HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 2007-080 N.C.S. 05/07/2007 Resolution No. 2007-080 N.C.S.
of the City of Petaluma, California
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA CERTIFYING
THE APRIL 2007 ADDENDUM TO THE WATER RECYCLING FACILITY AND
RIVER ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS EIR; APPROVING THE PROJECT REVISIONS;
AND MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT
WI~EREAS, in 1938, the original wastewater treatment processes were constructed at
950 Hopper Street; and,
WHEREAS, to meet the community's needs and changing regulatory requirements,
various upgrades and additions to the wastewater treatment plant were conducted through the
1960s; and,
WHEREAS, in 1972, the oxidation ponds were constructed at 4400 Lakeville Highway
to provide additional treatment capacity; and,
WHEREAS, in 1988, with influent flows exceeding 75% of the permitted capacity of the
wastewater treatment facility, and necessary upgrades to the facility to increase treatment
capacity and continue to meet the needs of the community were determined to be too costly, the
City determined to replace the existing wastewater treatment. facility; and,
WHEREAS, in 1991 the City executed a Memorandum of Understanding with
Envirotech Operating Services (EOS) to design, build, construct, own and operate (20 years) a
new wastewater treatment facility (Resolution No. 91-107 N.C.S.); and,
WHEREAS, on July 31, 1991, EOS submitted an application to the California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC) seeking an exemption from CPUC regulation under the California
Local Government Privatization Act of 1985; and,
WHEREAS, on October 21, 1991, Administrative Law Judge Ramsey determined that
the MOU did not meet the requirements of the Public Utilities Code and ordered that "the
application is denied without prejudice to refiling after amendment"; and,
WHEREAS, in February 1992 EOS and the City mutually agreed to rescind the MOU;
and;
WHEREAS, on June 20, 1994, following a report prepared by Ernst and Young, the City
Council adopted Resolution No. 94-156 N.C.S., which directed that the Service Agreement
Approach (privatization) be utilized for procurement of a new wastewater treatment facility; and,
WHEREAS, on June 17, 1996, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 96-163 N.C.S.,
which certified the Final EIR documents, Resolution No. 96-164 N.C.S., which approved the
project, and Resolution No. 96-165 N.C.S., which approved and authorized issuance of the
Request. For Proposal; and,
Resolution No. 2007-080 N.C.S. Page 1
WHEREAS, on July 17, 1996, the RFP was issued to five pre-qualified vendor teams;
and,
WHEREAS, on January 5, 1998, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 98-11 N.C.S.,
which selected MUW for contract negotiations; and,
WHEREAS, negotiations with MUW on technical, legal and agreement issues began on
January 27, 1998 and proceeded through spring 1999; and,
WHEREAS, on September 21, 1998, the City Council, recognizing the need for
development of a public alternative to the proposed privatization project, approved preparation
of the wastewater treatment facility master plan; and,
WHEREAS, on September 21, 1999, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 99-188
N.C.S., which terminated the privatization process and established City ownership of the new
wastewater treatment facility; and,
WHEREAS, on September 21, 1999, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 99-189
N.C.S., which approved the Wastewater Treatment Master Plan, with the understanding that the
Master Plan's recommended project would be further reviewed to address questions asked by the
City's independent wastewater professionals; and,
WHEREAS, on October 29, 1999, the City issued a Request For Proposal for
engineering services in support of the water recycling facility project (new wastewater treatment
facility); and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2000-066N.C.S. on Apri13,
2000, which authorized the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with
Carollo Engineers for engineering services in support of Phase 1 -Project Report of the Water
Recycling Facility Project; and,
WHEREAS, five alternatives for the new water recycling facility were presented at a
Public Forum at the Community Center on June 14, 2000; and,
W>FIEREAS, the City Council heard a discussion on the criteria for evaluating the
alternatives on September 5, 2000; and,
WHEREAS, the results of the analysis and comparison of the alternatives were
presented at a Public Forum at the Community Center on November 8, 2000; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council considered and discussed the Draft Water Recycling
Facility Project Report (Carollo Engineers, November 2000) on November 20, 2000; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 00-214 N.C.S. on December 11,
2000, which approved the Water Recycling Facility Project Report (Carollo Engineers,
November 2000), selected Alternative 5 -Extended Aeration as the preferred alternative for the
new water recycling facility, and identified Option A -Wetlands as the preferred alternative for
algae removal over Option B - DAFs; and,
Resolution No. 2007-080 N.C.S. Page 2
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 00-215 N.C.S. on December 11,
2000, which authorized the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with
Carollo Engineers for professional engineering services in support of Phase 2 -Project
Development of the Water Recycling Facility Project; and,
W>FIEREAS, the City Council considered the Water Recycling Facility Project and the
Draft Water Recycling Facility Predesign Report (Carollo Engineers, November 2001) on
November 14, 2001, November 28, 2001., December 17, 2001 and January 7, 2002; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2002-012 N.C.S. on January 7,
2002, which approved design parameters for the preferred alternative for the water recycling
facility project and authorized completion of the environmental impact report; and,
WHEREAS, the City prepared Water Recycling Facility and River Access Improvements
DraftElR (April 2002) and distributed it to the California State Clearinghouse and to all
.responsible local, state and federal agencies involved in the project and made it available for
public review; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held noticed public hearings on May 13,.2002, and May
20, 2002, during which all interested persons were provided an opportunity to comment on the
adequacy of the Draft EIR; and,
WHEREAS, the public review period for the Draft EIR began April 15, 2002, and closed
May 29, 2002; and,
WHEREAS, the City prepared Water Recycling Facility and River Access Improvements
Final EIR and Response to Comments (July 2002), which responded to comments received on
the Draft EIR. The Final EIR did not identify any new significant impacts that had not been
previously evaluated in the Draft EIR; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council held a noticed public hearing on August 5, 2002, to
consider the Final EIR; and,
WHEREAS, that after due consideration, the Petaluma City Council certified the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the Water Recycling Facility and River Access Improvements
Project and made the following findings on August 5, 2002.
1. The Final Environmental Impact Report has been completed in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines.
2. The documents referenced below constitute the Final Environmental Impact Report
and were presented and considered along with both written and oral comments
received during the public review period on the project and environmental
documents:
a. Water Recycling Facility and River Access Improvements Draft Environmental
Impact. Report, in two volumes (April 2002).
b. Water Recycling Facility and River Access Improvements Final Environmental
Impact Report and Response To Comments (July 2002).
Resolution No. 2007-080 N.C.S. Page 3
3. The City Council, as the decision making body of the City of Petaluma,
independently reviewed, analyzed and considered the information in the Final EIR
and found. that the contents of the Final EIR reflect the independent judgment of the
City of Petaluma
4. The Final EIR was published, made available and circulated for review and comment.
WHEREAS, the project certified in the Final EIR included locating a portion of the
treatment plant at 4400 Lakeville Highway, the current site of the City's oxidation ponds (APN
0680-010-025, 032 and 024), with polishing treatment wetlands located at 4100 Lakeville
Highway (APN 068-010-026, and 017-170-002) ;and,
WHEREAS, the City completed approximately 50% design of the facility in November
2002; and,
WHEREAS, through the value engineering effort conducted in December 2002, it
became apparent the alternative of locating the water recycling facility at 4000 Lakeville
Highway and preserving the oxidation pond site for its current function warranted further
evaluation; and,
WHEREAS, to construct the water recycling facility at the oxidation pond site would
require the removal, drying and disposal of sludge from the aerated lagoon and oxidation pond
no. 1, construction of a pipeline to deliver influent to oxidation pond no. 2, the construction of
aerators in oxidation pond nos. 2 and 3 to maintain and improve treatment capacity, and require
- the placement of approximately 250,000 cubic yards of imported fill in the oxidation pond no. 1;
and,
WHEREAS, a feasibility study determined that locating the water recycling facility at
4000 Lakeville Highway was feasible and yields many benefits; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2003-196 N.C.S. on August 18,
2003, which authorized the City Manager to execute an amendment to the professional services
agreement with Carollo Engineers for engineering services in support of locating the new
treatment plant at 4000 Lakeville Highway; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council authorized acquisition of approximately 262 acres of land
in the 4000 block of Lakeville Highway for construction of the Water Recycling Facility and
development of the Petaluma Marsh Acquisition, Enhancement and Access Project on September
8, 2003 through Ordinance No. 2161 N.C.S. for the purchase of real property described as
Sonoma County Assessor's parcel Nos. 068-010-026 and 017-010-002; and,
WHEREAS, the City acquired Parcel Nos. 068-010-026 and 017-010-002 in February
2004 with the assistance of grant funding from the California Coastal Conservancy and the
Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District; and,
WHEREAS, an Addendum to the Water Recycling Facility and River Access
Improvements EIR was prepared to evaluate potential changes to the environmental affects of
the Project due to the proposed Project revisions; and,
Resolution No. 2007-080 N.C.S. Page 4
WHEREAS, the EIR Addendum concluded that the determinations of the Final EIR
remain valid for the revised Project in that none of the Project modifications will have new
significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant
effects, or otherwise meet the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 which outlines
the standards by which subsequent ETRs are required; and,
WHEREAS, the EIR Addendum was published on April 15, 2004 and was available for
public review at the City of Petaluma City Hall, Petaluma Library, Petaluma Community Center,
Petaluma Senior Center, and the Santa Rosa Junior College, Petaluma campus; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004-101 N.C.S. Re-certifying
the Water Recycling Facility and River Access Improvements Project Final Environmental
Impact Report Addendum, and Adopting Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations,
and Adopting Revised Mitigation Monitoring Program on June 7, 2004; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004-092 N.C.S. Authorizing the
City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement with The Covello Group for
Construction Management Services Task 1 and Task 2 for the City of Petaluma Ellis Creek
Water Recycling Facility Project on June 7, 2004; and,
WHEREAS, the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee approved the Project on
November 18, 2004; and,
WHEREAS, the Petaluma Planning Commission considered the Project and the
proposed land use designations at 4000 Lakeville Highway on December 14, 2004, and
recommended the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment to the land use
designation of Public/Institutional, prezoning to Planned Community District (PCD) and
rezoning from Agricultural to Planned Community District, and annexation to the City of
Petaluma; and,
WHEREAS, a Construction Addendum (July 2005) to the Water Recycling Facility and
River Access Improvements EIR was prepared to evaluate potential changes to the
environmental affects of the Project due to the proposed Project revisions; and,
WHEREAS, after due consideration, the City Council certified the Water Recycling
Facility and River Access Improvements EIR Construction Addendum and adopted the revisions
to the project on August 1, 2005; and,
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2005 the City Council awarded the Construction Contract for
the Ellis Creek Water Recycling Facility to Kiewit Pacific Co.; and,
WHEREAS, in the course of construction the construction manager requested a change
in the construction truck route for ingress at the Water Recycling Facility site; and,
WHEREAS, a Construction Addendum (February 2006) to the Water Recycling Facility
and River Access Improvements EIR was prepared to evaluate potential changes to the
environmental affects of the Project. due to the proposed Project revisions; and,
Resolution No. 2007-080 N.C.S. Page S
WHEREAS, after due consideration, the City Council certified the Water Recycling
Facility and River Access Improvements EIR 2006 Addendum and adopted the revisions on
Apri13, 2006; and,
WHEREAS, in 2006 the City prepared a Draft Water Demand and Supply Analysis
identifying a maximum day demand for tertiary treated water of 6.7 mgd; and,
WFIEREAS, the Certified Water Recycling Facility and River Access Improvements
EIR analyzed a project that would tertiary treat 4.0 mgd; and,
WHEREAS, an Addendum (Apri12007) to the Water Recycling Facility and River
Access Improvements EIR was prepared to evaluate potential changes to the environmental
affects of the Project due to the minor changes to the project required to increase the capacity of
tertiary treatment from 4.0 to 6.7 mgd and add luminaries for improved security; and,
WHEREAS, the Apri12007 Addendum found that the determinations of the Final EIR,
as modified by the 2004 Addendum, 2005 Construction Addendum and 2006 Construction
Addendum, remain valid for the revised Project in that none of the Project modifications will
have new significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of previously identified
significant effects, or otherwise meet the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
which outlines the standards by which subsequent EIRs are required; and,
WHEREAS, the Apri12007 Addendum was published in April, 2007, and was available
for public review at the City of Petaluma City Hall, and was considered by the City Council
together with the Final EIR, as modified by the 2004 Addendum, 2005 Construction addendum
and 2006 Construction Addendum.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council that:
1. The above recitals are true and correct and are adopted as findings of fact together
with the further findings of fact set forth in Exhibit A, which are also incorporated
herein and adopted by the City Council.
2. The April 2007 Addendum. to the Water Recycling Facility and River Access
Improvements EIR as modified by the 2004 Addendum, 2005 Construction
Addendum, and 2006 Construction Addendum is certified by the City Council as
having been prepared in accordance with CEQA.
3. As stated in the findings of fact attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein,
the project revisions evaluated in the April 2007 Addendum do not cause new
significant environmental effects, and therefore, the Statement of Overriding
Considerations adopted at the time of the project approval in August 2002 and April
2004 is still applicable and need not be modified.
4. As stated in the findings of fact attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein,
the project revisions evaluated in the April 2007 Addendum do not cause new
significant environmental impacts or new or revised mitigation measures, and.
therefore, the Revised Mitigation Monitoring Program adopted in July 2005 is still
applicable and need not be modified.
Resolution No. 2007-080 N.C.S. Page 6
5. The Certified EIR, 2004 Addendum, 2005 Construction Addendum, 2006
Construction Addendum, April 2007 Addendum and all documents constituting the
Administrative Record shall reside with the Environmental Review Coordinator of
the City of Petaluma and be made available at the office of such Coordinator at the
Petaluma City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma, California.
6. The Environmental Review Coordinator is directed to file a Notice of Determination
for the revisions to the project adopted hereby.
Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City.
REFERENCE: I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the A ro ed s to
Council of the City of Petaluma at a Regular meeting on the 7`~ day of May, 2007, f
by the following vote:
City At rney
AYES: Barrett, Freitas, Vice Mayor Nau, Rabbitt
NOES: Mayor Torliatt
ABSENT: Harris, O'Brien
ABSTAIN: None
I ,f~l~
ATTEST: ~
City Clerk Mayo
Resolution No. 2007-080 N.C.S. Page 7
EXHIBIT A TO THE RESOLUTION APPROVING REVISIONS TO
THE CITY OF PETALUMA WATER RECYCLING FACILITY AND
MARSH ACQUISITION, ENHANCEMENT, AND
ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Introduction
The City is constructing a new wastewater treatment facility, capable of producing tertiary
treated recycled water, at property northwest of the existing oxidation pond. site at 4000
Lakeville Highway. The project includes a set of improvements that will provide public
recreational and educational amenities.
These findings have been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act,
the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., title 14, § 15000 et seq.). The City of Petaluma is the
lead agency for the environmental review of the Program and has the principal responsibility for
its approval.
An EIR for the project was certified, findings made, and a statement of overriding considerations
adopted in August 2002. Revisions to the project were subsequently proposed and an EIR
addendum certified, findings made, and statement of overriding considerations adopted in April
of 2004. Subsequently, final engineering design occurred requiring minor revisions in the
project, an EIR construction addendum was certified, and findings made in August of 2005. In
February 2006 a construction addendum was prepared to evaluate truck routing and one pipe
placement. This was certified and findings made in February 2006.
In 2007 the Engineering Manager and Construction Manager requested minor changes to the
Project Description to increase the volume of tertiary treated water to be produced and to update
the site's lighting plan in accordance with recent safety and security guidelines. Therefore, the
following additional minor revisions in the project are currently proposed:
® Increase the peak capacity for tertiary treatment from 4.0 to 6.7 mgd. The Water Supply
and Demand Analysis determined that 6.7 mgd of tertiary recycled water is required during
peak demand. To meet. this supply need the tertiary recycled water storage basin needs to be
increased from 1.0 million gallons to 1.5 million gallons (mg). To accommodate the increase
in size the basin would be expanded to the north and west. The depth and height of the basin
would remain the same. A pump station also needs to be added north of the polishing
wetlands flow split structure to pump secondary water from the polishing wetlands to the
tertiary filters and UV equipment. Pumping from the polishing wetlands to the tertiary filters
would off-set the low-flow influent water at night when flow rates are low and tertiary
irrigation demand is high.
® Additional lighting. The core Ellis Creek Water Recycling Facility site is principally lit
with approximately 100 pole-mounted or building-mounted light fixtures (luminaries), of
which approximately ten have dusk-to-dawn automatic control, the remainder are manually
controlled. "The Guidelines for Physical Security of Wastewater/Stormwater Utilities" (by
ASCE/AWWA) and the "Water Security Research and Technical Support Action Plan" (by
Resolution No. 2007-080 N.C.S. Page 8
EPA) recommend dusk-to-dawn lighting for plant security; accordingly, approximately 16 of
the existing bollard type and 40 wall mount type luminaries will be changed from manual to
automatic operation, and 15 roadway luminaries will be added to cover under-lit areas of the
site.
The minor revisions described above currently being considered for adoption do not result in
new significant impacts, and therefore, no changes to the previously adopted statement of
overriding considerations is required. In addition, the revisions to the project do not require
any changes to mitigation measures. Therefore, the previously adopted 2005 Revised
Mitigation Monitoring Program is still applicable.
These Findings of Fact are made relative only to the decision at hand: approval of minor
revisions to the City of Petaluma Water Recycling Facility and Marsh Acquisition,
Enhancement, and Access Improvements Project, as described in the April 2007Addendum.
These findings are available for~public review at the City of Petaluma.
2. Findings
The April 2007 Addendum did not identify any significant impacts resulting from the proposed
project revisions described herein.
Section 15164 of the Guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act
("CEQA") provides that an Addendum is the appropriate level of CEQA analysis when the
circumstances defined in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR do not
occur. None of the circumstances that require a Subsequent EIR, such as new significant
impacts or significant impacts of a substantially more severe nature, is present. Thus, an
Addendum is the. appropriate level of CEQA analysis and the appropriate method of amending
the 2002 Certified EIR.
3. Alternatives Analysis
Where a significant impact can be substantially lessened (i.e., mitigated to an "acceptable level")
solely by the adoption of mitigation measures, the lead agency, in drafting its findings, has no
obligation to consider the feasibility of alternatives with respect to that impact, even if the
alternative would mitigate the impact to a greater degree than the proposed Project. (Pub.
Resources Code, § 21002; Laurel Hills Homeowners Association, supra, 83 Ca1.App.3d at p.
521; see also Kings City Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 730-731;
Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47
Ca1.3d 376, 400-40.3.)
The preceding discussion regarding project impacts reveals that no significant effects were
identified in the April 2007 Addendum and therefore no further consideration of project
alternatives need be undertaken.
Resolution No. 2007-080 N.C.S. Page 9