1992 MAR 10 CC MINAENUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 10, 1992 - 6:00 P.M.
CALLED TO ORDER by Mayor Jacobson at 6:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE led by Mayor ProTem Dannen.
ROLL CALL
Councilwoman Cruikshank -
Present
Councilman West -
Present
Councilman Wise -
Present
Mayor ProTem Dannen -
Present
Mayor Jacobson -
Present
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (City Business Only - 5 minute limit)
Blake Mitchell, 1654 E. Palm - addressed Council stating that the Capital Improvement Advisory
Committee has received and are currently reviewing the General Plan and related documents.
Mayor ProTem Dannen read an excerpt from the State law relating to Capital Improvements; City
Attorney Dolley commented that his office will return with a proper ordinance.
Mayor Jacobson closed the public communications portion of the meeting.
A SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
Continued Public Hearing - On Environmental Assessment Number 275, the 1992 General Plan
and the Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan.
Mayor Jacobson stated this was the time and place fixed hereto for a continued public hearing on
Environmental Assessment Number 275,1991 General Plan and the Final Environmental Impact Report
for the General Plan He asked if proper publication for this hearing was done in a timely manner and
if any written communications had been received by the Office of the City Clerk; Jacqui Paul responded
that the hearing was published by the Planning Department, and that no written communications had
been received.
Mayor Jacobson opened the continued public hearing for public comments. No one wished to addressed
the Council.
Mayor ProTem Dannen stated he wished to bring one matter to the Council's attention before going
through the plan element by element. He stated the density issue is required to be addressed in the
general plan under Government Code Section 65302A of the State law.
Councilman West stated he was concerned with the Council's decision at their last meeting regarding
no residential east of Sepulveda Boulevard, and was concerned that if something comes up at some point
in the future where it would benefit the City to have residential there, it would require changing the
general plan.
Councilman Wise stated he also had concerns regarding this issue, and that he went out and canvassed
people of the community; Mayor ProTem Dannen stated that this issue was of great concern in the
community.
Lou Lightfoot, General Plan Consultant, responded that even if it were left in the general plan that they
would still have to do a specific plan and an EIR, and it would take at least one year to do at no
additional cost. He informed them that only four amendments a year which can be made to the general
plan.
City Attorney Dolley then went over the following decisions made at their last meeting: 1) No residential
east of Sepulveda Boulevard, 2) Air Products and Allied Signal property changed from Commercial back
to M -2 - no vote on this, 3) School properties on Imperial and Center were changed to R -3 zone.
City Manager Cano suggested the Council's decisions be summarized and stated that Council voted: 1)
No residential would be allowed east of Sepulveda Boulevard, 2) Change the land designation on Center
Street and Imperial Avenue to R -3 zone. Further stating that Council gave direction - without voting -
on the following: 1) Utilization of FARs vs Traffic Generation Rate, and that Council's preference was
to go through each one of the land use designations and decide what would be the appropriate measure,
and 2) Issue of non - conforming uses and how they would deal with them.
Discussion ensued regarding FARs vs. Trips per Density.
City Council Minutes
March 10, 1992
Mayor ProTem Dannen informed the Council that he asked staff to present him with a copy of the ITE
manual as this was what traffic generation would be based upon, but that there were no copies in City
Hall or the Library.
Mr. Lightfoot suggested that the ITE manual be used until such time that they adopt a set of locally
generated standards or make their own traffic model.
Mayor ProTem Dannen questioned whether there needed to be a specific reference to California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines in the general plan; discussion ensued.
Councd coneensus to have specific refusace to CEQA guidelines in the General Plan.
CONSERVATION ELEI RENT - Chapter 7:
Mr. Lightfoot introduced the Conservation Element stating that this was a State - mandated element.
Discussion ensued on the following:
Mayor Jacobson asked if there was anyone interested in addressing this element; no one addressed the
Council.
Councilwoman Cruikshank stated she would be abstaining from discussions and /or actions regarding
Pages 7 -8, Policy CN 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 in the Conservation Element due to a conflict of interest.
City Attorney Dolley asked Council to address those issues now without Councilwoman Cruikshank, and
then she could participate with the rest of the element; Council concurred.
Page 41 - Of Modification Package
Policy CN 4.1: Mayor ProTem Dannen asked to move the words "city, county," before "state and federal
agencies "; Mr. Lightfoot then suggested that the wording "Develop and support" environmental protection
policies..., be used instead of "Support".
MOVED by Councilman Wise; SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Dannen approval of CN 4.2,4.3,4.4, and
Change 133/Page 41. MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE 4/0/1 - AYES: Mayor
Jacobson, Mayor ProTem Dannen, and West and Wise. NOES: None.
ABSTENTIONS: Councilwoman CruilsshanlL
Councilman West left dais at 7:45 p.m. and returned at 7:46 p.m.
Mayor ProTem Dannen explained the conflict of interest rules to the public, and that the Council may
have to draw straws to get measures voted on because of the removal of councilpersons due to conflicts
of interest.
Councilwoman Cruikshank rejoined Council discussion.
MOVED Mayor ProTem Dannen; SECONDED by Councilman Wise to approve the Conservation
Element, with recommended changes 132, 134, 135, the changes to Policy CN 4.1 "Develop and
Encourage" - replacing the word "Support", and the addition of "City, County ", state and federal agencies.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0.
RECESS at 6:50 P.M.
RECONVENED at 7:05 P.M.
ROLL CALL all City Councilmembers present.
Discussion ensued regarding FARs as opposed to ADT with Councilmembers posing different scenarios
on how ADTs would be calculated. No action was taken.
LAND USE EI AIENT:
Mr. Lightfoot introduced the state - mandated Land Use Element stating that he had received eight letters
concerning this element which he would present to them at the appropriate time. Further stating that
their decision to eliminate residential uses east of Sepulveda Boulevard would cause changes in thirteen
different places within the general plan. Seven or eight of those are in the Land Use Element, and he
would be pointing those out as they go through the element.
Mayor Jacobson asked if anyone wished to address this element.
Madeline Bennett, 770 W. Imperial Avenue, #2 addressed Council on the fourth quadrant which
contained several large corporations and aerospace companies stating that the presentation suggested
this area not be included with the ADT concept but rather the FAR concept, and that this would be to
the larger companies advantage. She recommended they take one quadrant containing aerospace and
not force them into ADT but leave them with an FAR, and that they be reviewed in 1994, thereby not
City Council Minutes
2 March 10, 1992
locking them into a twenty year period but rather a two year period. During that time, the City could
examine the ADT to see what the advantages would be and get knowledge of how ADT is preferable to
FAR.
Blake Mitchell, 1564 E. Palm addressed Council stating that ADTs encourage developers to mitigate
traffic somehow, and stated he was in favor of a battery or solar power trolley.
Bill Mason, President - Chamber of Commerce distributed another copy to them of the Chamber's
written statement which he wanted to be a part of the public record.
Mac Dalgleish, 624 Sierra Street addressed Council stating that the Council now has the opportunity to
use the most recent technology in the form of ADT.
R.J. Switz, 1209 E. Maple Avenue cited an example to Council asking what the effect on ADTs on the
size of the Prudential Towers would be; Mr. Lightfoot responded that they would be smaller, and if the
old FARs were in place back then - the building would be substantially smaller.
Kevin Warner, Santa Fe Railroad Representative addressed Council referring to two letters from the
railroad's representative the Catellus Management Company, and stated that the railroad is asking the
Council to consider redesignating that land presently used as parking for an aerospace firm to private
use. Further stating that the Planning Commission recommended that the northerly two - thirds be
designated as Urban Mixed Use in conformance with the adjacent property to the west and the
designating of the southerly one -third of their property as Urban Mixed Use.
Gordon Leon, 423 W. Maple Avenue addressed Council stating he is a Planning Commissioner and was
unable to attend the Commission meeting at which the proposed land use designation for the two El
Segundo school sites was discussed, and therefore would like to speak on it this evening. He had
received numerous comments from residents regarding the growth of the City, and the concern was that
R3 residences would change the small town character of the community. Another concern expressed was
that once it is zoned R3, the City will never be able to reduce its land use. With the understanding that
the School Board wants to maximize the value of their property, he still believed that this desire could
be met by using other methods rather than rezoning the properties to R3. The general plan could
approach this issue with a special land use designation of Planned Residential Development (PRD), and
the proposed plan needed to provided a fair and equitable treatment for all residents of the City. He
recommended both sites be zoned PRD which would allow the City to have a better review of any
planned developments in the area, and will also meet the needs of the schools and the adjacent residents.
Discussion ensued with the general conclusion that the PRD designation would discourage developers
from purchasing those two sites.
Chuck Wilkerson, 502 Washington Street addressed Council stating he was also a Planning
Commissioner and that his major concern was with the Economic Development Element as follows: 1)
The general plan states that the City must promote and expand business, and under current conditions
the City's vacancy rate was less than half of the average city. He stated that while there was room for
creativity in creating taxes, the fact is that the City's taxes on businesses was less than Los Angeles, and
that this was not considered in the study. He spoke of payroll tax to offset the increase in sales tax
revenues; 2) Concerned with how flexible the general plan was, and that some important things need to
be in the plan - like height limits, and S) Addressed the issue of the public opinion poll stating that the
ESRA Poll was taken as input by the Planning Commission but that no comment was made regarding
the results. He stated that ESRA received 400 responses from the 3,000 questionnaires sent out, and
that Cooper and Lybrand did a Poll of businesses which was used in the general plan as part of the
rationale for land use which went to 250 businesses with 50 responses. He then questioned why the City
did a Poll of businesses but not residences.
Councilman Wise stated that on behalf of business, 1% or $50 was not that easy to come up with in these
hard times, that many businessmen were barely keeping their businesses open, and that he believed they
pay a fair tax already.
Mr. Wilkerson stated he is also a small business owner and his business is also hurting, and that he was
not inferring that they should add a tax to businesses but in that particular study, that aspect was not
considered and should have been.
Councilman Wise pointed out that the plan proposed to generate 33% less traffic miles traveled than the
existing plan.
Liz Garnholz addressed Council thanking both Commissioner's Leon and Wilkerson for coming to the
meeting and for being so informative.
R.J. Switz addressed Council asking what data did the Council us in terms of getting resident's opinions
about the housing density, and stated he remained convinced that a person with data has power.
Without a Poll, what would the Council base their decision on. Further stating that as far as he knows,
all polls are against higher density, and that the streets will not tolerate more traffic.
City Council Minutes
3 March 10, 1992
Councilman Wise responded that the Poll was taken with specific instructions not to include R3, and this
Poll was not done. In his opinion, honorably and with integrity, he holds no credibility to this Poll.
Further stating he got his input from ten or eleven private meetings with Smokey Hollow landowners,
downtown business owners, land owners east of Sepulveda Boulevard, and residents.
Mayor ProTem Dannen left dais at 8:35 p.m. and returned at 8:36 p.m.
Mayor Jacobson asked if anyone else wished to address the Council; no one came forward.
City Attorney Dolley pointed out that Page 3 -6 was the first area of conflict of interest which would
require drawing of straws.
Mayor ProTem Dannen stated concerns with the wording under Single Family Residential which stated
that the minimum lot size was "5,000" square feet; Mr. Lightfoot suggested the wording "the minimum
lot size for new lots is 5,000 square feet."
Councilman West asked for clarification on whether he could participate in the discussion on this issue;
City Attorney Dolley responded that he could. Councilman West continued by pointing out that under
Multi- Family Residential, the last sentence stated "29 dwelling units per acre", and asked if this would
be a good time to change that; Mr. Lightfoot suggested dual criteria based on lot size.
Discussion ensued that above 15,000 square foot lot size you would have something less than 29 units
per acre, and you would have 22 for less than 15,000 square foot. 15,000 at 29 and above 15,000 at 22
should be the threshold.
MOVED by Mayor ProTem Dannen; SECONDED by Councilman West that in the Multi - Family
Residential any properties 15,000 square feet and below that the maximum permitted density would be
29 units per acre. For properties 15,000 square feet and more that the permitted density would be 22
units per acre. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0.
RECESS at 8:45 P.M.
RECONVENED at 9:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL all City Councilmembers present.
PAGE 8-Z && 3-5 Modification No. 28. 8-6:
Mr. Lightfoot explained the changes in No. 19 on Page 5.
Council consensus to accept changes on Page 8-2,84% 3-5 Modification No. 23, and 36.
City Attorney Dolled called Council's attention to Page 3 -6: Item 24 - Page 7, regarding FARs, that all
Councilmembers could participate if there was a general discussion, but in going into Community
Commercial that there would be conflicts of interest. Discussion followed concerning FARs.
City Attorney Dolley stated that at this point, the Council was getting into the subject of downtown, and
that he has determined that in order for them to proceed, the three members of the Council which have
conflicts of interest must draw straws between those who cannot participate so that three can participate
in the discussions and actions. He then proceeded to have them draw straws, and Mayor ProTem
Dannen was designated by the draw to discuss downtown.
City Attorney Dolley stated that they are on Page 3 -6 and speaking of Commercial Designation,
Neighborhood Commercial, and that this was designated by the Planning Commission to be Community
Commercial, Page 9 of the addendum Item Nos. 25 and 26.
Mr. Lightfoot explained ADT and FARs for the downtown area. Discussion followed.
Mayor ProTem Dannen suggested that downtown be written as 1.0 FAR and that it only creates 5 trips
per 1000 square feet, and it will be subject to the findings of the traffic model for the downtown area.
William Kessner, 524 E. Pine addressed Council stating he felt that they needed an index which they
could go to that stated what would happen if changes were made, and then asked if there was such an
index.
Mr. Lightfoot responded that everything that the Council was dealing with could be dealt with by using
a locally derived traffic model.
Discussion followed with Mayor ProTem Dannen asking if a paragraph could be written in the general
plan which stated that they were going to continue with the existing use designation and FARs pending
the development of a traffic model as far as Community Commercial.
After a lengthy discussion, Councilman Wise suggested that a 1.0 FAR be utilized downtown pending the
traffic model.
City Council Minutes
4 March 10, 1992
MOVED by Councilman Wise; SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Dannen that a 1.0 FAR be utilized
downtown pending the traffic model. MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE *10/2 -
AYES: Mayor Jacobson, Mayor ProTem Dannen, and Councilmember Wise. NOES: None.
ABSTENTIONS: Councilmembers Cruikshank and West.
Mayor ProTem Dannen then reminded the Council that the traffic model would cost the City $200,000
to $250,000; Mr. Lightfoot agreed.
Mayor Jacobson asked for two land use designations, one for downtown and one for neighborhood
commercial. Discussion followed.
Mr. Lightfoot suggested that Community Commercial be left the way it was, except to take out "adjacent
to residential neighborhoods" and replace it with "community serving area downtown." There could be
another designation called "Neighborhood Commercial" which permits the same uses for being located
in an adjacent to neighborhoods outside of downtown, and they could set a different FAR.
Council concurred, but it was requested that the downtown commercial area be defined on the map.
Mayor ProTem Dannen pointed out the exact streets on the map that comprise downtown commercial -
which were east of Concord and west of Eucalyptus.
MOVED by Mayor ProTem Dannen; SECONDED by Councilman Wise to approve the two designations,
and the defining of the downtown area and the community commercial. MOTION PASSED BY THE
FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE 8/0/2 - AYES: Mayor Jacobson, Mayor ProTem Dannen and
Councilmember Wise. NOES: None. ABSTENTIONS: Councilmembers Cruikshank and West.
Mr. Lightfoot clarified that Community Commercial is Downtown Commercial. The way it would read
for Downtown Commercial would be "Permits community serving retail, community service office and
residential on the floors above the ground floor." This designation is intended to provide a integrated
neighborhood - serving commercial area downtown. The maximum floor area ration allowed is 1.0.
Neighborhood would be the same, only the word Community would be changed to Neighborhood with
the FAR at .5 with residential overhead. Wording would be changed to "This designation is intended to
provide an integrated neighborhood - serving commercial area in and adjacent to the residential
neighborhoods." Council agreed.
Mayor Jacobson pointed out that on Center Street that is mainly R3 area, he asked if there was a reason
to call it Neighborhood Commercial. There are two small offices with apartments over the top,
everything else is apartments all the way up to Pine. Council agreed that the area in question could
remain R -3, that being the west side of Center Street, between Mariposa Avenue and Pine.
MOVED by Councilman Wise; SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Dannen to change that property to R3.
MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0.
Mr. Lightfoot asked if Council wanted to change the map to match the area that was now called
Downtown with Downtown Commercial; Council concurred.
ITEM 24:
Mr. Lightfoot questioned if Council wanted to eliminate ADTs totally and go with FARs in the whole
plan; Council consensus to continue discussion on this issue.
ITEM 25:
Council ooneemnus to add `Downtown Commercial, and to leave Neighborhood CommmvW.
Discussion then ensued regarding future meetings, with the following dates and times scheduled:
Thursday -March 12 at 6:30 p.m., Thursday -March 19 at 6:00 p.m., Monday -March 23 at 7:00 p.m., and
Tuesday -March 24 at 6:00 p.m.
PAGE 8-6 - MODIFICATION NO. 27:
Mayor ProTem Dannen abstained from discussions on General Commercial.
Councilman West expressed concerns that this did not include downtown, and suggested that they
approve Planning Commissions recommendation for the land in which Mayor ProTem Dannen had to
abstain, after the ADTs have been changed to FARs. The Crown Sterling Suites are currently C -2, with
an FAR of 1.5. It was developed in excess of that. Discussion followed.
MOVED by Councilman Wise; SECONDED by Councilman West to approve Crown Sterling Suites.
MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE 8/0/1- AYES: Mayor Jacobson, Councal-
memobers Crmkohank, Went and Wise. NOES: None. ABSTENTIONS: Mayor ProTem Darman.
City Council Minutes
5 March 10, 1992
Mayor Jacobson questioned if there were any drafts or anything related to non - conforming options that
they might have, and stated he felt that the non - conforming issue should be discussed in the next
meeting of March 12. Discussion followed concerning non-conformity.
City Manager Cano then directed Council's attention to a request for approval of a bid for one computer
system for the Library, and requested their approval of this as an urgency item which came up after the
posting of the agenda.
MOVED by Mayor ProTem Dannen; SECONDED by Councilman Wise to approve this item as an
urgency item arising after the posting of the agenda. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE
VOTE 5/0.
2. Reauest Annroval Of Bid from Computer Bav for one computer for the Public Libra
MOVED by Mayor ProTem Dannen; SECONDED by Councilwoman Cruikshank to approve bid from
Computer Bay for the purchase of one computer for the Public Library. MOTION PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (City Business On1v - 5 minute limit)
Bill Kessner addressed Council stating he believed that they could get used to computers that would do
the same job as a new one given the state of the economy; Mayor ProTem Dannen responded that buying
old computers looses money and old computers are not covered by any guarantee.
CLOSED SESSION
The Council moved into a closed session at 10:16 p.m. pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown
Act (Government Code Section 54950, et seq.) as announced by the City Attorney, for the purposes of
conferring with the City Attorney on potential and /or existing litigation and /or discussing personnel
matters as follows:
§ 54956.9(a) (City a party to pending litigation)
Lendsberg vs. City of El Segundo
Kilroy vs. City of El Segundo
§ 54956.9(b) (City might have significant exposure to litigation
One Matter.
Personnel
One Matter
ADJOURNED at 11:00 p.m. to March 12 at 6:30 p.m.
Lora Freeman,
Deputy City Clerk
City Council Minutes
6 March 10, 1992