crucial work not only for this port, but for the country on some of the specialized handling that he does. He has no idea the future of his business. But I'm not here to speak against the air. I'm going to address the fact that and request that council postpone their approval of this tonight until they can convene a meeting and another hearing to where probably the dozen or two dozen people that were outside that have not been able to get in have left out of frustration. Because when I got here about 20 minutes before, there was a 100 yard line, long line, and it just grew and grew. If I had not been forceful at the door with the police department, I would not be in here myself. I want to thank I did talk to Mario and I talked to Rick camera. And I know Rick went out and got the fire marshal to go out, try to get people in. My buddy Larry here and other impacted business is here. But I don't think that the pop, you know, the people being impacted that have skin in the game had adequate time to address the council and raise their issues. I, I can thank the port and I am totally positive that they follow every rule in Sitka. I'm very familiar with the square and the processing, but I think the council as a whole has left the stakeholders down, not allowing enough of them into the meeting to hear the appellants. I only got to hear Superior did not hear the Phillips Company, which I missed. Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker, Mr. Mayor Garcia and council members. My name is Lawrence Mihara and I'm with 435 Seafood, Long Beach Sportfishing, Queen's Wharf Restaurant in the Port of Long Beach. And I want to talk about my opposition to the approval of the air in the air, or the response states that our business is not significantly impacted yet. In the first paragraph in black and white in the report, the project eliminates 53 parking spots. We already are unable to accommodate our customers with sufficient parking spaces, particularly on the weekends. There are no overflow lots and no alternatives for parking. To state that reducing our parking lot by approximately 25% is not significant is to ignore the facts and nature of our business located there, which are popular with the community. This is one of the only places in the port where local community has access to the port. The response states that no building will be affected. But just I just learned in a meeting with the port design team that Pico Boulevard, essentially a multiple lane highway, will be 12 feet from my from the corner of my building to state that no building will be affected also ignores reality. And I also want to talk about the air quality will be adversely affected for our employees and customers. The report admits that the air quality is significantly worse as a result of the nitrous oxide levels that are beyond the federal threshold levels. And yet it says this is not a significant fact. It defies common sense to say that doubling the number of rail tracks and trains and having tracks and road 50 feet closer to our business will not significantly increase pollution and affect our business. Our restaurant is mostly outdoors with people sitting outside. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. And it looks like we're nearing the end of the speaker's list. So we will be our last speakers that are here in line for this hearing. Good evening, Mayor Garcia. Members of the City Council. My name is when I was meeting with the Regional Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. We're here to support business development. We support the Hispanic business community as well. We're here in favor of the Pier B on dock project. We're here because we support the jobs that it will generate. Trade through the port sustains about 300,000 jobs in the Southern California region. 30,000 of those jobs are in Long Beach. This project alone will be over about 1100 jobs, that it'll create it a lot more at the port to move more cargo more efficiently, generate more opportunities while maintaining low emissions, reducing traffic as well. The chamber supports the project. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Port. Port. I remember I adjudicate on employment law and some of the people, the attorneys who were called that office won it and adjudication determination in their favor simply because they were attorneys. Never mind that they were defrauding the people who were fired. When I heard this, and I'm sitting there with no real particular interest, and then my mind just skirted back to the airport argument. How beneficial it would have been financially, how the international community would have had access to Long Beach wanting to bring the Olympics here. And you got the aquarium that put this of the Pacific that you just gave $53 million to do. And the jobs that would have been created long term had you brought in International Airport to Long Beach. Why didn't you do it? You didn't do it because your rich clients didn't want it. That's why you didn't do it. They wouldn't have voted for you again, some of you, if you had brought that international airport that, you know, would have been of large global impact to Long Beach. It would have brought put Long Beach on the map like none other. But you voted no. Why did you do it? And now you're willing to say yes to this? Hypocrisy is terrible. The souls of men are being bought and sold here because the poorest of the community of Long Beach live there. And you don't care about it. Even though you're going to have jobs, you're going to have an international influence. But you said no to an international airport. You have a tunnel. The airport. You don't have a big boy airport. And why not? Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And we love our we love our airport as it is. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Grady Mayor, the city council. My name is Tony Rivera. Most of you know me already. I was former chair of RTA on the West Side. And I will I will tell you to everyone, this project, I am not opposed to this project, but it's been done incorrectly. When we were talking about a long time ago, we were talking about Unite Long Beach, not divide it. Now Long Beach. The problem is decided to divide us. Put a rail wall in there so we don't go to the port. Number one problem. Number two, problem. They just said that we're going to have a clean, local motors for the neighborhood. I got burials right now with the locomotives coming in and contaminate all the west and downtown Long Beach with all this smog. There's not been taking care of it. So that's the second thing is bad. The third one is that the ships are coming in 40 miles. They come in slow, but everybody's talking about trucks and trucks leaving the trucks alone. They already clean, concentrate on the ships 40 miles, even 100 miles up in the air. All the contamination comes to downtown and you can go see my yard on Sundays. How black it is for that smoke when the ships and the rail. Now, I'm going to tell you this. We need to work together and we I will ask you to send it back to the public, have some hearings. The port knows they need to go back and do the engineering at work. We cannot screw American people over international trade. You guys are elected by American people, not by the we're all agents and everybody. And and I would make a little point in here. And, you know, we always get unions from other cities to come in and support these projects. We live in lobbies. I spent 18 hours for the last 40 years alone. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Well, that concludes the public comment part of the hearing. We're going to go and close public comment and come back to the council for deliberation. So let me begin with Councilwoman Gonzales. Yes. Thank you, everybody, for being here tonight. I know that you have been through many different meetings, and so I will speak very shortly as you have. And we appreciate your time here. I want to thank everyone, particularly Darryl Phillips and Stan, to Nokia, as well as the West Side industrial area businesses. They have I've met with them about five or six different times over the last year, both my staff and myself. I've also worked very closely with our first district former first District Council member and Port Commissioner, Bonnie Lowenthal. We actually deci each other yesterday and chatted about this as well. And I want to thank our harbor commissioners as well as our harbor staff Rick, Samantha, Nina, Heather, Matthew, as well as our president, Mario Cordero. I've connected with everybody to make sure that we're getting this just right. And as you've heard here, you know, Phillip steal superior signs. I think the average time that the West Siders have been in business and invested out there has been probably it's the average is probably 60 years or so. Those businesses are historic. So of course, we we care very much about them. And although we know that this is going to be a good project, we have to be very mindful of this business community. And just to be clear as well, the city council is only making a determination on the appeal of the art in the segment analysis. So I have a few questions for staff. And really they're just two main concerns. And I know that they don't specifically speak to the air, but I feel like they have to be addressed. And I thank you for addressing this. So first, as it relates to access, as the 12 ST option was formally adopted by the Harbor Harbor Commission, it will remove access to Ninth Street. Do we have any other access options that we believe will be more beneficial for our Westside community other than Ninth Street? Thank you, Councilwoman. ACCESS Well, this shoemaker Brant ramps when they are removed can still occur through Anaheim Street and down one of the Archer arterials or via the 710. Okay. And I just want to make crystal clear as well, as you mentioned in the as far as the public safety access, there will be no issues with public safety going to and from the west side to attend to any emergency. That's correct. We have worked extensively with the fire department and other emergency services. They've done their own analysis about access and response times. There are no significant impacts or concerns with emergency service access. In addition, we've evaluated the routes to get to the nearest hospitals, and those routes will not be impacted as a result of this project . Great. Thank you. And then the second question is related to our businesses. Of course, as we've said here, and I want to emphasize how how many businesses do we have that not just the parcels, but businesses that will be directly impacted, either directly or indirectly, like Phillip Steel and Superior Science? Do you know how many actual businesses? So at this point, we can give estimates until the air was fully certified. We were limited in the. Amount of. Work we could do on the business relocation and survey side. But we believe that there's approximately 40 businesses that would be impacted in the project footprint. Okay, so 40 businesses. And after this decision tonight, should we move forward with staff's recommendations? How will we identify a strong business retention and relocation plan for these businesses both directly and indirectly impacted, whether it's receiving mitigations for noise and air just in general, and also finding alternative options in our city for these particular businesses. The port staff has already been establishing a project team to evaluate all of these issues, to work with the affected businesses, to work with the community. We've already been addressing questions and responding to the comments and questions that have come up through the process. We've also been reaching out to the other city departments like Development Services and Economic Development, and we will be continuing those discussions and looking for ways that we can relocate all of these businesses within the city of Long Beach and close to their to their current location. And so we commit to continuing to work through that process and to make sure that we're listening to all the concerns and addressing those concerns as we go through the design and construction process. Okay. And that was my next question. Have we worked with the Economic Development Department? You said we have. That's fantastic. So these businesses are fully aware of their options. And as the project moves forward, what is the timeline for the project? I understand this could be, of course, done in phases. Do we have something coming up, a milestone that we can hit and we can report out to, say, the Harbor and Tidelands Committee? We would be happy to report out to the Harbors and Tidelands Committee. I think in general, the the initial priorities are for us to start working on developing further development of the design. We'll need to go through a process for the evaluation of the properties that will be affected for the acquisition of those properties. And that will be a long term process. We'll also be moving forward with the ninth Street closure, which will be a early priority for the project as well. That's likely to take place in the next year or two to the acquisition process will likely be over about a five year period. And we'll also be doing some of the initial efforts for the utility relocation, which will also need to take place in the early phase of the project. So a lot of that work will take place over the next approximately five years. Okay. Thank you. So as we hit those milestones prior to ninth Street closing, which seems to be a fast tracked, you know, priority, I would just ask that we report this information out to the Harbor and Highlands Committee. I'm the chair. Councilmember Price and Pearce are both on the committee with me to ensure that our businesses are fully aware of what comes next and our residents are fully aware of what will happen next. And you need to just specifically notice them as well. So we're working either with my office or I know you're very you're well acquainted with our West Side industrial area, but for any other residents that might want to have this information and and be privy to it so they understand what exactly is going on with the project, I would just ask that we we do that. And then the last question I have here, will will there be mitigation and will it provide funding for the West Side livability plan for both residents and business stakeholders? This was the Westside Livability Plan that was a multi year process for communities and business stakeholders. They came together, they talked about many projects for lessening mitigations due to air pollution, noise, etc. So this can this be folded into to this project? So this project does have a contribution to our community grants program between the air quality and the greenhouse gas impacts associated with this project, there will be an approximately $1.5 million contribution to that fund. As a reminder, several years ago, our board established an overall program that will be providing over $46 million in funding through the Community Mitigation Program. So this this project will make a contribution to that program. Part of the reason why the Port of Long Beach worked with the city and development of the Livability Westside Livability Plan, initially we provided some. Funding to help support the development of that plan. Was that so that we could get a better understanding of the priorities for the projects that could be done to help address those concerns in in West Long Beach and to help us line up how we could prioritize some of the funding through our program. And so we look forward to continuing to coordinate with the city on those priorities and how those funds can help to address some of those projects. We will continue to work with the community as well each year as we go through developing the funding priorities for that program going forward. And so we look forward to continuing to support that project. And as a reminder, this project will make a contribution to help further that program. Okay. Thank you. I just want to make sure that was addressed. And I will just say let's just continue to keep connected to make sure that that was saved. Livability Plan sees fruition for the community. I know it's a big deal for them as well as businesses, residents, everyone. And so do we know what the community process will be in terms of that? Is that coming back at a certain time? It's it should pass, right? So each year it's an ongoing program. Now, that was part of the board's approval a few years ago is so that we could establish an ongoing program. So each year we go through a process of having community meetings where we seek input from the community. We also meet regularly with city department staff to find out about priority projects. So we go through a process approximately around the fall each year to gather input on funding priorities for the upcoming year. We make a presentation to our Harbor Commission in the early part of the year. We made a presentation in February of this year identifying the priorities that were shared by the community and the city staff. During those meetings, we made a recommendation for this upcoming funding cycle to focus on stormwater projects, and so we'll be releasing a request for proposals later this spring for approximately $3 million to fund projects that can improve stormwater infrastructure in the in the city in that area. But each year we go through a process last year that the funding was provided for air filters and community health programs. But each year we go through a process to seek input from the community about those priorities, and then we release a new funding cycle each year . So that will be an ongoing process. Okay, great. Thank you. And I will just ask, with that said, to make sure that we are connected. The council offices are connected. I know some of the meetings had been occurring on a Tuesday, which was a council Tuesday, and I would just really urge that we all just stay connected to make sure that the community is fully aware of what is happening at every step of the way. And I know that will do that. But we appreciate you answering those questions. So thank you very much. I will move that we review and I'm sorry we should receive and file all documentation of the record concerning the two concerning the two appeals and adopt the city staff recommendation and uphold the Board of Harbor Commissioners certification of the final air. I just want to say again, thank you very much to the Westside Industrial Area for coming out. I know this is very difficult. It's very difficult to deal with this. I get that. But I urge you to just stay involved with our office. We've been connected with you. We will remain connected with you. We will make sure that you do not lose sight of what this project will mean and entail. And we will ensure that everyone is privy to the information, both residents and businesses. Thank you. Thank you. So just to be clear, also, that's a motion on the floor then to approve the staff recommendation on the on the air and deny the appeal. And with that, the second on the motion, Councilmember Janine Pearce. Plus everybody in the room that's been coughing and sneezing. I want to thank first of all, I want to thank the appellants for being involved in this process, for advocating on your business's behalf, on your neighborhood's behalf. I know that a decision like this is scary and emotional because it is your livelihood that you have been building on and working on for a long time. And so I just want to thank you guys. I want to thank all the staff at the port, our commissioners, the staff at the city. It speaks volumes to me. That we had as many people here and support and a small handful of those that that spoke with some concern, somebody who's watched issues of the port for the last decade. I know that this always is a rare occasion to have so many people in support of. And I did reach out to my environmental. Activist. Organizations and nonprofits and tried to get their take on this policy on this earth as well. And so I'm happy to be able to support my council colleagues. Decision to receive. And file I did have. A couple of questions that I wanted to ask staff and I did want to also highlight. I think somebody started as a speaker here, but one train takes 750 trucks off the road. One train takes 750 trucks off the road. And to me, as somebody who takes that freeway almost every day and knows what the fight has been to try to clean up our air, really having a conversation around when the impacts are. And so my my first question is really when we talk about the air quality issues, I believe it was stated that a lot of those come from building out PRB and not so much that it's extremely long term. There are long term effects, but how much of of the the air pollution is caused from just. Building the projects? The air analyzed both impacts from the construction of the project over the seven year period through the three phases, in addition to the operational impacts associated with the the trains that will be operating in the facility for the for Philip Steel specifically and their response to comment that they had when we looked at the impacts at the nearest receptor to their location, the impacts were the significant impacts were limited to the construction phase of the project. But there were areas around the project that did experience both construction phase impacts and operational phase impacts for nitrogen oxide specifically. Okay. And then this is just an idea I had off the top of my head, so forgive me, but I know that there were the bonnets that were created for ships. Is there anything like that in the works for trains. To help reduce some of the pollution that comes from them? So there is a project that the the two ports established a technology advancement program many years ago. Over a decade ago. One of the recently funded projects that we're working on is with a technology developer called Vir Rail, and they have developed a near zero emission locomotive. So these are cleaner than the cleanest locomotive standards that are out there. These these have extremely low nitrogen oxide emissions. And so we've provided funding for the development of that switcher locomotive. But then recently through a grant from the California Air Resources Board, we're going to be able to replace the onboard generator in that locomotive with batteries so that the the locomotive can operate using zero emission track miles. So that's a project that we're developing right now, working with our operator, Pacific Harbor Line, who's been a great partner with us on demonstrating different technologies over the years. So we're hopeful that that technology will be effective and then we can look at future opportunities to get more of them integrated into the operations. Currently, Pacific Harbor Line is the cleanest switcher operate switcher locomotive operator in the country. They've done a lot of work over the years to upgrade their locomotives and they're currently testing out a Tier four locomotive. Great. So when we we talk about the air, it does not include that plan, right? It's based on what we have in place today. That is correct. We used a conservative analysis based off of what we have today, but we're hopeful that we can reduce emissions even further in the future. That's great. I think that speaks volumes again. And this is a question around the workforce piece. We had some conversation around local residents. This project falls in line with the project labor agreement that also has a local higher percentage. Is that correct? This project is included in the project labor agreement. Great. Thank you so much. I know again, operations at our ports having multiple layers and tiers of where we're doing that work is really a big challenge to please everybody. And I think that you guys have done a fantastic job. So thank you. Thank you. Next speaker is Vice Mayor Richardson. Thanks. I know Councilmember Arango represents West Side. If he wants to go ahead of me, I don't mind. Councilor Murray. Ringo. Thank thank you, Vice Mayor Richardson, for the permit. I want to thank my councilmembers. GONZALEZ It appears they touched a lot on the issues that I had obviously been the representative of the West Side. You know, we're talking about the West, the Westside Livability Study. We're talking about the trains. We're talking about taking off cargo on dark rail and away from freeways that would take 750 trucks out of the freeways. So based on the fact that there's a long term benefit to what's taking place here, I think there's a there's a support here for that when it comes to what the effects of the project would have in the short term, I think are outweighed by the benefits in the long term, when we're looking at taking container traffic out of the freeway out of the 710 and the issues that we deal with it with it there also the fact that in addition to having more on dock rail facilities, this was an issue that has been taking place for many years. And in fact, when I joined the city council four years ago, that was a big issue of debate in terms of whether the candidates at that time were in favor of undock. Rail And of course, I was, and here we are. Here's the opportunity now to move this proposal forward. It's a part of a process. Obviously, it starts with CEQA and then the engineering work takes place to make it happen. So I'm very pleased with staff and their support and their work in getting this done. I think that they've done it with the sensitivity to the neighborhood's impact in terms of the impact to the West Palm Beach community. And I, I think that it's a job well done. And I again, want to thank my councilmembers for their for their support of this. Thank you, Councilwoman Price. Thank you very much. So I support this project. And I want to thank both the appellants and city staff who provided the presentation this evening. As the chair of the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority. I'm a big supporter of anything that we can do to stay ahead of the changing industry that we have in terms of goods, movement and on dock rail provides us an opportunity to do that. It allows us to stay competitive and really look to the future in terms of the way we're moving goods both locally, regionally and throughout the nation. And so I support everything that's being done in regards to this project. I think it's going to be a great model and it's going to allow Long Beach to, in practice, do what it always preaches, which is to be a zero emissions port move towards a zero emissions port. I'm grateful that it includes the play and I'm also thankful for the comments of my colleagues to try to mitigate the issues for the immediate neighbors. I think that obviously is an ongoing concern and something that should be addressed along the way. So I think everyone for being here tonight and I wholeheartedly support this this project. Thank you. Base me, Richardson. Thank you. I want to just give some kudos to the work that the port did. It's not often and I think Councilmember Gonzalez or Jeanine. Councilman Pearce mentioned it's not often that you see no environmental group opposing infrastructure investment at the port and you see a lot of positive comments here. So, so good. Good work there and sort of doing the outreach. And it appears that you've you've done a lot of work to be sensitive to those adjacent businesses and neighborhoods. On dog rail is smart for a lot of reasons. It's the standard we encourage it across the country gets, you know, trucks off the trucks off the street. It cleans up your your air and it creates a more efficient system. And then infrastructure investment in general supports job creation. And so obviously support infrastructure investment. Three things I want to note. So I recognize that conversation on the West Side about the Shoemaker Bridge up in North Long Beach. We have an area of town that's sort of cut off by the 17th is kind of the Coolidge Triangle Longwood area. And as infrastructure is modernized, we try to find ways to stitch communities back together. So I just want to say, if there are, you know, just ask if there are any conversations about mobility plans or seventh and or anything else to make sure that we're thinking about stitching communities back together. Yes. The port staff, our transportation planning and engineering staff have been coordinating with City Public Works as well as Metro and Caltrans on their work on the I 710 project and the early action projects that will affect the Shoemaker Bridge. So we'll be. Making sure to continue those discussions, continue that coordination, and making sure that we're developing circulation and traffic management plans that accommodate access through that area. Okay. And secondly, I want to recognize and thank you for the conversation about engaging economic development and development services, about thinking about ways to retain businesses here. I just want to just sort of just put it out there that if ever there is some displacement of a business, we should think about, you know, opportunities to clean up other industrial spaces and create economic activity there. For example, the gentleman who spoke about his sign saying business, I would love to have this same business in North Palm Beach if if the opportunity was was there. So there are other other industrial spaces that could use more economic activity to sort of raise the standard in some of those areas. So I just wanted to sort of put that on the table. And then the last thing I would say, I would encourage you or rather our frame it as a question, is there an opportunity to continue to to to work to find a solution with the utilities? The conversations brought up about the utilities and the pipelines. Is there an opportunity to continue working to find a resolution there? Yes. And we have had some initial discussions with all of the affected parties for the utility relocation work that will be necessary for this project. Once we move through the air certification process and can start the design phase, that's where we'll move forward with those discussions in earnest and make sure that we're working with all the affected stakeholders to make sure that we're accommodating those needs as we develop the final design. Fantastic. Well, you have a good project here and I'm happy to support it. Thank you. Thank you. There's a motion and a second, of course, that's been made. I just got a couple of brief comments. We all know, of course, that the actual vote tonight is a narrow one for the council from from the scope of the actual vote itself. But I do want to make just a couple of comments just for the public at large, I think are important. And the first is, I know there was some concern about pollution or impacts of the project. I just think it's important to note that long term, the actual benefit of on dock rail and the actual benefit of implementing the full cleaner action plan will dramatically reduce pollution in and around the ports and up, up and down the 710 corridor. And so from an infrastructure creation perspective, this project at Pier B and and the expansion of our rail capacity is critical to the to the clean air future that we all want to have in this community. So I do want to commend the Board of Harbor Commissioners for, I know the incredible amount of work that went into getting us to this point. Pier B and the conversations around Pier B have been going on for many years, and there were many decisions that led up to getting to this process. And it's critical that we expand rail. The only way that we ensure that Long Beach as a port remain competitive across the world is to expand rail. It is a critical piece of the future. And there were some comments about, you know, being global or being local. And I just want to be clear that the port provides 30,000 local jobs to people in and around the port area. And so we are talking about local issues. And I want to think there are many workers that are here, both carpenters and electricians and others that are local, live in Long Beach and that live in the area. And so this idea that somehow they're not local, I take offense to I also add that it's as important that we are working with our businesses. And I do. I well, I want to thank Councilman Gonzalez for I know having met multiple times with with these businesses. But I also I'm confident I look to our harbor commissioners. I know that Vice President Askew and Commissioner Lowenthal are both here. And I ask you, as I know on behalf of the council, I know that you will ensure that our our port team continue to work with the businesses. I know, Commissioner Lowenthal, how much you have worked with these businesses in the past and when you were here. And so just to those that came forward, I think we hear you and you have our commitment that we're going to do everything we can to mitigate these impacts to to meet with you. And I know our port team are going to do just that. And so, again, I want to thank Tom Lee and the entire Mr. Cameron, the entire environmental team. Mr. Cordero, your your senior staff getting here has been a long and long process, but an important one to make this to make the air cleaner and to move to a zero emissions port. And so with that, we do have a motion and a second on the floor. Please cast your votes. Motion carries. Great. Thank you very much. And thank you all for coming out. We appreciate that. Okay. We are we are going to take as a reminder, we have two hearings left. We're going to take those two hearings next. We are going to just do take a one minute pause so we can clear folks out our fires, asks that we get some folks out first before we move on to the next hearing. And we will be doing hearing item number one next. Oh, everyone I knew I. If you were here for the first hearing, please exit and take conversations outside. Please take conversations outside. Okay. If you want to have a conversation, please, please take it outside. Where, as a reminder, we just finished our first hearing. We have two hearings left, and then we will go to the regular agenda of the city council. So we'll have two hearings left. Yes. Okay. We're moving on. I need everyone to take a seat or please. Exit. Exit the room, please. Okay. I need everyone to exit the room if you're having a conversation or we will move on. So we have the next the next two items are two hearings. So, Madam Clerk, hearing item number one.