SMC Bundy Campus Environmental Impact Concerns

On September 26, 2005, Santa Monica Community College District (SMCCD) issued a 19-page Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for its Santa Monica College satellite Bundy Campus. Based on the initial evaluation, an EIR was required due to the fact that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. According to the SMC CEQA Initial Study Checklist, the following areas of concern, which were rated as a "potentially significant impact" include the following: air quality, aesthetics, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, noise, public services, transportation/circulation, utilities, neighborhood effects, and mandatory findings or significance.

Here's the breakdown of questions that were rated as a potentially significant impact.

AIR QUALITY.

Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD or Congestion Management Plan?
Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?

Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the air basin is non-attainment (ozone, carbon monoxide, & PM 10) under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

AESTHETICS.

Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?

Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.

Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?

Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.

Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned land uses for which permits have been granted)?

Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?

Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in an manner which would result in flooding on- or off site?

Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?

NOISE.

Exposure of persons to or generation of noise in level in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

Exposure of people to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

PUBLIC SERVICES.

Fire protection?

Police protection?

TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.

Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to ratio capacity on roads, or congestion at intersections)?

Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?

Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

Result in inadequate emergency access?

Result in inadequate parking capacity?

Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?

UTILITIES.

Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?

Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

NEIGHBORHOOD EFFECTS.

Will the proposal have considerable effects on the project neighborhood?

MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.

Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects).

Does the project have environmental effects which cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

According to a February 25, 2005 Conference Report pertaining to the Santa Monica College Bundy Campus Long Range Master Plan, Bud Allen of the CCS Group pointed out a few financial facts:

State funding for higher education facilities is at an $18 billion deficit.

Current rates of state funding will require decades just to fund current requests.

Even if local money is used for the construction of a building, there is maintenance and operations money that is normally provided by the State but that can be withdrawn if the facilities do not meet the State Chancellor’s guidelines as to their purposes and their amount of use.

One only needs to take a quick glance at those involved in the Bundy Conference to see how all these problems have allegedly developed. Those relevant SMC individuals in attendance include Judith Penchansky, Erica LeBlanc, Randy Lawson, and Katharine Muller’s husband, David Muller. Also in attendance was Zina Josephs from Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP). According to the LookOut News article for October 18, 2005, Josephs "implied that the process was rigged as she read off a list of numbers and facts that have changed from college document to document." Eric Gabster of FOSP accused Santa Monica College of "high-handed dealing."

Also in attendance for the Bundy conference was Shane Parker of Christopher A. Joseph & Associates, the environmental consultant to Santa Monica College. Parker and his firm is responsible for the drafting of the EIR. How much money has Christopher A. Joseph & Associates raked in from the college? Let's look at the Santa Monica College Board of Trustees Minutes.

Here's the SMC Board of Trustees Agenda from the Citizens Bond Oversight Committee for January 10, 2005:

AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES – BUNDY CAMPUS MASTER PLAN

It is recommended that the Board of Trustees approve the following consultants to prepare a master plan, environmental studies and public outreach component for the Bundy Campus:

Christopher A. Joseph & Associates: Master Plan environmental consultant and preparation of a full Environmental Impact Report if necessary. Not to exceed $50,000 for Master Plan services; not to exceed $65,000 for EIR; plus reimbursable expenses.

Here's the SMC Board of Trustees Minutes for August 6, 2001:

AGREEMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, MADISON THEATER PROJECT

Agreement with CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES for environmental services associated with the Madison Theater project for an amount not to exceed $110,320 plus reimbursable expenses.

Funding Source: SMC Foundation2001-2002
Budget: District Capital Outlay Fund

Comment: This agreement will provide for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report and supporting environmental technical analysis of the proposed Madison Theater project in accordance with the appropriate State laws and SMCC District administrative regulations.

Here's the SMC Board of Trustees Minutes for July 6, 1999:

RECOMMENDATION NO. 29-I
FACILITIES: ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR EIR, PARKING STRUCTURE

It is recommended that the Board of Trustees approve the following for consulting services related to the completion of the City of Santa Monica Environmental Impact Report for the parking structure addition at Santa Monica College. Services to be provided for the period of July 1 through December 31, 1999 in the amount indicated:

Christopher A. Joseph and Associates, in an amount not to exceed $10,000.
Funding Source: Parking C.O.P.

Comment: The City of Santa Monica is requesting the College to prepare technical responses to issues raised in the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report for the Parking Structure. The consultants will assist with the architectural responses.

Here's the SMC Board of Trustees Minutes for July 6, 2005:

Agreement for Environmental Consulting Services

Agreement with CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES to prepare an Environmental Impact Report on the Corsair Field Renovation project for an amount not to exceed $107,510 plus reimbursable expenses.

Comment: This agreement provides all necessary environmental consulting services in the preparation of an environmental impact report for the renovation of Corsair Field and related underground parking. This firm has participated in other major projects with the District.

So, SMC shelled out approximately $342,830 to Christopher A. Joseph & Associates in only four separate consulting contract deals. It will be most revealing to see what the college and its community received for all this money.

-- Des Manttari,
Editor-in-Chief,
Phoenix Genesis

(c) 2006: Phoenix Genesis/MBS LP

Feel free to link or print this; just include the SAVE SMC URL: http://savesmc.blogspot.com/

Technorati Tags: Santa Monica College, Bundy campus, Bundy Master Plan, environmental impact report, environmental concerns, air quality, hazardous materials, traffic problems, noise pollution, environmental consultant, News and politics, Shane Parker, Christopher A. Joseph