CC RESOLUTION 4386RESOLUTION NO. 4386
A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING A PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 579
AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 02 -1, ADOPTING A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND AMENDING
THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE EL SEGUNDO GENERAL
PLAN.
The City Council of the City of El Segundo does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares that:
A. On December 1, 1992, the City of El Segundo Adopted a General Plan for
the years 1992 -2010;
B. On December 1, 1992, the City of El Segundo certified a Final
Environmental Impact Report and adopted a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the El Segundo General Plan pursuant to Ordinance
No. 1189;
C. The Circulation Element is a required element of the City's General Plan.
Government Code § 65302(b) requires that a Circulation Element consist
of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major
thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, any military airports and
ports, and other local public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the
General Plan's Land Use Element. To fulfill this goal, the Circulation
Element creates a plan for constructing arterial, residential, and collector
roads; intersections; traffic volume; and other, similar, matters which,
together, create a system capable of responding to urban growth within
the City's jurisdiction;
D. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15378(a)(1), the City Council
began environmental review in 1998 for updating the City's Circulation
Element. While the City determined that updating the Circulation Element
of the General Plan was desirable, California law does not impose a
particular time period for such updates;
E. These efforts continued in 2002 in order to provide a Circulation Element
reflecting the existing traffic conditions and making reasonable forecasts
of anticipated future traffic conditions in the City;
F. The proposed Circulation Element contains descriptions of the general
location and extent of proposed major thoroughfares, transportation
routes, terminals, military facilities, airports and other local public utilities.
1
All of these facilities are correlated with the Land Use Element of the
General Plan as required by Government Code § 65302(b);
G. The proposed Circulation Element includes modifications to the roadway
designations, physical changes to roadway configurations, identification of
specific intersection improvements, and revisions to the City's goals,
objectives and policies;
H. The City reviewed the project's environmental impacts under the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.,
"CEQA "), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of
Regulations § §15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines "), and the City's
Environmental Guidelines (City Council Resolution No. 3805, adopted
March 16, 1993);
During the preparation of the Circulation Element update, the public, civic
organizations, public agencies and other community groups were provided
the opportunity to participate in the preparation of the Circulation Element
update at scoping meetings held on June 5, 2002 and June 25, 2002; and
at City Council meetings held on September 17, 2002, November 19,
2002, February 4, 2003, August 5, 2003, and October 8, 2003 as required
by Government Code § 65351;
J. A duly noticed public hearing was scheduled before the Planning
Commission for August 12, 2004 to receive public comment regarding the
DEIR and Circulation Element update;
K. On August 12, 2004 the Commission opened a public hearing to receive
public testimony and other evidence regarding the application including,
without limitation, information provided to the Commission by City staff.
There were no public speakers at that time and the Planning Commission
continued the public hearing to August 26, 2004;
L. At the continued public hearing on August 26, 2004, the Commission
considered the evidence submitted to the record including, without
limitation, testimony from the public, the City's third -party consultant, and
City staff. The Commission adopted Resolution No. 2572 recommending
approval of the proposed project based upon the evidence presented to
the Commission at its August 12, 2004 and August 26, 2004 hearings
including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Community,
Economic and Development Services Department;
M. On September 7, 2004 the City Council conducted a public hearing to
receive public testimony and other evidence regarding the application
including, without limitation, information provided to the Commission by
City staff; and,
2
N. At the public hearing, the City Council considered the evidence submitted
to the record including, without limitation, testimony from the public, the
City's third -party consultant, and City staff. This Resolution is made based
upon the evidence presented to the City Council at its September 7, 2004
public hearing including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by
the Community, Economic and Development Services Department.
SECTION 2: Environmental Assessment. The City Council makes the following
environmental findings:
A. The purpose for amending the Circulation Element (the "Project') is to
refine and make appropriate adjustments to the programs, future traffic
forecasts, goals, policies, and objectives in order to address concerns
raised by the community about future traffic growth in the City;
B. CEQA Guidelines § 15378(a)(1) requires environmental review for
amendments to the City's General Plan;
C. An Initial Study and Notice of Preparation were prepared pursuant to the
requirements of CEQA. The Notice of Preparation of the DEIR was
circulated for public review between December 30, 2003 and January 29,
2004. A revised Notice of Preparation was prepared and circulated for
public review from May 7, 2004 to June 7, 2004. The Initial Study found
that the project could cause significant environmental impacts;
D. Accordingly, a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ( "DEIR ") was
prepared by Christopher A. Joseph and Associates under contract to the
City and under the supervision of the City Community, Economic and
Development Services Department and circulated for public review and
comment between June 25, 2004 and August 9, 2004. A Notice of
Completion was filed with the State Clearinghouse on June 25, 2004;
E. The City received ten comments on the DEIR from public agencies,
groups and individuals;
F. A Final Environmental Impact Report (`FEIR ") was prepared, which
includes the DEIR, comments regarding the DEIR and written responses
to such comments, a summary of changes to the DEIR, and all technical
appendices;
G. The FEIR for the proposed Project, entitled "El Segundo Circulation
Element Project Update Final Environmental Impact Report", prepared by
Christopher A. Joseph and Associates under contract to the City and
under the supervision of the City Community, Economic and Development
Services Department on June 25, 2004 (State Clearinghouse No.
3
2004011012), is incorporated by reference;
H. The City, acting as lead agency, has reviewed and edited as necessary
the Draft EIR and the Final EIR to reflect its own independent judgment to
the extent of its ability, including reliance on City technical personnel from
other departments as well as professional consultants retained by the City
in order to provide technical advice an assistance in evaluating
environmental impacts associated with the Project.
I. Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21082.1(c)(3), the City Council
independently reviewed and analyzed the FEIR. Based upon that review
and analysis, and recommendations made by the City's Planning Agency
as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2572, the City Council
finds the FEIR is an accurate and complete statement of the potential
environmental impacts resulting from the Project. The FEIR reflects the
City's independent judgment as lead agency;
J. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15091, any changes or alterations
required for the Project, or incorporated into the Project, which avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect are identified for
the FEIR. Any potential changes or alterations that may be made to the
proposed mitigation measures are addressed and analyzed in the FEIR;
K. The DEIR and FEIR were made available for public review and comment
in the time and manner prescribed by CEQA;
L. The FOR generally concluded that, with mitigation, the Project would not
have a significant, adverse effect on the environment. Those mitigation
measures are desirable and feasible;
M. The FEIR also identified three environmental impacts that cannot be
mitigated:
1. Traffic impacts at six City intersections;
2. Temporary construction related Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions;
and
3. Temporary construction related noise impacts. The temporary
construction impacts would arise from the construction of planned
roadway and intersection improvements proposed in the Circulation
Element;
N. Based upon a review of all relevant matters in the record, the City Council
finds that the proposed construction of planned roadway and intersection
improvements will improve the overall circulation system of the City and
M
reduce long -term air quality impacts. Therefore, the temporary
construction impacts are offset by the long -term benefits;
O. In accordance with § 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, the record on which
the City Council's findings are based is located at the Community,
Economic and Development Services Department, City of El Segundo,
350 Main Street, El Segundo, California 90245. The custodian of records
is the Director of Community, Economic and Development Services;
P. There is no evidence that the project will have the potential for an adverse
effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends,
because the project is in a built -out urban environment;
Q. The City reviewed the FEIR for the project and considered the public
record on the project, including, without limitation, the following:
1. Staff reports prepared by the Community, Economic and
Development Services Department and the DEIR and FEIR
prepared by Christopher A. Joseph & Associates for the City;
2. Staff presentations at public hearings and meetings;
3. All applicable regulations and codes;
4. Public comments, both written and oral, received and /or submitted
at or prior to the public hearings and meetings, supporting or
opposing the proposed project; and,
5. All related documents received and/or submitted at or before the
public hearings;
R. Because of the facts identified in this Resolution, specifically the creation
of significant unavoidable environmental impacts as described above, the
FEIR found that a Statement of Overriding Considerations would be
required in order for the project to be approved.
SECTION 3: General Plan. The proposed project conforms with the City's General
Plan as follows:
A. The proposed Circulation Element General Plan Amendment is consistent
with the 1992 General Plan, as amended, since it provides a set of goals,
objectives and policies to implement a traffic circulation system in the City
capable of supporting the urban development anticipated in the Land Use
Element of the General Plan;
B. The proposed Circulation Element would not create an internal
W
inconsistency within the General Plan; and,
C Generral pPlan, comprises and integrated and compatible h compatible tateme tl of
policies.
SECTION 4: Approvals.
A. The City Council adopts Findings of Facts and a Statement of Overriding
Considerations as set forth in attached Exhibit "A," which are incorporated
into this Resolution by reference;
B. In accordance with the requirements of Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a)
and 21081.6, the City Council adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) as set forth in attached Exhibit "B," which is incorporated
into this Resolution by reference. The City Council adopts each of the
mitigation measures expressly set forth in the MMRP as conditions of
approval of the proposed project;
C. The City Council certifies that FEIR SCH No. 2004011012, dated June 2004
for Environmental Assessment No. 579 and General Plan Amendment No.
02 -1 is adequate and was completed in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq.; and,
D. The City Council amends Chapter 4 of the El Segundo General Plan, entitled
"Circulation Element," in its entirety as set forth in attached "Exhibit C;' which is
incorporated by reference.
SECTION 5: Reliance on Record. Each and all of the findings and determinations in
this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and
written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and
determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City
Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in
the record as a whole.
SECTION 6: Limitations. The City Council's analysis and evaluation of the project is
based on the best information currently available. It is inevitable that in evaluating a
project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the project will not
exist. One of the major limitations on analysis of the project is the City Council's lack of
knowledge of future events. In all instances, best efforts have been made to form
accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are the limitations on the City's ability
to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national problems and issues. The City
must work within the political framework within which it exists and with the limitations
inherent in that framework.
G
SECTION 7: Summaries of Information. All summaries of information in the findings,
whi_ch precede articular fact from dany tsuchusummary eisdnot an i the dicationd The
ta
absence of any y p p
particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
SECTION 8: This Resolution will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent
resolution.
SECTION 9g: According to the El Segundo Municipal Code, a copy of this Resolution
will be mailed to any person requesting a copy.
SECTION This Resolution is the City Council's final decision and becomes effective
thirty (30) days from its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOMT1hjth d y of a ember 2004. S.
Kelly McDowe , May
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that
the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing
Resolution No. 4-Aft was duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and
signey the Councilbheld on he 7th day of Septemberr,, 2004, 1a d the same was so pa sed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: MCDOWEU, CAMS, BOULGAMES, BUSCH, JACOBSON
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Cindy ABSTAIN: NONE
• ! -
P: \Planning & Building Safety\Projects \576 - 599 \Ea -579
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 4386
Exhibit A
After receiving, reviewing, and considering all the information in the administrative
record for this matter, including, without limitation, the factual information and
conclusions set forth in this Resolution and its attachment, the City Council finds,
determines, and declares as follows:
I. FINDINGS REQUIRED BY CEQA.
Public Resources Code § 21081 and CEQA Guidelines § 15091 require the City, before
approving a project, to identify significant impacts of the project and, if significant
impacts are identified, make one or more of three allowable findings based upon
substantial evidence in the record for each significant impact:
A. The first allowable finding is that 'changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen
the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR" (CEQA
Guidelines § 15091(a)(1)).
B. The second allowable finding is that "such changes or alterations are
within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the
agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other
agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency" (CEQA Guidelines
§ 15091(a)(2)).
C. The third allowable finding is that "specific economic, social, or other
considerations make unfeasible the mitigation measures or Project alternatives
identified in the Final EIR" (CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3)).
A. Potential Impacts Found to be Insignificant by the Initial Study.
The Initial Study identified the following environmental effects as not potentially
significant. Accordingly, the City Council finds that the Initial Study, the FEIR, and the
record of proceedings in this matter do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to the areas listed
below.
1. Agricultural Resources
2. Mineral Resources.
3. Public Services
4. Recreation
1
B.
Although the Initial Study identified the following environmental effects as potentially
significant, the City Council finds that the Initial Study, the FEIR, and the record of
proceedings in this matter do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying
significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to the areas listed below.
1. Aesthetics.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The City of El Segundo is an urban environment.
Most of the City is built out with urban uses, with a small
portion of the developed area in parkland, recreational uses,
and open space, much of which is located along public utility
and railroad right -of -ways.
(2) The City does not contain any notable landforms or
natural areas that would be considered scenic resources or
would comprise scenic vistas.
(3) The Pacific Ocean is located along the western
boundary of the City. The Pacific Ocean touches the City
boundary at the site of the Chevron Oil Refinery. North of
the refinery, along the coast but not within the El Segundo
City limits, are the City of Los Angeles Hyperion Wastewater
Treatment Plant and the Department of Water and Power
Scattergood Generating Station. These facilities generally
work to obscure any type of scenic view of the Pacific Ocean
available from the City.
(4) No designated state scenic highways are located in
the City of El Segundo. No notable scenic resources are
present in the City.
(5) The conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from
one -way to two -way operation, the addition of roadways or
improvement of intersections would not substantially change
the visual character of areas within the City. The proposed
modifications to roadways resulting from implementation of
the Circulation Element roadway designations do not include
massive structures such as bridges, fly -over ramps or large
under- or overpasses that could potentially result in
substantial changes in the visual environment. While
development of an underpass may be required for the Park
Place extension, it would be located underground and would
not change the existing visual landscape. Impacts are
anticipated to be limited to additional traffic signals, roadway
markings or additional street lanes that would be consistent
with the visual character of existing roadways.
2
K
3.
b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to Aesthetics.
Air Quality.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) Implementation of the proposed project would not
have the potential to create odors. The proposed project
consists of reconfiguration of existing roadways and
intersection improvements in certain locations throughout the
City. The project would not generate additional traffic on
existing roadways. Only one new road would be created.
Specific air quality impacts associated with the construction
of this road would be addressed under the EIR being
prepared for the Plaza El Segundo development. The
proposed project does not include substantial odor
generating uses, such as industrial processes, landfills or
wastewater treatment plants.
b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to Air Quality.
Biological Resources.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The City is a highly urbanized area with only a small
portion of the City undeveloped. There are no known locally
designated natural communities or conservation plans in the
City. The proposed project would not conflict with the
provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plans.
b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council
of proceedings do not identify
identifying significant environm(
respect to Biological Resources.
finds that the FEIR and the record
or contain substantial evidence
!ntal effects of the Project with
4. Cultural Resources.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) Development of the proposed project will not disturb
any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries.
b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to Cultural Resources — Human Remains.
5. Geology and Soil.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The City is located within the seismically active
Southern California region and is subject to similar risks from
seismic activity as other communities in the region.
According to the City's General Plan, no known active or
potentially active faults are located within the City. The
proposed project includes the construction of a structure,
specifically the underpass for Park Place associated with its
extension to Sepulveda Boulevard. The only seismic effect
that could be associated with the proposed project would be
as a result of ground rupture and seismic shaking.
(2) The City is located in the vicinity of the San Andreas
Fault Zone, the Newport- Inglewood Fault Zone, the
Cucamonga Fault Zone, the Whittier - Elsinore Fault Zone,
and the San Jacinto Fault Zone.
(3) Roadways and intersection improvements associated
with the proposed project could be affected by ground
shaking as a result from seismic activity on these, as well as
other fault systems located in Southern California.
(4) The only structure associated with the proposed
project is the construction of the Park Place underpass.
Construction of this structure would not expose people or
structures to the adverse effects of seismic groundshaking
greater than those typically encountered in the Southern
California region. In addition, construction of this structure
would be accomplished in accordance with all applicable
building regulations.
(5) The proposed project would not involve use of
wastewater disposal systems. No impact is anticipated.
4
b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to Geology and Soils.
6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The proposed project would not involve the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
(2) The proposed project will not result in a release of
hazardous materials into the environment because it would
not involve the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials. Only one new road would be constructed under
this project. The road would connect Park Place to
Sepulveda Boulevard through the property located at the
northeast corner of Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans
Avenue. This road is not anticipated to be used for the
transport of hazardous materials.
(3) The proposed project would not involve the transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials and would therefore
not emit hazardous or acutely hazardous materials within a
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The only
new road proposed under this project would be constructed
on the property located at the northeast corner of the
intersection of Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue.
No schools are located within a quarter mile of this site.
(4) The City of El Segundo is located directly south of
LAX. The proposed project does not include the
construction of structures that would have the potential to
conflict with the existing airport land use. Any new streets
lights added to the City street system would be shielded and
would be aimed towards the ground. They would not
interfere with the operation of LAX. Compliance with the City
of El Segundo General Plan and any FAA requirements
would result in less than significant impacts from safety
hazards for people utilizing the roadways or intersections
included under the proposed project.
(5) There are no private airstrips located within the City of
El Segundo.
(6) The proposed project would be required to conform to
all applicable City of El Segundo emergency response
5
and /or emergency evacuation plans. The proposed project
would be required to comply with all applicable Fire
Department and Public Works Department regulations
pertaining to emergency access and evacuation during
construction.
(7) The City is an urbanized area and is not situated near
wildlands.
b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
7. Hydrology and Water Quality.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The proposed project does not propose any
groundwater wells or pumping activities. All water supplied
to any site requiring irrigation will be derived from the City's
existing water supply and infrastructure. Though the
proposed project may result in a slight increase in the
amount of impervious surface in the City through
construction of additional paved roadway and intersection
areas, it would not be substantial enough to interfere with
groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit
in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater
table level.
(2) The proposed project would not include any other
potential sources of runoff pollution that could substantially
degrade water quality, other than those discussed in the
preceding sections. No impact would result.
(3) The proposed project does not involve the
construction of any housing. According to the General Plan,
apart from coastal storm surges, the City is not prone to
flooding during 100 -year storm events.
(4) The City is not located within a 100 -year flood zone.
The facilities that would be built as part of the proposed
project do not include structures that would impede or
redirect flood flows that could occur as part of coastal storm
surges.
(5) There are no major dams located within the City or
upstream of the City that would expose people or structures
to risk of loss, injury or death as a result of flooding.
b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to Hydrology and Water Quality.
8. Land Use.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The proposed project would result in construction of
roadways in an existing street system and modification of
existing streets and intersections. New roadways would not
divide an established community.
(2) The City is a highly urbanized area with only a small
portion of the City undeveloped. There are no known locally
designated natural communities on the site or in the project
vicinity and there are no habitat or natural communities
conservation plans in effect in the City.
b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to land use.
9. Noise.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The City of El Segundo is located directly south of
LAX. However, the proposed project would not include
residences or employment locations that would result in
exposure of people to excessive noise levels from airport
operations.
(2) There are no private airstrips located in the City of El
Segundo. Additionally, the proposed project would not
provide places of employment or residence. Therefore, the
project would not expose persons to excessive noise levels
associated with a private airstrip.
7
b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to noise.
10. Population, Housing, and Employment.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The proposed project would not require the
acquisition of property containing housing. Therefore no
displacement of housing would occur and the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere would not be required.
(2) The proposed project would not require the
acquisition of property containing housing. Therefore no
displacement of people would occur and the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere would not be required.
b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to population and housing.
11. Transportation and Circulation.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) Because the proposed project only includes roadway
and intersection improvements, implementation of the
project would not have the potential to result in a change in
air traffic patterns at the Los Angeles International Airport or
any other airport in the area.
(2) The proposed project would modify the street system.
The proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause
an increase in hazards to a design feature, but would instead
change the street system to accommodate projected traffic
growth and minimize dangerous street conditions.
(3) The proposed project includes modification of the
street system. Design of roadway and intersection
modifications will be undertaken by the City's Public Works
Department and must comply with all Fire Department
requirements regarding emergency access.
0
(4) The proposed project includes the modification of the
street system. The proposed project would not result in the
need for parking.
(5) The proposed project would not conflict with adopted
goals and policies supporting alternative transportation. The
Bicycle Master Plan would not be affected by the proposed
project. Any development of the proposed project would be
required to adhere to applicable policies or programs
supporting alternative transportation.
b) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts
below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to transportation and circulation.
12. Utilities and Service Systems.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The proposed project would not involve the
development of any facilities that would generate
wastewater. Therefore, the project would not impact any
wastewater treatment requirements of the Los Angeles
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
(2) Wastewater conveyance and treatment in the project
area is under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles County
Sanitation Districts. The proposed project would not involve
the development of any facilities that would generate
wastewater and would not require or result in the
construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities.
(3) The City of El Segundo provides water service to the
entire City and projects that it has sufficient supplies
available to serve the City in the future. Implementation of
the proposed project could result in the need for water only
to irrigate landscaping. This additional demand would be
minimal.
(4) The proposed project would not involve developing
any facilities that would generate wastewater. Therefore, the
proposed project would not affect the capacity of any waste
water treatment provider.
(5) Solid waste generated in the City of El Segundo is
disposed in several landfills in Los Angeles County. The
proposed project would not result in a consistent and
9
substantial generation of solid waste. Construction debris
and a potential increase in littering might result from
modifications proposed by the project.
(6) Except for the disposal of construction debris that
might result from modifications to existing roadways and
potential littering, the proposed project would not involve
solid waste disposal Any disposal would comply with federal,
state and local statues and regulations. No impact would
occur.
b) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts
below a level of significance.
c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record
of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with
respect to utilities and service systems.
C.
The City Council finds that although the following environmental effects were
identified as potentially significant in the FEIR, changes or alterations within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and not the City have been
adopted by such other agencies or can and should be adopted by such other agency to
avoid or lessen the potential significant environmental effects listed below to a level of
insignificance.
1. Aesthetics.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The proposed changes in roadway designations and the
construction of the new roadway system identified as part of
the El Segundo Circulation Element Update would not
produce a significant lighting impact.
(2) Under the proposed Circulation Element Update,
modifications to 14 intersections are identified to
accommodate growth in future traffic levels in the City.
Implementation of these intersection improvements would
have the potential to generate increased lighting levels that
could impact light sensitive receptors. These impacts could
occur at up to four intersections that are located near
residential areas by increasing the amount of street lights
and traffic signals in the immediate area. These
intersections include:
• Intersection #12 — Aviation Boulevard/El Segundo
Boulevard (Hollyglen)
10
b)
C)
d)
• Intersection #13 — Aviation Boulevard /Utah Avenue
(Hollyglen)
• Intersection #25 — Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans
Avenue (Manhattan Beach)
Intersection #50 — El Segundo Boulevard /Isis Avenue
(Del Aire and Hollyglen)
(3) The Bright Horizons Day Care would not be impacted by
increased night lighting as it is a daytime use.
Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be
prepared for any intersection improvement project proposed
at any of the following four intersections: Aviation
Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard; Aviation Boulevard /Utah
Avenue; Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue; El
Segundo Boulevard /Isis Avenue; to identify potential impacts
on sensitive receptors that could result from additional
lighting. The subsequent environmental documentation
must address the following:
Before constructing specific intersection improvements,
impacts associated with increased night lighting in the
area must be examined in light of this Program EIR to
determine whether a new Initial Study would be required
to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative
Declaration. This examination must address the potential
of the subsequent activity to increase ambient lighting
levels beyond the threshold identified in the Program
EIR. The analysis must incorporate the mitigation
measures identified below as appropriate.
Mitigation:
(1) Street lights must be designed and located to
minimize spill over of light into residential areas (C -1).
(2) New lighting sources must be shielded to direct light
downward and not toward the sky to minimize atmospheric
light pollution (C -2).
Finding:
(1) Impacts of the conversion of Nash and Douglas
Streets from one -way to two -way operations and intersection
improvements, with the exception of the four listed above,
would be less than significant.
11
(2) Impacts of the improvements at the four intersections
identified above would be determined by the subsequent
environmental documentation.
(3) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project
with respect to Aesthetics.
2. Air Quality.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) Minimal or no construction emissions would be
expected to result from the conversion of Nash and Douglas
Streets from one -way to two -way, as this activity would occur
within the existing right -of -way and would involve only
restriping of the existing roadway and possible installation of
new street lighting or traffic signal poles (i.e., no major
grading or construction activity required), or from the deletion
of roadways from the Circulation Element network. Impacts
from construction emissions associated with these
components of the proposed Circulation Element Update
would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds and would be less
than significant.
(2) The proposed Circulation Element Update would not
result in any increase in traffic utilizing the City's Circulation
Element roadway network. Therefore, no additional regional
emissions would occur as a result of the proposed
Circulation Element Update and no impacts related to
regional air emissions would occur.
(3) One -hour CO concentrations would range from
approximately 6.4 ppm to 10.3 ppm at worst -case sidewalk
receptors. Eight -hour CO concentrations are anticipated to
range from approximately 4.4 ppm to 7.1 ppm. The State
one- and eight -hour standards of 20.0 ppm and 9.0 ppm,
respectively, would not be exceeded at worst -case sidewalk
receptor locations at the study intersections. Thus, a less
than significant impact is anticipated at the study
intersections. In addition, because the intersections with the
highest levels of traffic and congestion (Imperial /Sepulveda
and Aviation /Rosecrans) would not exceed the State
standard, other intersections in the City would also not
exceed the standard. Impacts related to CO concentrations
would be less than significant.
(4) The proposed Circulation Element Update would
accommodate future traffic levels without resulting in
12
violations of state standards for CO. Therefore the proposed
Circulation Element Update would be consistent with the
2003 AQMP.
(5) Impacts of the proposed Circulation Element Update
with respect to regional emissions and localized CO
concentrations would be less than significant.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
• No subsequent environmental documentation is required
for conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -
way to two -way operation.
c) Mitigation:
(1) Because of the limited construction activity that would
be associated with the conversion of Nash and Douglas
Streets from one -way to two -way operation, no mitigation
measures are required for this component of the proposed
Circulation Element Update
d) Finding:
(1) Construction impacts associated with the conversion
of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way
operation would be less than significant.
(2) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project
with respect to Air Quality.
3. Biological Resources.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) No impacts to biological resources would occur with
the changes in roadway designations as they would not
result in a physical change to the existing environment.
(2) The changes to and along Nash Street and Douglas
Street would not impact biological resources. The entire
area adjacent to these streets is completely developed and
does not contain any sensitive biological resources. No
sensitive or endangered plant or animal species, including
the El Segundo Blue Butterfly, exist in this area, no
riparian /wetland habitat is present, and the area is not known
to be a wildlife corridor. Therefore, no biological resource
impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of the roadway
changes and modifications along Nash Street and Douglas
Street.
13
(3) The development of a roadway network on the
Sepulveda /Rosecrans site has the potential to significantly
impact biological resources. This area may contain
wetlands /riparian habitat or vernal pools that could
potentially be affected by construction of new roadways. In
addition, this site may include other species in areas that
have not been disturbed.
(4) Most of the intersections where the identified
intersection improvements would be implemented are
located in areas that are completely developed and contain
no biological resources. However, intersection #25
(Sepulveda/ Rosecrans) is located in an area that has or
may have biological resources. Any modifications to this
intersection would have a potentially significant impact.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be
prepared for any proposed construction of a new roadway
system on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and any proposed
improvements to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans
Avenue intersection to identify potential biological resources
impacts. Before constructing new roadways on the
Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and any proposed improvements
to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection,
impacts associated with biological resources must be
examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether
a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading
to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent
environmental documentation must address the following:
• A general biological assessment must be conducted to
determine the presence /absence of sensitive biological
resources and wetlands. If sensitive biological resources
are identified, measures must be identified to reduce
impacts to these resources to less than significant levels.
c) Mitigation:
(a) Impacts of the conversion of Nash and Douglas
Streets from one -way to two -way operations and the other
components of the Circulation Element Update, except as
identified above, would be less than significant and no
mitigation measures are required.
d) Finding:
(a) Impacts of the conversion of Nash and Douglas
Streets from one -way to two -way operations and the other
14
components of the Circulation Element Update, except as
identified above, would be less than significant.
(b) Impacts of the improvements at the Sepulveda
Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection and the roadway
network on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site would be
determined by the subsequent environmental
documentation.
(c) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project
with respect to Biological Resources.
4. Cultural Resources.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) No impacts to historic, archaeological, or
paleontological resources are anticipated as a result of
converting Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -
way operation as this activity would take place within the
existing right -of -way.
(2) The development of a roadway network on the
Sepulveda /Rosecrans site could impact subsurface
archaeological resources as the site is relatively
undeveloped. Archaeological resource 19- 186856 is located
on the northeastern portion of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site
and could be affected by the new roadway network. In
addition, it is unknown whether paleontological resources
exist on this site. Construction of the remainder of the north -
south connection between Hughes Way and El Segundo
Boulevard could also affect archaeological and /or
paleontological resources. This would be a potentially
significant impact.
(3) No historic resources have been identified and
therefore, no impacts to historic resources are anticipated.
(4) Implementation of the identified intersection
improvements at the 14 identified intersections could
potentially impact archaeological resources located near
these intersections. At all of the intersections requiring the
implementation of traffic mitigation measures, the potential
exists to encounter and disturb previously unknown,
subsurface cultural resources. These impacts would be
potentially significant.
(5) At all of the intersections requiring the implementation
of intersection improvements, the potential exists to
15
encounter and disturb previously unknown, subsurface
paleontological resources. These impacts would be
potentially significant.
(6) No historic resources have been identified and
therefore, no impacts to historic resources are anticipated.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be
prepared for any proposed project on the
Sepulveda /Rosecrans site to identify potential impacts to
cultural resources (archaeological, paleontological or
historic). Impacts to cultural resources must be examined in
light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial
Study would be required to be prepared leading either to an
EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental
documentation must address the following and must
incorporate mitigation measures identified below as
appropriate:
• A records search and /or Phase I Archaeological Survey
must be conducted by a qualified archaeologist before
the implementation of physical changes to the existing
roadway network, involving the construction of new
roadways. If the survey identifies resources within the
construction area of the roadway, follow on studies must
be conducted in accordance with the recommendations
of the records search before commencement of
construction.
c) Mitigation:
(a) In the event that archaeological or paleontological
resources are encountered during the course of grading or
construction, all development must temporarily cease in
these areas until the resources are properly assessed and
subsequent recommendations are determined by a qualified
archaeologist (F -1).
d) Finding:
(a) Impacts of the conversion of Nash and Douglas
Streets from one -way to two -way operations would be less
than significant. No mitigation measures are required.
(b) With implementation of the listed mitigation measure,
impacts to cultural resources from intersection improvements
would be less than significant.
16
(c) Impacts from the construction of the new roadway on
the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site would be determined by the
subsequent environmental documentation.
(d) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project
with respect to cultural resources.
5. Geology and Soil.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from
one -way to two -way operation would occur within the
existing right -of -way. No removal and compaction of fill
material or grading would occur with the implementation of
this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update.
(2) Removal of existing asphalt, removal and compaction
of fill material, grading of areas for new roadway surfaces,
etc. would expose soils to localized erosion during periods of
high winds and heavy precipitation. Control of waterborne
soil erosion during construction is governed by existing
regulations. Windborne erosion during construction would
constitute a significant impact.
(3) None of the proposed roadway network, including the
conversion of Nash Street and Douglas Street, and the
Sepulveda /Rosecrans site, is located in the high risk area for
liquefaction. In addition, none of the intersections requiring
the implementation of traffic mitigation measures are located
in this high risk area.
(4) The roadway network that would be modified and the
14 intersections where improvements have been identified
are not at risk from landslides.
(5) Both Nash Street and Douglas Street as well as 9 of
the 14 intersections where improvements have been
identified are located within soil types that have a high
shrink/swell potential. However, because the conversion of
Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way
operation would consist of restriping and minor construction
activities within the existing right -of -way, this component of
the proposed Circulation Element Update would have less
than significant impacts with respect to expansive soils.
(6) Depending upon the configuration and specific
location of the new roads proposed for the
Sepulveda /Rosecrans site, and the location of specific
17
intersection proposed for modification, they may be located
on expansive soils. Roads and intersections could be
damaged by the shrinking and swelling of soils if constructed
on expansive soils, which would be a significant impact.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be
prepared for any new roadway construction or intersection
improvement project located within areas with expansive soil
hazards, as listed above. The subsequent environmental
documentation must address the following:
• Before constructing new roadways or specific intersection
improvements, impacts associated with expansive soil
hazards must be examined in light of this Program EIR to
determine whether a new Initial Study would be required
to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative
Declaration. The analysis must include a comprehensive
geotechnical investigation which must be submitted as
part of the design process for individual portions of the
proposed Circulation Element Update and must also
incorporate the mitigation measures identified below, as
appropriate.
c) Mitigation
(1) The following mitigation measures must be
incorporated as appropriate for intersections and roadways
located within areas with expansive soil hazards, as listed
above. Mitigation measure G -3 must apply to all
construction activities associated with the proposed
Circulation Element Update to address wind -borne erosion
impacts. Regulatory requirements to address water - related
erosion impacts are contained in Section IV.H, Hydrology
and Water Quality.
• Specific design recommendations presented in a
comprehensive geotechnical report, discussed above
under Subsequent Environmental Documentation, must
be incorporated into the final design and approved by the
City Engineer and City Council prior to construction (G-
1).
• Specifications for site grading must be subject to
approval by the City Engineer (G -2).
• Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved
surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per hour (mph) (G -3).
18
d) Finding:
(1) Impacts associated with the conversion of Nash and
Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation would
be less than significant. No mitigation measures are
required.
(2) Impacts at the nine identified intersections and the
new roadway system on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site with
respect to expansive soil would be determined by the
subsequent environmental documentation.
(3) With implementation of Mitigation Measure G -3,
impacts related to wind -borne erosion would be less than
significant.
(4) Impacts from landslides, and liquefaction at the
intersections with identified improvements and the new
roadway system on the Sepulveda/ Rosecrans site would be
less than significant.
(5) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project
with respect to geology and soils.
6. Hydrology and Water Quality.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) Conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -
way to two -way operation would take place within the
existing right of way and would not involve major
construction activity. Impacts related to water quality during
construction for this component of the proposed Circulation
Element Update would be less than significant.
(2) Construction activities associated with implementation
of the proposed Circulation Element Update would likely
involve clearing and grading of one or more acres (not
including the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from
one -way to two -way operations), a General Construction
Activity Storm Water Permit must be obtained from the State
Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) prior to the start
of construction. The NPDES requires that a notice of Intent
(NOI) be filed with the SWRCB. By filing an NO[, the
applicant agrees to the conditions outlined in the General
Permit. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) identifies which best management practices
(BMPs) will be implemented such as sandbag barriers, dust
controls, employee training, and general good housekeeping
19
practices. With the implementation of the BMPs, as required
under existing regulations, short-term water quality impacts
would be less than significant.
(3) If not properly designed and constructed, the
proposed Circulation Element Update could increase the
rate of urban pollutant introduction into storm water runoff.
In order to prevent these potential impacts, the project will be
required to be designed in compliance with 1) Section 402
(p) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, or Clean
Water Act (CWA); 2) Order No. 01 -182 of the Regional
Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, which
regulates the issuance of waste discharge requirements to
Los Angeles County and Cities tributary to the County under
NPDES Permit No. CA0061654; and 3) the County of Los
Angeles Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan
(SUSWMP).
(4) In compliance with the SUSWMP requirements,
modifications to intersections and roadways associated with
the implementation of the proposed Circulation Element
Update would be required to provide for the
treatment/filtration of on -site storm water runoff, before it
enters the public storm water conveyance system, in order to
minimize the introduction of pollutants of concern. In
meeting this specific requirement (i.e., minimization of the
pollutants of concern), implementation activities under the
proposed Circulation Element Update will incorporate a BMP
or combination of BMPs best suited to maximize the
reduction of pollutant loadings. Applicable BMPs will be
selected from those approved sources identified in the
County of Los Angeles Standard Urban Storm Water
Mitigation Plan (SUSWMP). As required by the SUSWMP,
the implemented system must remove 85 percent of such
"first flush" storm water pollutants as hydrocarbon
compounds (i.e., automotive oils, lubricants and other fluids)
deposited, as a matter of course, along the proposed streets.
With compliance with the existing regulatory SUSWMP
requirements, the proposed Circulation Element Update's
operational impacts on storm water quality would be less
than significant.
(5) New roads would be constructed and some existing
intersections could be modified in order to accommodate
future traffic growth. This would increase the amount of
impermeable surfaces within the City and thereby increase
the amount of storm water entering the drainage system. If
the existing or future /planned storm drains cannot
accommodate the increase in storm water flow, flooding
We
would occur on roadway segments and in intersections.
Additionally, during the widening of existing roadways, storm
drains currently in place may be impacted by construction
activities or need to be relocated in order to accommodate
the roadway modifications. The proposed conversion of
Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way
operations would take place within the existing right -of -way
and would not increase storm water runoff.
(6) The areas of the City where physical roadway
changes are proposed and intersections improvements have
been identified are not at risk of impact from tsunamis due to
their distance from the Pacific Ocean and any large bodies
of water. Therefore, no impacts from tsunamis on the new
roadway network and intersection improvements would
occu r.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be
prepared for any proposed roadway construction or
intersection improvement project at any of the 14
intersections listed below to identify potential impacts on the
storm drain system. Before construction of specific roadway
or intersection improvements, impacts to the storm drain
system must be examined in light of this Program EIR to
determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to
be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative
Declaration:
• The City must prepare a master drainage plan for any
area of the City affected by implementation of the
proposed Circulation Element Update. This plan must
include detailed hydrology /hydraulic calculations and
drainage improvements, showing quantitatively how the
project that implements the proposed Circulation Element
Update would eliminate the potential for downstream
flooding due to increased storm water runoff.
• The City must design a conveyance and detainment
system to meet the LACDPW limits on storm drains that
would convey the discharge from the new and modified
roadways and intersections.
c) Mitigation:
(a) No specific mitigation measures related to drainage
systems have been identified at this time. The subsequent
environmental documentation described above may identify
21
mitigation measures pertinent to a specific roadway or
intersection improvement project.
d) Finding:
(a) Impacts associated with conversion of Nash and
Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation would
be less than significant. No mitigation measures are
required.
(b) Impacts to storm water drainage from the construction
of the roadway system on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and
identified intersection improvements would be determined by
the subsequent environmental documentation.
(c) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project
with respect to hydrology and water quality.
7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) There are several contaminated sites located within
the boundaries of the City of El Segundo. These sites tend
to be concentrated in the industrial and commercial areas of
the City due to the nature of the contamination. These lists
continually change as some sites are cleaned up and others
are identified and it is possible that they could be identified
within residential areas. All of the proposed physical
changes in the roadway network would be located on or near
properties with known contaminated sites. Depending upon
the nature of the individual sites and the extent of roadwork
required, workers could be exposed to these hazardous
substances. This would be a potentially significant impact.
(2) Intersections where traffic improvements have been
identified may also be located on or adjacent to
contaminated sites. Implementation of the traffic mitigation
measures may also expose construction workers and
adjacent bystanders to the site contamination. This would
be a potentially significant impact.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be
prepared for any proposed intersection improvements or
construction of new roadways to identify potential impacts
that could result from exposure to contaminated sites.
Impacts associated with contaminated sites must be
22
examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether
a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading
to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent
environmental documentation must address the following:
A Phase One Environmental Site Assessment must be
conducted for any of the proposed roadway and
intersection modifications to identify potentially
contaminated sites. If contaminated sites are identified
within the boundaries of the project site, appropriate
measures must be taken to protect the well -being of the
construction workers and the surrounding population.
Investigative and remedial activities undertaken in
accordance with this requirement must be undertaken
under the oversight and to the satisfaction of the
cognizant regulatory agency(ies) including but not be
limited to: Department of Toxic Substances Control,
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment,
Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles
Region and /or South Coast Air Quality Management
District.
c) Mitigation:
(1) No specific mitigation measures have been identified
at this time. The subsequent environmental documentation
described above would identify the measures required to
address any conditions related to contamination or
hazardous materials that may be encountered by future
roadway or intersection improvements.
d) Finding:
(1) Impacts associated with the conversion of Nash and
Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation would
be less than significant. No mitigation measures are
required.
(2) Impacts from the implementation of the intersection
improvements and the new roadway construction would be
determined by the subsequent environmental
documentation.
(3) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project
with respect to hazards and hazardous materials.
23
8. Land Use.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) With the Circulation Element Update, there would be
no change in the existing land uses throughout the City of El
Segundo. The Circulation Element Update would be
implemented in order to accommodate the existing /future
land uses and anticipated traffic levels. No impact to land
use compatibility would occur.
(2) The proposed Circulation Element Update would not
conflict with any of the applicable policies of the El Segundo
General Plan (Economic Development Element, Circulation
Element, Air Quality Element, Noise Element, and the Public
Safety Element) or Southern California Association of
Government's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide.
Therefore, no impacts with plan consistency are anticipated
as a result of the proposed Circulation Element Update.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) No subsequent environmental documentation is
required.
c) Mitigation:
(1) Because no significant impacts related to land use
have been identified, no mitigation measures are required.
d) Finding:
(1) Land use compatibility impacts associated with the
proposed Circulation Element Update would be less than
significant. The proposed Circulation Element Update would
be consistent with adopted plans and policies set forth in the
El Segundo General Plan and Regional Comprehensive
Plan and Guide.
(2) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project
with respect to land use.
9. Noise.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) Deletion of roadways from the Circulation Element
roadway network would have no construction noise impacts
as no construction activity would be associated with this
component of the proposed Circulation Element Update.
24
(2) Conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -
way to two -way operation would involve restriping and
reconfiguration within the existing right -of -way to provide for
the movement of two -way traffic at existing intersections on
these streets and would involve minimal construction activity.
Construction noise impacts of this component of the
proposed Circulation Element Update would be less than
significant.
(3) The increase in projected traffic noise levels on the
proposed Circulation Element Update roadway system
would be less than audible (i.e., less than 3 dBA) on six of
the seven roadway segments. The largest increase, 3.5
dBA, would occur on the segment of Aviation Boulevard
located south of Imperial Highway. However, this increase
would be less than the significance threshold of 5 dBA.
Impacts related to vehicular noise sources resulting from
implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update
would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) No subsequent environmental documentation is
required for conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from
one -way to two -way operation.
c) Mitigation:
(1) Construction contracts must specify that all
construction equipment must be equipped with properly
working mufflers and other applicable noise attenuation
devices (K -1).
(2) All property owners located within 400 feet of the
construction site must be sent a notice regarding the
construction schedule of the proposed project. All notices
must indicate the dates and duration of construction
activities, as well as provide a telephone number where
residents can inquire about the construction process and
register complaints (K -2).
(3) A "noise disturbance coordinator' position must be
established for the project. The disturbance coordinator is
responsible for responding to any local complaints about
construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would
determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too
early, bad mufflers, etc.) and would be required to implement
reasonable measures such that the complaint is resolved.
All notices that are sent to the property owners within 400
25
feet of the construction site must list the telephone number
for the disturbance coordinator (K -3).
(4) As stated in the El Segundo Municipal Code,
construction is restricted to the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 6:00
P.M. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at anytime
on Sunday or a Federal holiday (K -4).
d) Finding:
(1) Construction noise impacts from conversion of Nash
and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation
would be less than significant.
(2) Operational traffic noise impacts would be less than
significant.
(3) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project
with respect to noise.
10. Population. Housing, and Employment.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) No housing would be constructed as part of this
project and no permanent employment opportunities would
be created.
(2) Implementation of the proposed Circulation Element
Update would result in increased temporary employment
opportunities in the construction field during the
modifications of the existing roadways and intersections and
construction of a new roadway network on the
Sepulveda /Rosecrans site. Employment patterns of
construction workers in Southern California are such that it is
not likely that they would relocate their households as a
consequence of the construction employment associated
with the proposed Circulation Element Update. Therefore,
impacts to employment in the region would be less than
significant.
(3) There would be no permanent employment
associated with the proposed Circulation Element Update.
As no permanent employment opportunities are associated
with the implementation of the proposed Circulation Element
Update, no demand for housing or increase in permanent
population is expected. Therefore, no impacts to housing or
population growth would be anticipated.
26
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) No subsequent environmental documentation is
required.
c) Mitigation:
(1) As no significant impacts on population, housing, and
employment have been identified, no mitigation measures
are required.
d) Finding:
(1) No significant impacts were identified and no
mitigation measures were required. No impact is anticipated
to employment or population growth as a result of
implementing the proposed Circulation Element Update.
(2) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying significant environmental effects of the Project
with respect to population, housing, and employment.
D. Significant Unavoidable Effects that Cannot Be Mitigated to a Level
of Insignificance.
The City Council finds that in response to each adverse impact identified below,
changes or alterations have been required or incorporated in the Project, which
lessen the significant adverse environmental impact. However, these impacts
cannot be totally avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance if the Project is
implemented.
Air Quality.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) A prototypical construction scenario for intersection
improvements to implement the proposed Circulation
Element Update would involve the construction of up to three
intersection improvements at any given time. Estimated
daily construction emissions for this scenario would exceed
the SCAQMD threshold for NOx emissions. Accordingly,
NOx emissions would have a significant environmental
impact. Emissions of other pollutants would be below the
SCAQMD thresholds and less than significant impacts would
occur.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be
prepared for any roadway or intersection improvement
project identified in the proposed Circulation Element Update
27
to identify emissions associated with construction of that
specific roadway or intersection improvement. The
subsequent environmental documentation must address the
following:
Before constructing specific roadway or intersection
improvements, impacts associated with temporary
construction related emissions must be examined in light
of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial
Study would be required to be prepared leading to either
an EIR or Negative Declaration. This examination must
provide quantified estimates of construction related
emissions based upon the specific site, schedule and
construction equipment utilization characteristics of the
proposed roadway or intersection improvement and
compare the estimated emissions to the SCAQMD
thresholds for construction emissions. The analysis must
incorporate the mitigation measures identified below as
appropriate, along with any other mitigation measures
identified by the project- specific analysis.
c) Mitigation:
(1) The following is a list of feasible control measures that
the SCAQMD recommends for construction emissions of
PM10. These mitigation measures apply to all construction
activities associated with implementation of the proposed
Circulation Element Update, including construction of new
roadways on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and construction
of identified intersection improvements at 14 intersections.
Fugitive Dust, PM10
(a) Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403,
including, but not limited to, the following:
• The construction area and vicinity (500 -foot
radius) must be swept (preferably with water
sweepers) and watered at least twice daily. Site
wetting must occur often enough to maintain a 10
percent surface soil moisture content throughout
all earth - moving activities (D -1).
• All unpaved roads, parking and staging areas
must be watered at least once every two hours of
active operations (D -2).
• Site access points must be swept/washed within
thirty minutes of visible dirt deposition (D -3).
28
• On -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or rusty material
must be covered or watered at least twice daily (D-
4).
• All haul trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose
materials must either be covered or maintain two
feet of freeboard (D -5).
• All haul trucks must have a capacity of no less
than twelve and three - quarter (12.75) cubic yards
(D -6).
• At least 80 percent of all inactive disturbed surface
areas must be watered on a daily basis when
there is evidence of wind - driven fugitive dust (D-
7).
• Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be
suspended when winds exceed 25 mph (D -8).
• Traffic speeds on unpaved roads must be limited
to 15 miles per hour (D -9).
• Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be
suspended during first and second stage smog
alerts (D -10).
• Haul trucks must be staged in non - residential
areas (D -11).
• Haul truck routes must be planned to avoid
residential areas, schools, and parks (D -12).
NOx Emissions
o Equipment must be turned off when not in use for
more than 5 minutes (D -13).
d) Finding: The City finds that incorporation of such changes or
alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City.
The City finds that although the temporary construction related air
quality NOx impact will remain significant and unavoidable, no
feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen the
impact below a level of significance. The Project benefits set forth
in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh this
significant unavoidable impact.
29
2. Noise.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) Temporary construction noise impacts associated
with proposed intersection improvements associated with
implementation of the proposed Circulation Element update
would be expected to vary throughout the construction
period. Projected noise levels resulting from the
employment of construction equipment during various
phases of the construction cycle would result in generation
of noise levels in excess of 65 dBA and would have the
potential to exceed existing ambient noise levels at sensitive
receptors by greater than 5 dBA. These resulting noise
levels during construction activity could be experienced in
the vicinity of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda site and at the
following intersections where identified traffic mitigation
measures could be constructed near residential areas.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be
prepared for roadway improvements proposed to be
constructed on the Sepulveda / Rosecrans site and
intersection improvements proposed to be constructed at the
intersections located adjacent to residential areas, as listed
in the DER. The subsequent environmental documentation
must address the following:
• A project - specific construction noise analysis must be
prepared that calculates, based on project- specific
parameters and identification of the site - specific sensitive
receptors that could be affected by construction activities,
the noise levels that would be experienced at sensitive
receptors located adjacent to that site. If noise levels
resulting from construction activity would result in
temporary construction noise levels that exceed 65 dBA
at a sensitive receptor, or cause an incremental increase
of 5 dBA over the existing ambient sound level, if the
existing ambient sound level at the sensitive receptor
location is 65 dBA or more, then the study must identify
feasible mitigation measures to be applied to that
roadway or intersection improvement project from the list
of mitigation measures K -1 through K -4 below.
c) Mitigation:
(1) Construction contracts must specify that all
construction equipment is equipped with properly working
30
3.
mufflers and other applicable noise attenuation devices (K-
1).
(2) All property owners located within 400 feet of the
construction site must be sent a notice regarding the
construction schedule of the proposed project. All notices
must indicate the dates and duration of construction
activities, as well as provide a telephone number where
residents can inquire about the construction process and
register complaints (K -2).
(3) A "noise disturbance coordinator" position must be
established for the project. The disturbance coordinator is
responsible for responding to any local complaints about
construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would
determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too
early, bad mufflers, etc.) and would be required to implement
reasonable measures such that the complaint is resolved.
All notices that are sent to the property owners within 400
feet of the construction site must list the telephone number
for the disturbance coordinator (K -3).
(4) As stated in the El Segundo Municipal Code,
construction is restricted to the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 6:00
P.M. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at anytime
on Sunday or a Federal holiday (K -4).
d) Finding:
(1) Temporary construction noise impacts would be
significant and unavoidable for planned improvements,
except the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from
one -way to two -way operation.
(2) The City finds that incorporation of such changes or
alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the
City. The City finds that although the temporary construction
related noise impacts will remain significant and
unavoidable, no feasible mitigation measures are available
to avoid or lessen the impact below a level of significance.
The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact.
Transportation and Circulation.
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) Future traffic levels generated as a result of land uses
within the City were estimated for year 2025 based on the
existing General Plan land use and zoning designations.
31
The analysis used the SCAG regional traffic model as the
basis for factoring in traffic growth from outside the City.
(2) An analysis was conducted to determine the
capability of the roadway system set forth in the adopted
Circulation Element to accommodate future traffic projected
to occur under the No Land Use Change scenario. In the
absence of the proposed Circulation Element Update, it
would be reasonably foreseeable that the City's roadway
system would continue to develop in accordance with the
designations and policies set forth in the adopted Circulation
Element. An additional analysis was conducted to determine
the capability of the roadway system that would result from
the proposed Circulation Element Update to accommodate
future traffic, reflecting the modifications to the existing
Circulation Element roadway system and policies that are
contained in the proposed Circulation Element Update.
(3) The ICU and LOS values for the "Without Project" and
'With Project" scenarios were compared against the City's
threshold of significance to determine locations where
significant impacts would occur. With respect to the
proposed Circulation Element Update, an "impact"
represents a location where the future growth in traffic would
exceed the City's level of service standard, in spite of
implementing all feasible improvements at the intersection.
A total of six intersections would be unable to accommodate
year 2025 traffic in at an acceptable LOS D or better in the
a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour or both, after implementation
of all feasible intersection improvements. The remaining 49
study intersections would not exceed the level of service
standard under future conditions and would not be
significantly impacted. Implementation of the proposed
Circulation Element Update would improve the ICU value at
21 intersections in the a.m. peak hour and 21 intersections in
the p.m. peak hour, which would constitute a beneficial
impact of the proposed Circulation Element Update.
(4) Analysis of freeway segments or designated
intersections would not be required under the Los Angeles
County Congestion Management Program (CMP), based
upon trip generation. No additional traffic beyond that
already anticipated in the El Segundo General Plan and
SCAG regional model would be expected to utilize
Sepulveda Boulevard (State Route 1). Thus, implementation
of the proposed Circulation Element Update would not
impact Sepulveda Boulevard and could potentially have
beneficial effects with regard to future traffic levels that
would use that roadway. The proposed Circulation Element
32
Update would include roadway intersection improvements
designed to accommodate growth in traffic levels projected
to occur in the City through 2025. The Circulation Element
roadway network would be designed to operate in a manner
that would allow for effective flow of traffic through the City
on surface streets and thus would not cause additional traffic
to utilize the surrounding freeways to bypass conditions of
congestion within the City. As such, the proposed
Circulation Element Update would not cause additional traffic
congestion on the Century Freeway (1 -105). Impacts of the
proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to the
CMP would be less than significant.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) No subsequent environmental documentation is
required.
c) Mitigation:
(1) The proposed Circulation Element Update includes
policies that provide for the implementation of all feasible
intersection improvements to achieve LOS D or better at
intersections throughout the City. There are no further
feasible mitigation measures that could be implemented at
the six locations where the City's level of service standard
would be exceeded.
(2) Because no significant impacts would occur with
respect to the Congestion Management Program, no
mitigation measures are required.
d) Finding:
(1) Because no additional mitigation measures are
available, impacts at the six intersections where the City's
level of service standard would be exceeded would be
significant and unavoidable. Impacts at the remaining 49
intersections would be less than significant. Impacts related
to the CMP would be less than significant.
(2) The six intersections that would exceed the City's
level of service threshold, even after implementation of all
feasible intersection improvements, are:
• Aviation Blvd. /Imperial Hwy.
• Aviation Blvd./El Segundo Blvd.
• Aviation Blvd. /Rosecrans Ave.
• Sepulveda Blvd. /Rosecrans Ave.
33
• Sepulveda Blvd./El Segundo Blvd.
• Douglas St./El Segundo Blvd.
(3) The City finds that incorporation of such changes or
alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the
City. The City finds that although the transportation and
circulation impact will remain significant and unavoidable, no
feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen
the impact below a level of significance. The Project
benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact.
E. Insignificant Cumulative Impacts.
The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter
do not identify or contain substantial evidence which identifies significant adverse
cumulative environmental effects associated with the Project with respect to the areas
listed below.
1. Transportation and Circulation
2. Aesthetics
3. Air Quality
4. Agricultural Resources
5. Cultural Resources
6. Geology and Soils.
7. Hydrology and Water Quality
8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
9. Land Use
10. Mineral Resources
11. Noise
12. Population, Housing, and Employment
13. Public Services
14. Recreation
15. Utilities and Service Systems
34
F.
The City Council finds that although the following cumulative environmental
effects were identified as potentially significant in the FEIR, changes or alterations
within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and the City have been
adopted by such other agencies or can and should be adopted by such other agency to
avoid or lessen the potential significant environmental effects listed below to a level of
insignificance.
1. Biological Resources (Endangered Species, Wetlands, or Habitat)
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) The proposed Circulation Element Update, in
conjunction with future development projects within the City
of El Segundo, has the potential to produce cumulative
biological resources impacts.
(2) The proposed Circulation Element Update would
include components that would affect one of the few
remaining, relatively undeveloped areas within the City and
could potentially impact sensitive species and wetlands.
(3) No impacts to biological resources would occur with
the changes in roadway designations as they would not
result in a physical change to the existing environment.
(4) The development of a roadway network on the
Sepulveda /Rosecrans site has the potential to significantly
impact biological resources. This area may contain
wetlands /riparian habitat or vernal pools that could
potentially be affected by construction of new roadways. In
addition, this site may include other species in areas that
have not been disturbed.
(5) Most of the intersections where the identified
intersection improvements would be implemented are
located in areas that are completely developed and contain
no biological resources. However, intersection #25
(Sepulveda / Rosecrans) is located in an area that has or
may have biological resources. Any modifications to this
intersection would have a potentially significant impact.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be
prepared for any proposed construction of a new roadway
system on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and any proposed
improvements to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans
Avenue intersection to identify potential biological resources
35
impacts. Before constructing new roadways on the
Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and any proposed improvements
to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection,
impacts associated with biological resources must be
examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether
a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading
to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent
environmental documentation must address the following:
• A general biological assessment must be conducted to
determine the presence /absence of sensitive biological
resources and wetlands. If sensitive biological resources
are identified, measures must be identified to reduce
impacts to these resources to less than significant levels.
c) Mitigation:
(1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce
impacts below a level of significance
d) Finding:
(1) Cumulative Impacts of the improvements at the
Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection and
the roadway network on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site
would be determined by the subsequent environmental
documentation.
(2) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of
proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence
identifying a significant cumulative contribution to any
significant unavoidable environmental effects of the Project
with respect to Biological Resources.
2. Transportation and Circulation
a) Facts /Effects.
(1) Future traffic levels generated as a result of land uses
within the City were estimated for year 2025 based on the
existing General Plan land use and zoning designations.
The analysis used the SCAG regional traffic model as the
basis for factoring in traffic growth from outside the City.
(2) An analysis was conducted to determine the
capability of the roadway system set forth in the adopted
Circulation Element to accommodate future traffic projected
to occur under the No Land Use Change scenario. In the
absence of the proposed Circulation Element Update, it
would be reasonably foreseeable that the City's roadway
system would continue to develop in accordance with the
Kr
designations and policies set forth in the adopted Circulation
Element. An additional analysis was conducted to determine
the capability of the roadway system that would result from
the proposed Circulation Element Update to accommodate
future traffic, reflecting the modifications to the existing
Circulation Element roadway system and policies that are
contained in the proposed Circulation Element Update.
(3) The ICU and LOS values for the 'Without Project" and
"With Project" scenarios were compared against the City's
threshold of significance to determine locations where
significant impacts would occur. With respect to the
proposed Circulation Element Update, a project "impact"
represents a location where the future growth in traffic would
exceed the City's level of service standard, in spite of
implementing all feasible improvements at the intersection.
A total of six intersections would be unable to accommodate
year 2025 traffic in at an acceptable LOS D or better in the
a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour or both, after implementation
of all feasible intersection improvements. The remaining 49
study intersections would not exceed the level of service
standard under future conditions and would not be
significantly impacted. Implementation of the proposed
Circulation Element Update would improve the ICU value at
21 intersections in the a.m. peak hour and 21 intersections in
the p.m. peak hour, which would constitute a beneficial
impact of the proposed Circulation Element Update.
b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation:
(1) No subsequent environmental documentation is
required.
c) Mitigation:
(1) The proposed Circulation Element Update includes
policies that provide for the implementation of all feasible
intersection improvements to achieve LOS D or better at
intersections throughout the City. There are no further
feasible mitigation measures that could be implemented at
the six locations where the City's level of service standard
would be exceeded.
d) Findings:
(1) The analysis of traffic impacts of the proposed
Circulation Element Update considers the effects of both
background growth in the region, as reflected in the SCAG
regional model, and within the City, in accordance with the
existing land use designations of the City's General Plan.
37
(2) Consequently, impacts of cumulative growth are
already incorporated into the 2025 traffic model and are
equivalent to those indicated for the Without Project and
With Project conditions in Table IV.13-3 in the DER.
G. Significant Unavoidable Cumulative Impacts.
The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter
do not identify or contain substantial evidence which identifies a cumulatively
considerable contribution to any significant unavoidable cumulative environmental
effects associated with the Project.
H. Project Alternatives.
1. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration.
Various alternatives to the Proposed Action were considered and dismissed
without further study because they failed to accomplish the objectives of the Project or
were otherwise not feasible.
CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(c) requires EIRs to identify any alternatives that
were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping
process, and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency's determination.
During the City's 90 year history, its roadway system became highly developed and its
land use patterns are well - established. Accordingly, there is no land currently available
for constructing major new roadways or realigning the existing roadway system to
provide substantial additional roadway capacity. Moreover, it is improbable that
substantial land area will become available within the City's current boundaries without
major displacement of existing commercial or residential uses. Absent available land
area for roadway development, the potential range of changes to Circulation Element
roadways or policies is limited to relatively minor, incremental changes to the City's built
roadway network. The proposed Circulation Element Update addresses all locations
within the City's roadway network where such minor changes would be reasonably
expected to change the performance of the Circulation Element roadway network. The
only alternative roadway network that could reasonably be analyzed would be one
which does not include the proposed changes in roadway designations and proposed
deletion of currently designated roadway segments. However, this alternative is
reflected in the No Project alternative which analyzes the existing Circulation Element
roadway network. Therefore, the City rejected the consideration of alternative
Circulation Element roadway networks, which would include alternative locations where
Circulation Element designations or policies could be applied, as infeasible.
In addition, the City considered the alternative of taking no action (i.e.,
modification of the Circulation Element to reflect the status quo, leaving the City's
roadway network as it currently exists and not undertaking any further roadway or
intersection improvements), as this alternative would avoid impacts related to
construction activities. The City rejected this alternative because traffic growth both
inside and outside of the City will continue because of other factors (economic
development, population growth), even if the Circulation Element were modified in that
K-1
manner. It would be unreasonable for the City to take no action in the face of this
continued growth in traffic.
2. No Project Alternative.
a) Description.
Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Circulation Element Update
would not be implemented and the policies set forth in the adopted Circulation Element
would remain unchanged. The Circulation Element roadway network would remain as
currently set forth in the adopted Circulation Element. Roadway and intersection
improvements would be constructed to implement the adopted Circulation Element
roadway network and the proposed Circulation Element Update policy that would limit
identified intersection improvements to those that are feasible (i.e., would not affect
building, freeway supports, or railroad rights -of -way) would not be included in the
Circulation Element. Nash and Douglas Streets would not be converted from one -way
to two -way operation. Traffic growth from land uses within the City of El Segundo would
be governed by the adopted General Plan land use designations and increased regional
traffic that would use the City's roadway system would be as currently anticipated in
adopted SCAG regional growth forecasts and associated regional transportation
models.
b) Comparison to Project.
There would be an increase in traffic impacts at three additional locations
compared to the proposed Circulation Element Update, under which 6 intersections
would exceed the City's level of service standard under future traffic conditions. Traffic
impacts of the No Project alternative would be greater than the proposed Circulation
Element Update and would be significant and unavoidable. Aesthetic, biological
resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, land use,
and population, housing and employment impacts would be similar to the proposed
Circulation Element Update and less than significant. Impacts of the No Project
alternative would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and significant
and unavoidable with respect to NOx emissions during construction. Impacts of the No
Project alternative with respect to construction noise would be similar to the proposed
Circulation Element Update and would be significant and unavoidable. Although impacts
of the No Project Alternative would be slightly higher than the proposed Circulation
Element Update with respect to traffic noise, those impacts would be less than
significant. Although impact of the No Project alternative would be higher than the
proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to local CO concentrations, those
impacts would be less than significant. Impacts of the No Project alternative would be
lower than the proposed Circulation Element with respect to hazards and hazardous
material and less than significant.
3. FAR 0.8 Alternative.
a) Description.
Under the FAR 0.8 alternative, the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan
and associated zoning classifications would be amended to provide for a maximum FAR
of 0.8 in the areas of the City that are currently zoned Urban Mixed -Use North (MU -N)
39
and Corporate Office (CO). Under the existing General Plan designations and zoning
classifications, development in the MU -N zone is presently permitted to a maximum
FAR of 1.3, while development in the CO zone is limited to a maximum FAR of 0.8.
Thus, under the FAR 0.8 alternative, maximum development density in the MU -N zone
would be reduced to 0.8 FAR, while the maximum development density in the CO zone
would remain the same. This would result in lower traffic levels than would be
experienced under the proposed Circulation Element Update, where no land use
designations would be changed. All other land use designations set forth in the General
Plan and zoning code would remain the same. Future levels of regional traffic that
would utilize the City's roadway system would remain as currently anticipated in
adopted SCAG regional growth forecasts and associated regional transportation
models. The proposed changes to Circulation Element policies and roadway
configurations would be the same as under the proposed Circulation Element Update.
Nash and Douglas Streets would be converted from one -way to two -way operations.
b) Comparison to Project.
Impacts of the FAR 0.8 alternative would be greater than the proposed
Circulation Element Update with respect to the number of impacted intersections, but
more beneficial than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to improved
operating values at a greater number of intersections.
More intersections would be impacted under the FAR 0.8 alternative and
therefore total construction emissions would be greater than the proposed Circulation
Element Update. However, with respect to individual construction projects required to
implement the FAR 0.8 alternative, impacts would be similar to the proposed Circulation
Element Update and significant and unavoidable with respect to NOx emissions.
Impacts of the FAR 0.8 alternative would be greater than the proposed Circulation
Element Update with respect to local CO concentrations and both would be less than
significant.
Impacts of the FAR 0.8 alternative with respect to construction noise would be
similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and would be significant and
unavoidable. Although impacts of the FAR 0.8 Alternative would be slightly lower than
the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to traffic noise, those impacts
would be less than significant.
Aesthetic, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology
and water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, land use, and population, housing
and employment impacts from the FAR 0.8 Alternative would be similar to the proposed
Circulation Element Update and less than significant. Subsequent environmental
documentation shall be prepared, similar to the proposed project, to determine whether
a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or
Negative Declaration for the construction of new roadways and intersection
improvements identified in the Circulation Element.
<Z
4. FAR 1.0 Alternative.
a) Description.
Under the FAR 1.0 Alternative, the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan
and associated zoning classifications would be amended to provide for a maximum FAR
of 1.0 in the areas of the City that are currently zoned Urban Mixed -Use North (MU -N)
and Corporate Office (CO). Under the existing General Plan designations and zoning
classifications, development in the MU -N zone is presently permitted to a maximum
FAR of 1.3, while development in the CO zone is limited to a maximum FAR of 0.8.
Thus, under the FAR 1.0 alternative, maximum development density in the MU -N zone
would be reduced to 1.0 FAR, while the maximum development density in the CO zone
would increase to 1.0 FAR. This would result in substantially similar traffic levels as
would be experienced under the proposed Circulation Element Update, where no land
use designations would be changed. Future levels of regional traffic that would utilize
the City's roadway system would be as currently anticipated in adopted SCAG regional
growth forecasts and associated regional transportation models. The proposed
changes to Circulation Element policies and roadway configurations would be the same
as under the proposed Circulation Element Update. Nash and Douglas Streets would
be converted from one -way to two -way operations.
b) Comparison to Project.
Impacts of the FAR 1.0 alternative would be greater than the proposed
Circulation Element Update with respect to the number of impacted intersections. Ten
intersections would exceed the City's standard for Level of Service. This would be an
increase of four intersections compared to the proposed Circulation Element Update,
under which six intersections would exceed the City's level of service standard under
future traffic conditions.
More intersections would be impacted under the FAR 1.0 alternative and
therefore total construction emissions would be greater than the proposed Circulation
Element Update. However, with respect to individual construction projects required to
implement the FAR 1.0 alternative, impacts would be similar to the proposed Circulation
Element Update and significant and unavoidable with respect to NOx emissions.
Impacts of the FAR 1.0 alternative would be slightly higher than the proposed
Circulation Element Update with respect to local CO concentrations and both would be
less than significant.
Impacts of the FAR 1.0 alternative with respect to construction noise would be
similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and would be significant and
unavoidable. Although impacts of the FAR 1.0 Alternative would be slightly higher than
the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to traffic noise, those impacts
would be less than significant.
Aesthetic, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology
and water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, land use, and population, housing
and employment impacts from the FAR 1.0 Alternative would be similar to the proposed
Circulation Element Update and less than significant. Subsequent environmental
documentation shall be prepared, similar to the proposed project, to determine whether
EE
a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or
Negative Declaration for the construction of new roadways and intersection
improvements identified in the Circulation Element.
5. FAR 1.3 Alternative
a) Description.
Under the FAR 1.3 Alternative, the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan and
associated zoning classifications would be amended to provide for a maximum FAR of
1.3 in the areas of the City that are currently zoned Urban Mixed —Use North (MU -N) and
Corporate Office (CO). Under the existing General Plan designations and zoning
classifications, development in the MU -N zone is presently permitted to a maximum
FAR of 1.3, while development in the CO zone is limited to a maximum FAR of 0.8.
Thus, under the FAR 1.3 alternative, maximum development density in the MU -N zone
would remain the same, while the maximum development density in the CO zone would
increase to 1.3 FAR. This would result in higher traffic levels as would be experienced
under the proposed Circulation Element Update, where no land use designations would
be changed. All other land use designations set forth in the General Plan and zoning
code would remain the same. Future levels of regional traffic that would utilize the
City's roadway system would be as currently anticipated in adopted SCAG regional
growth forecasts and associated regional transportation models. The proposed
changes to Circulation Element policies and roadway configurations would be the same
as under the proposed Circulation Element Update. Nash and Douglas Streets would
be converted from one -way to two -way operations.
b) Comparison to Project.
Impacts of the FAR 1.3 alternative would be greater than the proposed
Circulation Element Update with respect to the number of impacted intersections. This
would be an increase of fifteen intersections compared to the proposed Circulation
Element Update, under which six intersections would exceed the City's level of service
standard under future traffic conditions.
More intersections would be impacted under the FAR 1.3 alternative and
therefore total construction emissions would be greater than the proposed Circulation
Element Update. However, with respect to individual construction projects required to
implement the FAR 1.3 alternative, impacts would be similar to the proposed Circulation
Element Update and significant and unavoidable with respect to NOx emissions.
Impacts of the FAR 1.3 alternative would be higher than the proposed Circulation
Element Update with respect to local CO concentrations and both would be less than
significant.
Impacts of the FAR 1.3 alternative with respect to construction noise would be
similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and would be significant and
unavoidable. Although impacts of the FAR 1.3 Alternative would be slightly higher than
the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to traffic noise, those impacts
would be less than significant.
Aesthetic, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology
and water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, land use, and population, housing
42
and employment impacts from the FAR 1.3 Alternative would be similar to the proposed
Circulation Element Update and less than significant. Subsequent environmental
documentation shall be prepared, similar to the proposed project, to determine whether
a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or
Negative Declaration for the construction of new roadways and intersection
improvements identified in the Circulation Element.
6. Findings Regarding Alternatives.
a) Reasonable Range of Alternatives.
The City Council finds that that (a) the FEIR describes a reasonable range of
alternatives to the Project, which could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the
Project and would avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the Project; and
(b) the City Council evaluated the comparative merits of the alternatives.
b) Environmentally Superior Alternative.
CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6 requires that an analysis of alternatives to the
Project identify one alternative as the environmentally superior alternative.
Furthermore, if the environmentally superior alternative is the "No Project" alternative,
the EIR must also identify the environmentally superior alternative from among the other
alternatives.
From a strictly environmental standpoint, the No Action Alternative is superior to
all others.
None of the alternatives examined in this EIR would avoid the significant and
unavoidable impacts of the proposed Circulation Element with respect to construction
air quality and construction noise. The only option available to avoid these impacts
would be to conduct no construction activity in conjunction with the proposed Circulation
Element Update. The option of taking no action with respect to the Circulation Element
roadway network in the City (i.e., modifying the Circulation Element to leave the City's
roadway network as it currently exists) was considered and rejected by the City Council
because traffic growth both inside and outside of the City would continue as a result of
other factors (economic development, population growth) and it would not be a
reasonable policy for the City to take no action in the face of this continued growth in
traffic. Similarly, all of the alternatives examined in this EIR would have less than
significant impacts with respect to aesthetics, operational air quality, land use,
operational noise, and population, housing and employment as a result of implementing
roadway or intersection improvements in the City. Taking no action would also be the
only way to eliminate these impacts and was similarly considered and rejected by the
City.
The only substantial difference between the alternatives examined in this EIR is
related to the ability of the alternatives to accommodate projected growth in traffic in the
City to the year 2025. In this regard, the FAR 0.8 alternative would be environmentally
superior to the proposed Circulation Element. Even though one additional intersection
would exceed the City's level of service threshold under the FAR 0.8 alternative
compared to the proposed Circulation Element Update, the FAR 0.8 alternative would
have beneficial impacts (i.e., reducing ICU value) at 10 more intersections during the
43
a.m. peak hour and 8 more intersections during the p.m. peak hour than would the
proposed Circulation Element Update. However, the FAR 0.8 alternative would not
meet the objectives of the proposed "No Land Use Change" project as described in the
project description of the DEIR, as it would reduce allowable development density in the
MU -N zone from 1.3 to 0.8, which would potentially affect the City's economic and
employment base, and would therefore be inconsistent with the policies of the General
Plan Economic Development Element. Overall, the No Project, the FAR 1.0 and the 1.3
alternatives would have traffic impacts that are similar to or higher than the proposed
Circulation Element Update and would not be environmentally superior to the proposed
Circulation Element Update.
The City Council finds on the basis of the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this
matter that:
A. Growth Inducing Impacts
The proposed Circulation Element Update would accommodate future growth by
upgrading the existing circulation system to adequately handle the amount of traffic
anticipated by 2025. The proposed Circulation Element Update would foster economic
growth by adding temporary construction jobs to the surrounding area. These
individuals could, in turn, patronize other local businesses and services in the area.
However, no permanent employment would be created by the implementation of the
proposed Circulation Element Update. The proposed Circulation Element Update does
not include housing and therefore would not include (direct) permanent population
growth. As discussed in Section IV.L of the DEIR, construction workers typically do not
relocate to the area in which they are doing construction, as these employment periods
tend to be short-term. Therefore, no additional housing would be required. Accordingly,
no significant population, housing, or employment impacts would be created by the
proposed Circulation Element Update. As discussed below, the proposed Circulation
Element Update also would not induce growth in an area that is not already developed
with infrastructure to accommodate such growth.
The City of El Segundo is located in a highly urbanized and developed area of
Southern California. The existing utility infrastructure is sufficient to operate any
additional intersection hardware (e.g., traffic signals) which may be implemented as part
of the proposed Circulation Element Update. This infrastructure is located adjacent to
the roadways and intersections proposed for modifications. Therefore, the project
would not result in significant growth inducing impacts.
B. Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes.
The type and level of construction associated with the implementation of the proposed
Circulation Element Update would consume limited, slowly renewable, and non-
renewable resources. Such resources would include the following construction
supplies: aggregate materials used in concrete and asphalt such as sand, gravel, and
stone; metals such as steel, copper, and lead; petrochemical construction materials
44
such as plastics; and water. Fossil fuels such as gasoline and oil would also be
consumed in the use of construction vehicles and equipment.
The implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would not add
additional traffic to local roads beyond what is already anticipated by the year 2025.
Construction of the roadway and intersection modifications would result in short-term
increases in ambient noise levels. Potential irreversible damage from environmental
accidents associated with the proposed Circulation Element Update are unlikely and
would be avoided by compliance with the mitigation measures proposed in this EIR as
well as existing city, county, state, and federal safety regulations.
IV. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS.
The City Council finds on the basis of the FEIR and the record of proceedings in
this matter that the unavoidable significant impacts of the Project are acceptable when
balanced against the benefits of the Project. This determination is based on the
following factors and the substantial public, social, economic, and environmental
benefits flowing from the Project as identified in the FEIR and the record of proceedings
in the matter.
A. The infrastructure and other improvements proposed as part of the
updated Circulation Element will help address future traffic growth in the City.
This will help ensure the community maintains its economic competitiveness with
surrounding communities by facilitating the orderly flow of vehicle traffic
throughout the City's boundaries.
B. The proposed project will help the City address the forecasted growth in
regional traffic.
C. The proposed conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to
two -way operations will improve vehicle access to adjacent properties, thereby
improving the marketability and desirability of properties on the two affected
streets.
D. The proposed conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to
two -way operations will improve emergency services by providing more direct
access from Fire Station No. 2 to properties in the northeast portion of the City.
E. The incorporation of policies to create significance thresholds for review of
development projects will establish objective criteria for evaluating traffic impacts
of new commercial and residential development, which will help ensure that all
mitigation is properly evaluated and fairly distributed.
F. The incorporation of a policy to update the congestion mitigation fee
program will help ensure the City continues to study and evaluate the
effectiveness of its circulation system and ensure that new development supports
its fair share contribution to future traffic growth.
G. The project facilitates the long -term economic health of the City and its
neighboring cities and communities by providing a comprehensive evaluation of
45
future traffic growth, which can be used by the community to guide land -use
decision making in the future.
V. RECIRCULATION.
A. Facts.
1. The City received comments on the DEIR from members of the
public and from public agencies in both written and oral form. The FEIR
contains written responses to all comments ('Responses to Comments ")
received on the DEIR as of August 26, 2004. Some comments were
incorporated into the FEIR as factual corrections and minor changes.
Sections I - IV of the FEIR sets forth all factual corrections and minor
changes to the DEIR.
B. Finding.
Pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15088.5 and Public Resources Code § 21092.1,
and based on the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter, the City Council
finds that:
1. Factual corrections and minor changes are set forth as additions
and corrections to the DEIR; and
2. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR are not
substantial changes in the DEIR that would deprive the public of a
meaningful opportunity to comment on a substantial adverse
environmental effect of the Project, a feasible way to mitigate or avoid
such an effect, or a feasible Project alternative; and
3. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR will not
result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the
severity of the significant effects previously disclosed in the DEIR; and
4. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR will not
involve mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably
different from those analyzed in the DEIR that would substantially reduce
one or more significant effects on the environment; and
5. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR do not
render the DEIR so fundamentally inadequate and conclusory in nature
that meaningful public review and comment would be precluded.
Thus, the City Council finds that none of the conditions set forth in CEQA
Guideline § 15088.5 or Public Resources Code § 21092.1 requiring recirculation of a
draft environmental impact report were met. The City Council further finds that
incorporation of the factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR into the FEIR
does not require that the FEIR to be recirculated for public comment.
M
VI. SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
The City Council finds and declares that substantial evidence for each and every
finding made herein is contained in the FEIR, which is incorporated herein by this
reference, and in the record of proceedings in the matter. To the extent applicable,
each of the other findings made by the City Council in connection with its approval of
the entitlement applications listed in Section I above are also incorporated herein by this
reference.
PAPlanning & Building Safety\Projects \576- 599\Ea- 579 \EA- 579.CEOA Resolution findings Exh A.kb.doc
47
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 4386
EXHIBIT B
IX. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PROCEDURES
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires a Lead Agency to adopt a "reporting or
monitoring program for the changes to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to
mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment' (Mitigation Monitoring Program, Section 15097
of the CEQA Guidelines provides additional direction on mitigation monitoring or reporting). The
Community, Economic and Development Services Department for the City of El Segundo is the Lead
Agency for the El Segundo Circulation Element Update.
An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared to address the potential environmental impacts of the
proposed project. Where appropriate, this environmental document identified project design features or
recommended mitigation measures to avoid or to reduce potentially significant environmental impacts of
the proposed project. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is designed to
monitor implementation of requirements for subsequent environmental documentation and mitigation
measures identified for the El Segundo Circulation Element Update. The MMRP is subject to review and
approval by the Lead Agency as part of the certification of the EIR and adoption of project conditions.
The required subsequent environmental documentation and mitigation measures are listed separately and
categorized by impact area, with an accompanying identification of the following:
• Monitoring Phase, the phase of the project during which the mitigation measure must be
monitored;
Pre- Construction, including the design phase
Construction
Post- Construction
• The Implementing Party, the agency with the power to implement the mitigation measure;
• The Enforcement Agency, the agency with the power to enforce the mitigation measure, and
• The Monitoring Agency, the agency to which reports involving feasibility, compliance,
implementation and development are made.
In addition to mitigation measures, requirements for the preparation of subsequent environmental analysis and
documentation are identified in the EIR. These requirements are intended to provide guidance for
environmental review of feture projects that would implement the Circulation Element Update, using the
Program EIR. Because these requirements would also work to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the
environment in accordance with PRC Section 21081.6, they have been included in this MMRP.
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -I
City of El Segundo August 2004
The MMRP performance must be monitored annually to determine the effectiveness of the measures
implemented in any given year and re- evaluate the mitigation needs for the upcoming year.
I. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
No subsequent environmental documentation is required.
Mitigation Measures
The proposed Circulation Element Update includes policies that provide for the implementation of all
feasible intersection improvements to achieve LOS D or better at intersections throughout the City. There
are no further feasible mitigation measures that could be implemented at the six locations where the
City's level of service standard would be exceeded.
No mitigation measures are required with respect to the Congestion Management Program.
II. AESTHETICS
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any intersection improvement project
proposed at any of the following four intersections: Aviation Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard; Aviation
Boulevard/Utah Avenue; Sepulveda Boulevard/Rosecrans Avenue; El Segundo Boulevard/Isis Avenue; to
identify potential impacts on sensitive receptors that could result from additional lighting. The
subsequent environmental documentation must address the following:
Before constructing specific intersection improvements, impacts associated with increased night
lighting in the area must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new
Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration.
This examination must address the potential of the subsequent activity to increase ambient
lighting levels beyond the threshold identified in the Program EIR. The analysis must incorporate
the mitigation measures identified below as appropriate.
Mitigation Measures
C -1. Street lights must be designed and located to minimize spill over of light into residential
areas.
Monitoring Phase: Construction, Post - Construction
Implementation Party: City of El Segundo
Enforcement Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division
Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report page IX -2
City of El Segundo August 2004
C -2. New lighting sources must be shielded to direct light downward and not toward the sky to
minimize atmospheric light pollution.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
III. AIR QUALITY
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
Construction, Post - Construction
City of El Segundo
Public Works Department, Planning Division
Public Works Department, Planning Division
Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any roadway or intersection improvement
project identified in the proposed Circulation Element Update to identify emissions associated with
construction of that specific roadway or intersection improvement. The subsequent environmental
documentation must address the following:
• Before constructing specific roadway or intersection improvements, impacts associated with
temporary construction related emissions must be examined in light of this Program EIR to
determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR
or Negative Declaration. This examination must provide quantified estimates of construction
related emissions based upon the specific site, schedule and construction equipment utilization
characteristics of the proposed roadway or intersection improvement and compare the estimated
emissions to the SCAQMD thresholds for construction emissions. The analysis must incorporate
the mitigation measures identified below as appropriate, along with any other mitigation
measures identified by the project- specific analysis.
Mitigation Measures
Construction
Fugitive Dust, PMto
Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, including without limitation the following:
D -1. The construction area and vicinity (500 -foot radius) must be swept (preferably with water
sweepers) and watered at least twice daily. Site wetting must occur often enough to
maintain a 10 percent surface soil moisture content throughout all earth - moving
activities.
Monitoring Phase: Construction
Implementation Party: City of El Segundo
Enforcement Agency: South Coast Air Quality Management District
( SCAQMD)
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -3
City of El Segundo August 2004
Monitoring Agency:
Public Works Department
D -2. All unpaved roads, parking and staging areas must be watered at least once every two
hours of active operation.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
D -3. Site access points must be swept/washed within thirty minutes of visible dirt deposition.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
D-4. On -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or rusty material must be covered or watered at least
twice daily.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
D -5. All haul trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials must either be covered or
maintain two feet of freeboard.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
D -6. All haul trucks must have a capacity of no less than twelve and three- quarter (12.75)
cubic yards.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
D -7. At least 80 percent of all inactive disturbed surface areas must be watered on a daily basis
when there is evidence of wind - driven fugitive dust.
Monitoring Phase:
Construction
Implementation Party:
City of El Segundo
Enforcement Agency:
SCAQMD
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -4
City of El Segundo August 2004
Monitoring Agency:
Public Works Department
D -8. Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended when winds exceed 25 mph.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
D -9. Traffic speeds on unpaved roads must be limited to 15 miles per hour.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
D -10. Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended during first and second stage
smog alerts.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
D -11. Haul trucks must be staged in non - residential areas.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
D -12. Haul truck routes must be planned to avoid residential areas, schools, and parks.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
NO, Emissions
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
D -13. Equipment must be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
SCAQMD
Public Works Department
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report page IX-5
City of El Segundo August 2004
Operation
No mitigation measures are required with respect to operational impacts.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed construction of a new
roadway system on the Sepulveda/Rosecrans site and any proposed improvements to the Sepulveda
Boulevard/Rosecrans Avenue intersection to identify potential biological resources impacts. Before
constructing new roadways on the Sepulveda/Rosecrans site and any proposed improvements to the
Sepulveda Boulevard/Rosecrans Avenue intersection, impacts associated with biological resources must
be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be requiredto
be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental
documentation must address the following:
• A general biological assessment must be conducted to determine the presence /absence of
sensitive biological resources and wetlands. If sensitive biological resources are identified,
measures must be identified to reduce impacts to these resources to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed project on the
Sepulveda/Rosecrans site to identify potential impacts to cultural resources (archaeological,
paleontological or historic). Impacts to cultural resources must be examined in light of this Program EIR
to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading either to an EIR or
Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following and
must incorporate mitigation measures identified below as appropriate:
• A records search and/or Phase I Archaeological Survey must be conducted by a qualified
archaeologist before the implementation of physical changes to the existing roadway network,
involving the construction of new roadways. If the survey identifies resources within the
construction area of the roadway, follow on studies must be conducted in accordance with the
recommendations of the records search before commencement of construction.
Mitigation Measures
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental impact Report Page IX -6
City of El Segundo August 2004
F -1. In the event that archaeological or paleontological resources are encountered during the
course of grading or construction, all development must temporarily cease in these areas
until the resources are properly assessed and subsequent recommendations are
determined by a qualified archaeologist.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
Construction
City of El Segundo
Public Works Department
Planning Division
Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any new roadway construction or
intersection improvement project located within areas with expansive soil hazard, which include the
following intersections:
• Aviation Boulevard/Imperial Highway
• Aviation Boulevard/Rosecrans Avenue
• Aviation Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard
• Aviation Boulevard/Utah Street
• Atwood Way/1 -105 Eastbound Ramp Entrance
• Douglas Street/El Segundo Boulevard
• El Segundo Boulevard/Isis Avenue
• Sepulveda Boulevard/Imperial Highway
• Continental Boulevard/Grand Avenue
The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following:
• Before constructing new roadways or specific intersection improvements, impacts associated with
expansive soil hazards must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a
new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative
Declaration. The analysis must include a comprehensive geotechnical investigation which must
be submitted as part of the design process for individual portions of the proposed Circulation
Element Update and must also incorporate the mitigation measures identified below, as
appropriate.
Mitigation Measures
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -7
City of El Segundo August 2004
G -1
Specific design recommendations presented in a comprehensive geotechnical report,
discussed under Subsequent Environmental Documentation, must be incorporated into
the final design and approved by the City Engineer and City Council before construction.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Pre - construction
City of El Segundo
Public Works Department
Public Works Department
G -2. Specifications for site grading must be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Pre - construction
City of El Segundo
Public Works Department
Public Works Department
G -3. Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per
hour (mph).
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
Public Works Department
Public Works Department
No mitigation measures are required for the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to
two -way operation.
VII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed roadway construction or
intersection improvement project at any of the 14 intersections listed below to identify potential impacts
on the storm drain system. Before construction of specific roadway or intersection improvements,
impacts to the storm drain system must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a
new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration.
• Aviation Boulevard/Imperial Highway
• Aviation Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard
• Aviation Boulevard/Utah Avenue
• Aviation Boulevard/Rosecrans Avenue
• Sepulveda Boulevard/Imperial Highway
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report page IX-8
City of El Segundo August 2004
• Sepulveda Boulevard/Maple Avenue
• Sepulveda Boulevard/Mariposa Avenue
• Sepulveda Boulevard/Grand Avenue
• Sepulveda Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard
• Sepulveda Boulevard/Rosecrans Avenue
• Atwood Way /I -105 Eastbound Ramp Entrance
• Douglas Street/El Segundo Boulevard
• Continental Boulevard/Grand Avenue
• El Segundo Boulevard/Isis Avenue
The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following:
• The City must prepare a master drainage plan for any area of the City affected by implementation
of the proposed Circulation Element Update. This plan must include detailed
hydrology/hydraulic calculations and drainage improvements, showing quantitatively how the
project that implements the proposed Circulation Element Update would eliminate the potential
for downstream flooding due to increased storm water runoff.
• The City must design a conveyance and detainment system to meet the LACDPW limits on storm
drains that would convey the discharge from the new and modified roadways and intersections.
Mitigation Measures
No specific mitigation measures related to drainage systems are identified at this time. The subsequent
environmental documentation described above may identify mitigation measures pertinent to a specific
roadway or intersection improvement project.
No mitigation measures are required for the conversion of Nash and Douglas from one -way to two -way
operation.
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed intersection improvements
or construction of new roadways to identify potential impacts that could result from exposure to
contaminated sites. Impacts associated with contaminated sites must be examined in light of this Program
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -9
City of El Segundo August 2004
EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be preparedieading to either an EIR or
Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following:
• A Phase One Environmental Site Assessment must be conducted for any of the proposed roadway
and intersection modifications to identify potentially contaminated sites. If contaminated sites are
identified within the boundaries of the project site, appropriate measures must be taken to protect
the well -being of the construction workers and the surrounding population. Investigative and
remedial activities undertaken in accordance with this requirement must be undertaken under the
oversight and to the satisfaction of the cognizant regulatory agency(ies) including but not be
limited to: Department of Toxic Substances Control, Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region and/or South Coast Air
Quality Management District.
Mitigation Measures
No specific mitigation measures are identified at this time. The subsequent environmental documentation
described above would identify the measures required to address any conditions related to contamination
or hazardous materials that may be encountered by future roadway or intersection improvements.
No mitigation measures are required for the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to
two -way operation.
IX. LAND USE
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
No subsequent environmental documentation is required.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
X. NOISE
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for roadway improvements proposed to be
constructed on the Sepulveda/Rosecrans site and intersection improvements proposed to be constructed at
the intersections located adjacent to residential areas, as listed above. The subsequent environmental
documentation must address the following:
• A project- specific construction noise analysis must be prepared that calculates, based on project -
specific parameters and identification of the site - specific sensitive receptors that could be affected
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -10
City of El Segundo August 2004
by construction activities, the noise levels that would be experienced at sensitive receptors located
adjacent to that site. If noise levels resulting from construction activity would result in temporary
construction noise levels that exceed 65 dBA at a sensitive receptor, or cause an incremental
increase of 5 dBA over the existing ambient sound level, if the existing ambient sound level at the
sensitive receptor location is 65 dBA or more, then the study must identify feasible mitigation
measures to be applied to that roadway or intersection improvement project from the list of
mitigation measures K -1 through K4 below.
Mitigation Measures
K -1. Construction contracts must specify that all construction equipment must be equipped
with properly working mufflers and other applicable noise attenuation devices.
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Pre- construction
City of El Segundo
Public Works Department
Public Works Department
K -2. All property owners located within 400 feet of the construction site must be sent a notice
regarding the construction schedule of the proposed project. All notices must indicate the
dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone number where
residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints.
Monitoring Phase: Pre - construction, construction
Implementation Party: City of El Segundo
Enforcement Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division
Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division
K -3. A "noise disturbance coordinator" position must be established for the project. The
disturbance coordinator is responsible for responding to any local complaints about
construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise
complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad mufflers, etc.) and would be required to implement
reasonable measures such that the complaint is resolved. All notices that are sent to the
property owners within 400 feet of the construction site must list the telephone number
for the disturbance coordinator.
Monitoring Phase: Pre - construction, construction
Implementation Party: City of El Segundo
Enforcement Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division
Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division
K-4. As stated in the El Segundo Municipal Code, construction is restricted to the hours of
7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at anytime on Sunday
or a Federal holiday.
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report page IX -II
City of El Segundo August 2004
Monitoring Phase:
Implementation Party:
Enforcement Agency:
Monitoring Agency:
Construction
City of El Segundo
Public Works Department
Public Works Department
No mitigation measures are required for the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to
two -way operation.
XL POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
Subsequent Environmental Documentation
No subsequent environmental documentation is required.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
PAPlanning & Building Safety\Projects \576- 599\Ea- 579 \EA- 579.CEQA Resolution Exh B MMRP.doc
El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -12
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 4386
EXHIBIT C
El Segundo General Plan -1992
4. Circulation Element
Table of Contents page
Introduction 4 -1
Summary of Existing Conditions 4 -2
Future Conditions 4 -12
Master Plan of Streets 4 -19
Alternative Modes of Travel 4 -30
Goals, Objectives, and Policies 4-44
Goal C1: Provision for a Safe, Convenient, and Cost
Effective Circulation System 4-44
Goal C2: Provisions for Alternative Modes of
Transportation 4-47
Goal C3: Development of Circulation Policies that
are Consistent with other City Policies 4 -51
Goal C4: Compliance with all Federal, State, and
Regional Regulations 4 -53
4. Circulation Element
Introduction
Draft 917104
4. Circulation Element
The circulation system is one of the most important of all urban
systems in determining the form and quality of the El Segundo
environment. The circulation modes used, location of routes,
operational policies and the operating levels of service influence the
nature of urban development, the physical organization of the City,
and can enhance or limit the social and economic activity within the
City.
Purpose and Authority The purpose of the Circulation Element is to assist the City in
providing a safe, convenient, and efficient circulation system. The
Circulation Element identifies a system capable of responding to
growth occurring consistent with the policies and Land Use Plan
presented in the Land Use Element. The Circulation Element
identifies physical improvements that will be needed to attain the
Circulation goals and objectives, as well as alternative techniques to
improve the City's circulation system.
The Circulation Element is part of the City of El Segundo's General
Plan. State law requires that a circulation element be incorporated
into the general plan. The pertinent government code sections are as
follows:
• Government Code Section 65302(b): The general plan shall
include ... a circulation element consisting of the general
location and extent of existing and proposed major
thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other
local public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the land
use element of the plan.
• Government Code Section 65303: The general plan may ...
address any other subjects which, in the judgment of the
legislative body, relate to the physical development of the
County or City.
T
H
E
C
I T
Y
O
F
E
L
S
E
G
U
N
D
O
•
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
4-1
4. Circulation Element
Draft 917104
Related Plans and Circulation issues and travel patterns extend far beyond the El
Programs Segundo city limits. Consequently, the circulation system within the
City is heavily impacted by land use and circulation plans and
developments of other jurisdictions. The impact to the City's
circulation system of projected land use changes and circulation
system improvements of other jurisdictions, as projected during the
development of the General Plan, were incorporated into the analysis
and preparation of the Circulation Element.
Summary of Existing Conditions
Existing Street System The City of El Segundo is served by the existing network of
roadways shown on Exhibit C -1. The existing street network is
essentially a grid system of north/south and east/west roadways. The
primary north/south roadways are Aviation Boulevard, Douglas
Street, Nash Street, Sepulveda Boulevard, Center Street, Main Street,
and Vista Del Mar. The primary east/west streets are Imperial
Highway, Imperial Avenue, Maple Avenue, Mariposa Avenue,
Grand Avenue, El Segundo Boulevard, and Rosecrans Avenue. Each
of these arterial roadways is described in the Existing Conditions
Report.
Daily Operating Conditions on Existing Street Network
Daily operating conditions were analyzed on each of the arterials
designated on the City's Master Plan of Roadways. This was done by
comparing the average daily traffic volume for each arterial to the
estimated daily capacity and developing a corresponding Level of
Service (LOS) estimate of operating conditions. The daily traffic
volume, and estimated roadway capacity, and resulting LOS for each
of the key roadways in the City are shown on Exhibit C -2. A
definition of Level of Service (LOS) for urban arterial roadway
segments is included in Exhibit C -3.
A review of Exhibit C -2 reveals that most roadways in the City of El
Segundo operate at LOS "C" or better. Several roadway links operate
at LOS "D," which is considered marginally acceptable. These are:
• Aviation Boulevard between Hawaii Street and Rosecrans
• Avenue
• Imperial Highway between Main Street and California Street
• Sepulveda Boulevard between El Segundo Boulevard and
Rosecrans Avenue
• Sepulveda Boulevard between Mariposa Avenue and Grand
Avenue
T
H
E
C I
T
Y
O
F
E
L
S
E
G
U N
D
O •
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
4-2
4. Circulation Element Draft 911194
The following roadway segments operate at LOS "E," which is
considered unacceptable:
• Sepulveda Boulevard between Imperial Avenue and
Mariposa Avenue
• Rosecrans Avenue between Douglas Street and Aviation
Boulevard
While no traffic volumes on any of the roadways in the City now
exceed LOS E traffic volume thresholds, portions of Rosecrans
Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard carry traffic volumes very close to
the threshold.
Analysis of Peak Hourly Operating Conditions on Existing Street
Network
hi addition to the analysis of roadway segments on the basis of daily
traffic volume and capacity, peak hourly traffic conditions at several
key intersections throughout the City were also evaluated. Analysis
of intersection operations was conducted using the Intersection
Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. An explanation of the ICU
methodology and Intersection LOS is included in Exhibits C -4 and
C -5 respectively.
The results of the intersection analysis are presented graphically on
Exhibit C -6. A review of Exhibit C -6 reveals that according to the
peak hour intersection analysis, several intersections within the City
currently operate at unacceptable Levels of Service (LOS). The
following intersections currently operate at LOS "E" or "F" during
the AM or PM peak hour:
• Sepulveda Boulevard at Imperial Highway (LOS E AM Peak
only)
• Sepulveda Boulevard at Mariposa Avenue (LOS E in AM
Peak only)
• Sepulveda Boulevard at Grand Avenue (LOS E in both AM
and PM Peak)
• Sepulveda Boulevard at El Segundo Boulevard (LOS E in
AM Peak, LOS F in PM Peak)
• Sepulveda Boulevard at Rosecrans Avenue (LOS F in PM
Peak only)
• Rosecrans Avenue at Aviation Boulevard (LOS E in AM
Peak, LOS F in PM Peak)
Aviation Boulevard at El Segundo Boulevard (LOS E in AM
and PM Peak)
During the AM and PM peak hours, at least one movement carves
higher volumes than the available capacity at the unsignalized
intersection of Douglas Street at Utah Avenue.
T
H
E
C
I T
Y
O
F
E
L
5
E
G
U N
D
O
•
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
4-6
4. Circulation Element Dreg 911104
Street Classification and Function
The magnitude of traffic volumes on a particular street represents but
one element of hierarchy in an overall circulation system. The
system provides a balanced linkage between high traffic corridors
and low volume streets. The presently adopted City circulation
system consists of local streets, collector streets, secondary arterials,
major arterials and freeways. There are a myriad of other categories
or names for the components of a circulation system. However, it
should be recognized that the classification is not as important as the
function to be fulfilled.
The functions of the above street categories are as follows:
• Local Streets principally provide vehicular, pedestrian, and
bicycle access to property abutting the public right -of -way
with movement of traffic acting only as a secondary function.
• Collector Streets are intended to serve as the intermediate
route to handle traffic between local streets and arterials. In
addition, collector streets provide access to abutting property.
• Major and Secondary Arterials function to connect traffic
from collectors to the major freeway system. They move
large volumes of automobiles, trucks and buses, and link the
principal elements within the City to other adjacent regions.
• Freeways are controlled access, high speed roadways with
grade separated interchanges intended to expedite movement
between distant areas in a metropolitan community or region.
The basic principles of network circulation, using these various
functional street types, is important because it establishes the
rationale by which the existing and recommended El Segundo
circulation system was evaluated, and by which new proposals
should be evaluated in the future. The variety of street types is
designed for a specific function to provide adequate service to the
community.
In addition to the desired function within the circulation system, the
differing roadway classifications should be designed to carry
differing amounts of traffic volumes. The capacity of a specific
roadway section will be affected by a number of factors, including
street width, number of travel lanes, number of crossing arterials and
collectors, the number and type of signals, amount of parking, and
the number of driveways. Although the capacity on a given roadway
link will vary, daily capacities for each of the City's roadway
classifications listed, in Exhibit C -7, were determined to be
representative of roadway operating conditions in the City of El
Segundo. Therefore, these capacity estimates are presented for
general planning purposes and for use in traffic analysis throughout
the City.
T H E
C I T Y O F
E L S
E
G
U N
D
O
• G E N E R A L P L A N
4-10
4. Circulation Element
Future Conditions
Draft 8 lA4
Streets and Highways The Circulation Element goals and objectives presented later in this
Element, combined with the future traffic demand as indicated by the
Land Use Element, formed the basis for planning the future system
of streets in El Segundo.
El Segundo Street Classifications and Standards
The recommended street classifications and standards are illustrated
in Exhibit C -8 and described in the following paragraphs. These are
consistent with regional standards and classifications. For example,
the Los Angeles County Plan of Highways indicates a 100 -foot
right -of -way for a major highway. This would be equivalent to a
secondary arterial in the El Segundo Circulation Element.
Any street segment which is constructed to geometrics that are
inconsistent with the geometrics shown on Exhibit C -8 for the
corresponding street classification is generally considered to be
substandard. When new roadways are constructed or existing
roadways are improved, the standards shown on Exhibit C -8 should
be used as a guide to ensure that adequate rights -of -way exist to
provide sufficient width of travel lanes, parking lanes, curbs,
sidewalks, and medians where appropriate. It should also be noted
that right -of -way may be needed beyond the standards shown in
Exhibit C -8 in special locations, such as approaches to major
intersections.
The right -of -way, lane and on- street parking widths shown in
Exhibit C -8 are intended to be minimum widths. Ranges are
provided in order to provide flexibility depending on the existing and
future anticipated development, roadway volumes, and right -of -way
widths, as well as conformance with the goals, policies and
objectives of the General Plan. The evaluation of future
development should consider all of these issues in order to determine
the appropriate right -of -way dedication.
Freeways
Freeways are controlled access, high speed roadways with grade -
separated interchanges intended to expedite movement between
distant areas in a metropolitan community or region. Planning,
design, and construction of freeways in California are undertaken by
Caltrans. As a result, they fall outside the jurisdiction of a city.
Nonetheless, the City played an important role in the selection of the
I -105 Freeway alignment, in determining the number of lanes
required to carry projected traffic loads, and in locating the major
interchanges along the freeway to serve the City street system. Since,
T
H
E
C I
T
Y
O
F
E
L
S
E
G
U N
D
O •
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
4-12
4. Circulation Element Dreg 817104
the Century (I -105) Freeway carries significant traffic volumes and
plays an integral role in the City's roadway system, it is included in
the City's Master Plan of Streets.
Major Arterials
Major arterials function to connect traffic from collectors to the
major freeway system as well as to provide access to adjacent land
uses. They move large volumes of automobiles, trucks and buses,
and link the principal elements within the City to other adjacent
regions. These facilities handle inter -city and intra -city vehicular
trips in the magnitude of 40,000 to 75,000 vehicles per day (vpd).
They should be planned for eight lanes of through traffic. In the
majority of cases in El Segundo, curb parking will be prohibited
during peak periods. Bicycle traffic would travel with vehicular flow
or be separated by a path behind the curb. Raised medians can be
used to separate opposing flows of vehicular traffic as necessary.
Access points, (i.e., driveways and minor intersecting streets) should
be minimized.
Separate left -turn lanes at major signalized intersections would be
mandatory with double left -turn lanes the rule rather than the
exception. Separate right -turn lanes which also serve as bus loading
areas would be considered at locations indicating high turn volumes.
At some intersections up to three left turn and up to two right turn
lanes may be provided, if needed, and if acquisition of additional
right -of -way is practical.
Secondary Arterials
Secondary arterials are similar to major arterials in function. They
connect traffic from collectors to the major freeway system. They
move large volumes of automobiles, trucks and buses, and link the
principal elements within the City to other adjacent regions. These
streets handle intra -city trips in the magnitude of 25,000 to 55,000
vpd and are not as continuous in length as major arterials. At least
six through lanes should be provided to handle these needs along
with single or double left -turn lanes (the latter preferably) at major
signalized intersections. Curb parking would be prohibited during
peak periods. Bicycle traffic would have to use paths behind the
curb, separate bicycle lanes, or travel in the street with autos, trucks
and buses.
Collector Streets
The collector street is intended to serve as an intermediate route to
handle traffic between local streets and arterials. In addition,
collector streets provide access to abutting property. Collector
streets are anticipated to carry traffic volumes between 15,000 to
40,000 vpd and serve important internal functions within the
community. A collector street may have one through lane per
T H E C I
T Y O F
E L
S E
G
U N
D O •
G
E N
E R A L
P L
A
N
4-14
4. Circulation Element Dreg 911104
direction; but more realistically, it should have a minimum of two
through lanes (at least during peak periods). In some cases, a 4 -lane
collector may have a median divider. Curb parking can be
accommodated if abutting property owners have insufficient off -
street parking. The function of the collector, however, is to 'collect"
vehicles from the local street system and transport them to the
arterial system as efficiently as possible.
Signalization of collector /local street intersections should be timed to
permit the majority of the traffic flow on the collector while allowing
local street access. Restriction of free flow along collectors due to
unwarranted STOP controls should be discouraged.
Local Streets
Local streets principally provide vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle
access to property abutting the public right -of -way. Cross sections of
local streets vary, depending on the abutting land uses, parking
requirements, street trees, and other considerations. Where both sides
of the street are served equally in residential areas, the common
right -of -way width for a local street is 60 feet with a 36 -foot
pavement width.
In multi - family areas where there is continuous parking throughout
the day, a minimum of 40 feet of pavement may be required to
provide room for two moving lanes of traffic in addition to street
parking on both sides. In commercial and industrial areas, a
minimum pavement width of 40 feet is considered necessary. In
industrial areas, consideration of the predominant type of trucking,
and whether or not maneuvering of trailers must be provided, may
require a pavement width of more than 44 feet.
When pavement widths exceed 40 feet on local streets, rights -of -way
should be increased above 60 feet. Each parkway width should be 12
feet, including landscaped area and sidewalk. Sidewalk width should
be 4 feet in residential areas and 5 feet in commercial or industrial
areas.
The overall system design of local streets can greatly affect traffic.
Unduly long streets build up traffic volumes and act as collectors.
Cross streets and intersections with acute angles are likely to
contribute to accidents. Good practice precludes carrying local
streets into arterials since such intersections create unnecessary
friction points and cause related congestion on the arterials. A far
better approach is to bring local streets into collectors which then
feed into arterials.
T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G
U N
D O • G
E N E R A L
P L A N
4-15
4. Circulation Element
Draft 917104
Planned or Funded Roadway Improvements
A series of roadway improvements are either planned, funded or
currently under construction. The traffic model forecasts have
included these roadway improvements since they will be completed
prior to buildout of the Land Use Element. These roadway
improvements are illustrated in Exhibit C -9 and listed below.
Widening of Aviation Boulevard - Rosecrans Avenue to Imperial
Highway. The scope of work involves adding one lane in each
direction. The following intersections will benefit from this project.
• Aviation Boulevard/Imperial Highway - Add one through
lane in each direction for northbound and southbound
movements, resulting in dual lefts, 3 through and one right
turn only lane for both movements.
• Aviation Boulevard/120th Street - Add one through lane in
each direction for northbound and southbound movements,
resulting in one left and 3 through lanes for both movements.
• Aviation Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard - Add one
through lane in each direction for northbound and
southbound movements, resulting in one left, 3 through and
one right turn only lane for the southbound movement; one
left and 3 through lanes for the northbound movement.
• Aviation Boulevard/Utah -135th Street - Add one through
lane in each direction for northbound and southbound
movements, resulting in one left and 3 through lanes for both
movements.
• Aviation Boulevard/Rosecrans Avenue Improvements - The
intersection improvements are being implemented by the City
of Hawthorne. The proposed lane additions are:
Add second left -turn lane on northbound,
southbound and eastbound approaches.
➢ Add a fourth through lane and one exclusive right
lane on the southbound movement.
➢ Add a third through lane on the westbound
approach.
➢ Add an exclusive right -turn lane on the
northbound and eastbound approaches.
Construct left -turn pocket for northbound Continental Boulevard
at Grand Avenue - This improvement will result in one left and
three through lanes for the northbound movement.
T H E C I T Y
O F E L S
E G U N
D O • G
E N E R
A L
P
L
A N
4-16
4. Circulation Element Dreg 917104
Douglas Street Extension from Park Place to Alaska Avenue —
This improvement will connect the discontinuous street between
Park Place and Alaska Avenue.
Construct left -turn pocket for southbound Sepulveda Boulevard at
Grand Avenue.
Convert one through lane to a shared through left -turn lane on
eastbound El Segundo Boulevard at Sepulveda Boulevard.
Convert Nash and Douglas Streets to two -way operation between
Imperial Avenue and El Segundo Boulevard. Make all necessary
intersection improvements to accommodate two -way operation.
Other Additional Intersection Improvements identified in the
Traffic Analysis Report and EIR for the Circulation Element to
further improve intersection levels of service which may require
additional right -of -way beyond the street classifications in Exhibit
C
Future Travel In order to plan for the future travel conditions in El Segundo, traffic
Forecasts forecasts were developed for buildout of the City's Land Use Plan as
presented in the Land Use Element. The traffic forecasts
incorporated the type and density of future land uses within the City,
the location and potential interaction of various land use types, as
well as the characteristics and capacity of each of the City's
roadways. The following types of development activity in the City
have been considered:
• Approved and Active Projects - Those projects which have
already received discretionary approval or are being
reviewed. Approved or active projects are summarized in
Table III -3 of the Traffic Analysis Report for the Circulation
Element.
• Vacant Parcels - Potential development of all vacant parcels
has been assessed, assuming appropriate zoning categories
and floor -area- ratios. The results are presented in Table III -4
of the Traffic Analysis Report for the Circulation Element.
• Recyclable Parcels - Parcels which currently have buildings
but which are likely to be recycled within the time frame of
the Circulation Element have been assessed. Potential
development on vacant parcels and recyclable parcels is
summarized in Appendix C of the Traffic Analysis Report for
the Circulation Element.
T H E C I T Y
O F E L
S
E G
U N
D
O
• G
E N
E
R A
L
P
L
A N
4-18
4. Circulation Element Drell 917104
Due to the fact that El Segundo is located in an urbanized area with
many jurisdictions and a variety of planners and decision makers,
planning for the City's future must incorporate projected activities in
the jurisdictions neighboring the City and in the region as a whole.
Therefore, projected traffic using the City's streets that would be
generated by land use changes outside the city was incorporated into
the analysis of buildout traffic conditions. In addition, regional
initiatives and activities, due to air quality and congestion concerns,
are projected to have an impact on future travel patterns and traffic
conditions in the region. The effect of regional air quality and
congestion reduction activities was also considered and incorporated
into the analysis of future traffic conditions.
Master Plan of Street
The Master Plan of Streets is presented in Exhibit C -10. The Master
Plan of Streets has been revised since the existing Master Plan was
adopted in 1992 and has been developed taking into consideration
existing street alignments, constraints in the City, the potential for new
routes, and future traffic volumes, all predicated on the types of
existing and future land uses and their spatial relationships.
The Master Plan of Streets designates a preferred number of traffic
lanes to support buildout of the General Plan Land Use Element.
Accordingly, the Master Plan of Streets would be developed with the
full cross section of lanes for each street designation, as shown in
Exhibit C -8. Thus, all streets designated as 6 -lane roadways would
have three through lanes in each direction (six through lanes total) in
the future, all streets designated as 8 -lane roadways would have four
through lanes in each direction.
The Master Plan of Streets differs from the Master Plan of Streets
adopted in 1992 in the following aspects:
The previously planned extension of Grand Avenue from
Douglas Street to Aviation Boulevard is no longer included in
the Master Plan of Streets.
The previously planned extension of Mariposa Avenue from
Douglas Street to Aviation Boulevard is no longer included in
the Master Plan of Streets.
The previously planned direct connection of Nash Street north
of Rosecrans Boulevard is no longer included in the Master
Plan of Streets.
The previously planned direct connection of Hughes Way to
Utah Avenue is no longer included in the Master Plan of
Streets.
T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N
4-19
4. Circulation Element
Draft 917104
T H E C I T Y O F E L 8 E G
U N
D O
• G
E N E R
A L
P L
A N
4-18
4. Circulation Element Draft 917N4
Nash and Douglas Streets are designated as two -way streets
between Imperial Avenue and El Segundo Boulevard,
representing a change from the existing one -way operation on
those streets
The designation of a future transportation corridor in the
southeastern part of the city to include extensions of Park Place
and Allied Way.
The designation of Park Place between Nash Street and Douglas
Street as a collector, rather than a local street.
A discussion of these changes and the reasons for change are presented
in the following paragraphs.
Unconstructed Master Plan Street Extensions
The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included some
unconstructed street system extensions. None of these street extensions
would be expected to serve through traffic since none would provide
continuous travel routes for regional through trips. Therefore, the main
purpose of each street extension is to serve local parcels of land as they
are developed and provide access to each parcel. In general, given the
grid -like circulation system, the parcels can be efficiently served by a
series of well designed access points, driveways and internal roadways
as opposed to new through streets.
One of the serious concerns associated with the previously planned
east/west through streets is the potential to also increase traffic flow on
streets west of Sepulveda Boulevard. This concern is especially critical
for Mariposa Avenue and Grand Avenue. Extension of either street
through to Aviation Boulevard would likely result in increased traffic
volume on those streets to the west of Sepulveda Boulevard as a result
of the creation of new convenient routes.
Grand Avenue
The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included the extension of
Grand Avenue from Duley Road east to Aviation Boulevard. Based on
significant traffic growth in the vicinity of Grand Avenue between
Continental Boulevard and Douglas Street, Grand Avenue is
maintained in the Master Plan as far as Douglas Street. This will help
to relieve congestion at the intersections of Nash Street/El Segundo
Boulevard and Douglas Street/El Segundo Boulevard. The segment of
Grand Avenue from Douglas Street to Aviation Boulevard is no longer
included in the Master Plan of Streets. This will protect the segment of
Grand Avenue west of Sepulveda Boulevard from becoming a through
route for commuter traffic.
T H E C I T Y O F
E L S
E G U N
D O •
G
E
N E
R
A L
P L
A N
4-21
4. Circulation Element Dreg 911104
Mariposa Avenue
The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included the connection of
Mariposa Avenue from Douglas Street to Aviation Boulevard. The
construction of this street extension would primarily serve the land uses
in that vicinity as they are developed. This would likely increase traffic
volumes on Mariposa Avenue in the residential neighborhoods west of
Sepulveda Boulevard. For this reason, the street extension has been
deleted from the Master Plan.
Lairport Street
The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included the connection of
Lairport Street from Maple Avenue to Selby Street. This connection
would serve though traffic volumes from the area south of Maple
Avenue, however, little growth is forecast in the area between Maple
Avenue and Imperial Highway. This link would connect Lairport
Street to Imperial Highway relatively close to the intersection with
Sepulveda Boulevard. This street extension is maintained in the Master
Plan.
Douglas Street
The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included connection of
Douglas Street from its current terminus through to existing Douglas
Street near Park Place (for connection through to Rosecrans Avenue).
Given the significant forecast congestion on both Sepulveda Boulevard
and Aviation Boulevard, as well as the forecast increase in trips along
Douglas Street north of Rosecrans Avenue, this connection is
warranted and remains in the Master Plan. The future traffic model
forecasts included the Douglas Street extension improvements as an
assumed baseline condition since it is anticipated to be completed prior
to buildout of the Land Use Element.
Nash Street
The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included the direct
connection of Nash Street from El Segundo Boulevard to the existing
terminus north of Rosecrans Avenue. Due to current and anticipated
future land use patterns, this connection is not likely to be feasible
within the time frame of the Circulation Element. It is therefore not
included in the Master Plan.
Hughes Way
The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included the connection of
existing Hughes Way to Utah Avenue to the east. Due to current and
anticipated future land use patterns, this connection is not likely to be
feasible within the time frame of the Circulation Element. It is
therefore not included in the Master Plan.
T
H
E
C I
T
Y
O
F
E
L
S
E
G
U N
D
O
• G
E
N
E
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
4-22
4. Circulation Element
Draft 917104
Future Transportation Corridor
At this time, there are emerging plans for redevelopment of a
significant portion of the southeast portion of the City (north of
Rosecrans Avenue and east of Sepulveda Boulevard). If
redevelopment activity occurs in the future, there may be a need for
additional roadway capacity to support the increased trips that would
occur as a result of the development activity. Although the Nash Street
and Hughes Way extensions are not warranted at this time, and neither
is included in the Master Plan of Streets, the City expects to establish a
future transportation corridor in that quadrant of the City. The Corridor
will allow the City to reserve potential right -of -way, to be determined
as development is proposed, to complete the necessary transportation
networks which will serve the new development. At this time, it is not
possible to designate the precise alignment of roadway connections;
however, it must be recognized that additional east/west and
north/south circulation capacity will be required. This may include an
extension of Park Place from Nash Street to Sepulveda Boulevard and
an extension of Allied Way south to connect to Park Place. The City
should evaluate the need for additional east/west and north/south
capacity based upon development proposals as they arise. The
alignment of the transportation facilities will be determined based upon
further studies and should include capacity to serve the new
development as well as anticipated through traffic that may use the new
roadways. With the potential extension of Park Place, it is appropriate
to redesignate the portion of Park Place between Nash Street and
Douglas Street from a local street to a collector street to be consistent
with the designation of the Park Place extension.
Nash /Douglas One Way Couplet Versus Two -Way Traffic Flow
Nash and Douglas Streets currently operate as one -way streets from El
Segundo Boulevard to Imperial Highway. In 1996, the change to one-
way operation was completed in response to the opening of the I -105
Freeway and concerns associated with freeway access and related
congestion. Since the conversion to one -way operation there have been
concerns related to the circuitous travel paths created for some
businesses. Conversion to two -way flow, with appropriate mitigation
measures would provide more desirable traffic operating conditions.
Based on the technical findings and the City's strong desire to return to
two -way flow, these two streets are included as two -way streets in the
Master Plan of Streets.
Future Redevelopment of the Chevron Refinery
The current land uses and activities on the Chevron Refinery site are
expected to remain throughout the life of this General Plan and
Circulation Element. However, potential redevelopment of this site
T H E C I T Y
O F E L S E G U N
D O
• G
E N E
R A L
P L
A
N
4-23
4. Circulation Element Draft 917114
will have a significant impact on all aspects of the City, including
circulation. Redevelopment of the Chevron site will require
reevaluation and possibly an update of the General Plan and require
reevaluation of the Circulation Element. The potential redevelopment
of this site may require significant roadway system improvements
beyond those identified in the Master Plan of Streets. All future
roadways within the Chevron site would be planned and constructed
consistently with the City's Master Plan of Streets to ensure system
continuity and use of appropriate standards.
Projected Traffic Volumes on El Segundo Arterial Roadways
The projected future traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit C -11 for
each of the City's arterial roadways.
Transportation System and Transportation Demand Management
It is recognized that there are physical limitations to the amount of
street width that can be provided. The buildout traffic projections in
many instances cannot be accommodated solely by conventional
roadway widening techniques. The use of Transportation System
Management (TSM) and Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
techniques (discussed later in the Circulation Element) to handle the
projected "person trips" in the area must also be considered.
Such TSM and TDM techniques should be considered both:
• As a general augmentation to implementation of the Master
Plan of Streets and Highways generally; and
• As an alternative to site specific Master Plan implementation if
it can be reasonably demonstrated that the TSM alternative will
have at least as great a mitigating impact, and the property
owner is willing to enter into a legally binding agreement with
the City to implement such TSM alternatives.
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
Nearly every jurisdiction in southern California has experienced
roadway congestion problems that cannot be solved simply by adding
roadway capacity. This is for several reasons including the lack of
right -of -way to accomplish various widening projects as well as the
environmental impacts associated with major roadway enhancements.
As an alternative and supplemental improvement, many local agencies
are implementing Intelligent Transportation Systems projects using
advanced computer and communication technologies. The ITS projects
that are being implemented provide improved traveler information,
manage the flow of traffic, and utilize existing transportation systems
more efficiently.
T
H
E
C I
T
Y
O
F
E
L
S
E
G
U N
D
O •
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
4-24
4. Circulation Element Dreg 917N4
The goals of ITS are to reduce travel times, provide more reliable travel
times, improve safety, reduce delay and reduce congestion. The high
concentration of employment in the northeast quadrant of El Segundo
makes it an area that is well- suited for application of advanced
technology to accomplish the goals of ITS. This is because of the
high density of employment, the large number of peak hour trips, the
potentially high growth rate and the constraints on physical
improvements. Examples of ITS system components include a
centralized computer transportation management center, advanced
transportation monitoring systems such as closed circuit TV (CCTV),
transit traveler information, dynamic information displays at activity
centers, bus priority treatment, real -time traffic management,
coordination of local circulators, corporate Intranet information and
other elements. In other jurisdictions, these types of improvements
have resulted in significant savings in vehicle and motorist delay,
significant travel time reductions and significant environmental
benefits all without major roadway widening or reconstruction projects.
Recent deployment of ITS technologies has occurred throughout Los
Angeles (ATSAC and other systems), Orange County (SMART
STREETS), the South Bay, Santa Monica and many other agencies.
Due to its many benefits and cost effectiveness, ITS could be
considered as an integral part of the future transportation system of El
Segundo. Similar to the City of Los Angeles methodology, a ten
percent enhancement in capacity has been incorporated into the traffic
modeling for the projected traffic volumes at buildout to represent the
savings in vehicle stops and delays that would occur as a result of an
ITS system in the City.
Truck Routes The residents and businesses of El Segundo rely heavily on trucks for
the efficient movement of goods in an economical and safe manner.
For this reason, the truck route system within and through the City is
an important aspect of the Circulation Element.
Current City Truck Routes
The El Segundo Municipal Code officially authorizes the City
Council, by resolution, to designate truck routes on streets where
vehicles in excess of three tons may travel. Existing truck routes are
provided with appropriate sign posting to guide truck traffic through
the City. These existing routes are shown in Exhibit C -12.
Truck Route Considerations
Selection of a truck routing system necessitates the determination of
the impact of truck traffic on abutting land uses. There are land use
categories that benefit from heavy truck access. Among these are
industrial and commercial uses that require streets and alleys
accessible to their development. Industry has to be served by trucks
T H E C I T Y O F E L S
E G
U N
D O
• G
E
N
E R
A L
P
L
A
N
4-26
4. Circulation Element Dreg 917104
for deliveries of raw materials, the transfer of inventory, and the out-
flow of finished goods. Commercial land uses also require access to
trucks primarily for the transfer of inventory.
Conversely, there is a need to protect those land uses that are
adversely affected by heavy truck traffic. hi El Segundo, these include
the single - family, two - family, and multi - family residential uses in the
northwestern portion of the City. Heavy truck traffic within
residential neighborhoods produce annoying and often excessive
levels of noise, fumes, vibrations, and unsightliness. Areas in which
schools, hospitals, churches, convalescent homes, and mortuaries are
located must also be considered.
Establishment of a truck route system must basically follow the
arterial street system. These routes must be located along those
arterials designed to accommodate large vehicle traffic, and must, at
the same time, seek to avoid fully developed residential areas where
there are close and reasonable alternatives. They should also
concentrate in areas of need such as the primary commercial and
industrial areas in the southwest and easternmost portions of the City.
The gross maximum weight restriction (6,000 pounds) in El Segundo
is consistent with the weight limit imposed by most cities for non-
truck route streets. The streets selected for the truck route system
must be designed to support loads in excess of this limitation.
Provisions must also be made for vehicles transporting hazardous
materials into and through the City along the truck route system.
Current Municipal Code sections in El Segundo adequately account
for such provisions.
Master Plan Truck Route System
The Recommended Master Plan Truck Route System is shown in
Exhibit C -13. It incorporates the following roadways as recommended
additions to the existing truck route system in El Segundo:
Grand Avenue between Sepulveda Boulevard and Aviation
Boulevard
Douglas Street between Imperial Avenue and Rosecrans
Avenue
Nash Street between Imperial Avenue and El Segundo
Boulevard
The recommended truck routes differ from those recommended in
1992 as follows:
T H E C I
T Y O F
E L
S
E
G
U N
D O
• G
E N
E
R
A
L
P L A N
4-28
4. Circulation Element Draft 91IN4
Nash Street from El Segundo Boulevard to Park Place is
removed since that street extension is deleted.
Grand Avenue from Douglas Street to Aviation Boulevard is
deleted since that street extension is deleted.
Grand Avenue from Main Street to Sepulveda Boulevard is
added.
Grand Avenue from Main Street to Sepulveda Boulevard is
retained since it has been implemented and is no longer
recommended for deletion.
Truck Loading Zones
There are presently narrow streets and alleys within some of the
industrial areas of the City that serve as impediments to truck
operation on the present street system. Current land uses and future
development require truck access in many of these areas. The City
needs to work toward widening the streets and alleys, eliminating the
impediments for truck operation from the City's street system. In
addition, the City should work toward implementing the appropriate
policies listed later in the Circulation Element in order to minimize
the truck access impediments wherever street widening is not feasible.
Alternative Modes of Travel
Public Transportation The automobile has traditionally been the primary method of
transportation in the Southern California region. However, changing
lifestyles, economic pressures and greater social and environmental
concerns have increased the need for alternatives to automobile
travel. Public transportation is one of the alternative modes of travel
that can possibly reduce the region's and the City's dependence on the
present auto - oriented transportation system.
In order for a transit system to attract users away from the
automobile, it must be as convenient and affordable as possible.
Compared to the convenience, flexibility, and privacy of travel by
car, transit travel is perceived to be less appealing, especially for
recreational purposes. Thus, for transit service to provide a viable
alternative to the automobile in the City of El Segundo, the City must
take an active role in planning and supporting the provision of various
transit opportunities.
Existing Public Transit
The current transit service in El Segundo is provided by the Metro
Green Line light rail system and fixed bus routes operated by the Los
Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) and a Dial -a-
Ride service by the City of El Segundo. The Green Line route and
stations in El Segundo and the current fixed MTA bus routes
operating within the City are shown on Exhibit C -14.
T H E C I T Y O F
E L S E G
U N
D 0'
G
E N
E R A L
P L A N
4-30
4. Circulation Element Dreg 917104
The Municipal Area Express, or MAX Transit Service, is funded
cooperatively by eight cities and Los Angeles County. It is a
directional bus service primarily provided for the workers in the El
Segundo area. Buses run on two routes from residential areas in the
South Bay to El Segundo in the AM, and from El Segundo back to
the South Bay residential areas in the PM.
Demand Responsive Transit Service (Dial -a -Ride)
In E1 Segundo, the City provides one twelve- passenger van that
operates on a 'Dial -a- Ride" basis in response to specific demand.
This service has been in operation since 1975. Residents phone for
appointments, with a door -to -door response time of approximately 10
minutes.
The service is currently funded by Proposition A funds. Dial -a -Ride
service is free to El Segundo residents and only operates within the
City limits. The van operates from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM Monday
through Friday, and from 10:00 AM to 3:00 PM on Saturday.
Ridership levels have stabilized over the years to approximately 38
passengers per day (approximately 12,000 passengers per year).The
predominant users of this service are senior citizens, accounting for
approximately 80 percent of the trips.
The City also operates a fixed -route beach shuttle from mid -June to
Labor Day. The service operates from 10.00 AM to 4.00 PM
everyday and carries approximately 200 riders daily.
Downtown Lunchtime Shuttle
The City of El Segundo operates a lunchtime downtown shuttle
service, with four 12- passenger vans. Two routes are operated, one
along Grand Avenue and one along Imperial Avenue, both between
Sepulveda Boulevard and the downtown area. Hours of operation are
between 11:30 AM and 2:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Shuttles
are operated with a frequency of about one van every 10 minutes.
Considering Public Transit Alternatives
Presently, the City has a variety of transit alternatives, including the
Metro Green Line, the MTA bus services, the MAX Transit System,
the City of El Segundo Dial -A -Ride, and Route 8 of the Torrance
Transit System.
Public investment regionally in transit services can be a viable means
of mitigating the effects of automobile usage while providing
increased mobility to all groups of citizens and employees. It must be
T H E C I T Y
O F E L S
E G
U N
D
O
• G
E N
E R
A
L
P L
A N
4-32
4. Circulation Element Draft 917104
emphasized that transit bus or rail service cannot substitute for all
automobile travel in the City, nor should it be intended to do so. The
private automobile is an attractive means of travel for many people,
offering an unmatched advantage for certain types of trips. Transit
alternatives are only one component in the total transportation system
serving the City, yet certainly the most environmentally respectful in
the urban context.
Certain areas are more suitable for transit services than others. The
following conditions exist and overlap in the City and adjacent urban
areas and suggest that transit service would be appropriate within the
City:
• High population concentration of housing and/or employment
• Excess auto demand on present highway system
• Fragile residential environment
Rail Rapid Transit
As illustrated in Exhibit C -14, the 2.9 mile Metro Green Line
Extension running from the Century Freeway south through El
Segundo provides access to the regional rail rapid transit system via
rail stations at various locations in El Segundo. The following
stations provide access to the Metro Green Line:
• Douglas/Rosecrans Station
• El Segundo/Nash Station
• Mariposa/Nash Station
• Aviation/I -105 Freeway Station (adjacent to the eastern
boundary of El Segundo)
The Metro Green Line provides light rail service along the I -105
Freeway from Norwalk to Los Angeles Airport (LAX). Through
transfer to the Metro Blue Line, Metro Red Line and Metro Gold
Line, it provides El Segundo with rail service to downtown Los
Angeles, Long Beach, Hollywood and Pasadena.
The Metro Green Line is elevated through all of the City, along the
alignment shown in Exhibit C -14. Service is provided seven days a
week from 5:30 AM to 1:30 AM with 6- minute headways during the
peak and 20- minute headways during the off -peak. Parking is
provided at the Nash/El Segundo station. Connecting bus or shuttle
service is also available at all stations.
Implementation of the Metro Green Line provides the eastern portion
of the City with direct rail service. The service attracts some
commuters and visitors away from the automobile and thus,
positively impacts the roadway system within the City. Projected
impacts and usage of the Metro Green Line service and increased
T H E C I T Y O F
E L S E
G
U N
D
O
• G
E N E
R
A L P L A N
4-33
4. Circulation Element Draft 917104
emphasis on transit regionally were incorporated into the analysis and
development of the Circulation Element.
To ensure that the Metro Green Line is integrated into the City's
circulation system, and City activities in general, consideration of the
rail line should be incorporated into all aspects of City planning
activities and the development review process. This is particularly
important in the vicinity of the rail line stations. In addition, the
pedestrian and bicycle circulation system must be designed to allow
convenient access to each of the stations. Further, the City should
monitor the MTA and incorporate all Metro Rail planning and
development into the City's planning process.
Park - and -Ride
"Park- and -ride" facilities provide an interface between the private
automobile and public transit/mass transit. Park- and -ride facilities
enable the public to access the transit system by driving to a park -
and -ride facility, parking the car, then riding the transit system to
complete the trip. When the location of a park- and -ride facility is
coupled with highly efficient fixed transit service and an adequate
collection and distribution service at the commercial end of the trip,
this concept is an integral part of public transportation.
Metro Green Line
Within the City, a park- and -ride facility is provided at the El
Segundo/Nash Metro Green Line station in addition to the Aviation/1-
105 Metro Green Line station just east of the city limits. Additionally
a multi -modal transit center with a park- and -ride facility is planned to
be constructed on City property adjacent to the Douglas Street Metro
Green Line Station as part of the Douglas Street extension project.
Bicycle Facilities The bicycle is increasing in popularity as a mode of transportation for
commuter travel as well as for recreation. This is due to the growing
cost of motor vehicle operation, the significantly shorter portal -to-
portal time when bikes are used on short trips, the increasing
awareness and desire of travelers to utilize clean-air travel methods,
and the acceptance of the bicycle for personal health, exercise, and
increased mobility. There is a need to meet the growing demand for
safe places to ride bicycles, both for recreation and commuter
activities.
For many years, roadway facilities have been built exclusively to
meet the needs of the motorized vehicle, resulting in street
geometries, lane widths, and intersections that have not been designed
for bicyclist concerns. Bicycle safety is jeopardized due to bike /auto
and bike /pedestrian confrontation on the street, and the lack of space
given to bicycle movement. Conflicts between bicycles and
pedestrians at intersections and on sidewalks results in the need to
T H E C I
T Y O F
E L S
E G
U N
D O
• G
E
N
E R
A L
P L
A N
4-34
4. Circulation Element Dreg 917104
separate these three modes, wherever possible, to provide a safer and
more efficient operational environment for each.
Definitions
To clarify any discussion on bicycles, a distinction must be made
between the type of bicycle facilities in use. The following definitions
(recognized Statewide) are identified below, and used throughout the
Circulation Element:
Bicycle Path - Class I
This facility is a special path for exclusive use of bicycles which
is separated from the motor vehicle traffic by space or a physical
barrier.
Bicycle Lane - Class II
A bicycle facility where a portion of the paved area is marked
especially as a lane for use of bicycles. It is identified by
BIKELANE signing, pavement marking and lane line markings.
Usually, special ordinances are necessary to legally define the
area's exclusive use of bicycle traffic and to exclude mopeds and
infringement by motor vehicles.
Bicycle Route - Class III
A bicycle way designated within a public right -of -way. The
purpose of the bike route is primarily that of transportation,
allowing the bicyclist to travel from one point in the City to
another. A "shared bicycle route" is a street identified as a bicycle
facility by BIKE ROUTE signing only. No special markings on
the pavement are provided.
Existing Bicycle Route System
The existing system of bicycle facilities in the vicinity of El Segundo
currently is limited to bicycle paths (Class I) along Imperial Highway,
along the beach (Los Angeles County implementation), and portions
of Grand Avenue approaching the beach. Exhibit C -15 illustrates
existing and planned bicycle routes in the City. All routes shown on
the exhibit are future planned routes unless specifically indicated as
existing on the map.
Bicycle Route Guidelines and Standards
Implementation of any bicycle route facility, as designated on the
Bicycle Master Plan, would be subject to applicable design standards
and guidelines. The State of California has prepared and approved
"Standards and Guidelines for the Implementation and Design of
Bicycle Facilities." The evolution of design concepts for this mode of
transportation continues today, but the basic conclusions and basis for
design remain with the State Guidelines. The principle bicycle design
areas that should be adhered to include:
T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N
4-35
4. Circulation Element Dreg 917104
• Minimum widths (8 -foot minimum for two -way path; 5 -foot
minimum for one -way)
• Signing and striping of routes, lanes, and paths
• Design speed
• Horizontal alignment; i.e., curvature and super - elevation of
paths
• Stopping sight distance
• Grades, length of crest vertical curves
• Adequate structural section
• Treatment of bicyclist at intersections
• Treatment when passing over at -grade railroad crossings,
drainage grates, manhole covers, and driveway access points
Master Plan of Bicycle Routes
The need to link the City with a system of bicycle facilities led to the
development of a Master Plan of Bicycle Routes, adopted in 1992. It
includes existing routes, and routes that are, or could be, developed
into major bicycle - carrying corridors. The Master Plan of Bicycle
Routes, shown on Exhibit C -15, is an integral part of the city's
Circulation Element. No changes are proposed to the adopted Master
Plan of Bicycle Routes.
Pedestrian Circulation The pedestrian is an integral part of the circulation system and
requires appropriate attention in the Circulation Element. The
sidewalk is an area of refuge that represents a convenient and safe
route for pedestrian transport. The relatively high percentage of
elderly residential population in E1 Segundo, plus school children
coupled with mid -day walkers for shopping trips and jogging,
necessitate the establishment of a pedestrian circulation system that
will support and encourage walking as a mode of transportation.
The El Segundo Municipal Code Section on "Street and Sidewalks"
does not address the issue of sidewalk design nor the policies for
sidewalk implementation. The City Department of Public Works,
however, has prepared Standard Plans and Specifications for the
installation of sidewalks. The primary criteria is minimum width of
sidewalk on new installation which is standard at 4 feet for residential
streets. Sidewalks in commercial areas should be a minimum of 8 feet
wide. The only exception for commercial streets is the case where the
distance from face of curb to property line is 5 feet. The sidewalk
minimum requirement then becomes 4 feet, 6 inches.
Installation of sidewalks is mandatory with all new improvements in
the City. Existing locations that do not have sidewalks can only
require implementation on an assessment district basis; i.e., petition
T H E C I T Y O F
E L
S E
G
U N
D
O
• G
E N
E R
A
L
P
L
A N
4-36
4. Circulation Element Draft 917104
from the homeowners with City installation and cost of the sidewalk
distributed to each homeowner on the basis of their street frontage.
The City has pursued sidewalk installation on the basis of the 1911
Act. This Act allows installation of a sidewalk by an agency in all
blocks where over 50 percent of the block has existing sidewalk.
Protest from the citizens can be made to nullify installation under this
Act with the final decision resting with the City Council. The City of
El Segundo in the past has used this Act to install sidewalks to "close
the gaps" in many of the residential areas.
It is necessary to keep the sidewalk area free of obstructions to allow
for the free flow of pedestrians. When there is a need to place certain
obstructions, i.e., traffic signal poles, they should be designed to
present the least interference to pedestrians.
In the areas of new planned development, the separation of
pedestrians from autos must be considered. Utilizing pedestrian
overpasses between buildings is one method of accomplishing this.
The removal of the pedestrian from at -grade crossings significantly
improves signal timing conditions, thus improving traffic flows.
Transportation System Transportation System Management (TSM) and Transportation
and Demand Demand Management (TDM) techniques are cost - effective methods
Management of improving traffic conditions. Roadway system expansion alone
will not be enough to serve all projected circulation needs within the
City of El Segundo. TSM and TDM techniques will have to be
incorporated as an integral part of the City's package of transportation
services provided in the future. The City currently has regulations in
place, Municipal Code Chapters 15 -16 and 15 -17, which serve this
function.
Transportation System Management (TSM)
Transportation System Management (TSM) techniques are generally
low cost methods relative to capital improvements. They involve
changes to the existing system that permit improvements in operation.
Caltrans defines TSM projects as "those projects designed to increase
the number of person trips which can be carried on the system
without significantly increasing the design capacity or the number of
through lanes."
The City should evaluate a variety of TSM techniques and implement
those that are deemed appropriate. Suggested TSM programs for
consideration should include but are not limited to:
• Auxiliary lanes, such as acceleration and deceleration lanes
• Intersection improvements including addition of turn lanes,
channelization, and implementation of signal coordination
system
T H E C I T Y O F
E L S E G
U N
D O • G
E N E R A L
P L A N
4-38
4. 0mulation Element Dreg 917iV4
Restriction of peak hour parking
Commuter Information Systems, such as changeable message
signs, highway advisory radio, computer bulletin boards,
telephone call- in systems, and related links with other city or
state traffic operations centers
Improvements designed to assist traffic flow related to transit
vehicles, such as bus turnouts and signal preemption systems
Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs are geared
toward reducing the number of vehicle trips wishing to use the
circulation system. TDM techniques can be an effective tool in
reducing air pollution, as well as traffic congestion. In fact, the
Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD),
through Regulation 2202, has required TDM plans and programs
throughout the region for companies of 250 or more employees. This
includes many of the businesses and a significant portion of the
workers located within El Segundo. The City should encourage and
assist all the businesses in El Segundo to plan and maintain TDM
programs. This should be done directly or through cooperation with
and support of the El Segundo Employers Association (ESEA).
Potential TDM programs and techniques should include but are not
limited to:
• Flexible work schedules to reduce demand during the peak
commuting periods
• Carpooling and vanpooling
• Employer subsidized transit passes
• Provision of bike storage areas and showers
• Telecommuting, such as working at home through telephone,
intemet and FAX machine use
• Provision of bike access and storage facilities at future Metro
Green Line stations to encourage internodal bike /rail use,
reducing auto use and the need for parking at the stations
Several companies also operate employee shuttle aervices between
their facilities contributing to an overall reduction of vehicle miles
veled.
Transportation The City of El Segundo is located in one of the fastest developing
Systems Interface urban centers in the nation. The proximity to Los Angeles
International Airport (LAX), active railroad lines (Union Pacific,
BNSF), and a major street and freeway network, dictates the need for
close interface between transportation modes and systems other than
the automobile.
Los Angeles International Airport (LAX)
T H E C I T Y O F
E L S E G
U N
D
O
• G
E
N E
R
A L
P L A N
4-39
4. Circulation Element Draft 917104
The Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) is adjacent to the City
on the north. This includes the West Imperial Terminal and Imperial
Cargo Complex which are located on Imperial Highway.
The Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) encompasses a total of
almost 3,500 acres. Approximately 1,257 acres of the property are
utilized for landing, takeoff, and ground maneuvering. The remaining
acreage is used for the terminal complex, automobile parking
facilities, airline maintenance facilities, fuel storage systems,
industrial purposes, air cargo complex, and related facilities. Some
land has not yet been devoted to specific airport uses, including those
acquired because of noise impact.
Circulation within and around LAX is by automobile, bus, and
parking lot trams. For the general public, surface traffic circulation
between major facilities is on public streets.
A Central Terminal Area (CTA) serves scheduled airline operations,
while the West Imperial Terminal, located along the southern
boundary of the airport, services charter flights and other non-
scheduled operations. The Central Terminal Area is situated at the
hub of the runways with passenger boarding facilities located in
satellite buildings around its periphery. Inward from the satellites, and
linked by underground passageways, are their respective ticketing
buildings. These front on World Way, the main inner loop street
serving all terminals. Within the loop itself is central parking, the
airport administration and control tower building, the airport theme
building with an elevated restaurant, and other facilities.
Air freight operations are presently concentrated east of the Central
Terminal Area (CTA) serving over two million tons of freight in
1997, forecasted to increase to over three million tons by 2005. This
area is served by both Century and Aviation Boulevards.
Extensive parking facilities are provided for the public, employees,
and car rental fines. About half of the passenger parking spaces are
located within the loop formed by World Way. The balance is located
on the perimeter of the airport. The outlying spaces are lower priced
and served by free buses to the CTA. Total parking spaces number
approximately 24,000.
Ground access to LAX is predominantly by means of motor vehicles
using the street and highway system. The I -405 Freeway is aligned in
a north/south direction easterly of the airport. The I -105 freeway
provides east/west access to LAX. The major access route from the
freeway to LAX is Century Boulevard, a major east/west
thoroughfare. Alternative access routes are Imperial Highway and
Lincoln Boulevard. In a north/south direction, Sepulveda Boulevard
T H
E
C I
T Y
O F
E L
S E
G
U N
D O •
G
E N E R A L
P L
A N
4-40
4. Circulation Element Draft 817N4
leads directly to LAX via an interchange at Century Boulevard.
Aviation Boulevard leads to the existing cargo facilities and the
Imperial Cargo Complex located just north of Imperial Highway.
The west end of the airport is served via City of Los Angeles streets,
Vista Del Mar, and Pershing Drive. Pershing Drive terminates at
Imperial Highway on the south and allows east/west flow into and out
of the area. Vista Del Mar continues northerly into the Marina Del
Rey/Westchester area. To the south, it serves the Manhattan and
Hermosa Beach communities.
Annual passenger demand at LAX has risen steadily from 22 million
in 1972 to 26 million in 1976, 32.7 million in 1981, 49.8 million in
1990 and 67.3 million in 2000. The Proposed LAX Master Plan will
include an additional projected passenger growth to approximately 78
million passengers versus the 67.3 million passengers recorded in
2000.
LAX is undergoing a master planning process that may result in
extensive modifications including extension of the Metro Greenline
from the I -105 to the CTA, relocation of cargo facilities and rental car
facilities, and potential construction of a new passenger terminal east
of the CTA. These changes could significantly alter the current
transportation patterns to and from LAX and impact traffic patterns in
El Segundo.
The City must monitor future plans and development at the airport,
Because of the interrelationship of the City's economy and circulation
system to the activity at LAX. The City must also ensure that airport
plans and development are incorporated into all aspects of the City's
planning process.
Railroad Freight Considerations
The City has several railroad lines that are actively used for freight
transport and are shown on Exhibit C -16. Most prominently located
in the southeast portion of the City are the Burlington Northern Santa
Fe Railroad (BNSF) and the Union Pacific Railroad. These rail lines
do not provide public transportation service.
There are twenty -one at -grade crossings of railroad lines with arterial
roadways within the City of El Segundo. The crossing of freight
trains disrupts vehicular traffic on the City's streets considerably,
contributing to delay and congestion.
Two major grade separations of the BNSF railroad span El Segundo
Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue. The former crossing occurs
immediately west of Aviation Boulevard while the latter separation
diagonally crosses the intersection of Aviation/Rosecrans.
T H E
C I
T Y
O F
E L S E G
U N
D O
• G
E
N
E
R
A L
P L
A N
4-41
4. Circulation Element Dreg 917104
The El Segundo /Aviation railroad crossing has a middle support due
to the long span across the west leg of the intersection. While the
grade separation eliminated railroad/auto conflicts, its position over
the road and its supports preclude roadway widening unless a large
cost is incurred.
Likewise, the diagonal orientation of the separation across Rosecrans
Avenue at Aviation Boulevard precludes widening of either street.
T H E C I T Y O F E L S
E G U N
D O
• G
E N
E R
A L P L A N
4-42
4. Circulation Element
Draft 917104
T
H
E
C I
T
Y
O
F
E
L
S
E
G
U N
D
O
• G
E
N
E
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
4-42
4. Circulation Element Draft 917104
The proximity of the railroad approach embankment necessitates
railroad relocation or an extremely long span if major widening were
to occur.
The grade separation of the highway and rail facilities allows both to
operate more safely and efficiently. Grade separation at additional rail
crossings within the City should be analyzed and encouraged.
However, the necessary structures should be configured to allow
future alterations or expansions of both the highway and rail link
without necessitating reconstruction.
Port Considerations
The City does not have a deep water port nor any small craft harbors
along its jurisdictional boundary. Chevron does have a marine
terminal to moor offshore for the loading and unloading of its large
oil tankers.
The marine terminal is located in the Santa Monica Bay, and consists
of three (3) berths that are comprised of mooring buoys permanently
anchored to the ocean floor. Each of the three berths has a transfer
pipeline to the refinery shore facilities for discharge and loading of
crude oil and refined products.
Chevron currently has no plans for expansion of the operations, nor to
increase capacity through the use of supertankers.
Small Craft Harbors
While the Countywide demand for small craft harbors continues to
grow, there are no plans for harbor facilities within the El Segundo
jurisdiction. Marina Del Rey, the world's largest man-made harbor,
lies to the north of El Segundo, while Kings Harbor in Redondo
Beach provides berthing and mooring capacity to the south.
T H E C I T Y O F E L S
E G
U N
D O •
G
E N E R
A
L
P L A N
443
4. Circulation Element
Goals, Objectives, and Policies
Draft 911104
Circulation goals, objectives, and policies are presented as part of the
Circulation Element for the City of El Segundo to guide policy
makers and City staff in the planning and provision of the City's
circulation system. The goals, objectives, and policies were
developed through consideration of existing circulation issues,
projected circulation needs associated with the Land Use Element,
growth outside of the City, and the interests of the residents and
businesses of El Segundo. Each of the goals identifies the general
direction for the City's circulation system. The objectives outline
more specific circulation guidelines for the City's decision makers
and staff to work toward. The implementation policies are actions or
policies that will assist the City in achieving the identified goals and
objectives.
Goal Cl: Provision for a Safe, Convenient, and Cost Effective
Circulation System
Provide a safe, convenient, and cost - effective circulation system to
serve the present and future circulation needs of the El Segundo
community.
Objective C1 -1 Provide a roadway system that accommodates the City's existing and
projected land use and circulation needs.
Policy C1 -1.1
Maintain and update the citywide traffic model as needed for
purposes of evaluating project - related and external traffic impacts on
the City circulation system.
Policy C1.1.2
Pursue implementation of all Circulation Element policies such that
all Master Plan roadways are upgraded and maintained at acceptable
levels of service.
Policy C1 -1.3
Provide adequate roadway capacity on all Master Plan roadways.
Policy C1 -1.4
Construct missing roadway links to complete the roadway system
designated in the Circulation Element when needed to improve traffic
operating conditions and to serve development.
T H E
C I
T Y O F
E L S
E G
U N
D O
• G
E
N
E R
A L
P L
A N
444
4. Circulation Element Draft 917i94
Policy C1 -1.5
Implement roadway and intersection upgrades to full Circulation
Element standards when needed to improve traffic operating
conditions and to serve development.
Policy C1 -1.6
Ensure that planned intersection improvements are constructed as
designated in Exhibit C -9 to achieve efficient operation of the
circulation system at a Level of Service "D" or better where feasible.
Policy C1 -1.7
Provide adequate intersection capacity to the extent feasible on
Major, Secondary, and Collector Arterials to maintain LOS D and to
prevent diversion of through traffic into local residential streets.
Policy C1 -1.8
Provide all residential, commercial, and industrial areas with efficient
and safe access to the major regional transportation facilities.
Policy C1 -1.9
Provide all residential, commercial, and industrial areas with efficient
and safe access for emergency vehicles.
Policy C1 -1.10
Ensure that new roadway links are constructed as designated in the
Master Plan and link with existing roadways within the City such that
efficient operation of the circulation system is maintained at an
operating Level of Service of "D" or better.
Policy C1 -1.11
Ensure that the transition from any Master Plan roadway to another
Master Plan roadway at a higher classification operates safely and
efficiently, incorporating the appropriate intersection configuration
and any turn lanes that are necessary.
Policy C1 -1.12
Convert Nash Street and Douglas Street from a one -way couplet to a
two -way roadway operation between El Segundo Boulevard and
Imperial Highway, incorporating appropriate signage, traffic controls,
and other modifications to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety and
efficient traffic operations.
Policy C1 -1.13
Establish and maintain a citywide traffic count program, to ensure the
availability of data needed to identify circulation problems and to
evaluate potential improvements.
Policy C1 -1.14
T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N
4-45
4. Circulation Element Draft 917104
Require a full evaluation of potential traffic impacts associated with
proposed new developments prior to project approval. Further,
require the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures prior
to, or in conjunction with, project development. Mitigation measures
may include new roadway links on segments that would connect the
new development to the existing roadway system, intersection
improvements, and other measures. Mitigation measures shall be
provided by or paid for by the project developer.
Policy C1 -1.15
Pursue and protect adequate right -of -way to accommodate future
circulation system improvements.
Policy C1 -1.16
Encourage the widening of substandard streets and alleys to meet City
standards wherever feasible.
Policy C1.1.17
Encourage cooperation with other governmental agencies to provide
adequate vehicular traffic movements on streets and through
intersections by means of synchronized signalization.
Policy C1 -1.18
Review future developments to ensure uniformity of street naming
and avoidance of name duplication or name inconsistencies on a
continuous link.
Policy C1 -1.19
Continue to monitor the impacts of the I -105 Freeway on local El
Segundo streets. If it is determined that freeway traffic is using local
streets like California Street as a short cut through the City, evaluate
potential mitigations.
Objective C1 -2 Provide a circulation system consistent with current and future
engineering standards to ensure the safety of the residents, workers,
and visitors of El Segundo.
Policy C1 -2.1
Develop and maintain a circulation system which shall include a
functional hierarchy and classification system of arterial highways
that will correlate capacity and service function to specific road
design and land use requirements.
Objective C1 -3 Ensure that the City's Master Plan Truck Route System efficiently
serves the shipping needs of the commercial and industrial land uses
in El Segundo while balancing potential conflicts with residential and
recreational land uses throughout the City.
T H E C I T Y
O F E L S E G
U N
D O
• G E
N E
R A
L
P L
A N
4-46
4. Circulation Element Dreg 917i94
Policy C1 -3.1
Ensure that the City's designated truck routes provide efficient access
to and from the I -105 Freeway.
Policy C1 -3.2
Ensure that the development review process incorporates
consideration of off - street commercial loading requirements for all
new projects.
Policy C1 -3.3
Require that all new construction on streets or corridors that are
designated truck routes have a Traffic Index calculation as stated by
the State Department of Transportation in order to provide a roadway
structural section that will accommodate the projected truck volumes
and weights.
Policy C1 -3.4
Prohibit parking within the public right -of -way on either side two -
way alleys. Parking on one side of a one -way alley could be allowed
if the alley width is a minimum of 19 feet.
Policy C1 -3.5
Ensure that the trucks from the cargo facility north of Imperial
Highway at Main Street stay on the City truck route system and do
not travel along Main Street.
Goal C2: Provisions for Alternative Modes of Transportation
Provide a circulation system that incorporates alternatives to the
single - occupant vehicle, to create a balance among travel modes
based on travel needs, costs, social values, user acceptance, and
air quality considerations.
Objective C2 -1 Provide a pedestrian circulation system to support and encourage
walking as a safe and convenient travel mode within the City's
circulation system.
Policy C2 -1.1
Encourage the development of pedestrian linkages to and from the
Metro Green Line stations to encourage and attract intemodal transit/
walking trips.
Policy C24.2
Develop a citywide system of pedestrian walkways, alleviating the
conflict between pedestrians, autos, and bicyclists throughout the
City.
T H E
C I
T Y
O
F
E L
S E
G
U N
D O
• G
E N
E R
A L
P L
A
N
4-47
4. Circulation Element Draft 917104
Policy C2 -1.3
Encourage new developments in the City to participate in the
development of the citywide system of pedestrian walkways and
require participation funded by the project developer where
appropriate.
Policy C2 -1.4
Ensure the installation of sidewalks on all future arterial widening or
new construction projects, to establish a continuous and convenient
link for pedestrians.
Policy C2 -1.5
Encourage the continued use of the 1911 Act to provide missing
sidewalk sections where applicable in residential and commercial
areas.
Policy C2 -1.6
Encourage shopping areas to design their facilities for ease of
pedestrian access.
Policy C2 -1.7
Closely monitor design practices to ensure a clear pedestrian walking
area by minimizing obstructions, especially in the vicinity of
intersections.
Objective C2 -2 Provide a bikeway system throughout the City to support and
encourage the use of the bicycle as a safe and convenient travel mode
within the City's circulation system.
Policy C2 -2.1
Implement the recommendations on the Bicycle Master Plan
contained in the Circulation Element, as the availability arises; i.e.,
through development, private grants, signing of shared routes.
Policy C2 -2.2
Encourage new development to provide facilities for bicyclists to
park and store their bicycles and provide shower and clothes changing
facilities at or close to the bicyclist's work destination.
Policy C2 -2.3
Develop off - street bicycle paths in corridors where appropriate
throughout the City.
Policy C2 -2.4
Encourage the use of bicycles for trips to and from elementary,
middle, and high schools in the area as well as parks, libraries, and
other public facilities.
T H E C I T Y O F
E L S E G
U N D O
• G
E N E R A L
P L A N
4-48
4. Circulation Element Draft 9171V4
Policy C2 -2.5
Continue coordination of bicycle route planning and implementation
with adjacent jurisdictions and regional agencies.
Policy C2 -2.6
Encourage design of new streets with the potential for Class I or Class
II bicycle routes that separate the automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian
to the maximum extent feasible.
Policy C2 -2.7
Although Hillcrest Street is closed between Imperial Avenue and
Imperial Highway to allow emergency vehicular access only, ensure
that the link in the Master Plan of Bicycle Routes is maintained, via
the Hillcrest Street right -of -way or any appropriate alternative route.
Policy C2 -2.8
Evaluate bikeway system links with the Metro Green Line rail
stations and improve access wherever feasible.
Objective C2 -3 Ensure the provision of a safe and efficient transit system that will
offer the residents, workers, and visitors of El Segundo a viable
alternative to the automobile.
Policy C2 -3.1
Work closely with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority (MTA), Torrance Municipal Bus Lines, the
El Segundo Employers Association (ESEA), and private businesses to
expand and improve the public transit service within and adjacent to
the City.
Policy C2 -3.2
Ensure that transit planning is considered and integrated into all
related elements of City planning.
Policy C2 -3.3
Evaluate and implement feeder bus service through the City where
appropriate. Feeder bus service could potentially take commuters
from the fixed transit services (rail and bus) in the eastern portion of
the City to the industrial and commercial areas to the west. In
addition, midday shuttling of workers east of Sepulveda Boulevard to
the Downtown retail area should also be maintained.
Policy C2 -3.4
Pursue potential Proposition A and Proposition C funds for bus transit
shelters, signing, advertising, and bus turnouts to encourage bus
ridership.
T H E C I T Y O F
E L S
E G
U N
D
O
• G
E N
E R A L
P L A N
4-49
4. Circulation Element Drag 917,414
Policy C2 -3.5
Continue the Dial -a -Ride operation and City subsidy to serve all
residents of El Segundo, especially the elderly and handicapped.
Policy C2 -3.6
Continue to support the Downtown Lunchtime shuttle operation.
Policy C2 -3.7
Explore the feasibility of using excess government right -of -way,
purchased property, or land use arrangements for multiple use of
existing facilities, in order to establish or construct park- and -ride
services of benefit to El Segundo residents and employees.
Policy C2 -3.8
Encourage the implementation of park- and -ride facilities proximate to
the I -405 and I -105 Freeways for shuttle service into El Segundo.
Policy C2 -3.9
Investigate all MTA programs which may be beneficial to the City.
Policy C2 -3.10
Encourage the MTA to provide bike storage facilities at the Metro
Green Line rail stations.
Objective C2-4 Ensure the use of Transportation System Management (TSM)
measures throughout the City, to ensure that the City's circulation
system is as efficient and cost effective as possible.
Policy C24.1
Establish and maintain a citywide traffic count program to ensure the
availability of data needed to identify necessary operational
improvements to the roadway system.
Policy C2-4.2
Continue to increase operational efficiencies of the transportation
system by implementing all appropriate Transportation System
Management (TSM) measures, including but not limited to improving
design standards, upgrading and coordination of traffic control
devices, controlling on- street parking, and using sophisticated
electronic control methods to supervise the flow of traffic.
Objective C2 -5 Ensure the use of Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
measures throughout the City, where appropriate, to discourage the
single- occupant vehicle, particularly during the peak hours. In
addition, ensure that any developments that are approved based on
TDM plans incorporate monitoring and enforcement of TDM targets
as part of those plans.
T H E C I
T Y
O F
E L
S
E G
U N
D
O
• G
E
N
E
R
A L
P L
A N
4-50
4. Circulation Element Draft 917M
Policy C2 -5.1
Ensure that Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures
are considered during the evaluation of new developments within the
City, including but not limited to ridesharing, carpooling and
vanpooling, flexible work schedules, telecommuting and car /vanpool
preferential parking.
Policy C2 -5.2
Coordinate activities with neighboring jurisdictions and the El
Segundo Employers Association (ESEA) to optimize the
effectiveness of Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
activities.
Policy C2 -5.3
Encourage the provision of preferential parking for high occupancy
vehicles wherever possible.
Goal C3: Development of Circulation Policies that are
Consistent with other City Policies
Develop a balanced General Plan, coordinating the Circulation
Element with all other Elements, ensuring that the City's decision
making and planning activities are consistent among all City
departments.
Objective C3 -1 Ensure that potential circulation system impacts are considered when
the City's decision makers and staff are evaluating land use changes.
Policy C3 -1.1
Require all new development to mitigate project - related impacts on
the existing and future circulation system such that all Master Plan
roadways and intersections are upgraded and maintained at acceptable
levels of service through implementation of all applicable Circulation
Element policies. Mitigation measures shall be provided by or paid
for by the project developer.
Policy C3 -1.2
The minimum acceptable level of service (LOS) at an intersection is
LOS D. Intersections operating at LOS E or F shall be considered
deficient. If traffic caused by a development project is forecast to
result in an intersection level of service change from LOS D or better
to LOS E or F, then the development impact shall be considered
significant. If a development project is forecast to result in the
increase of intersection volume /capacity ratio (V /C) of 0.02 or greater
at any intersection that is forecast to operate at LOS E or F, the
impact shall be considered significant.
T H E C I T Y O F E L S
E G U N
D O
• G
E
N
E R
A L
P L
A N
4-51
4. Circulation Element Draft 917104
Policy C3 -1.3
Limit intersection improvements to feasible improvements that do not
affect buildings, freeway supports, or railroad rights -of -way. Such
improvements should not include more than three left -turn lanes, four
through lanes, and two right -turn lanes on any approach to an
intersection
Policy C3 -1.4
Encourage development projects that effectively integrate major
transportation facilities with land use planning and the surrounding
environment. These joint uses will obtain economic and aesthetic
benefits of coordinated design, achieve land conservation in space -
short urban areas of El Segundo, and maintain neighborhood
continuity in built -up areas affected by future major transportation
routes.
Policy C3 -1.5
Ensure that transit planning is considered and integrated into all
related elements of City planning.
Policy C3 -1.6
Apply planning principles and Circulation Element goals, objectives,
and policies should apply consistently to all land uses in the City.
Policy C3 -1.7
Require submittal and implementation of a Transportation
Management Plan (TMP) for all projects within the Urban Mixed -Use
area, and encourage a TMP for all projects within the northeast
quadrant.
Policy C3 -1.8
Require the provision of adequate pedestrian and bicycle access for
new development projects through the development review process.
Policy C3 -1.9
Ensure that the driveway stacking distance for multi - family housing
is evaluated during the development review process.
Objective C3 -2 Ensure the consideration of the impacts of land use decisions on the
City's parking situation.
Policy C3 -2.1
Ensure the provision of sufficient on -site parking in all new
development.
Policy C3 -2.2
Ensure that the City's parking codes and zoning ordinances are kept
T H E C I T Y O F E L
S
E G U N
D O'
G
E N
E R A
L
P L A N
4-52
4. Circulation Element
up -to -date.
Draft 917104
Goal C4: Compliance with all Federal, State, and Regional
Regulations
Ensure that the City remains in compliance with all Federal,
State, and Regional regulations, remains consistent with the
plans of neighboring jurisdictions and thus remains eligible for
all potential transportation improvement programs.
Objective C4 -1 Cooperate to the fullest extent possible with State, County, and
regional planning agencies responsible for maintaining and
implementing the Circulation Element to ensure an orderly and
consistent development of the entire South Bay region.
Policy C44.1
Actively participate in various committees and other planning
forums associated with County, Regional, and State Congestion
Management Programs.
Policy C4 -1.2
Ensure that the City remains in compliance with the County,
Regional, and State Congestion Management Programs (CMP)
through the development of appropriate City programs and traffic
impact analyses of new projects impacting the CMP routes of
Sepulveda Boulevard, the I -105 Freeway, and the I -405 Freeway.
Policy C4 -1.3
Investigate and evaluate the feasibility and merits of adding more
routes, that are impacted by external traffic sources, to the County
CMP highway system.
Objective C4 -2 Ensure that the City's circulation system is consistent with those of
neighboring juri sdictions.
Policy C4 -2.1
Ensure that new roadway links are constructed as designated in the
Circulation Element, and link with existing roadways in
neighboring jurisdictions to allow efficient access into and out of
the City.
Policy 104 -2.2
Carefully assess adjacent local agencies' plans to ensure
compatibility across political boundaries. This does not imply that
such compatibility is a requirement for adoption of the Circulation
Element.
T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G
U N
D O •
G
E N
E R
A L
P L A
N
4-53
4. Circulation Element Draft 917104
Policy C4 -2.3
Continuously monitor and evaluate Los Angeles International
Airport (LAX) master planning and evaluate the impacts of LAX on
the City's Circulation Element.
Policy 104 -2.4
Encourage cooperation with other governmental agencies to provide
adequate vehicular traffic movements on streets and through
intersections by means of synchronized signalization.
Objective C4 -3 Establish the City's short-term (5 -year) Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) consistent with the Circulation Element and the
entire General Plan, and ensure that the CIP incorporates adequate
funding for the City's circulation needs.
Policy 104 -3.1
Identify and evaluate potential revenue sources for financing
circulation system development and improvement projects.
Policy 104 -3.2
Update the City's 1996 Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee Program,
to reflect changes in planned improvements requiring funding
changing needs and changes in the construction cost index.
PAPlanning & Building Safety\PROJECTS \576 - 599 \EA - 579 \Circulation Element Text Documents \Draft Circulation Element 6-23 -
04.doc
T H E
C I
T Y
O F
E
L
S
E
G
U N
D
O
• G
E
N
E
R A
L
P L
A
N
4-54
o ;
� n�l
1
z
a
a
z
w
c7
0
�a
w
a
w
w
O
r
s
Z
iU
L
O
Z
O
N
O
C
N
W
C
X
W
z
a
a
a
w
z
w
c7
A
a
w
w
0
r
H
v
N
U
C
O
fiS
i
O
CL
0
co
3
ca
O
ry
cu
cn
C
cn
X
W
O
I
N
E
E
7
CO
Level of Service
(LOS) Operating Conditions
A Free flow, with no restrictions on maneuvering
or operating speeds. Minimal or no delay.
B Stable flow, with some restrictions on
maneuvering or operating speeds. Nominal
delays.
C Stable flow, with more restrictions on speed and
maneuverability. Some delays.
D Approaching unstable flow. Restricted speed
and maneuverability. Delays encountered at
intersections.
E Unstable flow, with some stoppages.
Constitutes maximum capacity by definition.
Extensive delays at some locations.
F Forced flow, with many stoppages. Low
operating speeds, extensive queuing and very
extensive delays.
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN
Level of Service Description
for Urban Arterials
C -3
The ability of a roadway to carry traffic is referred to as capacity. The capacity is usually greater
between intersections and less at intersections because traffic flows continuously between
intersections, and only during the green phase at intersections. Capacity at intersections is best
defined in terms of vehicles per lane per hour of green; if the green phase is 50 percent of the
cycle and there are three lanes, then the capacity is 1,600 times 50 percent times 3 lanes, or 2,400
vehicles per hour.
The technique used to compare the volume and capacity of an intersection is known as
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU). ICU, usually expressed as a percent, is the proportion of
an hour required to provide sufficient time to accommodate all vehicles on all approaches. If an
intersection is operating at 80 percent of capacity, then 20 percent of the signal cycle is not used.
The signal could show red on all indications 20 percent of the time and the signal would just
accommodate approaching traffic.
ICU analysis consists of (a) determining the proportion of signal time needed to serve each
conflicting movement of traffic, (b) summing the times for the movements, and (c) comparing the
total time required to the total time available. For example, if for north -south traffic, the
northbound traffic is 1,600 vehicles per hour, the southbound traffic is 1,200 vehicles per hour,
and the capacity of either direction is 3,200 vehicles per hour, the northbound traffic is critical
and requires 1,600/3,200 or 50 percent of the signal time. If for the east -west traffic, 30 percent
of the signal time is required, then the ICU is 50 plus 30, or 80 percent. When left -turn phases
exist, they are incorporated into the analysis. The critical movements are usually the heavy left -
turn movements and the opposing through movements. In the ICU computation, an inefficiency
or "lost time" factor is also included.
Level of Service is used to describe the quality of traffic flow. Levels of Service "A" to "C"
operate quite well. While Level of Service "C" is considered desirable, Level of Service "D" is
encountered commonly at busy urban intersections. Most jurisdictions consider "D" to be an
acceptable Level of Service. Level of Service "E" is the maximum volume a facility can
accommodate and will result in possible stoppages of momentary duration. Level of Service "F"
occurs when a facility is overloaded and is characterized by stop- and -go traffic with stoppages of
long duration. A description of the various levels of traffic services appears in Exhibit C -5, along
with the relationship between ICU and level of traffic service.
The ICU calculation assumes that an intersection is signalized and that the signal is ideally timed.
Although calculating ICU for an unsignalized intersection is invalid, the presumption is that a
signal can be installed and the calculation shows whether the geometries are capable of
accommodating the expected volume.
It is possible to have a ICU well below 100 percent, yet have severe traffic congestion. This
would occur if one or more movements is not getting sufficient time to satisfy its demand, and
excess time exists on other movements. This is an operating problem which should be remedied.
The ICU technique is a tool to quantify existing as well as future intersection operation. The
impact of adding a lane can be quickly determined by examining the effect the lane has on the
intersection capacity utilization.
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN 1
Explanation of Intersection C_4
Capacity Utilization
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
LEVEL OF RANGE
SERVICE TRAFFIC QUALITY OF ICU (a)
A Low volume; high speeds; speed not restricted by other vehicles; all
signal cycles clear with no vehicles waiting through more than one 0.00 -0.60
signal cycle.
B Operating speed beginning to be affected by other traffic; between 0.61 -0.70
one and ten percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles
which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak hour
traffic periods.
C Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other 0.71 -0.80
traffic, between 11 and 38 percent of the signal cycles have one or
more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during
peak traffic periods; recommended ideal design standard.
D Tolerable operating speeds; 31 to 70 percent of the signal cycles have 0.81 -0.90
one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle
during peak traffic periods; often used as design standard in urban
areas.
E Capacity, the maximum traffic volume an intersection can 0.91 -1.00
accommodate; restricted speeds; 71 to 100 percent of the signal
cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one
signal cycle during peak traffic periods.
F Long queues of traffic; unstable flow; stoppages of long duration; Over 1.00
traffic volume and traffic speed can drop to zero; traffic volume will
be less than the volume which occurs at Level of Service "E."
(a) ICU means Intersection Capacity Utilization. Refer to Exhibit C -4 for explanation.
UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Level of Service Average Control Delay
A 0 -10
B >10 -15
C >15 -25
D >25 -35
E >35 -50
F >50
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN
Level of Service Description c -5
for Intersections
� 6
1(9
U
C
O
(0
L
Q
O
c
O
cu
U
z �
L
0.
W
W L
C7 �
� O
Q
Y
y
.a a
W �
H N
v X
W
4-.
O
fd
E
E
CO
ESTIMATED DAILY ROADWAY CAPACITY
Master Plan Roadway Number of Roadway Estimated Daily Roadway
Classification Lanes (a) Capacity (b)
Major Arterial 8LD 70,000
Secondary Arterial (Six 6LD 53,000
Lane Divided)
Collector (4 -Lane Divided) 4LD 40,400
Collector 4 -Lane 4LU 31,000
Collector 2 -Lane 2LU 14,000
Local 2LU 10,000
(a) 8 LD = Eight (8) lanes divided
6 LD = Six (6) lanes divided
4 LD = Four (4) lanes divided
4 LU = Four (4) lanes undivided
2 LU = Two (2) lanes undivided
(b) Estimated Daily Roadway Capacity at Level of Service "E" is considered to be the
carrying capacity of the roadway. Numbers indicate vehicles per day for roadway
system planning. Volume to Capacity (v /c) ratios are computed on the basis of LOS
E capacity. If the v/c ratio exceeds 1.00, the roadway LOS would be F. A v/c ratio
between 0.81 and 0.90 indicates LOS D, and a v/c ratio between 0.91 and 1.00
indicates LOS E.
Note: It is the goal of the City of El Segundo to achieve and maintain LOS D or better on
the City's arterials. The City considers LOS C to be desirable and LOS D to be
marginally acceptable for roadway segments. LOS E and LOS F are not
acceptable.
I CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN
Estimated Daily Roadway Capacity C -7
5, I 5'
s••i' 1P � rz' it I IP i rls.
M
I
6a'
COLLECTOR
(2 or 4 LANE)
MAJOR ARTERIAL IS LANES MINIMUM)
P
iL rr —iaP I I.
SECONDARY ARTERIAL
eo'
30'
12' T T
COLLECTOR
(4 LANE DIVIDED)
Ir I r¢
I 16
LOCAL STREET
(RESIDENTIAL)
.__.. _.
30'
---
-1
fl'
5'
S'
I
ro'
i n
s'Ir'r•fr +1' I tr �r.+ ' -. z'I
LOCAL STREET
(COMMERCIAL)
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN
_ ..MK
Street Classification and Standards C -8
will°
X01
10)
U
a
a
a �C
C
z �
� o
o Q
A �
a c
w �
w �
0
U
I��i Ri
U
z
¢ <n
a
a �
a �
4 L
a r-+
z �
W4 4-
O
o C
w a
� N
w
o �
U
z
U
E
cn w
co
w UJ
cu
N
(D
fB fA
w 0�
w a) r_
o U fC
H OJ
O O
O
.0
. u
CN
` U
z
0.
Qa �
F4 0
z ry
W Y
U
O :3
c7 Cn
w C
w fA
o X
W
H
cU
O
as O
a �
Y
w U
w �
A a
C7 C
w O
w E
w E
o O
F O
U ry
z
a
a
a
w
z
O
Q
W
.a
W
W
O
H
v
^U)
W
O
V!
co
co
a
a�
x
a
c
cu
c
J
C
a�
rLn
V
0
2
U
N
CO
U)
c
N
LL
r
C
x
W
� 1 _
C]
z
a m
� d
w i
w �
c7 �
O f6
A
i+
w U_
w m
O
U
� g
e
U
cn
N
� J
a
N
o
f0
L
w N
a LL
w 0)
O �
F U)
X
W
o ;
� n�l
1
z
a
a
z
w
c7
0
�a
w
a
w
w
O
r
s
Z
iU
L
O
Z
O
N
O
C
N
W
C
X
W
z
a
a
a
w
z
w
c7
A
a
w
w
0
r
H
v
N
U
C
O
fiS
i
O
CL
0
co
3
ca
O
ry
cu
cn
C
cn
X
W
O
I
N
E
E
7
CO
Level of Service
(LOS) Operating Conditions
A Free flow, with no restrictions on maneuvering
or operating speeds. Minimal or no delay.
B Stable flow, with some restrictions on
maneuvering or operating speeds. Nominal
delays.
C Stable flow, with more restrictions on speed and
maneuverability. Some delays.
D Approaching unstable flow. Restricted speed
and maneuverability. Delays encountered at
intersections.
E Unstable flow, with some stoppages.
Constitutes maximum capacity by definition.
Extensive delays at some locations.
F Forced flow, with many stoppages. Low
operating speeds, extensive queuing and very
extensive delays.
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN
Level of Service Description
for Urban Arterials
C -3
The ability of a roadway to carry traffic is referred to as capacity. The capacity is usually greater
between intersections and less at intersections because traffic flows continuously between
intersections, and only during the green phase at intersections. Capacity at intersections is best
defined in terms of vehicles per lane per hour of green; if the green phase is 50 percent of the
cycle and there are three lanes, then the capacity is 1,600 times 50 percent times 3 lanes, or 2,400
vehicles per hour.
The technique used to compare the volume and capacity of an intersection is known as
Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU). ICU, usually expressed as a percent, is the proportion of
an hour required to provide sufficient time to accommodate all vehicles on all approaches. If an
intersection is operating at 80 percent of capacity, then 20 percent of the signal cycle is not used.
The signal could show red on all indications 20 percent of the time and the signal would just
accommodate approaching traffic.
ICU analysis consists of (a) determining the proportion of signal time needed to serve each
conflicting movement of traffic, (b) summing the times for the movements, and (c) comparing the
total time required to the total time available. For example, if for north -south traffic, the
northbound traffic is 1,600 vehicles per hour, the southbound traffic is 1,200 vehicles per hour,
and the capacity of either direction is 3,200 vehicles per hour, the northbound traffic is critical
and requires 1,600/3,200 or 50 percent of the signal time. If for the east -west traffic, 30 percent
of the signal time is required, then the ICU is 50 plus 30, or 80 percent. When left -turn phases
exist, they are incorporated into the analysis. The critical movements are usually the heavy left -
turn movements and the opposing through movements. In the ICU computation, an inefficiency
or "lost time" factor is also included.
Level of Service is used to describe the quality of traffic flow. Levels of Service "A" to "C"
operate quite well. While Level of Service "C" is considered desirable, Level of Service "D" is
encountered commonly at busy urban intersections. Most jurisdictions consider "D" to be an
acceptable Level of Service. Level of Service "E" is the maximum volume a facility can
accommodate and will result in possible stoppages of momentary duration. Level of Service "F"
occurs when a facility is overloaded and is characterized by stop- and -go traffic with stoppages of
long duration. A description of the various levels of traffic services appears in Exhibit C -5, along
with the relationship between ICU and level of traffic service.
The ICU calculation assumes that an intersection is signalized and that the signal is ideally timed.
Although calculating ICU for an unsignalized intersection is invalid, the presumption is that a
signal can be installed and the calculation shows whether the geometries are capable of
accommodating the expected volume.
It is possible to have a ICU well below 100 percent, yet have severe traffic congestion. This
would occur if one or more movements is not getting sufficient time to satisfy its demand, and
excess time exists on other movements. This is an operating problem which should be remedied.
The ICU technique is a tool to quantify existing as well as future intersection operation. The
impact of adding a lane can be quickly determined by examining the effect the lane has on the
intersection capacity utilization.
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN 1
Explanation of Intersection C_4
Capacity Utilization
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
LEVEL OF RANGE
SERVICE TRAFFIC QUALITY OF ICU (a)
A Low volume; high speeds; speed not restricted by other vehicles; all
signal cycles clear with no vehicles waiting through more than one 0.00 -0.60
signal cycle.
B Operating speed beginning to be affected by other traffic; between 0.61 -0.70
one and ten percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles
which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak hour
traffic periods.
C Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other 0.71 -0.80
traffic, between 11 and 38 percent of the signal cycles have one or
more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during
peak traffic periods; recommended ideal design standard.
D Tolerable operating speeds; 31 to 70 percent of the signal cycles have 0.81 -0.90
one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle
during peak traffic periods; often used as design standard in urban
areas.
E Capacity, the maximum traffic volume an intersection can 0.91 -1.00
accommodate; restricted speeds; 71 to 100 percent of the signal
cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one
signal cycle during peak traffic periods.
F Long queues of traffic; unstable flow; stoppages of long duration; Over 1.00
traffic volume and traffic speed can drop to zero; traffic volume will
be less than the volume which occurs at Level of Service "E."
(a) ICU means Intersection Capacity Utilization. Refer to Exhibit C -4 for explanation.
UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Level of Service Average Control Delay
A 0 -10
B >10 -15
C >15 -25
D >25 -35
E >35 -50
F >50
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN
Level of Service Description c -5
for Intersections
� 6
1(9
U
C
O
(0
L
Q
O
c
O
cu
U
z �
L
0.
W
W L
C7 �
� O
Q
Y
y
.a a
W �
H N
v X
W
4-.
O
fd
E
E
CO
ESTIMATED DAILY ROADWAY CAPACITY
Master Plan Roadway Number of Roadway Estimated Daily Roadway
Classification Lanes (a) Capacity (b)
Major Arterial 8LD 70,000
Secondary Arterial (Six 6LD 53,000
Lane Divided)
Collector (4 -Lane Divided) 4LD 40,400
Collector 4 -Lane 4LU 31,000
Collector 2 -Lane 2LU 14,000
Local 2LU 10,000
(a) 8 LD = Eight (8) lanes divided
6 LD = Six (6) lanes divided
4 LD = Four (4) lanes divided
4 LU = Four (4) lanes undivided
2 LU = Two (2) lanes undivided
(b) Estimated Daily Roadway Capacity at Level of Service "E" is considered to be the
carrying capacity of the roadway. Numbers indicate vehicles per day for roadway
system planning. Volume to Capacity (v /c) ratios are computed on the basis of LOS
E capacity. If the v/c ratio exceeds 1.00, the roadway LOS would be F. A v/c ratio
between 0.81 and 0.90 indicates LOS D, and a v/c ratio between 0.91 and 1.00
indicates LOS E.
Note: It is the goal of the City of El Segundo to achieve and maintain LOS D or better on
the City's arterials. The City considers LOS C to be desirable and LOS D to be
marginally acceptable for roadway segments. LOS E and LOS F are not
acceptable.
I CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN
Estimated Daily Roadway Capacity C -7
5, I 5'
s••i' 1P � rz' it I IP i rls.
M
I
6a'
COLLECTOR
(2 or 4 LANE)
MAJOR ARTERIAL IS LANES MINIMUM)
P
iL rr —iaP I I.
SECONDARY ARTERIAL
eo'
30'
12' T T
COLLECTOR
(4 LANE DIVIDED)
Ir I r¢
I 16
LOCAL STREET
(RESIDENTIAL)
.__.. _.
30'
---
-1
fl'
5'
S'
I
ro'
i n
s'Ir'r•fr +1' I tr �r.+ ' -. z'I
LOCAL STREET
(COMMERCIAL)
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN
_ ..MK
Street Classification and Standards C -8
will°
X01
10)
U
a
a
a �C
C
z �
� o
o Q
A �
a c
w �
w �
0
U
I��i Ri
U
z
¢ <n
a
a �
a �
4 L
a r-+
z �
W4 4-
O
o C
w a
� N
w
o �
U
z
U
E
cn w
co
w UJ
cu
N
(D
fB fA
w 0�
w a) r_
o U fC
H OJ
O O
O
.0
. u
CN
` U
z
0.
Qa �
F4 0
z ry
W Y
U
O :3
c7 Cn
w C
w fA
o X
W
H
cU
O
as O
a �
Y
w U
w �
A a
C7 C
w O
w E
w E
o O
F O
U ry
z
a
a
a
w
z
O
Q
W
.a
W
W
O
H
v
^U)
W
O
V!
co
co
a
a�
x
a
c
cu
c
J
C
a�
rLn
V
0
2
U
N
CO
U)
c
N
LL
r
C
x
W
� 1 _
C]
z
a m
� d
w i
w �
c7 �
O f6
A
i+
w U_
w m
O
U
� g
e
U
cn
N
� J
a
N
o
f0
L
w N
a LL
w 0)
O �
F U)
X
W