Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 4/4/1989VERBATIM MINUTES OF THE WORKSHOP SESSIONOFTHECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFGLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA HELDTUESDAY, APRIL 4, 1989 AT 3:00 P.M. AIR QUALITY UPDATEStaffwillbepresent to brief the City Council on airqualityissues. RECOMMENDATION: This item is for information only. Mayor Renner: This is on the agenda simply to give LoriLiebermanalastopportunitytoappearbeforetheCouncilbeforesheleaves. Lori Lieberman: That's why I picked such an exciting topic, Mayor Renner. Mayor Renner: That's right. OK. Air Quality Update, Lori. Lori Lieberman: Mayor and members of the council, I just wanted to give you an update. There has been some things occurring in the area of air quality, both on the state level and with EPA. Probably first, I should let you know is that we have completed all the communities in the MAG Planning area that participated in development of the MAG 1987 CO and Ozone Plan. We have completed the update for 1987, the results have been very positive, people have been meeting their implementation schedules, and in fact, in the area of short range transit improvements we are actually ahead of schedule. In terms of some of the commitments made there we're actually ahead of schedule. Long range transit improvement will have to obviously go back and be revisited given the results of the special election last week. One other note on the carbon monoxide plan, the EPA has filed another law suit, the good news is that they filed the law suit. actually the Center for Law has filed a law suit against the EPA and has not named the state of Arizona in the law suit. The Center for Law has indicated that they feel that the EPA did not act within their authority in granting us a nine year extension for attainment. We don't know what the results of that will be. The State of Arizona has intervened in that law suit and so more hearing are pending. They cited a variety of reasons for filing this law suit, the Arizona Center for Law in the public interest contends aside from the nine year extension that this was done without just cause by the EPA. That we did not include all available measures for attainment within that plan. That we acted illegally, arbitrarily and capriciously in ignoring projections of increased vehicular traffic and that comes as a direct result of some fine tuning that MAG TPO has done in our vehicle mile travel projections. Those projections however, if you look at the types of trips that those vehicles are making and the age of fleet on the road, actually does not contribute as significantly to our COproblemastheCenteriscontending. So that is going to beaverytechnicalissuethat's going to have to be resolved onaverytechnicalstafflevel. In addition, the Centercontendsthatthisplandoesnotdemonstratelongtermattainmentcapability. In other words, we might reachattainmentinnineyearsbutwecan't maintain thatattainment. Mayor Renner: we can attain but we can't maintain? Lori: That's right, that's correct. Some additional goodnewsis, however, that the Sun Oil waiver was approved. ThatmeansthattherewillbeaMTEblendavailablethatis15% rather than 11%. That additional 4%, while it might notsoundlikealot, will contribute positively in reducingthoseCOemissionandespeciallyintheareaofsomeof the older vehicles that are still on the road. MTBE tends to be a little more compatible than an ethenal or methenal blend. You may have noticed around town a lot of gas stations torn up, having new tanks installed. These tanks are compatible with the alternative fuels. So that's why your seeing a lot of construction in some of the gas stations. In the areas of particulate plan the EPA is still not happy with that plan we submitted to them, they sent a letter to the Maricopa County Bureau of Air Pollution Control back in November stating that we needed to include additional measures in our plan to try to reach attainment. If you'll recall the plan that was submitted by MAG thru the State to the EPA showed a very small reduction in particulate pollution. That was primarily due to the fact that some of the measures that would reap the biggest results are either very expensive to implement or are not feasible for a desert environment. That being either you go out and you pave large miles of roadways. Those roadways that are unpaved are predominately in the county. The county does not have the money to go out and put together an aggressive pavement program in those areas. In the area of wind and dust, this is the desert, we continue to talk with the EPA and try and get some changes in the area of that particulate reduction. Councilman Falbo: Why don't you mention the second highest. Lori: The second highest source of particulate pollution is paved road. The EPA suggestion for resolving that problem is to literally wash the streets, which given our ground water restricts that we are under in the valley, really are not feasible. This continues to be an on-going discussion with the EPA. I know at times it does seem to border on the ridiculous. They have sent us a whole new range of strategies that they feel we should implement to reduce PM10 pollution. The response that we have sent back to the EPA has been one of once we complete our ground cloud study inthisstateandweknowwheretheparticulatepollutioniscomingfrom, we can which of those measures are feasible forustoimplement. Arizona Department of Environmental Qualitydiddoaverybriefstudythislastwinter, it ran aboutthreeweeks, looking at a variety of things, primarily howthebrowncloudmovesoverthevalley, in other words, wehaveparticulatepollutionparticularlyinaninversionseasonandwheredoesthatbrowncloudmove, what doprevailingwindsdotoimpactthat. We haven't seen any datafromthatbecausecensusisthatit's really not going togiveusthekindofinformationweneed. DEQ is gone to thelegislatorwithapieceoflegislationrequestingadditionalfundingtodoaverycomprehensivebrowncloudstudy. So weknowiftheparticulatepollutioniscomingfromunpavedroad, paved roads. How much of it is plant matter, all thosekindsofthings, but just specifically in the area of PM10particulates, and there are other sizes, unfortunately a particulate that we will all have to contend with. The EPA has not set a deadline for the Phase II portion of the PM10 plan. All these issues are wrapped in renewal of the clean air legislation and that legislation you hear a variety of things. You hear from some people that something is going to happen in this session, other people will tell you we're not touching it, we're going to leave it along. The primary road block to renewal of that legislation is the acid rain issue. We are not just dealing with particulate and CO and Ozone pollution, but the acid rain issue is tied up in this because the eastern states and the concern that severe restrictions will have on industry in their area. So, unfortunately, while all of you have gone back and talked with our congressional delegation and tried to impart to them that some kind of change needs to happen in the legislation for our particular geographic area. We have not received much encouragement that that was likely to happen within the next couple of years so we will continue to be a non -attainment area. Finally, the travel reduction program, that was a part of the legislation that was passed by the State Legislator last year, that program is in the process of being implemented. The county who was charged with implementing the program has appointed a travel reduction board and a travel reduction task force. The City of Glendale does have a representative on the travel reduction task force. That group is a very technical group responsible for designing program implementation for getting the surveys out to employers to determine base line data from which they must reduce that 5% of single occupant vehicle trips, to providing feedback to the travel reduction board on what plan should be approved and what plans should be disapproved. The City of Glendale does fall within that first group of employers, 500 or more employees. However, because of the way the legislation was written it deals with specific worksites and we have several different worksites that will be impacted by thislegislation. We actually will not be required to submit aplanuntillatesummerorearlyfallwhichencouraginginthatwe'll be in the second group, the first group will betheguineapigs, they will be the people that will be thefirstonestodevelopaplanandsubmitthemandthetaskforcewillprovidethemfeedbackonthoseimplementationstrategies. That is moving forward that is something thatyourgoingtobehearingmoreabout. Penalties for non- compliance really have not been discussed at great lengthbecauseit's going to take a year or two of managing theprogramtofindoutwhat's going to be effective in reducingthosesingleoccupantvehicletrips. That is a very brief air quality update. I'd be happy toansweranyquestions. Vice Mayor Tolby: does this take into account the number of miles driven, like if you work in Mesa and live in Glendale or vice versa? Lori: The single occupant vehicle trip the way the legislation is written does not take in account the length of the trip. No. So, if you have an employee that lives in Mesa and drives to Glendale that single occupant trip is counted as one trip one way. Vice Mayor Tolby: that seems a very large omission. I mean we can comply if we'll get four people to carpool from across the street and one person can drive by himself from Mesa. I mean they count they keep score on the wrong thing. The right thing is to keep score on the average number of miles it takes to get somebody to work. Lori: Mayor Renner, Vice Mayor Tolby that is something that has been discussed at the task force level. I think the concern that the folks had that drafted the legislation with trying to track those vehicle miles, was they felt they could get a better handle on single occupant vehicle trips because you could look at how many employees someone has, the majority of people drive to work alone in their vehicles and they felt they could get a better handle on that number by looking at single occupant vehicle trips. Vice Mayor Tolby: the employers mandate to put a plan in. He's not really mandated to achieve the plan is he? Lori: Mayor Renner, Vice Mayor Tolby. a plan will be reviewed by this task force to determine if effort was made to implement the plan and that is something that will probably be Vice Mayor Tolby: OK, let me go back right there, you saidtheword. Effort was made. He is not mandated to achievesuccess, he's just mandated to make an effort. Lori: Mayor Renner, Vice Mayor Tolby, they are mandated toreducethenumberofsingleoccupantvehicletripsby5%. The legislation provides some discretion to the county thatisimplementingtheprogramastowhat, I don't want to sayreasonableeffort, but as to what will be deemed appropriateefforttotryandgetthenumberofsingleoccupantvehicletripsreduced. I think once you see the program in place, and you see people starting to submit plans, their going tohavetodealwiththoseexactissues. Now who is reallytryingandwhoisjustputtingtogetheraplanandsayingwell, we designated 4 spaces for carpool people and no onewantedtousethem, so that's our plan". Then at that pointintimethecountyhastogotothatemployerandsay "you'venotmadereasonableeffort, your not meeting your goal" and it provides them with some penalty opportunities. Vice Mayor Tolby: Am I being wrong in being highly skeptical that we're really not going to accomplish anything with this whole program? Lori: Mayor Renner, Vice Mayor Tolby, there is probably some concern out there that we will not accomplish what the legislation mandates, however, we have every incentive to accomplish that because we have some quite severe federal standards we are violating and we still have that hammer of withholding those federal highways monies from us if in fact we don't reach attainment. I don't think that the Arizona Center from Law in the public interest is going to let this issue pass. There going to be watching us very closely. They already feel that the trip reduction program is not strong enough, and have indicated that if we don't make some reasonable progress that they probably will be court filing a law suit whether it is against the county or the state as the submitting agency for the federal plan I don't know. Vice Mayor Tolby: do they have the power to levy a fine on a business man? Lori: The legislation is written, yes Vice Mayor Tolby, does allow for penalties. What those penalties will be is something that in terms of dollar amount or whatever, is something that is going to have to be determined. Probably will be determined at the task force level and that probably will be presented to the travel reduction board. The task force is comprised, there are two public sector agencies represented, the remainder of the folks are private sector employers. These are the people who are putting together the guidelines for program implementation. Asst. City Manager Pedrow: Mr. Mayor that fine structure hasaboutasmuchsubstituteasourmeritsystemplanrightnow. It's got a lot of work to do. Vice Mayor Tolby: just seems like to me, there doing a lotofhuffingandpuffingandgoingnowhere. There's no, and Idon't think we do it ourselves, we don't, when we go to hiresomebodywereallydon't take into account where they liveandmaybeinsocietyweoughttostartthinkingaboutthatthatwehirealittleclosertohome. That would do more toreducetripsthanthiscarpoolingyourtalkingabout. Lori: Mayor Renner, Vice Mayor Tolby, actually the lastsurveythatwasdonebythetransitdivisionthatmanages therideshareprogram, I believe, 85% of our employees livewithinfivemilesofcityhall, so we are very much theexception. We do have some people that live out towardsWickenburgandsomepeoplethatliveoutinChandler, but 850 do live within five miles of city hall. Mayor Renner: and by God, we're going to find out who those other 15% are. Vice Mayor Tolby: no merit if they more than five miles. That's a better figure than I thought it was. I didn't know we did that well. But again, one person that quits driving from Chandler will do more for air pollution then getting ten people to carpool that live within five miles of city hall. Lori: Mayor Renner, Vice Mayor Tolby: we do have an employee that lives in Chandler that did ride the bus during the week of the clean air challenge; however, it did extend his work day. It took him about 2 1/2 hours to get to work in the morning and 3 hours to get home. Mayor Renner: Marty, Councilman Hugh is interested in discussing those 15%. Opportunities to save money on their maintenance. All right, thanks Lori, we appreciate it. We wish you good luck, Lori. We know the air quality in Chula Vista is bound to improve with your arrival.