Loading...
1999 JUL 06 CC PACKETAGENDA EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 350 Main Street The City Council, with certain statutory exceptions, can only take action upon properly posted and listed agenda items Unless otherwise noted in the Agenda, the Public can only comment on City- related business that is within the jurisdiction of the City Council and/or items listed on the Agenda during the Public Communications portion of the Meeting Additionally, the Public can comment on any Public Hearing item on the Agenda during the Public Hearing portion of such item The time limit for comments is five (5) minutes per person Befoi a speaking to the City Council, please come to the podium and state Your name and residence and the organization you represent, of desired Please respect the time limits Members of the Public may place items on the Agenda by subtrunting a Written Request to the City Clerk or City Manager's Office at least six days prior to the City Council Meeting (by 2 00 p in the prior Tuesday) The request must include a brief general description of the business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting Playing of video tapes or use of visual aids may be permitted during meetings if they are submitted to the City Clerk two (2) working days prior to the meeting and they do not exceed five (5) minutes in length In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact City Clerk, 607 -2208. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, July 6,1999 - 7:00 P.M. Next Resolution # 4121 Next Ordinance # 1309 CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION — Rev Bonnie Wulff, Living the Inner Light Foundation PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Mayor Pro Tern Sandra Jacobs PRESENTATIONS (a) Presentation by Mayor's Good Friday Breakfast Founder and former Mayor of the City of El Segundo, Mr Floyd Carr, of proceeds from this year's event to the El Segundo Teen Center, and recognition by the City Council of the Centmela Valley YMCA and the El Segundo Teen Center for their work with youth ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Only - 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalfof their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council Falure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250 A. PROCEDURAL MOTIONS Consideration of a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions on this Agenda by title only Recommendation - Approval. B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS - Discussion with United States Congressman Steve Kuykendall about issues and concerns of the City of El Segundo Recommendation — Discussion and possible action. 2 Public Hearing on Environmental Assessment EA -472, General Plan Amendment GPA 99 -1, Zone (Map) Change ZC 99 -1 and Zone Text Amendment ZTA 99 -1 (124'h Specific Plan). Address 401 Aviation Boulevard Applicant Bruce Kaufman, Extra Space Storage of Studio Recommendation — 1) Open Public Hearing; 2) Discussion; 3) Adopt Resolution upholding the Planning Commission's recommendation thereby denying the project; or 4) Direct Staff to prepare an Ordinance approving the project with conditions; or, 5) Other possible action /direction. C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Report of the City /School Sub - Committee on agreement for assistance Recommendation — Conceptually approve plan for City assistance for certain school functions and direct staff to prepare an Agreement. 4 Selection of an architectural team to design the Plaza improvements Recommendation — Select team of Spitz/Denton and direct staff to negotiate a design contract. [III) E. CONSENT AGENDA All items listed are to be adopted by one motion without discussion and passed unanimously If a call for discussion of an item is made, the item(s) will be considered individually under the next heading of business Warrant Numbers 2503425- 2503652 in total amount of $882,673 76, Warrant Numbers 2503653- 2503934 in total amount of $651,542 60, Wire Transfers in the amount of $995,342 43 and Wire Transfers m the amount of $974,39181 Recommendation - Approve Warrant Demand Register and Authorize staff to release. Ratify: Payroll and Employee Benefit checks; checks released early due to contracts or agreements; emergency disbursements and /or adjustments; and wire transfers from 06/04/99 through 06/30/99. City Council meeting minutes of June 15, 1999. Recommendation - Approval. Proposal to proceed with the Public Safety Communications Center project by selecting a Resident/Continuous Inspector and Materials Testing service and entering into contract with Hayer Consultants Incorporated for inspection and testing services based on the hourly rates of $34 00 and $38 00 respectively The amount "not to exceed" will be based on a detailed contractor schedule and will be funded from Asset Forfeiture Recommendation — Upon approval of the City Attorney, enter into a professional services agreement for inspection and testing services with Hayer Consultants Incorporated. Award the lease of 453 acre -feet of adjudicated groundwater rights to the Dominguez Water Company with a fiscal impact of $22,650 of revenue to the Water Fund Recommendation — Authorize the Mayor to execute the lease agreement. Adopt plans and specifications for the 1998 -99 replacement of water lines — project no PW 98 -10 (estimated cost = $335,000 00). Recommendation — Adopt plans and specifications and authorize staff to advertise the project for receipt of construction bids. 10 Request by Gold Graphics for installation of 1999 Acura Tennis Classic (to be held in Manhattan Beach) banners on median light poles in Sepulveda Boulevard between Imperial Highway and El Segundo Boulevard, and in Rosecrans Avenue between Sepulveda Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard, during the period of July 19, 1999 through August 19, 1999 Recommendation — Approve the request of Gold Graphics for installation of banners contingent upon approval by the following agencies: (a) For Sepulveda Boulevard: Southern California Edison Company and CalTrans. (b) For Rosecrans Avenue: Southern California Edison Company and the City of Manhattan Beach. 005 11 Proposed Amendments to the Zoning Code to revise the regulations for automobile service uses in proximity to residentially zoned property in the Small Business (SB) and Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Area; and, a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Environmental Assessment EA -483 and Zone Text amendment ZTA 99 -2 Applicant City of El Segundo Recommendation — 1) Second reading of Ordinance, by title only; and 2) By motion, adopt Ordinance. 12 Return of $7,500 in grant monies to the California Library Services Board (CLSB) The grant was to be utilized for the purchase of Z39 50 software for the Library's INNOPAC automation system to allow our Library to participate in a "Linked System" Pilot Project to view other library catalogs within the Metropolitan Cooperative Library System (MCLS) MCLS has recently imposed additional software and hardware requirements besides the Z39 50 software to participate in the "Linked" project The grant money must be returned since it cannot be used effectively without the other technology (Fiscal Impact $7,500) Recommendation — Approve the return of $7,500 to the CLSB which was to be utilized for Z39.50 software for the INNOPAC system so that the El Segundo Public Library could participate in the Metropolitan Cooperative Library System's (MCLS) "Linked Systems Project." 13 Request to continue the agreement for professional services with Evelyn A Riley, M Ed , R N, M I C N, a Quality Improvement/Assurance Emergency Medical Services Educator, for two years Fiscal Impact. Not to exceed $15,000 annually Recommendation — Approve a two -year extension to the agreement for the professional services of Evelyn A. Riley, M.Ed., R.N., M.I.C.N. 14 Professional Services Agreement with Public Sector — Personnel Consultants to conduct a Classification and Compensation Study of positions and classifications represented by the Supervisory and Professional Employees Association and the City Employees Association Recommendation — Approve entering into a Professional Services Agreement with Public Sector — Personnel Consultants to conduct Classification and Compensation Study of positions and classifications represented by the Supervisory and Professional Employees Association and the City Employees Association. 15 Examination plans for the Personnel Merit System job classifications of Network Technician, Library Assistant and Water/Wastewater Operations Technician Recommendation — Approve the Examination Plans. 16 Proposed revisions to the class specification for the job classification of Fire Inspector IIII Recommendation — Approve the class specification. CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA no F. NEW BUSINESS — 17 A Resolution of the City Council to accept grant funding in the amount of $100,000 from the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) of the State of California for enforcement and education programs Recommendation — Adopt resolution. 18 Request for the City Council to consider imtiatmg an Amendment to the El Segundo General Plan and Zoning Code to add Hotels and Motels as conditionally permitted uses in the Corporate Office Land Use Designation and Corporate Office (CO) Zone with a possible limitation to conditionally permit them east of Sepulveda Boulevard Applicant City of Recommendation — 1) Discussion; 2) Provide Direction to Staff; and /or, 3) Other possible /direction. G. REPORTS - CITY MANAGER - NONE H. REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY - NONE I. REPORTS - CITY CLERK - NONE J. REPORTS - CITY TREASURER - NONE K. REPORTS - CITY COUNCILMEMBERS Councilmember McDowell - NONE Councilmember Gaines - NONE Councilmember Wernick - NONE Mayor Pro Tern Jacobs - NONE Mayor Gordon — NONE PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Only - 5 minute limit) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalfof another, and employees speaking on behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and pumshable by a fine of $250 MEMORIALS CLOSED SESSION The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code Sec 54960, et sec ) for the purposes of conferring with the City's Real Property Negotiator, and/or conferring with the City Attorney on potential and/or existing litigation, and/or discussing 007 matters covered under Government Code section 54957 (Personnel), and/or conferring with the City's Labor Negotiators, as follows Continuation of matters listed on the City Council Agenda for 5.00 p m , July 6, 1999 under "Closed Session" (if needed) REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION (if required) ADJOURNMENT POSTED DATE & �e) TIME a NAME w 070699ag CITY OF EL SEGUNDO INTER - DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE June 28,1999 TO Mary Strenn City Manager FROM Bellur Devaraf City Engineer SUBJECT Potential Conflict of Interest Items - City Council Meeting of July 6, 1999 Is the project within 300 feet of a business or property owned by a City Council member? [ 0 . cc Ron Green Interim Director of Public Works N 'IDIC5 CONFLICT 706 non Mayor Mayor Council Council Council Agenda Item Mike Pro Tem Member Member Member Gordon Sandra Nancy John Kelly Jacobs Wernick Gaines McDowell Adoption of plans and specifications for the 1998 -99 No No No No No Replacement of Water lines [ 0 . cc Ron Green Interim Director of Public Works N 'IDIC5 CONFLICT 706 non Discussion with United States Congressman Steve Kuykendall about issues and concerns of the City of El Segundo Recommendation — Discussion and possible action. EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 6 July 1999 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Special Orders of Business - Public Hearng AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Public hearing on Environmental Assessment EA -472, General Plan Amendment GPA 99 -1, Zone (Map) Change ZC 99 -1 and Zone Text Amendment ZTA 99 -1 (124" Specific Plan) Address 401 Aviation Boulevard Applicant Bruce Kaufman, Extra Space Storage of Studio City, LLC RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Open Public Hearing, 2) Discussion, 3) Adopt the attached Resolution upholding the Planning Commission's Recommendation, thereby Denying the Project, or, 4) Direct Staff to Prepare an Ordinance Approving the project with conditions, or, 5) Other possible action /direction INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant requests approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone (Map) Change, and Zone Text Amendment to establish a Specific Plan area within a 3 93 gross acre parcel located near the northwest comer of Aviation Boulevard and El Segundo Boulevard The request is to change the General Plan Land Use designation and Zoning of the parcel from Parking to the 124'" Specific Plan The primary objective of the 124`" Specific Plan is to establish a mini- storage facility with an appurtenant caretaker's unit, along with the option to develop and operate a City water well and water treatment building within a portion of the property DISCUSSION This item was presented to the Planning Commission on 24 June 1999 At the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted (3 -1) to Recommend Denial of the proposed mini- storage Specific Plan and directed Staff to prepare a Resolution recommending Denial of the project On 28 June 1999, the Planning Commission held an adjourned meeting and Adopted Resolution No 2440, thereby recommending that the City Council Deny EA -472, GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1 A more complete project description, analysis, and background information is included in the accompanying Planning Commission Staff Report and its attachments, which were previously distributed to the City Council on 23 June 1999 as � all as the draft (excerpt) Minutes and Planning Commission Resolution ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS (draft) Resolution No (dratq Planning Commission (excerpt) Minutes 24 June 1999 Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachments 24 June 1999 (adopted) Planning Commission Resolution No 2440 (draft) Planning Commission Minutes, 28 June 1999 (to be distributed under separate cover) FISCAL IMPACT None ORIGIN and REVIEWED Date: 28 June 1999 Date: P iprojwtsN51.475\ea-472\as -4 0, 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DENYING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA -472, FOR THE CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND DENIAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 99 -1, ZONE CHANGE 99 -1, AND ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 99- 1 FOR THE 124th SPECIFIC PLAN AT 401 AVIATION BOULEVARD. PETITIONED BY: BRUCE KAUFMAN, EXTRA SPACE STORAGE OF STUDIO CITY, LLC. WHEREAS, applications have been received from Bruce Kaufman of Extra Space Storage of Studio City, LLC, requesting said approvals, WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment (EA -472), including a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the proposed use, has been prepared and circulated to all interested parties, staff, and affected public agencies for review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the application and supporting evidence with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act, State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of El Segundo Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Resolution No 3805); WHEREAS, on April 8, 1999, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, a duly advertised public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street, and notice of the public hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law, WHEREAS, on June 24, 1999, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, a duly advertised public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street and notice of the public hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law WHEREAS, on June 28, 1999, the Planning Commission Adopted Resolution No 2440, recommending to the City Council Denial of the proposed project, WHEREAS, on July 6, 1999, the City Council did hold, pursuant to law, a duly advertised public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street, and notice of the public hearing was given in the time form and manner prescribed by law, WHEREAS, opportunity was given to all persons present to speak for or against the findings of Environmental Assessment EA -472, GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1, and, WHEREAS, at said hearings the following facts were established The project site is a 3 93 gross acre (3 62 net acres) narrow, rectangular- shaped parcel located approximately 100 feet west from the northwest corner of Aviation Boulevard and El Segundo Boulevard, immediately west of the BNSF & ATSF railroad tracks, between El Segundo Boulevard and 124'" Street (Grand Avenue extension), 2. The request is to establish a Specific Plan area on the project site such that the Land Use designation and Zoning of the site would be changed from Parking to 12e Specific Plan (124'" SP) in the General Plan and Zoning Code 3 The project site is paved, devoid of vegetation and contains no structures except for three shuttle shelters which were used in conjunction with the prior use of the site 4 The (not current) previous use of the site was for a parking lot, for non - required overflow parking for Northrop Grumman employees 5 The topography of the project site is relatively flat and there are no known notable geologic features, rare or endangered animal species, or significant cultural or historical features on the site and in the immediate locale 6 Nearby land uses include the U S Air Force Base in the Public Facility (PF) Zone to the immediate west and southeast (across Aviation and El Segundo Boulevards), a parking lot to the immediate north zoned Parking (P), the Northrop Grumman aerospace facility located further north and northwest in the Urban Mixed -Use North (MU -N) Zone, and, the Aerospace Corporation facility to the south (across El Segundo Boulevard) in the Light Industrial (M -1) Zone The Lockheed Martin offices and the Entenmann's/Orowheat bakery outlet exist to the east (across Aviation Boulevard) in the Corporate Office (CO) Zone and residential uses exist further northeast, outside the City limits, in Los Angeles County 7 Primary (permitted) uses in the Specific Plan area would include warehousing and storage Ancillary uses would include a limited residential use, such as a caretaker's residence and the potential option to develop and operate a City Water Facility (Water Well and Water Treatment Budding) 8 The maximum building area allowed within the Specific Plan area would be 73,500 square teet with the Water Facility or 84,530 square feet without the Water Facility 9 The revised Traffic Report prepared for the project estimates that the proposed uses would generate a total of 169 trips per day Approximately 10 trips are projected for the morning peak hour and approximately 23 trips for the evening peak hour. The Report concludes that the projected trip generation would be nominal and would not result in significant increases to vehicle trips along adjacent roadways 10 The Parking Demand Study prepared for the project (dated March 2, 1999) concluded that 13 parking spaces would be sufficient to meet the on -site peak parking demand, however, the City's Consulting Traffic Engineer recommended that 22 spaces would be more appropriate Twenty -four (24) parking spaces plus one (1) loading space are proposed for the Specific Plan area, however, two (2) additional spaces would be provided for the exclusive use of the City if the Water Facility is developed 11 The Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by the City concluded that development of the Specific Plan area into a mini- storage facility would have a positive net fiscal impact to the City in the first year, (albeit a small amount), due to the one -time impact fees, which would decrease substantially in following years 12 The City, acting as the lead agency, has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is the appropriate environmental review for this project Potentially significant impacts were identified with regards to Water and Utilities and 2 013 Services Systems, however, mitigation measures are proposed which would reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level 13 The Water Facility will have to undergo the standard CEQA review once the protect is initiated by the City, if it is initiated, since the construction, development and operation of the facility was not addressed in the study 14 The Police Department commented that mini- storage facilities are popular targets for burglaries Due to the site's unusual location next to a large berm /railroad track, visibility by Police and passersby would be limited so the Police Department made several recommendations which would help to minimize this problem Moreover, if the site is developed with a water facility, the Police Department indicated that perimeter fencing would be important for the security of the storage facility 15 At the Planning Commission Public Hearing on June 24, 1999, the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed project and determined the following- A The protect site is a "gateway" to the City, and the proposed protect is not consistent with its vision for a "gateway" use, including Land Use Objective LU 1 -5 of the General Plan, B The proposed project is a land use decision that will have long term future implications which are inconsistent with future vision as expressed in the General Plan C The project site is adjacent to Aviation Boulevard which is a major thoroughfare with a large volume of traffic, D The proposed project has limited net fiscal benefit to the City, E The Police Chief identified that mini- storage uses are targets for crime, which the Commission believes could impact Police services, F The City already has several large mini- storage projects and an additional project is not essential to serve the community, G The proposed project is not the best use for the site from a land use perspective, for the following, including but not limited to, reason, in that the use is not a mixed -use as contemplated by the General Plan including Objective LU 4 -4, and, H It is anticipated that this site and surrounding sites will transition to other uses in the future and this project may be inconsistent with and potentially hinder that transition NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after considering the above facts, the testimony presented at the public hearings, and study of proposed Environmental Assessment EA -472, GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1, the City Council makes the following findings and Denies certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for Environmental Assessment EA -472 and Denies the adoption of the 124" Specific Plan (GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1 The Draft Initial Study was made available to all local and affected agencies and for public review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law As the General 3 014 Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Zone Text Amendments are recommended for Denial, the Planning Commission additionally recommends that the City Council Deny the certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY That the proposed use is not consistent with the following General Plan goals, policies, and objectives A The proposed General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning for the site is 124'h Specific Plan (124`" SP) The proposed 124'" Specific Plan designation is not compatible with the surrounding Public Facility, Light Industrial, Urban Mixed -Use North, and Corporate Office land use designations B The proposed project is not in conformance with the following General Plan goals, policies and objectives, Economic Development Policies ED 1 -1 1, ED 1 -1 2, ED 1- 2 2, ED 2 -1 2, and ED 2 -1 4 and Objective ED 1 -2, are in conflict with this project since they refer to the importance of promoting economic development, improving the tax base, maximizing revenues, investing in an infrastructure that encourages commercial and industrial development, and diversifying industries to create jobs and increase growth potential and fiscal impact, and, Land Use Element Policy LU 1 -5 5, Land Use Element Goal LU 5, and Land Use Element Objectives LU 1 -5, LU 4 -4, LU 5 -1, LU 5 -2, LU 5 -6, and LU 7 -2 are in conflict with the project since they emphasize the importance of developing an active program to beautify the major entrances to the City, providing a stable tax base, being economically beneficial, promoting the City appearance, and encouraging mixed -use developments NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby Denies Environmental Assessment EA -472 , GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1 n] 5 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, according to the El Segundo Municipal Code, a copy of this Resolution shall be mailed to the applicant at the address shown on the application and to any other person requesting a copy of same PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of July 1999. Mike Gordon, Mayor ATTEST STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO 1 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 Ordinance No was duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 6'" day of July 1999, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk 5 016 DRAFT EXCERPTS OF EA-472 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA June 24, 1999 Chairman Crowley called the regular meeting of the El Segundo Planning CALL TO ORDER Commission to order at 6.02 p.m in the Council Chamber of the City of El Segundo City Hall, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California Chairman Crowley led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag PLEDGE TO FLAG PRESENT KRETZMER, WYCOFF, CROWLEY, BOULGARIDES PALMER ROLL CALL (excused absence) Chairman Crowley presented Item 4, Environmental Assessment EA -472, PUBLIC HEARINGS - General Plan Amendment 99 -1, Zone (Map) Change 99 -1 and Zone Text CONTINUED Amendment 99 -1 — (124`" Specific Plan /City Water Well Project) Address: BUSINESS 401 Aviation Boulevard Applicant/Property Owner Bruce Kaufman, Extra EA-472 Space Storage of Studio City, LLC Contract Planner Hannah L Brondial Bowen presented the staff report as outlined in the agenda packet Commissioner Kretzmer expressed concern with the remote location of the facility and requested clarification on security. Ms. Bowen stated Chief Grimmond's memorandum of March 18, 1999 addressing secunty concerns has been incorporated in the Resolution Chairman Crowley opened the public hearing Joel Miller, Representing Mr Bruce Kaufman of Extra Space Storage He stated what is before the Commission are two plans He stated the first plan has 73,000 square feet of storage and about 9500 square feet for the water pumping and treatment plan He indicated that there would be a total of eight storage buildings He stated that the second option would occur if the City decided not to pursue a water facility, and in this case, it would be replaced by a single story storage building He said that the maximum total square footage for storage would be approximately 84,000 square feet He also said that the project has now complied with the City Traffic Engineer requirements for 24 parking spaces, and if the City decides to approve the water facility, 2 additional parking spaces would be provided He further stated they have read the staff report and reviewed the Conditions of Approval and find all of them to be acceptable In conclusion, he stated they believe the proposed entitlements which would implement the alternative projects with or without the water facility are appropriate because the site will be brought back to economic use, will be attractive, will be clean and a safe 06 -24mm 472 I - OF DRAFT use for the City, will have positive fiscal impacts for the City and the development will offer support services which are lacking in quantity for existing and future businesses and for the residents of the City Don Wilkins, Project Architect He stated Extra Space Storage is an owner and operator and takes great pride in the project. He indicated that the project will have a significant investment of state -of- the -art security for the City and customers He stated the entry is off of 124'", and the site is internally circulated and fully fenced all around the westerly, and easterly side and the portion that is fenced along El Segundo Blvd He said that the customers would enter and exit with a code key with a recording and alarm, and there will be a caretaker's apartment who will be on site for maintenance and response as needed Chairman Crowley asked about the wall of the facility. Mr Wilkins stated it is an open decorative metal fence which is preferred by the customer as well as the Police Department Chairman Crowley requested further clarification on landscaping in the front vard facing El Segundo Boulevard Mr Wilkins stated there is a 35 -foot landscaped setback from the property line He said it extends to 50 feet in some areas as well They will be providing the majority of the landscaping where it is most visible Vice -Chair Wycoff asked about the single two -story building at the northern most portion of the sight Mr. Wilkins stated this area is where the caretaker's apartment is located He stated that it is a two -story element above the office, and is where the majority of the smaller units are located He stated that the units become larger further south on the site, and that this is preferred for the �)nentation and the economics of the circulation Commissioner Boulgandes asked for clarification of the doors on the units Mr Wilkins stated the doors on the first three buildings are setback with landscaping provided along the area He said that further south on the site, the buildings are set against the westerly property line and the doors are internal Chairman Crowley questioned the aesthetics and signage Mr Wilkins stated there will be three signs with one being a monument sign on El Segundo Boulevard, and that the other two signs will be on 124'" and on the face of Building "A" facing out toward Aviation Vice -Chair Wycoff asked where the other facilities are located in the Los Angeles area Mr Wilkins stated there are sites in Thousand Oaks, Newberry Park. Sherman Oaks, Venice and Hollywood as well as a few locations in Northern California There are projects under construction in Studio City, LaVeme and Pico Rivera Chairman Crowley pointed out that this project is adjacent to the Air Force 06 -24mm 472 2 0 1 �� DRAFT Base and asked what kind of monitoring is being used, as to what is being stored Mr Wilkins stated there is no monitoring as to what is being stored, but there has not been a concern for this in the past He stated that about 70% of business comes from homeowners along with some small businesses He indicated that there is no power or utilities available in the units, along with significant restrictions as to utilizing the unit for anything other than storage He further stated the facility opens at 7 a.m and closes at 7 p.m and is secured with lighting, an alarm system, motion sensors and conditions required by the Fire and Police Departments Vice -Chair Wycoff pointed out that Northrop Grumman is consistently misspelled in the report Director Bernard stated that Item 14 addresses the Sign Plan in the Conditions of Approval and could be modified to require that the Plan come to the Director for review and approval and be provided to the Commission as a receive and Fite item James Boski, Civil Engineer Contractor, Los Angeles Air Force Station He stated they are in full support of the project He gave a brief history regarding their easement on 124'" Street He expressed concern with the Railroad possibly not allowing future access through 124'" Street to the Base, and stated they would have to come back to the Commission about opening access off El Segundo Boulevard if this happens He further stated they need t, %o accesses and egresses from the Base for emergency purposes, natural disasters, accidents and to maintain the area on the other side of Aviation, Area A He said they are currently searching for whatever legal entity available that can guarantee them the easement Cnairman Crowley closed the public hearing Cnairman Crowley stated he is concerned with modifying the General Plan He said from a General Plan Perspective, he questioned if there would be a oetter use available for such an odd configuration of land He also questioned ` the small amount of land set aside for the Water Well will be adequate to produce much water Director Bernard stated Staff has been looking at the issue for an alternative for a water well somewhere in the City to supplement purchased water that the City currently undertakes as a hedge against future raises in water costs He stated that there has been a test well located on a 47 acre parcel north of the property, and the test was very positive in terms of the quality of the water He further stated that it provided an analysis that anywhere within two miles of the site the water would be adequate up to the point of Sepulveda Boulevard. He said that RBF Associates worked at a preliminary design for a water well He also said that staff looked at the property as an opportunity for a mixed use on the site and is satisfied that the site is adequate for the needs of a water well for the City Vice -Chair Wycoff also expressed concern with modifying the General Plan 06 -24mm 472 3 DRAFT He stated this facility would generate roughly $1,500 a year which seems like a small benefit to be gained for the size of the plot. The area is mixed use, and this site is a gateway to the City Turning it into a mini- storage facility may not be beneficial He further indicated that the Police Department commented that storage facilities are popular targets for burglaries He stated there are a number of storage facilities already in the City, and he is not sure if another storage facility is needed, especially at the gateway to the City. He feels this would not be keeping in accordance with the goals and objectives of the General Plan. Commissioner Boulgandes asked how much capacity of water would be kept in the tank Director Bernard stated the tank at ground level would be about 36 feet in height, but the tank, however, would be sunken into the ground being no higher than the buildings around it. Commissioner Boulgandes stated the water tank would be of benefit especially in emergency needs He further agreed with the Commissioners' comments He stated also that many of the customers using the facility will not be citizens of El Segundo Commissioner Kretzmer stated he is not ready to recommend approval or denial on this project and feels there is not sufficient information to make a determination at this point He stated he would also like to see language added to satisfy the Air Force's concerns Chairman Crowley reopened the public hearing Bruce Kaufman, Applicant/Property Owner, Extra Space Storage He stated he is primarily a landlord and knows how to rent and secure space. He stated that these facilities are built for them to run, and they are done nat onwioe He further stated there has not been self- storage units added to In;s marketplace in almost eleven or twelve years He pointed out that no "tner developers have done anything with the site because it is too narrow in Depth to deal with retail, and office cannot be parked or multi-tenant buildings �annol be built He also stated that the land receives surface water from everybody over a 5 mile radius with much drainage He pointed out that many ,ela lers would not be willing to share the parcel and its circulation with a Water Pump and Facility He stated they spent three meetings with all present including the City Attorney working out a site plan He said that staff needed nim to jointly develop a Water Treatment facility and define the amount of land needed as small as possible due to a fiscal impact He stated he tried to be as cooperative as possible He also stated he runs a clean business and would make the facility look very attractive and would be a benefit to the City Mr Miller pointed out that any change from parking would necessitate a General Plan Amendment He further stated that the site that is visible along El Segundo Boulevard for only about 125 feet and is oriented north /south. Commissioner Kretzmer thanked Mr Kaufman and again stated that he is not ready to approve or deny the General Plan Amendment. 06 -24mm 472 4 020 DRAFT Chairman Crowley stated there are areas in the City that could be developed for this kind of storage. He pointed out that looking long tern, the railroad track may not be on the site in twenty years Vice -Chair Wycoff agreed Director Bernard clarified that the Commission will be making a written recommendation to the City Council so no appeal would be necessary He expressed staff's appreciation of Mr Kaufman and his associates taking the time to work with Staff on the City Water Facility He further pointed out that the City Attorney was present at the meetings, however, Mr Kaufman and his associates were advised prior to the meeting that the City Attorney would be there, and he had the opportunity for his attorney to be present He stated Mr Kaufman chose not to have his attorney present. Commissioner Boulgandes appreciated Mr Kaufman's comments and his willingness to incorporate the water facility in the project He also agreed that the long -term view has to be looked at Chairman Crowley requested that the language of Condition #13 have the wording of "if feasible" stricken Director Bernard stated Staff would recommend, if the Commission recommends denial, that he formulate the Resolution, and he suggested that the Commission have a special meeting to adopt the Resolution Vice -Chair Wycoff moved to recommend denial of Environmental Assessment MOTION EA -472, General Plan Amendment 99 -1, Zone (Map) Change 99 -1 and Zone Text Amendment 99 -1 — (124`" Specific Plan/City Water Well Project) to the City Council Commissioner Boulgandes seconded Passed 3 -1 with Commissioner Kretzmer opposing Director Bernard suggested meeting on Monday, June 28, 1999 to meet the July 6 1999 City Council meeting packet deadline The Commission agreed .with Monday June 28, 1999 at 5 45 p m The Commission took a break at 7 45 p m The Commission reconvened at 7 55 p m 06 -24mm 472 5 = 021 There being no further discussion, Chairman Crowley moved to adjourn the meeting at 9.20 p m to the regular scheduled meeting of July 8, 1999 at 6:00 p m Commissioner Boulgandes seconded Passed 5 -0 PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS Bret B Bernard, AICP Director of Planning and Budding Safety, and Secretary Of the Planning Commission City of El Segundo, California DAY OF JUNE, 1999. Brian Crowley, Chairman of the Planning Commission City of El Segundo, California DRAFT ADJOURNMENT 06 -24mm 472 6 = G z 1) G CITY OF EL SEGUNDO INTER- DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE Meeting Date: Thursday, June 24, 1999 TO: Chair and Members of the Planning Commission 3 FROM: Bret B Bemard, AICP, Director of Planning and Budding Safety THROUGH* Laune B Jester, Senior Planner STAFF (1 PLANNER: Hannah L. Brondial Bowen, AICP, Contract Planner Fpm SUBJECT. Environmental Assessment EA -472, General Plan Amendment GPA 99 -1. Zone Change (ZC 99 -1) and Zone Text Amendment (ZTA 99 -1) Address: 401 Aviation Boulevard (100 feet west from the NW corner of Aviation and EI Segundo Boulevards) Applicant/Property Owner: Extra Space Storage of Studio City, LLC REQUEST The proposed protect is a request to establish a Specific Plan area within a 3 93 gross acre rectangular- shaped parcel located at 401 Aviation Boulevard The applicant has submitted applications for a General Plan Amendment (GPA 99 -1), Zone (Map) Change (ZC 99 -1) and Zone Text Amendment V7A 99 -1) to amend the land use designation and zoning of the parcel from Parking (P) to 124' Specific Plan (124th SP) The primary objective of the proposed 124'" SD is to encourage the development of warehouse and storage uses within the Specific Plan area however, residential uses associated with the primary uses (I e , a caretaker's unit) would also be permitted, as well as the option to develop and operate a City Water Well and Water Treatment Budding Pursuant to City practice for a Specific Plan, the Planning Commission will make a recommendation to the City Council on the protect, and the City Council will take final action on the applications (EA -472, GPA 99 -1 ZC 99 -1 and ZTA 99 -1) RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division recommends that the Planning Commission review the facts and findings related to the proposed project, determine If the requested actions are appropriate, and make one of the following two recommendations to the City Council P23 1. Recommend Approval of the Specific Plan, including General Plan Amendment (GPA 99 -1), Zone Text Amendment (ZTA 99 -1), and Environmental Assessment EA -472 (Mitigated Negative Declaration) to the City Council, with conditions The Specific Plan could be developed with or without the City Water Well. A Draft Resolution (No 2440) has been prepared for the Approval including Draft conditions, or, 2 Recommend Denial of the Specific Plan, including General Plan Amendment (GPA 99 -1), Zone Change (ZC 99 -1), Zone Text Amendment (ZTA 99 -1), and Environmental Assessment EA -472 (Mitigated Negative Declaration) to the City Council PROJECT DESCRIPTION As stated above, the primary objective of the proposed 124'" Specific Plan is to encourage the development of warehouse and storage uses within the Specific Plan area, however, a limited residential use associated with the primary uses would also be permitted (i e., a caretaker's unit) as well as the potential option to develop and operate a City Water Well and Water Treatment Building on a portion of the site The proposed 124`" Specific Plan would also establish goals, policies and development standards for the subject parcel Tne applicant has identified the following goals and objectives for the proposed Specific Plan area' Enhance the economic climate through diversity and adaptive reuse, • Objective 1 To allow for a strong and healthy economic community by accommodating the possibility of a diverse mix of uses from which all stakeholders may benefit • Objective 2 To allow for adaptive reuse of targeted spaces that could potentially benefit the City without adversely affecting local viable industries • Objective 3 Support current services available within the City for its residents and various businesses 2 Promote compatible and healthy land uses, • Objective 1 Retain current uses and attract viable and safe uses that do not infringe upon the economic viability of the Downtown area • Objective 2 Ensure the protection of the public health and safety by attracting uses that will not negatively impact the City 3 Promote a safe, convenient and cost - effective circulation system that serves the present and future circulation needs of the Specific Plan Area and the City, and, • Objective 1 Support current City services available to the Specific Plan area, the City's residents and its businesses • Objective 2 Ensure that private development associated with the area makes a conscious effort to mitigate against traffic impacts on the community • Objective 3 Support City circulation policies which intends to further implement the goals and objectives under the Circulation Element of the General Plan. 2 624 4 Accentuate the overall positive image of the City. • Objective 1. Provide convenient services to the residents and City without negatively impacting the current surrounding community. • Objective 2: Facilitate the changing image of the City by providing alternative uses that compliment the current existing economic base. • Objective 3- Incorporate into the Specific Plan Area, well designed landscaping, lighting and signage elements which recognizes the physical surroundings and takes them into consideration 'Source Draft 124" specific Plan (Psomw) Presently, the site is designated by the General Plan and Zoning Map for "Parking" uses As such, there are very limited 'Development Standards' suggested in the Zoning Code. Moreover, even where there are standards, by its nature a Specific Plan replaces the underlying Zones criteria The development standards suggested for the Specific Plan area are listed in Table A (below) TABLE A PROPOSED 124TH SPECIFIC PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 124T 4 SP PROPOSED PERruTTED USES Warehouse /storage caretakers unit, City water well and water treatment buildin "water facility") L-- - AREA MINIMUM 3 93 gross acres 171 190 gross square feet 157 649 net square feet �DIN3 HEIGHT 13 feet max for single story buildings 25 feet max for two-story buildings S_'E,CKS(BUILDING) Front (south) 30 -35 feet Side (west) 10 - 28 5 feet (variable setback) Side (east) 5 - 33 5 feet (variable setback) Rear 35 feet min E_ _DING AREA 73 500 square feet with the water facility (614 storage units), 84,530 square feet without water facility 678 storage units), R AREA RA710 (FAR) 0 47 1 with water facilit 054 1 without water facility) A�CESS Public access from 124 Street (Grand Avenue extension), Emergency access from El Segundo Blvd 24 spaces plus 1 loading space 2 additional spaces with water facility) 12% of total net site area (18 900 square feet) Landscaped Setbacks Front yard 30 - 35 feet Side yard (west) 8 5 - 10 feet (variable setback) Side yard (east) 5 - 15 feet (variable setback) Rear vard 20 feet min S,SNS 1 monument sign along El Segundo Blvd and 1 monument sign at 124 In Street Grand Avenue extension LIGHTING 1 -foot candle minimum H DURs OF OPERATION 7 AM - 7 PM daily oource Draft 124' Specific Plan SITE DESCRIPTION AND SURROUNDING AREA CHARACTERISTICS The proposed 1241" SP area is located approximately 100 feet west from the northwest comer of Aviation and El Segundo Boulevards, immediately west of the BNSF & ATSF railroad tracks, between El Segundo Boulevard and 124" Street (Grand Avenue extension) The 3.93 gross 3 025 acre parcel was previously used by Northrop Grumman for non - required, overflow employee parking The topography of the site is relatively flat and contains no structures except for three shuttle shelters which were used in conjunction with the prior use of the site The site is paved and devoid of vegetation It does not contain notable geologic features, rare or endangered animal species, or significant cultural or historical features The existing Parking (P) Zone only allows parking lots as a permitted use and parking structures with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) The subject site is located in the northeast quadrant of the City and nearby land uses include the U S Air Force Base in the Public Facility (PF) Zone to the immediate west and southeast (across Aviation and El Segundo Boulevards), a parking lot to the immediate north zoned Parking (P), the Northrop Grumman aerospace facility located further north and northwest in the Urban Mixed -Use North (MU -N) Zone, and, the Aerospace Corporation facility to the south (across El Segundo Boulevard) in the Light Industrial (M -1) Zone The Lockheed Martin offices and the Entenmann's /Orowheat bakery outlet exist to the east (across Aviation Boulevard) in the Corporate Office (CO) Zone, and residential uses exist further northeast, outside the City limits, in Los Angeles County Surrounding land uses are descnbed In Table B below TABLE B SURROUNDING LAND USES __c, Ciry of El Segundo SPECIFIC PLAN S--tlon No 65450 of the State Govemment Code authorizes Cities to adopt Specific Plans for the systematic Implementation of the General Plan for all or part of the area covered by the General Plan A Specific Plan is a regulatory plan which will serve as the Zoning Ordinance for the property within Its boundaries It establishes the permitted uses and development standards that apply only to the area covered by the Plan Proposed development plans or tner development approvals within the project area must be consistent with the Specific Plan arojects consistent with an adopted specific plan are automatically deemed to be consistent with the General Plan The adoption of a Specific Plan Is a legislative act by the City Council, based upon recommendations by the Planning Commission There are no specific findings that must be adopted for a Specific Plan, however, the City must, in approving a Specific Plan, make findings related to the following two (2) areas The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and, 2 The consistency of the action with the City's General Plan. 4 026 LAND USE ZONE NORTH PARKING LOT, AEROSPACE FACILITY PARKING (P), URBAN MIXED USE - NORTH MU -N SOUTH OFFICE, R &D FACILITY LIGHT INDUSTRIAL M -1 EAST OFFICES SAKERYOUTLET COPORATE OFFICE CO WEST US AIR FORCE BASE PUBLIC FACILITY PF __c, Ciry of El Segundo SPECIFIC PLAN S--tlon No 65450 of the State Govemment Code authorizes Cities to adopt Specific Plans for the systematic Implementation of the General Plan for all or part of the area covered by the General Plan A Specific Plan is a regulatory plan which will serve as the Zoning Ordinance for the property within Its boundaries It establishes the permitted uses and development standards that apply only to the area covered by the Plan Proposed development plans or tner development approvals within the project area must be consistent with the Specific Plan arojects consistent with an adopted specific plan are automatically deemed to be consistent with the General Plan The adoption of a Specific Plan Is a legislative act by the City Council, based upon recommendations by the Planning Commission There are no specific findings that must be adopted for a Specific Plan, however, the City must, in approving a Specific Plan, make findings related to the following two (2) areas The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and, 2 The consistency of the action with the City's General Plan. 4 026 CEQAt ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 1 The application has been prepared in accordance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and local CEQA Guidelines; and, The City of El Segundo, acting as the lead agency, prepared a Draft Initial Study for the project in accordance with the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Since no significant adverse environmental impacts were identified at the time the Draft Initial Study was first prepared (March 5, 1999), a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts was originally proposed On March 17, 1999, Staff held a Development Services Group (DSG) meeting to discuss and obtain additional input about the project, from other City Departments. At the meeting, the Public Works Department informed Planning Staff that an aquifer was located about 400 feet beneath the subject property and the entire area; and, that the City might like to develop and operate a water well and treatment plant somewhere in the area, possibly on approximately one -acre of the project site On May 27, 1999, Planning Staff revised the Initial Study and Checklist to include the option of the addition of a water well and water treatment plant in conjunction with the proposed project The City, acting as the lead agency, determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration was the appropriate environmental review for the revised draft Initial Study and Checklist and potential environmental impacts related to Water and Utilities and Services Systems were identified (see draft Initial Study and Checklist, Exhibit 2, for further discussion) It is important to note that, if approved, this project would be setting aside land for a potential water facility and that the development and /or operation of the City water well and water treatment building will be further reviewed, and potential environmental impacts analyzed, at the time of its initiation (if desired) by the City it conclusion, it is the opinion of City Staff that the requested actions are within the broad scope of the development limits approved by the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and that the Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration related to environmental effects for the proposed Specific Plan indicates that there will be no significant environmental impacts resulting from the adoption of the 124'" Specific Plan which cannot be mitigated to an insignificant level GENERALPLAN The Application request is consistent with the City's General Plan State law authorizes the City to adopt Specific Plans in order to implement the General Plan The proposed 124" Specific Plan includes a General Plan Amendment (GPA 99 -1) which would revise the City Land Use Map in order to depict the change in designation of the subject property from Parking to 124'" Specific Plan, as well as add the new land use designation in the Land Use Element section of the General Plan This would render the Specific Plan consistent with the new land use designation in the General Plan According to the Summary of Existing Trends Buildout (Exhibit LU -3) contained in the Land Use Element of the General Plan, 15 8 acres of land were set aside for parking. Since the prior use (and land use designation) of the site was for Parking, and since the current Parking 5 �' r land use designation does not contain a maximum Floor Area Ratio (enclosed structures were not anticipated to be built), no square footage was assigned or estimated to be built on the site The proposed floor area ratio of the parcel is 0 47 1.0 (with water well) or 0.541 (without water well), which would allow a maximum gross floor area (budding area) of 73,500 square feet (for storage facility) with the water well, or 84,530 square feet (without the water well) This additional floor area is considered insignificant in contrast to the Existing Trends Buildout of approximately 56,000,000 square feet Therefore, the proposed Specific Plan is determined to be consistent with the City's 1992 General Plan The General Plan goals, policies and objectives which relate to this proposal are from the Economic Development and Land Use Elements. Specifically, Economic Development Goals ED1 and ED2, and Policy ED1 -1 2, support this project since they refer to the importance of having a diverse economy within the City Additionally, Land Use Element Policies LU4 -3.6, LU 4 -4 5, and LU 5 -2 1 support the project since they emphasize the importance of landscaping in new office, mixed -use and industrial developments; and, they address the issue of transportation management for mixed -use developments in the northeast quadrant of the City Conformance with the General Plan is a policy issue which is determined at the discretion of the Planning Commission and the City Council. The Municipal Code incorporate many requirements which will help to mitigate any potential General Plan conflicts such as landscaping, underground utilities, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, :vater conservation and storm water control The General Plan may be amended a maximum of four (4) times per year This would be the first General Plan Amendment approved during the 1999 calendar year The proposed changes to the Land Use Element and Land Use Map will be included as attachments to the City Council Report if the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to Approve the Specific Plan Zn% yG CODE -ne application also includes a request to amend the Zoning Map (ZC 99 -1) and Zoning Code 'ext (ZTA 99 -1) The Zone (Map) Change would change the zoning of the parcel, on the Zoning Map, from Parking (P) to 124'" Specific Plan (124 SP) The Zone Text Amendment, , -, the other hand, would add references to the 124'" Specific Plan in Chapter 20 16 of the Zoning Code The proposed changes to Chapter 20 16 and the Zoning Map will be included as attachments to the City Council Report it the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to Approve the Specific Plan These two changes are necessary to ensure that the Zoning Map and Zoning Code are consistent with the Land Use Map and Land Use dement of the General Plan STAFF ANALYSIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT If the 124'" SP is approved, the applicant is prepared to develop the site according to the development standards indicated above and in the proposed Specific Plan document (dated May 21, 1999) If the water facility is built on the property, the applicant has indicated that the resulting development would contain 8 storage buildings (1 two -story building and 7 one -story buildings) with a total gross floor area of 73,500 square feet (storage facility only), a net FAR of 0 47 1 and 614 rental storage units The two -story building (labeled as Building A in the site 6 plan) would contain an office, a caretakers apartment unit, and 308 proposed rental storage units. The 7 one -story buildings (labeled Buildings B -H in the site plan) would contain only rental storage units and would have a combined total of 306 storage units. Additionally, 24 parking spaces and 1 loading space would be provided on -site. A total of 12% of the net site area (or 18,900 square feet) would be dedicated to landscaping, Including the setback areas. Public access to the site would be through a 7,050 square foot access easement at the north end of the property, through an at -grade railroad crossing, at 124"' Street (Grand Avenue extension) and Aviation Boulevard, and, only emergency access would be permitted from El Segundo Boulevard The proposed hours of operation of the mini- storage facility are 7 AM to 7 PM daily If the water facility is not built, the applicant has Indicated that they would add another one - story storage building (Building 1), with a gross floor area of approximately 11,000 square feet and 64 additional storage units Two additional parking spaces would be provided for the exclusive use of the City if the water facility is developed. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS A (revised) Traffic Report (dated June 14, 1999) was prepared for the proposed 124`' Specific Plan The Traffic Report estimated that the traffic generation for the proposed use would be a total of 169 trips per day based on Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) rates Approximately 10 trips are projected for the morning peak hour and approximately 23 trips for the evening peak hour According to the Traffic Report, and with concurrence from the City's Traffic Engineer, the project trip generation is nominal and would not result in significant Increases to vehicle trips along adjacent roadways The capacity of the intersection of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard was also analyzed in the Traffic Study. This intersection currently operates at poor Levels of Service LOS; LOS "D" (AM Peak Period) and LOS "E" (PM Peak Period), and is projected to worsen to LOS F" during both peak hours in the future (Year 2000), with or without development in the Sueafic Plan area However, the project's nominal traffic volume is not anticipated to significantly impact this intersection The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works has identified the widening of Aviation Boulevard as a planned roadway improvement which would add one through lane in both the north -and southbound directions The project is fully funded and the design is 30% completed Construction was initially scheduled to begin in the early part of 1999, however, the City of Hawthorne recently passed a resolution opposing the project The resolution also requires LA County to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), however, LA County has not yet made a determination on its course of action Should it decide to prepare an EIR and subsequently get support from the Hawthorne City Council, project construction may start in mid -2000 and take approximately one (1) year to complete It is anticipated that this roadway improvement would maintain the LOS at its current levels [LOS D (AM peak period) and LOS E (PM peak penod)) at the El Segundo Boulevard /Aviation Boulevard intersection, however, even with this improvement, cumulative development will result In LOS F in 2005 The project will be subject to the City's Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee Program adopted on May 21, 1996 (Resolution No 3969) The Fee program was established to provide a funding mechanism for specified major traffic system mitigation and/or improvements, the demand for which is created by such developments, in order to promote the health, safety, and welfare of the City and its 7 029 residents If approved, the project will be assessed a fee based on the rate per PM peak hour number of vehicle trips generated by the project The Department of Public Works shall determine the precise trip generation rate to calculate the applicable fee, which shall be payable pnor to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the project PARKING DEMAND STUDY As stated previously, the 124th Specific Plan proposes 24 on -site parking spaces plus 1 loading space If the water facility is developed, 2 additional spaces would be provided for the exclusive use of the City The Parking Demand Study conducted for the project indicated that 13 parking spaces would be sufficient to meet the on -site peak parking demand, however, the City's Traffic Engineer, Hartzog & Crabill, determined that 22 spaces would be more appropriate Public access to the site shall be through a proposed 7,050 square foot approximately (60 feet x 117 48 feet) access easement located at the north end of the Plan area, through an at -grade railroad crossing, at 124th Street (Grand Avenue extension) and Aviation Boulevard Only emergency access shall be permitted from El Segundo Boulevard Fiscal Impact Analysis A Fiscal Impact Analysis was conducted to assess the proposed development's impact to the City's operating budget The Fiscal Impact Analysis which was conducted estimated a total budding area of 93,000 square feet, which is slightly higher than the proposed building area if the site is not developed with a water facility (84,530 square feet) Using the information provided by the applicant in the Fiscal Impact Analysis Model application, a 93,000 square foot mini-storage facility would result in a net fiscal impact of $13,270 in the first year of operation ,1 9991 51,540 in year 2000, $1,550 in year 2001, $1,550 in year 2002, and, $1,560 in year 2003 It is worth noting that the high net fiscal impact during the first year of operation is attributable to the required one -time mitigation fees which are collected prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy (i e , Police, Fire, Library, Traffic) Thus, development and operation c* a storage facility at 93,000 square feet would have a positive net fiscal impact to the City albeit a small amount) and the proposed project (84,530 square feet without the water facility) ..,,uld show a (slightly) less net fiscal impact than the above - referenced figures INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS Tne Draft Initial Study, Draft 124" Specific Plan document, architectural plans and project dppl cations were circulated to all City Departments /Divisions for their review and comments The following Departments/Divisions concurred with Staff's determination to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration Economic Development, Finance, Library, City Attorney, Public Works, Building Safety Division, Police, Fire, and Recreation and Parks The Police Department commented that mini-storage facilities are popular targets for burglaries Due to the site's unusual location next to a large berm /railroad track, visibility by Police and passersby would be limited so the Police Department made several recommendations which have been included as potential conditions of approval in Draft Resolution No 2440 which would help to minimize this problem Moreover, if the site is developed with a water facility, the Police Department indicated that perimeter fencing would be important for security of the storage facility The City Attorney's office commented that additional language be included in the Draft Initial Study with regards to the water facility Specifically, that the water facility will have to undergo 8 o�n the standard CEQA review once the project is initiated by the City since the construction, development and operation of the facility was not addressed in the study The Fire Department commented that it will need to know the locations of the fire hydrants and that the fire lane will have to be a minimum of 26 feet wide near the fire hydrants These comments have been included as a potential condition of approval in Draft Resolution No 2440 As discussed in the CEQA/Environmental Review section of this Report, a DSG meeting was held on March 17, 1999 to further discuss the project with the other City Departments /Divisions It was at that time that the Public Works Division informed Planning Staff that the City may require approximately one -acre of the site, for the purpose of constructing a water well and water treatment plant. This requirement has been incorporated into Draft Resolution No 2440 as a condition of approval (to be implemented - - if required) Other Comments The County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Districts) responded to the public hearing notice for the project It indicated that the subject site is within District No 5 and had the toliowing comments (summarized) regarding sewage service 1 ) A direct connection to a Districts' trunk sewer requires a Trunk Sewer Connection Permit, issued by the Districts 21 The wastewater generated by the proposed project will be treated at the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant ( JWPCP) located in the City of Carson The JWPCP has a design capacity of 385 0 million gallons per day (mgd) and currently processes an average flow of 342 1 mgd 3 The expected average wastewater flow from the project site is 2,325 gallons per day » The Districts are empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to charge a fee for connecting (directly or indirectly) to the Districts' Sewerage System or increasing the existing strength and /or quantity of wastewater attributable to a particular parcel or operation already connected This connection fee is required to construct an incremental expansion of the Sewerage System to accommodate the proposed project which will mitigate the impact of this project on the present Sewerage System Payment of a connection fee will be required before a permit to the sewer is issued 5 ) The available capacity of the Districts' treatment facilities will be limited to levels associated with approved growth identified in the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG). The Districts' comment letter does not constitute a guarantee of wastewater service and that the Districts intend to provide this service up to the levels which are legally permitted It is also their intent (with this comment letter) to inform the City of the facilities' existing capacity and any proposed expansion of the Districts' facilities CONCLUSION As discussed in this Report, the proposed 124'" Specific Plan establishes the goals, objectives, uses and development standards for the Specific Plan area Thus, based on the information 9 - 031 presented In this Report, Staff recommends that the Commission review the facts and findings and either 1) Recommend Approval of the Specific Plan with conditions; or, 2) Recommend Dental of the Specific Plan, to the City Council. EXHIBITS 1 Draft Resolution of Approval No 2440 and attachments 2. Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts (May 27, 1999) 3 Applications (revised March 2, 1999) 4 Architectural Plans (revised May 21, 1999) 5 Proposed 124'" Specific Plan document, dated May 21, 1999 (revised) 6 Parking Demand Study, dated March 2, 1999 7 Memos from Police Department, dated March 18, 1999 and June 14, 1999 8 Traffic Analysis (revised), dated June 14, 1999 9 Comment letter from the County Sanitation Districts March 17, 1999 10 IDC Comment from Fire Department 1 1 IDC comment from City Attorney 12 Fiscal Impact Analysis (March, 1999) of Los Angeles County dated 13 Draft Resolution of Denial No 2440 <To be distributed under separate cover> Prepared by Hannah L Brondi I Bowen, AICP CDniract Planner reviewed by _dune B Jeste Senior Planner Peviewed�Efn - ed as o Form by ris Wt City Attorney Bret V Bard, g iicP Dire or f Pla ing and Building Safety p \projects \451- 475\ea472\PCSR -5 10 Ci32 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2440 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA -472, CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 99 -1, ZONE CHANGE 99 -1, AND ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 99 -1 FOR THE 120' SPECIFIC PLAN AT 401 AVIATION BOULEVARD. PETITIONED BY: BRUCE KAUFMAN, EXTRA SPACE STORAGE OF STUDIO CITY, LLC. WHEREAS, applications have been received from Bruce Kaufman of Extra Space Storage of Studio City, LLC, requesting said approvals, WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment (EA -472), including a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the proposed use, has been prepared and circulated to all interested parties, staff, and affected public agencies for review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the application and supporting evidence with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act, State CEQA Guidelines and the City of El Segundo Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Resolution No 3805), WHEREAS, on April 8, 1999, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, a duly advertised public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street, and notice of the public hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law WHEREAS, on June 24, 1999, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, a ouly advertised public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street, and notice of the public hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by ay., WHEREAS, opportunity was given to all persons present to speak for or against the findings of Environmental Assessment EA -472, GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1, and, WHEREAS, at said hearings the following facts were established The project site is a 3 93 gross acre (3 62 net acres) narrow, rectangular- shaped parcel located approximately 100 feet west from the northwest corner of Aviation Boulevard and El Segundo Boulevard, immediately west of the BNSF & ATSF railroad tracks, between El Segundo Boulevard and 124th Street (Grand Avenue extension). The request is to establish a Specific Plan area on the project site such that the Land Use designation and Zoning of the site would be changed from Parking to 1241h Specific Plan (124 SP) in the General Plan and Zoning Code. The project site is paved, devoid of vegetation and contains no structures except for three shuttle shelters which were used in conjunction with the prior use of the site. - n3� DRAFT 4- The previous use of the site was for a parking lot, for non - required overflow parking for Northrop Grumman employees. 5 The topography of the project site is relatively fiat and there are no known notable geologic features, rare or endangered animal species, or significant cultural or historical features on the site and in the immediate locale 6 Nearby land uses include the US Air Force Base in the Public Facility (PF) Zone to the immediate west and southeast (across Aviation and El Segundo Boulevards); a parking lot to the immediate north zoned Parking (P); the Northrop Grumman aerospace facility located further north and northwest in the Urban Mixed -Use North (MU -N) Zone, and, the Aerospace Corporation facility to the south (across El Segundo Boulevard) in the Light Industrial (M -1) Zone The Lockheed Martin offices and the Entenmann's /Orowheat bakery outlet exist to the east (across Aviation Boulevard) in the Corporate Office (CO) Zone and residential uses exist further northeast, outside the City limits, in Los Angeles County 7 Primary (permitted) uses in the Specific Plan area would include warehousing and storage Ancillary uses would include a limited residential use, such as a caretaker's residence, and the potential option to develop and operate a City Water Facility (Water Well and Water Treatment Building) 8 The maximum budding area allowed within the Specific Plan area would be 73,500 square feet with the Water Facility or 84,530 square feet without the Water Facility. 9 The revised Traffic Report prepared for the project estimates that the proposed uses would generate a total of 169 trips per day Approximately 10 trips are projected for the morning peak hour and approximately 23 trips for the evening peak hour The Report concludes that the projected trip generation would be nominal and would not result in significant increases to vehicle trips along adjacent roadways 10 The Parking Demand Study prepared for the project (dated March 2, 1999) concluded that 13 parking spaces would be sufficient to meet the on -site peak parking demand, however, the City's Consulting Traffic Engineer recommended that 22 spaces would be more appropriate Twenty -four (24) parking spaces plus one (1) loading space are proposed for the Specific Plan area, however, two (2) additional spaces would be provided for the exclusive use of the City if the Water Facility is developed The Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by t Specific Plan area into a mini- storage facility City, albeit a small amount ie City concluded that development of the would have a positive net fiscal impact to the 12 The City, acting as the lead agency, has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is the appropriate environmental review for this project Potentially significant impacts were identified with regards to Water and Utilities and Services Systems, however, mitigation measures are proposed which would reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level 13 The Water Facility will have to undergo the standard CEQA review once the project is initiated by the City, if it is initiated, since the construction, development and operation of the facility was not addressed in the study 2 r34 DRAFT 14. The Police Department commented that mini - storage facilities are popular targets for burglaries. Due to the site's unusual location next to a large berm/railroad track, visibility by Police and passersby would be limited so the Police Department made several recommendations which have been included as conditions of approval in this Resolution which would help to minimize this problem. Moreover, if the site is developed with a water facility, the Police Department indicated that perimeter fencing would be important for the security of the storage facility NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after considering the above facts, the testimony presented at the public hearings, and study of proposed Environmental Assessment EA -472, GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1, the Planning Commission makes the following findings and recommends the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for Environmental Assessment EA -472 and adopt the 1241" Specific Plan (GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT The Draft Initial Study was made available to all local and affected agencies and for public review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law. The Draft Initial Study concluded that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), 2 That when considering the whole record, there is no evidence that the proposed modifications to 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, and, 3 That the Planning Commission thereby recommends that the City Council authorize and direct the Director of Planning and Building Safety to file with any appropriate agencies a Certificate of Fee Exemption and de minimus finding pursuant to AB 3158 and the California Code of Regulations Within ten (10) days of the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts, the applicant shall submit to the City of El Segundo a fee of $25 00 required by the County of Los Angeles for the filing of this certificate along with the required Notice of Determination As approved in AB 3158, the statutory requirements of CEQA will not be met and no vesting shall occur until this condition is met and the required notices and fees are filed with the County GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY That the proposed use is consistent with the following General Plan goals, policies, and objectives A The proposed General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning for the site is 124'" Specific Plan (1241h SP) The proposed 124'" Specific Plan designation is compatible with the surrounding Public Facility, Light Industrial, Urban Mixed -Use North and Corporate Office land use designations B The proposed 124'h Specific Plan designation is designed to allow a maximum floor area (FAR) ratio of 0 47 1 (with Water Facility) or 0 54.1 (without Water Facility) While this would permit a greater amount of development than the existing Parking land use designation, the total build out of the plan area would be approximately 73,500 square feet (with water facility) or 84,530 square feet (without water facility) 3 535 DRAFT which is an insignificant increase in square footage compared to the anticipated total buildout of approximately 56,000,000 square feet (Citywide) envisioned in the 1992 General Plan C The proposed project is in conformance with the following General Plan goals, policies and objectives Economic Development Goals ED1 and ED2, and Policy E01 -1.2, support this project since they refer to the importance of having a diverse economy within the City, and, Land Use Element Policies LU4 -3.6, LU 4-4.5, and LU 5 -2 1 support the project since they emphasize the importance of landscaping in new office, mixed -use and industrial developments; and, they address the issue of transportation management for mixed -use developments in the northeast quadrant of the City NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Environmental Assessment EA -472 , GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1, and, adopts changes to the El Segundo Municipal Code as follows SECTION 1. Section 20 16.020 of Chapter 20.16, Title 20, of the El Segundo Municipal Code is amended to read as follows 20 16 020 SPECIFIC PLAN ZONES In order to classify, regulate, restrict and segregate the uses of lands and buildings, to regulate and restrict the height and bulk of buildings, to regulate the area of yards and other open spaces about buildings and to regulate the density of population, the City has adopted the following specific plan areas which function as the Zoning Code for specific areas Smoky Hollow Specific Plan There are four (4) classes of use zones intended to be used within the boundaries of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan These zones include GAC - Grand Avenue Commercial Zone MDR - Medium Density Residential Zone SB - Small Business Zone MM - Medium Manufacturing Zone 124'" Specific Plan There is one (1) use zone intended to be used within the boundaries of the 124" Specific Plan This zone is 124" SP - 124'" Specific Plan Zone The foregoing Zones are separate Zones and shall not be deemed to be more restrictive or less restrictive than any other Zone, but shall be limited to the uses permitted in the specified Zone SECTION 2 The 124'" Specific Plan is hereby adopted as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference SECTION 3. The Land Use Designations ( "Commercial Designations" subsection) and the Proposed Land Use Plan ( "Northeast Quadrant' subsection) sections of the Land Use Element are hereby amended to reflect the change at 401 Aviation Boulevard from Parking to 4 — r36 DRAFT 124'" Specific Plan. The corresponding changes to the Land Use Element as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, are also hereby approved. SECTION 4. The 1992 General Plan Summary of Existing Trends Buildout (Exhibit LU- 3) of the Land Use Element is hereby amended to reflect the change at 401 Aviation Boulevard from Parking to 124`" Specific Plan The corresponding changes to the Land Use Element as set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, are also hereby approved SECTION 5. The General Plan Land Use Map is hereby changed to reflect the change at 401 Aviation Boulevard from Parking to 124'" Specific Plan The corresponding changes to the Land Use Map as set forth in Exhibit D attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, are also hereby approved SECTION 6. The current Zoning Map is hereby amended to reflect a change at 401 Aviation Boulevard from Parking (P) to 124'" Specific Plan (1241" SP) The corresponding changes to the Zoning Map as set forth in Exhibit E, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, are also hereby approved NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of Environmental Assessment EA -472, GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1 and ZTA 99 -1, subject to the following conditions. Prior to approval of the building plans, the applicant shall develop plans which indicate that the proposed mini- storage facility is in substantial conformance with the 1241h Specific Plan development standards, as well as the plans approved and on file with the Department of Planning and Building Safety Any subsequent modification to the project (i e , amount of Landscaping to be provided, building and landscaped setbacks, maximum budding area, parking, etc.) as approved shall be referred to the Director of Planning and Budding Safety for a determination regarding the need for Planning Commission review of the proposed modification °nor to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the mint- storage facility, the applicant shall pay a one -time Library Services Mitigation Fee of $0 03 per gross square foot of building and storage unit floor area 3 Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the mini- storage facility, the applicant shall pay a one -time Fire Services Mitigation Fee of $0 14 per gross square foot of budding and storage unit floor area Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the mini- storage facility, the applicant shall pay a one -time Police Services Mitigation Fee of $0 11 per gross square foot of budding and storage unit floor area Prior to approval of the budding plans, the applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan and photometric study for the review and approval of the Director of Planning and Budding Safety and the Police Chief Lighting shall be installed per the approved plans prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 6 Prior to approval of the building plans for the mint- storage facility, the applicant shall submit Sign Plans for review and approval to the Directors of Planning and Building Safety and Public Works for a "Welcome to the City of El Segundo" monument sign in the median along El Segundo Boulevard, just west of Isis Avenue Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of 5 037 DRAFT Occupancy for the mini- storage facility, the applicant shall construct per the approved Plans the monument sign The applicant must maintain the sign in good condition at all times 7 Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the mint- storage facility, the applicant shall pay the required Traffic Mitigation Fee as determined by the Public Works Director 8 The applicant shall cooperate with the City to facilitate the acquisition of real property interest necessary to develop the Water Facility 9 The applicant shall make an Irrevocable Offer to dedicate land for the purpose of a roadway for El Segundo Boulevard, unless the applicant can provide documentation acceptable to the City Attorney that the irrevocable right to use the land for a roadway has already been granted to the City The City Engineer shall determine the amount of nght -of -way necessary for the Irrevocable Offer to Dedicate The Offer shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and recorded prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the mini - storage facility 10 The applicant shall pay the City Attorney's costs for preparing or reviewing the access easement, irrevocable offer to dedicate easements, or any such easements or agreements as required 1 1 Prior to approval of the building plans, the applicant shall submit Security Plans for review and approval of the Chief of Police which demonstrate conformance with the elements outlined in the memo from the Police Department, dated March 18, 1999, which is on file to the Planning Division The security measures shall be installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or implemented prior to operation, as appropriate. prior to approval of the building plans, the applicant shall submit a Fire /Life Safety Plan to the Fire Chief for review and approval All Fire /Life Safety Plan requirements must be installed and operational, and any required easements or documents recorded, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy A Landscaping and Irrigation Plan shall be submitted by the applicant to the Director of Planning and Building Safety, Director of Recreation and Parks, and Police Chief for review and approval prior to approval of the budding plans Landscaped areas shall be provided with a permanent automatic watering or irrigation system and shall be permanently maintained in a neat and clean manner The applicant, if feasible, shall incorporate provisions for the use of reclaimed water in the Landscaping and Irrigation Plan, and the Plan shall show consistency with the requirements of the Specific Plan The Landscaping and Irrigation shall be installed per the approved plans by the applicant prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall submit a Sign Plan to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area and the aesthetic objectives of the General and Specific Plan, as well as to ensure that signs do not impede traffic or pedestrian safety The Sign Plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Planning and Budding Safety and Police Chief and all signs shall be installed per the approved Plan prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 1S During construction, the entire project site shall be enclosed by a six -foot high chain link fence Gates for site fencing shall not open over sidewalk/public nght -of -way A fencing plan shall be submitted by the applicant and reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety prior to installation 6 038 DRAFT 18. All work within the City public right -of -way shall be in accordance with the latest edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and City of El Segundo Standard Specifications. No work shall be performed in the public nght -of -way without first obtaining a Public Works Permit 17 Prior to approval of the budding plans, plans shall indicate that all proposed utilities shall be placed underground to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The applicant shall assume the costs for the relocation of all utilities, including but not limited to, light poles, electrical vaults, and fire hydrants which are affected by the proposed project 18 Encroachment Permits must be obtained from the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department for demolition haul -off Permits must be obtained at the same time the permit for demolition is issued An encroachment permit for grading is also required when import or export of dirt exceeds fifty (50) cubic yards Demolition and grading may be listed on one Encroachment Permit 19 Prior to approval of the building plans, plans shall show the location and design of all proposed trash enclosures to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building Safety and the Police Chief, Plans shall also indicate that the trash area will incorporate adequate space for the collection of recyclable materials The enclosure shall be installed per the approved plans prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 20 If new sewer laterals are required and constructed in the public right -of -way they shall be a minimum of six (6) inches inside diameter Material shall be "vitreous clay pipe ". Each lateral shall have a six (6) inch clean -out brought to grade at the property line and securely capped A B9 size box shall be placed around the C O for protection The box shall have a cover emblazoned with the word "sewer" If in a traffic area, cover shall be traffic approved All planned sewer connections shall be checked for elevation prior to starting construction Existing sewer laterals shall be plugged at the sewer mainline and capped at the property line Existing six (6) inch wyes may be reused if approved by the Director of Public Works Prior to the approval of the building plans, the applicant shall obtain a Trunk Sewer Connection Permit (or any other permits as required) from the County Sanitation District of Los Angeles County and submit a copy to the Department of Public Works The improvements shall be installed per the approved plans prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy 22 No material storage is allowed in the public right -of -way except by permit issued by the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department If material storage is allowed in the public right -of -way it shall be confined to parkway areas and street parking areas, as long as safe and adequate pedestrian and vehicular passage is maintained at all times Storage beyond these areas in the public right -of -way requires prior approval of the Public Works Department and shall be limited to a maximum penod of 24 hours 23 Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, new curbs, sidewalk, driveway approaches, wheelchair ramps and A C pavement, shall be constructed /reconstructed as required by the Director of Public Works Existing driveways and other concrete work not to be incorporated into the construction shall be removed and replaced with standard curb and sidewalk, if applicable 24 Should any previously unrecorded archeological or cultural resources be encountered during construction of the project, all work will be stopped and the Department of Planning and Building Safety will be notified immediately At the owner's expense a qualified 7 - C3`1 DRAFT archeologist will be consulted to determine the potential significance of the find, and his findings shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Building Safety prior to the commencement of work 25 During construction dust control measures shall be required in accordance with the City's Dust Control Ordinance Grading will be discontinued during first -stage smog alerts and suspended during penods of high wind (i a over 15 miles per hour). All hauling trucks shall have loads covered or wetted and loaded below the sideboards to minimize dust 26 The applicant shall indemnify, defend, protect, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents and employees from and against any and all claims, actions, causes of action, proceedings or suits which challenge or attack the validity of the City's approval of Environmental Assessment EA -472, General Plan Amendment GPA 99 -1, Zone Change ZC 99 -1, and Zone Text Amendment ZTA 99 -1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that according to the El Segundo Municipal Code, a copy of this Resolution shall be mailed to the applicant at the address shown on the application and to any other person requesting a copy of same The decision of the Planning Commission as set forth in this Resolution shall become final and effective ten (10) calendar days after the date of the Planning Commission action, unless an appeal in writing is filed with the City Council PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of June 1999. Bret B Bernard, AICP Director of Planning and Building Safety, and, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City r` E� Segundo, California VOTES Crowley, (Chair) - b'✓ycoff (Vice- Chair)- Boulgarides - Kretzmer - Palmer — Brian Crowley, Chairman of the Planning Commission of the City of El Segundo, California P \prolects\451.475 \ea472 \Pc -res Am >r .Jr ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Project # EA- 4721GPA 99 -1li 99 -1 /ZTA 99 -1 BACKGROUND 1 Project Title 124th Specific Plan/ City Water Well Project i 2 Lead Agency Name and Address Citv of EI Segundo, 350 Man Street EI Segundo CA 90245 3 Contact Person and Phone Number Hannah L Brondial Bowen AICP, Planning and Building Safety Department (310) 322.4670 extension 412 4 Project Location 401 Aviation Boulevard (north of El Segundo Boulevard, west of Aviation Boulevard and south of 124th Street'Grand Avenue extension) 5 Project Sponsor's Name and Address Bruce Kaufman Extra Space Storage of Studio City, LLC, 13920 Otsego S1fee' She'man Oaks CA 91423 6 General Plan Designation Existing Parkin Proposed 124th Specific Plan 7 Zoning Existing Parking (P) Proposed 1241h Specific Plan (1241h SP) .. Description of Project (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation Attach additional sheets if necessary) `he o,coosed project is a request to establish a SpeCilld Plan area which encourages the development of (primarily) a,erouselmim- storage uses ancillary rescenual uses (i e caretakers unit) and a City Water Well and Water 'realmert Budding in the Plan area (as an option) The current zoning and land use designation of the project site is arr nc ana the proposal is to redesignate the site to 124th Specific Plan (1241h SP) in the General Plan Zoning rlac and Zoning Code Development of the Specific Plan area would involve the construction of either a 73 500 _c.,are too, mini- storage facility or an 84 530 square foot facility depending on whether the option to build a water Vie' and wale' treatment facility is exercised by the Cay If the City chooses to build the water facility it would have c­ss `goo, area of approximately 9 500 square feet and would occupy approximately 13 325 square feet of land <_ min, s'orage facility would include storage units (614 units without the water facility 675 units with the water facilely) a 980 so it (approx ) office and an 1 100 sq it ( approx ) caretaker's residence Public access to the site v ould be through a 7 050 square foot access easement at the north end of the property through an at -grade railroad c-cssing at 124th Street/ Grand Avenue extension and Aviation Boulevard Only Fire Department emergency access would be permitted from El Segundo Boulevard Surrounding Land Uses and Setting (Briefly describe the project's surroundings) The project site is a narrow 3 93 gross acre rectangular - shaped parcel situated along the eastern border of the City north of El Segundo Boulevard and south of 124th StreeUGrand Avenue extension, west of Aviation Boulevard and aojacenl to the railroad tracks The prior use of the land was for a parking lot for the nearby Northrop Grumman aerospace facility for non - required overflow employee parking The site Is paved with asphalt and devoid of vegetation Three shuttle shelters (associated with the previous use of the site) are the only structures on the property Nearby land uses include the US Air Force Base to the immediate west and southeast (across Aviation and El Segundo Boulevards) a parking lot to the immediate north the Northrop Grumman aerospace facility- further north and northwest. C, 41 and light Industrial uses to the south (across El Segundo Boulevard) Corporate offices exist to the east (across Aviation Boulevard) and residential uses exist about 250 feet northeast (across Aviation Boulevard) outside the City limits In Los Angeles County 10 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e g, permits, financing approval, orparticipation agreement) County Sanitation Districts of Los Angles County ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as Indicated by the checklist on the following pages Land Use and Planning _ Biological resources _X_ Utilities and Service Systems — Population and Housing Geological Problems bti'ater Sir Qualty - a,- soor;aI onlC�,cuIat'on DETERMINATION Energy and Mineral Resources Hazards Noise Public Service Aesthetics Cultural Resources Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance O^ the bans of this Initial Study of Environmental Impact, the Planning Commission of the City of El Segundo finds the following - -at ine proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will ne orecarec --- _ - 6- the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment there will not be a significant effect in -a_ cecause mitigation measures as described on an attached Sheet, have been added to the project A NEGATIVE �� -T :,N will be prepared '-a ',e proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is -a , occsec Drolect MAY have a significant erfect(s) on the environment but at least one effect 1) has been adequately _ez n an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures c` earner analysis as described on attached sheets if the impact is potentially significant impact' or a "potentially -r -a-, unless mitigated An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required but It must analyze only the effects that pe addressed _ ' -,a although the project could have a significant effect on the environment there WILL NOT be a significant effect in case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable ,-�:alcs and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to an earlier EIR including revisions or mitigation measures that - ^,-used upon-the proposed project — 1999 tr -)arc Alcp a- Planning and Budding Safety o' the Planning Commission Segundo C,42 IV ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all answers are required on attached sheets) 043 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than ISSUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1 Land Use Planning Would the proposal a) Conflict with general plan designation or X zoning) by Conflict with applicable environmental plans or X policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project) C Be incompatible with existing land use in the X � cinRy? C Affect agricultural resources or operations (e g X — z)acts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from I I - companole land uses)) _ - ­,c, o- civiae tie orysica( arrangement of an X es community (include a low- income or ,tn community)) Population and Housing Would the proposal c :�um,;ativeiy exceed official regional or local X copulation projections) s-:s ant,ai g'owtn in an area either X �- o� ic,rectiy le g through projects m an ze e ocee area or extension of major as-..cn.�elr _ __ ace ex,si nc - ousirg especially affordable X _ -o eq,c Problems Would the proposal result in or i e ,a e to petential impacts involving c .e X �e sT c c-ound snaking? X _ s c g,ound failure including liquefaction) I X _ e cue tsunami or volcanic hazard) X _ . -cs .des or mudflows) I X �_°os o^ chances in topography or unstable sod X cc ,)cibons from excavation, grading, or fill? - Suosidence of the land) X Exoansnve sods) I = X 043 4 F n >R A Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than ISSUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Unique geologic or physical features? I X 4 Water Would the proposal result in I , a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, X or the rate and amount of surface runoff? b I Exposure of people or property to water related X hazards such as flooding? G) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration X of surface water quality (e g temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidly)? d Changes in the amount of surface water in any X water body? Chances in currents or the course or direction I I X o' mo,ements? —a�Ce in the quality or ground waters, either X ' c- c,rec: additions or withdrawals, or iite-ceotion of an aquifer by cuts or _ =_.at o ^s o- inrough substantial loss of recha,ge capacity? AIteled direction or rate of flow of groundwater? X zc s to croundwater quality? X s a, a eauvion in the amount of X -,ale- otherwise available for public water :.» Quality V'loJle the proposal c a e a)% a - euahty standard or contribute to X e sync e• prolectee air quality violation? se se ^s',ve receptors to pollutants? X - e, ai• movement moisture, or temperature or X sa_se anv changes in climate? -rea'e objectionable odors? X c Transportation /Circulation Would the proposal -esu" rn i-creased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? X Hazards to safety from design features (e g , X snaro curves or dangerous intersections) or ,compatible uses (e g , farm equipment)? 4 F n >R A _ Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than ISSUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact C) Inadequate emergency access or access to 1 X nearby uses? J) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? I X e I Hazards or barriers ror pedestrians or X bicvchsts) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting X alternative transportation (e g , bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g, P,ad Ovate borne or air traffic impacts?I X 7 Biological Resources Would the proposal result in t -aacts to rca­lerec tnrea,er,ed or rare species or their I X -ac a s � c c nc oct -.ot limited to plants ''s- ^sects animals and birds)? -c-a' . ces cna'ee soecies (e g heniage X oca cesignaiee natural communities (e g I X oaK forest coastal habitat etc )1 c -ao, a• fe g marsh riparian anc vernal j X ., 'e c,sC)ersal or migration Corridors- X E E_n2rgy and Mineral Resources Would the accoted energy conservation I X -=_re,vab',e resources in a wastefu, arc X -- —,arner s_ tn= loss or availability of a known , X e-a resource that would be of future value to -_ rec c-i ano me residents of the State? l 9 Hazards V'oulC the proposal involve - r si­ or accidental explosion or release of X - aza; eous substances (including but not limited I` oi, pesticides chemicals, or radiation)? _ °ossible interference with an emergency I I X resoonse plan or emergency evacuation plan? 045 0 46 Potentially Significant i Potentially Unless Less Than ,SUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact ) The creation of any health hazard or potential X health hazard? rd) Exposure of people to existing sources of X potential health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammabie X brush grass, or trees? 10 Noise Would the proposal result in a) Increases in existing noise levels? X b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 11 Public Services Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered go> ernment services in any of the fol,ow ne areas a) Fire ovtecaon? X di Po ce o-otec, ion? I X scnoo S' X d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? I X e, co:ernmental services? I X _ Utilities and Service Systems Would the c- coosa, result in a need for new systems or SJD7 je5 or substantial alterations t0 the ... _ c' natural gas? I I X �_ . �ncations systems? X —ca, c' e2ional water treatment or distribution -' es X Se, 'e• o, sepnc tanks'? X v,ate, drainage? X Scud v.aste cisposal? X _ocal or rectorial water supplies? I X Aesthetics Would the proposal a, Arrect a scenic vista or scenic highway? X .%I Have a oemonstrable negative aesthetic effect? I X 0 46 047 Potentially Significant _ Potentially Unless Less Than ISSUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Create light or glare? X 14 Cultural Resources Would the proposal a) Disturb paleontological resources? X b) Disturb archaeological resources? I I X c) Affect historical resources? X dl Have the potential to cause a physical change X which would affect unique ethnic cultural I values? e I Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within I X the potential impact area? is Recreation Would the proposa( E! frcrease the eemand for neighborhood or X rec e -a DarK_ or otter recreational facilities : -ec er�s.,ng rec'eauona opportunities? I X I Mandatory Findings of Significance a Does the project have the potential to degrade X the c-aLr- of the environment substantially 'ec.,ce e nanitat of a fisn or wildlife species ,a_s_ a -,sn or wddnfe population to drop below _ _ =_s,a -arc ieveis threaten to eliminate a _ c c, ammai community reduce the number 'es - c' tie range of a rare or endangered ar ^.a, c' e;,m,nate important examples v ^� .-ajo- penocs of Cahforna history or .�_es '-,e p'Olec; have the potential to achieve I X ors e,m to the e- sadvantage of long -term ^er•ai coals? oes the project have impacts that are X -c I,,z .ally hmitec but cumulatively ':�^s :.elabie? ( Cumulatively considerable —ea ^s teat the incremental efrects of a project _-'e considerable when viewed to conjunction r the effecs of past projects the effects of c')e- current projects, and the effects of i crooaole future projects ) Does the project have environmental effects X which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? 047 17 EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses maybe used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration Section 15063(c)(3)(D) In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets a) Earlier analyses used None b) Impacts adequately addressed None C) Mitigation measures None p iproiectsi451- 4751ea- »72`ea- 1721Chkhsl3 r48 124" SPECIFIC PLAN/ CITY WATER WELL PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA -472 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 99 -1 ZONE (MAP) CHANGE 99 -1 ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 99 -1 May 27, 1999 Prepared oy City of El Segundo Department of Planning and Building Safety 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 322 -4670 1 n49 SECTION 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is a General Plan Amendment, Zone (Map) Change and Zone Text Amendment to adopt a Specific Plan which promotes the development of primarily warehouse and storage uses on a 3 93 gross acre (171,190 80 gross square feet/164,140 80 net square feet) rectangular strip of land The subject parcel is located along the eastern border of the City, west of Aviation Boulevard, between El Segundo Boulevard and 124th Street, adjacent to the BNSF & ATSF railroad tracks The current land use designation and zoning of the subject site is Parking (P) and the proposal is to redesignate the site to 124'" Specific Plan (124" SP) in the General Plan, Zoning Code and Zoning Map The primary objective of the 124" SP is to encourage the development of a mini- storage facility with ancillary office and residential uses (i e , caretaker's'urnt), as well as a City Water Well and Water Treatment Facility (as an option) If the City chooses to build the water facility, it would nave a gross floor area of approximately 9,500 square feet and would occupy approximately 13 375 square feet of land, the mini- storage facility would have a gross floor area of roughly 73 500 square feet, contain about 614 storage units and have a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of a 1 0 Conversely, if the City chooses not to build the water facility, the mini- storage facility cu'c na-e a cross floor area of approximately 84,530 square feet, contain about 675 units and nave a FHR of 5d 1 0 Nonetheless, in either scenario, the mini- storage facility would contain a ccG sc ft (aporox ) office an 1,100 sq ft (approx ) caretaker's residence, 24 parking spaces arc ' oat ng spate Public access to the Specific Plan area would be through a 7,050 square access easement at the north end of the property, through an at -grade railroad crossing, at S e_; ,C -and Avenue extension) and Aviation Boulevard Only emergency access would oe pe,mitted from El Segundo Boulevard SECTION 2 0 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENT _ site is a narrow 3 93 gross acre rectangular- shaped parcel situated along the oorce, of the City north of El Segundo Boulevard and south of 124'h Street /Grand ^ e extension west of Aviation Boulevard and adjacent to the railroad tracks The prior use e 'anc was for a parking lot for the nearby Northrop Grumman aerospace facility, for non- _ overf ow empiovee parking The site is paved with asphalt and devoid of vegetation ee snutiile shelte,s (associated with the previous use of the site) are the only structures on a ^c uses include the US Air Force Base in the Public Facility (PF) Zone to the e�: a'e west and southeast (across Aviation and El Segundo Boulevards), a parking lot to - rnec,ate north zoned Parking (P), the Northrop Grumman aerospace facility located e- ^crtn ano northwest in the Urban Mixed -Use North (MU -N) Zone, and, the Aerospace _­o^_-aton facility to the south (as-oss El Segundo Boulevard) in the Light Industrial (M -1) =_ne Corporate offices exist to the east (across Aviation Boulevard) in the Corporate Office 7_ Zone and residential uses exist about 250 feet northeast (across Aviation Boulevard), , s,de the City limits in Los Angeles County 2 050 The 124" SP area is located within an urbanized environment which does not support any natural plant or animal habitats in fact, the Specific Plan area is completely paved and devoid of vegetation The topography of the subject site is flat, with no distinct geological or physical features Further, there are no known cultural, historic, or scenic resources of recognized value located within the Specific Plan area nor in the immediate vicinity Access to the subject site would be through a 7,050 square foot access easement located at the north end of the property, through an at -grade railroad crossing, at 124th Street (Grand Avenue extension) and Aviation Boulevard Regional access to the Specific Plan area is provided by the 405 Freeway to the east and the 105 Freeway to the north SECTION 3 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Reproduced as Appendix I is the City of El Segundo Initial Study and Checklist provided under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The purpose of these oecuments is to identify and evaluate potential adverse environmental impacts The checklist consists of background information, a list of environmental impacts, and a determination by the lead agency of the project's potential impacts on the environment, and the type of CEQA cccument that will be prepared A discussion of the items checked on the form is located In Secticn 0 SECTION 4 0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS LAND JS-E PLANNING - s,= ec oreviously, the current zoning and land use designation of the subject site is Parking (P) Tnis oesignation is consistent with the previous use of the site which was a parking lot The = :5ec lanc use eesionation and zoning of the site is 124 "' Specific Plan (124'" SP), which s ceveicament of a mini- storaoe facility (and its ancillary office and residential uses), as �- � :�rt� '.bate, Well and Water Treatment Building (as an option) The applicant's stated :�_ _ �: i e o' the proposed 124" SP is to expand the City s economic base by providing alternative _�,, ment within an underutilized area Specifically, the 124th SP is based on a ten -year fc- cevelooment and growth of primarily warehouselstorage uses within the Specific Plan T e '24tn SP will provide land use policies development standards and guidelines for the =rea wnich will replace the current Parking (P) land use policies, development standards ::i ce ,nes currently governing the site However should the 124th SP fail to provide o, cu defines for a specific use the development standards for the Urban Mixed -Use "L' -U , Zcne shall apply SP proposes a maximum FAR of eithe, 0 47 1 0 (with the development of the City 1-aal lyi or 0 54 1 0 (without the City Water Facility) The current Parking designation does _c- a n provisions for Floor Area Ratio since structures (other than parking structures) are not 3 051 The General Plan goals, policies and objectives which relate to this proposal are from the Economic Development and Land Use Elements Specifically, Economic Development Goals ED1 and ED2, and Policy E01 -1 2, support this project since they refer to the importance of having a diverse economy within the City Additionally, Land Use Element Policies LU4 -3 6, LU 4- 4 5, and LU 5 -2 1 support the project since they emphasize the importance of landscaping in new office, mixed -use and industrial developments, and, they address the issue of transportation management for mixed -use developments in the northeast quadrant of the City Conformance with the General Plan is a policy issue which is determined at the discretion of the Planning Commission and the City Council The Zoning and Municipal Codes incorporate many requirements which will help to mitigate any potential General Plan conflicts such as landscaping, unaerground utilities, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, water conservation and storm water control The proposed 124" Specific Plan will not be incompatible with existing land uses in the vicinity since the allowable uses in the Plan area (warehouse /storage, office, residential) would be consistent with the surrounding land uses of light industrial, research and development, office, military facility and some residential uses outside of the City limits All new development within the Plan area will be required to comply with the policies, development stanaards and cu �I=lines set forth in the 124th SP Therefore no impact is anticipated j -ne "more project implementation will not affect agricultural resources or activities since the site s completely paved and located in an urbanized area Additionally, there are no a_r c2"ural land uses in the vicinity that would be impacted, therefore, no impacts to agricultural _s es o, operations are anticipated No residential community exists on the site, therefore, a c e�: r,clementation will not divide nor disrupt the physical arrangement of an established residential community and no impact is anticipated Also, there are no established low income or mmonty communities in the vicinity that would be impacted The project is not expected to _c_ze s,aniftcant impacts in the pattern or scale of existing development within the Specific P a- area or in its vicinity °OPULATION AND HOUSING -s c Janiary 1998 the City of El Segundo had a permanent residential population of _c cr ateh 16 424 approximately 7,340 housing units and approximately 2 375 person per use ^ci In 1997 the daytime population was approximately 75,000 This resident to c,ee ra'ic has contributed to a relatively high demand for housing within the City All _s cenr•es in the City are currently located west of Sepulveda Boulevard, while non - residential --a e .dated predominantly to the east of Sepulveda Boulevard The Specific Plan area is ec east of Sepulveda Boulevard and is surrounded by commercial and industrial uses ,e,e,opment within the Specific Plan area is anticipated to result in a one -unit residential r . a -nent intended for two resident caretakers of the proposed mini- storage facility Based on -� za- _nt of Finance 1998 population projections, this would generate an on -site population approx matey 5 0 persons This represents an increase of less than 0 1 percent in the City's ccowaticn which is very negligible and insignificant Due to this negligible increase in =pulahon the project is not anticipated to cumulatively exceed official regional or local 2coulat on projections, therefore, no impact is anticipated 4 f�52 The Specific Plan area is located in an urbanized area with well - established infrastructure and public utilities Project operation of the mint- storage facility would employ three persons, which represents a negligible increase (less than 0 1 percent) in the City's employment (daytime) population Construction of the mini- storage facility would involve using contractors from within the existing Los Angeles area labor pool, therefore, the project is not anticipated to induce substantial growth in any area, either directly or indirectly Additionally, project implementation would not involve the displacement of housing, especially affordable housing, since no housing units exist on the project site Based on the above factors, no impact is anticipated 3 GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS As shown on Exhibit PS -1 in the Safety Element of the City's General Plan, three active,lpotentialiy active faults (Newport - Inglewood Fauiti Palos Verdes Fault and Malibu -Santa Monica Fault) are located near the City, therefore, future development in the Specific Plan area would be exposed to seismic risks lust as other developments of comparable size in the vicinity would be should an earthquake occur along these faults Fault rupture or seismic ground shaKing could occur, however, the effects are mitigated because any development within the SI- ec;fic Plan area will be required to comply with the latest Uniform Budding Code (UBC) ements for seismic safety Compliance with the UBC will reduce the impacts of fault c- c,3une srak ng to below a level of significance c areas c` the City have a high potential for liquefaction during an earthquake the extreme c the City parallel to the coastline along Vista del Mar and, the northeast c, the C,ty from Aviation Boulevard, northwest to imperial Highway, just west of Seow,.eoa Boulevard Since the subject site is not located within these two areas, no impact is ant,c,pa'ed c the Safety Dement of the City s General Plan, the southwestern portion of the City Ile east tano ac)acent portions of the City of Los Angeles further north) are identified as an-- tsunami hazard areas, however, the subject site is about 2 5 miles east of the Ccean therefore no impacts due to these natural hazards are anticipated _e e __men! wdnin the Specific Plan would involve minimal grading since the site is flat and _e en previously graded and paved The issuance of a grading permit is a standard ^len in the City and will ensure slope stability and erosion control during construction ::a-' changes in the topography of the site is not anticipated to occur, however, some -_s c' sre soil may occur during construction This impact is considered short -term in --e as the site would eventually be landscaped and would contain hardscape surfaces upon = =�c euon of development Nonetheless sod erosion will be controlled with application of the s Storm Water and Urban Run -off Pollution Prevention Control Ordinance (No 1235) and - —,,a�iance with this Ordinance will reduce the impacts of sod erosion from project grading t es to below a level of significance -re subjec' site is completely paved and located in an urbanized environment No known _-roue geologic or physical features exist on the site, therefore, no impacts to unique geologic c- chysical features are anticipated As stated above, the project site is not located in an area ,.nich has a potential for seismic ground failure and liquefaction, therefore, the possibility of 5 � ^5' J land subsidence is remote and no impact is anticipated Furthermore, some areas located at the northeast corner of the City have been identified as having expansive sods (specifically Montezuma Clay Adobe), however, the project site Is not located within the specific limits of the impacted areas Therefore, no impacts due to expansive soils are anticipated in the Specific Plan area Additionally, the topography of the site is flat, therefore, the potential for landslides or mudflows is non - existent However, portions of the adjacent railroad right -of -way immediately east of the Specific Plan area are situated on a slope with a height of 17 feet near the southern end of the Specific Plan area The height of the slope decreases as it moves nortnward and it reaches grade level by the time it reaches the north end of the Plan area Since the slope will not be disturbed no impacts due to landslides or mudflows are anticipated WATER The proposed 124" Specific Plan consists of 3 93 acres 'of paved land and is essentially level The paving or asphalt on the property serves to impede percolation of on -site water into the croundwater table On -site surface water run -off is influenced by the existing topography of the oroject site An existing storm water collection and conveyance system serves the site and surrounding area Surface flows which are not absorbed on -site within the property drain off - s to into adjacent surface streets and eventually to storm drains which drain into the Pacific Oce: - P',^ -na cradinc would be required to construct the mini- storage facility, however, it will not S _n r candy impact absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface runoff e s� e since compliance with standard City requirements regulating grading and drainage rec,_oe the potential impact to below a level of significance Existing absorption rates and arainage patterns would change slightly, as proposed improvements (i a budding, surface carp, -ic lot driveways etc ) would change the drainage patterns Specifically, runoff from the s __'c ce controlled by compliance with the City's Storm Water and Urban Run -off Pollution c� Control Ordinance (No 1235) such that there will be no sod discharged from the site _-ace waters and such that no changes in the amount of surface water could occur A F c-a' Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit from the State Water s _ cos Control Board is not required because the site is less than 5 acres in size c to Exh,oit PS -2 contained in the Safety Element of the City's General Plan, El e_ is not at risk from flooding during a 100 -year storm since there are no dams or a s located near the City Localized flooding during periods of heavy rainfall may occur s .could be due to the inadequacy of storm drains, therefore, the risk of flooding or other a'ed azares on the subject site is considered remote and no impacts are anticipated ^ vc is Plan area is located within an urbanized environment, and is not near any surface _ybocies or within a flood plain designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency - - a -4 area subject to flooding Additionally, development of the subject site will not cause _-a - ces in mater currents or the course or direction of water movements since the subject site ccated on a water body Additionally construction and operation of the mini- storage vdl have no impact on water currents or the course or direction of water movements s 054 While the proposed development would represent a continuation of the region's urbanizing trend, it would not result in significant impacts to ocean or groundwater quality, absorption rates, drainage patterns or surface water run -off However, the project may Impact groundwater availability since an aquifer has recently been Identified 400 feet below the surface of the site by the Public Works Division The aquifer is reported to be several miles wide, situated between Sepulveda Boulevard and Prairie Avenue (outside the City limits) If unmitigated, this may result In a substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater available for public water supplies Therefore, in order to mitigate this potential Impact, the applicant will be required to reserve (and offer for sale) approximately 13,325 square feet (65 feet x 205 feet) of the land to the City of El Segundo for the purpose of constructing a water well and water treatment plant An initial study evaluating the Impacts of the water well site and Its location will be discussed at the appropriate time No other impacts to water are anticipated and no additional mitigation measures are required , AIR QUALITY Tne land uses permitted in the Specific Plan area (warehouse /storage and residential) would rat oe expected to produce any significant changes in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in the „c ni!� The Specific Plan permits a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 0 59 1 or 93,000 net square re= c, Ewlc,ng area G rc construction of the min)- storage facility, a less than significant amount of criteria and or coor may be dispersed into the air This might be due to the delivery of _i,� l,on materials, travel by construction workers, and /or application of architectural Ica rgs or other budding materials, such as paint or other weather - proofing chemicals Furtnermore minimal grading on the site may result in fugitive construction dust, however, due • -e srral scale of the project [the threshold of potential significance for air quality (as o_ = ec cy the SCAQMD) dunne construction begins at 1,102,520 square feet of gross floor a less than significant amount of impact is anticipated, therefore, no mitigation is �e cDeration of the mini- storage facility, negligible amounts of air pollutants associated eh;d traffic may occur however no air quality standards would be exceeded as a result plementation Furthermore the development or operation of the mini- storage nct alter air movement mo,sture or temperature, or cause changes In climate since -es= pes cr facilities are not known to cause or affect such changes Therefore, there will be - � anc no mitigation will be reeuiree for the construction and operation of the facilities '�ANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION T-afr ; Report was prepared for the proposed 124th Specific Plan The Traffic study - ^:a:ec that the traffic generation for the proposed use would be a total of 202 trips per day 3sed on Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) rates Approximately 13 trips are projected for the c -nin_ Dear, hour and approximately 23 trips for the evening peak hour According to the -a-f,c report, and with concurrence from the City's Traffic Engineer, the project trip generation is c� nal and would not result in significant increases to vehicle trips along adjacent roadways 7 ('55 The capacity of the intersection of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard was also analyzed in the Traffic Study This intersection currently operates at poor Levels of Service (LOS), LOS "D" (AM Peak Period) and LOS "E" (PM Peak Period), and is projected to worsen to LOS "F" during both peak hours in the future (year 2000), with or without development in the Specific Plan area However, the project's nominal traffic volume is not anticipated to significantly impact this intersection The proposed project, therefore, is not anticipated to create significant traffic impacts in the project area and no mitigation is necessary The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works has identified the wiaening of Aviation Boulevard as a planned roadway improvement which would add one through lane in both the nortn -and southbound directions The project is fully funded and the design is 30% completed Construction was initially scheduled to begin in the early part of 1999, however, the City of Hawthorne recently passed a resolution opposing the project The resolution also requires LA County to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (E1R), however, LA County has not yet made a determination on its course of action Should it decide to prepare an EIR and subsequently get support from the Hawthorne City Council, project construction may start in m;d -2000 and take approximately one (1) year to complete It is anticipated that this roadway improvement would maintain the LOS at its current levels [LOS D (AM peak period) and LOS E (PM peak oenod)) at the El Segundo Boulevard /Aviation Boulevard intersection, however, even tn�s imorovement, cumulative develooment will result in LOS F in 2005 Eased on the above - mentioned factors as well as the planned roadway improvement for a, B�ulevard the proposed 124" Specific Plan will not cause a significant traffic impact to e s c no ne environmental setting and circulation e 124 Specific Plan will not impact vehicular, bicycle, rail, or pedestrian safety and will not crease anv significant congestion impacts in the surrounding area The 124 "' Specific Plan ___se= 2z on -site parking spaces and 1 loading space The Parking Demand Study conducted oroiect indicated that 13 parking spaces would be sufficient to meet the on -site peak c=_mand nowever, the Citys Traffic Engineer, Hartzog & Crabill, determined that 22 cutd be more appropriate Public access to the site shall be through a 7,050 square foot ._ ess easement located at the north end of the Plan area, through an at -grade railroad crossing, v- Street' Grand Avenue extension and Aviation Boulevard Only emergency access shall rteb from EI Segundo Boulevard Moreover the project is not anticipated to have a pan, mpact on rail operations and no mitigation is required e o.c ec will be subject to the City s Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee Program adopted on May 21 esovtion No 3909) The Fee program was established to provide a funding mechanism =_e= r,ec major traffic system mitigation and /or improvements, the demand for which is created __z- developments, in order to promote the health, safety, and welfare of the City and its -_ s Tne project will be assessed a fee based on the rate per PM peak hour number of rr ps generated by the project The Department of Public Works shall determine the =c .e •nc generation rate to utilize to calculate the applicable fee, which shall be payable prior to _seance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the project 0 r-5 ri 7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES There are no known rare, unique or endangered plant or animal species associated with the proposed 124th Specific Plan area or within the immediate vicinity The Specific Plan area is completely paved and devoid of vegetation Development of the Plan area would include landscaping which would consist of plant species which readily adapt to urban environments and drought tolerant plant species as required by City regulations Therefore, the proposed Soecific Plan will not produce significant changes to the number of rare or endangered plant soecies in the project area (including trees, shrubs grass, crops, and micro flora) since none exist on the site No impact is anticipated and no mitigation is necessary The Specific Plan area and immediate locale are not known to contain any rare or endangered animal species Since the Plan area is completely paved, devoid of vegetation and is located within a highly developed urban area, the potential for animal life on -site is very limited and may cny include species that have adapted to such environments Development in the Specific Pian area would represent a continuation of a regional urbanizing trend which has permanently altered wildlife habitat in the area Given the very limited animal life on -site, the proposed 124th Scec fic Plan would not produce sign( scant impacts to the number of rare or endangered sceces or specimens in the project area, nor would result in significant changes in the diversity s, eoes recuciicn in numbers, or deterioration of valuable animal habitats There are no ,rc., n natura communities of wildlife, wetlands, or migration areas in the Specific Plan area _ ', E-SY AND MINERAL RESOURCES De e convent in the Specific Plan area would result in the slight increase and consumption of renewable and non - renewable natural resources during construction (building materials, water, s ano oroject operation During project operation, it is anticipated that consumption of water and natural gas would be marginal and would be considered insignificant c- muiative consumption volumes throughout the City of El Segundo and the airport a. _s a whole All future development within the Specific Plan area will comply with all -__ =ace statutes and regulations set forth In the Uniform Building Code, and all applicable escurce ccnservabon measures Therefore the proposal will not use non - renewable r a wasteful manner Additionally, the proposed 124" Specific Plan will not conflict sso +ee energy conservation plans or result in the loss of availability of a known mineral e No mitigation is required _ -_R-S Spec fic Plan anticipates that eevelopment would result in a less than significant c` hazardous substances being dispersed into the air during construction, from the on er architectural coatings, paint or other weather - proofing chemicals However, due relatively small scale of the project, no significant impacts are anticipated and no _a' on is required Specific Plan area would be accessible to emergency vehicles via a proposed access v:e-nent at 124th Street/ Grand Avenue extension and Aviation Boulevard, and at El Segundo cc,jue\,arc The Specific Plan proposes a one -way, U- shaped, 20 -foot wide driveway for the 0 057 northern half of the site, and, two-way driveway aisles for the southern half of the site Public access would be from the access easement at 124'° """ Grand Avenue extension only The gated El Segundo Boulevard driveway will be accessible to emergency vehicles only Additionally, evacuation plans and procedures would be incorporated into budding and site design Therefore, the 124th Specific Plan is not expected to interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans and no mitigation is required. Development within the Specific Plan area will not expose people to existing sources of hazardous substances since the subject site is currently vacant and unused Additionally, the most recent use of the site was for a parking lot, which is not associated with the generation of hazardous substances As stated previously, the subject site is completely paved and devoid of vegetation therefore, the proposal will not result in an increase in fire hazards since no vegetation exists on the site No mitigation is required 10 NOISE Norse and vibration effects on the surrounding land uses are analyzed for both short-term construction activities and long -term operation of the proposed project Construction activities v.ill ce short-term in nature (approximately 4 to 6 months in duration) and will occur only cet veer 7 AM to o PM Monday - Saturday as allowed by City regulations In addition, vibration at(, bu:aole to construction activities is expected to be minimal due to the type of construction c_-_ pment Generally employed for development of this nature Furthermore, the proposed '24'h Scecifiic Plan hmits the hours of operation for the project to 7 AM to 7 PM daily This will s e tna• the development will not impact the residential uses or other land uses which would be co- s,ce,ed sensitive to noise and vibrations within the vicinity of the project Therefore, no impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required I =JBDC SERVICES _ ocsec 124th Specific Plan will not significantly impact the demand for municipal �_ ­ ces Police and fire services to the Specific Plan area are provided by the City of El z:,Jncc Police and Fire Departments Water and park services are also operated by the City E Se�onoo Sewer demands for the proposed project will be accommodated by Los = e County Sanitation District sewer lines and will be treated at the County Waste -rea melt facility in the City of Carson School services are provided by the Wiseburn Unified stnct School district fees may be required, subject to standard District regulations, as as Police Library and Fire services fees which are required of all new development within %o impacts on public services are expected from the Specific Plan -)c the development of the Specific Plan area a Fire /Life Safety Plan and Security Plan will required to be submitted as part of the standard building permit plan check The Fire /Life a'ei Piarr, shall incorporate fire /life safety features and must be approved by the Fire = ez=-;ment prior to issuance of a budding permit Moreover, the Security Plan shall incorporate lighting, hardware and other security features into the budding design plans, as well as c�e-ation criteria The Security Plan must be approved by the Police Department prior to ssuance of a budding permit Furthermore, water and sewer lines serving the project site are ai able and have the capacity to meet the demands of the proposed project Therefore, the 10 project will not significantly impact municipal services in the area (police, fire, water, school, sewage, parks, or public facilities), and no mitigation measures are required, other than the standard Fire, Police and Library service mitigation fees The project will also be subject to a traffic impact fee to offset certain identified needed traffic improvements, pursuant to Resolution No 3969 12 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS The 124th Specific Plan area would necessitate new utility connections Existing utility infrastructure beneath El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard includes electricity, natural gas, telephone, cable television, water, sewer and storm drain lines Utility services would be provided by the appropriate purveyors, including. Southern California Edison Company, The Gas Company, Pacific Bell, Paragon Ca41e, and the City of El Segundo Water and Wastewater Division Solid waste disposal is provided to commercial and industrial users b� a variety of private haulers Development within the Specific Plan Area would contract with a provider Landfill capacity for the planning term (15 years) is adequate for assumed population anc commercial growth within Los Angeles County The 124th Specific Plan would not exceed an; assumptions for either population or commercial growth in the region Development in the Scec • z P,an area would submit all registration forms required for service connections, and .'c a�re-e tc all applicable utility permit guidelines and restrictions s:a,ec eisewnere in this Initial Study, the proposed project includes the possible 13 325 square foot City water facility on the site The project would include a a e I v.nich would enhance the availability of local water supplies and a water treatment ro- ioca treatment and distribution The subject site has been deemed suitable for such a water facility since it is within the path of the aquifer which is located approximately 400 ae to the surface To mitigate the potential impact the project could have on the City's e e nen: c, distribution facilities or water supplies, the applicant will be required to . c`e, for sale) approximately 13,325 square feet (65 feet x 205 feet) of the land to = -' Ei Seoundo for the purpose of constructing a water well and water treatment plant a s,udy e\,aluaung the impacts of the water well site and its location will be discussed at a cpra- time No other mitigation measures are required STHETICS ce =_ec 1241n Specific Plan development standards assure conformity with aesthetic ,a,os in effect throughout the entire Cily This will minimize any visual impact on arooe1t,es Thus there are no significant adverse impacts and no mitigation is -_essa v e=•-gent of the Specific Plan area would result in the creation of new light or glare to the n nc area At the time of buildino plan check, a complete fighting plan and photometric v ill be required to be submitted to assess the amount of off -site illumination generated by rep•., structures) If needed, the light and glare will be required to be minimized but must s comply with the Police Departments recommendations Light emitted from the building(s) oe required to be compatible with, and comparable to, the existing lighting surrounding the Specific Plan area and the adjacent area, so that it would not significantly alter the illumination 11 059 of the area Additionally, the photometric study and lighting design will take into consideration existing lighting adjacent to the site (such as street lighting) which already partially illuminates the subject property 14 CULTURAL RESOURCES The proposed 124th Specific Plan will not generate negative impacts on the City's cultural resources The Specific Plan area is currently vacant and undeveloped with buildings, thus no historic buildings exist on -site Similarly, there are no known prehistoric sites or objects associated with the property or located within the immediate vicinity The surrounding area is a Tully urbanized and developed environment No cultural, religious, or sacred uses or activities of importance to any particular segment of the general population are known to be associated with the Plan area or locale The potential for significant impacts to historic or prehistoric sites, cultural, paleontological, a cheological, historical or religious buildings or objects is considered remote Further archeological studies are not necessary, and preservation efforts are not required as a part of p,o ect implementation The proposed 124th Specific Plan would not be expected to produce s gn f,cant impacts upon or result in the alteration or destruction of any historic or prehistoric s e owlcing, structure, or object, nor would it result in physical changes which would affect e rn s a;1wral values or restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the vicinity Should any ors -s „ unrecorded cultural resources be encountered during the construction of the project, all va wW be stooped and a qualified archeologist will be consulted to determine the potential s �arce of the find No mitigation is required t � RECREATION or, parks and recreational facilities are primarily generated by permanent residential at cons Development of the Plan area would result in the addition of a one -unit apartment e_ c- two resident caretakers of the proposed mini- storage facility Thus, the proposed could generate an on -site population of approximately 5 0 persons (based on :.eoa—,nern of Finance 1998 population projections) This represents an increase of less than s in the City s population, which is negligible Because of this negligible increase, it is a 7 patec that development of the Plan area would generate a demand for additional _ ::3,nocd or regional parks or other recreational facilities, or affect existing recreational ^.rues Therefore, significant impacts upon the quantity or quality of recreational r, nes are not expected as a result of the proposed 124th Specific Plan No mitigation is MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE nr000sed 124th Specific Plan is for a completely paved site located in an urban setting efore the Specific Plan does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the Torment and will not achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long -term _- ­ronmental goals There are no foreseeable negative cumulative impacts associated with ',e croposed 124th Specific Plan that will have an adverse affect on human beings 12 - G60 SECTION 5 0 SOURCES Initial Studv Applicant Questionnaire and Application for the 124'0 Specific Plan, January, 1999 and March 1999 2 Traffic Analysis for Extra Space Management Protect at El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard, Crain & Associates, January 13, 1999 and March 2, 1999 El Segundo Self Storage Facility Parking Demand Estimate, Thomas S Montomery, P E , January, 18, 1999 and March 2, 1999 The City of El Seoundo General Plan 1992 13 _ c- 61 DRAFT MITIGATION MEASURES EA -472, GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1 and ZTA 99 -1 41) Water 1 The applicant shall reserve a 65 feet x 205 feet portion of the subject site, with the intent to sell tnat portion of the site to the City (for the purpose of constructing a City water well and water treatment plant), to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and the City Attorney 14 p 1prgectM451- 4751ea- 472\is -3 - X62 .lick., M ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Project # EA -472IGPA 99 -1IZC 99 -1IZTA 99 -1 BACKGROUND 1 Project Title 124th Specific Plant City Water Well Project 2 Lead Agency Name and Address Citv of El Segundo, 350 Main Street El Segundo CA 90245 3 Contact Person and Phone Number Hannah L Brondia( Bowen AICP, Planning and Building Safety Department (310) 322 -4670 extension 412 4 Project Location 401 Aviation Boulevard (north of El Segundo Boulevard west of Aviation Boulevard and south of 124th Street'Grand Avenue extension) 5 Project Sponsor's Name and Address Bruce Kaufman Extra Space Storage of Studio City, LLC, 13920 Otsego S,ree Sne,mar Oaks CA 91423 6 General Plan Designation Existing parking Proposed 12411-1 Specific Plan 7 Zoning Existing Parking (PI Proposed 124th Specific Plan (124th SP) Description of Project (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation Attach additional sheets if necessary) The proposed project is a request to establish a Specific Plan area which encourages the development of (pnmanly) are,o_se min, storage uses ancdlar� residential uses It a caretakers unit) and a City Water Well and Water - r2a,rrer* Building in the Plan area (as an option) The current Zoning and land use designation of the project site is =r• r_ and the proposal is to redesignate the site to 124th Specific Plan (124th SP) in the General Plan Zoning a_ arto Zoning Code Development of the Specific Plan area would involve the construction of either a 73 500 mare foot mini• storage facility or an 84 530 square foot facility depending on whether the option to build a water ve, and water treatment facility is exercised by the City If the City chooses to build the water facility it would have c ­ss fioo, area of approximates,- p 500 square feet and would occupy approximately 13 325 square feet of land - m ni storage facility would include storage units (614 units without the water facility, 675 units with the water tac,wv) a 980 sq it (approx ) office and an 1 100 sq It (approx I caretaker's residence Public access to the site be through a 7 050 square foot access easement at the north end of the property through an at -grade railroad 2-ossing at 14th Street, Grand Avenue extension and Aviation Boulevard Only Fire Department emergency access would be permitted from EI Segundo Boulei,ard Surrounding Land Uses and Setting (Briefly describe the project's surroundings) Tne protect site is a narrow 3 93 gross acre rectangular - shaped parcel situated along the eastern border of the City north of El Segundo Boulevard and south of 124th Street/Grand Avenue extension, west of Aviation Boulevard and adiacent to the railroad tracks The prior use of the land was for a parking lot for the nearby Northrop Grumman aerospace facility for non - required overflow employee parking The site is paved with asphalt and devoid of vegetation Three shuttle shelters (associated with the previous use of the site) are the only structures on the property Nearby land uses include the US Air Force Base to the immediate west and southeast (across Aviation and El Segundo Boulevards) a parking lot to the immediate north the Northrop Grumman aerospace facile further north and northwest r'63 IV ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all answers are required on attached sheets) {E Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than ISSUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I 1 Land Use Planning Would the proposal a) Conflict with general plan designation or X zoning? b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or X policies adopted by agencies with )unsdiction over the project? X cl Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? d i Afrect agricultural resources or operations (e g X mpacts to soils or farmlands or Impacts from I I - comoatible land uses)? Gis,,ni o, aviee the pnvsical arrangement of an I X es,aoasned community (include a low -income or r t� community)? Population and Housing Would the proposal I auvery exceeo official regional or local X 000ulat on projections? --. e scostantia� Growth in an area either i I X _ -ii, o• no rectly (e g through projects in an _e e'opec area or extension of major •as,ructure)? sz ace exisonc sousing especially afforeable X ro.,sro Geologic Problems 1%Iculd the proposal result in or e, ocse people to ootent.al impacts involwne _:. j:),-re' � X Se smic Ground shaking? X Sp,s^ c ground failure including liquefaction? X Se c ^e tsunami or volcanic hazard? X _P- cshces or mudflows? X Erosion cnanges in topography or unstable soil X coneitions from excavation, grading, or fill? Subsidence of the tang? X ^) Expansrve soils? ` - X {E 065 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than ISSUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact C) Inadequate emergency access or access to I X nearby uses) d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? I X e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or X bicvclists? r) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting X alternative transportation (e g , bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 9} Rail v aterborne or air traffic impacts? X i Biological Resources Would the proposal result to impacts to a �rdancered threatened or rare species or their X 2,oa,s rc,ic nc oi,t not limited to plants s- insects an;mais and birds)? _ocar, cesicra ed soecies (e g heritage X es - :. oca cesicna�eo natural communities (e g X oaK forest coastal habitat, etc )? i e "aid ^aoda; le g marsh, riparian and vernal X .cc i% e '.. c' re c'soersal or migration corridors" I X E Energy and Mineral Resources Would the ) Z)=Osa' Co ` c, v,.t- adopted energy conservatior X „ Z -s" Use non - renewable resources in a wasteful ane X e- c e-v manner Resu't .n the loss of availability of a known X m, era+ resource that would be of future value to ' ^e regic i arc the residents of the State's 9 Hazards VVculd the proposal involve i , F risk of accidental explosion or release of X hazardous substances (including but not limited i to oil pesticides chemicals, or radiation)? D Possible nterference with an emergency f X response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 065 066 Potentially Significant = Potentially Unless Less Than ISSUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Create light or glare? X 14 Cultural Resources Would the proposal a) Disturb paleontological resources? I X b) Disturb archaeological resources? I X c) Affect historical resources? X d) Have the potential to cause a physical change X which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within X the ootential impact area? 15 Recreation Would the proposal a increase the demand for neighborhood or X rec,onal Darks or other recreational facilities? a H-ect existing recreational opportunities? I I X Mandatory Findings of Significance a Does the project have the potential to degrade X t -e cuality of the environment, substantially -ec..ce ;he naoitat of a fish or wildlife species a,.se a nsn or wildlife population to drop below 5e sus,anino levels threaten to eliminate a a^ er animal community, reduce the number o, -esrict the range of a rare or endangered c z ^, c- animal or eliminate important examples o ^e major, penoes of California history or ' cry- sto'V� Does the project have the potential to achieve X s ^on -germ to the disadvantage of long -term I- , ro ^mental goals? Does me project have impacts that are I X na. cually limited but cumulatively ccns cerable? ( Cumulatively considerable 'neans that the incremental effects of a project ale corsiderable when viewed in conjunction ar, the effects of past projects, the effects of othe, curren� projects and the effects of o^ooab(e future projects ) Does the project have environmental effects X whicn will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? 066 124`h SPECIFIC PLAN/ CITY WATER WELL PROJECT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA -472 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 99 -1 ZONE (MAP) CHANGE 99 -1 ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 99 -1 May 27, 1999 Prepared by City of El Segundo Department of Planning and Budding Safety 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 322 -4670 067 The 124" SP area is located within an urbanized environment which does not support any natural plant or animal habitats In fact, the Specific Plan area is completely paved and devoid of vegetation The topography of the subject site is flat, with no distinct geological or physical features Further, there are no known cultural, historic, or scenic resources of recognized value located within the Specific Plan area nor in the immediate vicinity Access to the subject site would be through a 7,050 square foot access easement located at the north end of the property, through an at -grade railroad crossing, at 124th Street (Grand Avenue extension) and Aviation Boulevard Regional access to the Specific Plan area is provided by the 405 Freeway to the east and the 105 Freeway to the north SECTION 3 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Reproduced as Appendix I is the City of El Segundo Initial Study and Checklist provided under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The purpose of these documents is to identify and evaluate potential adverse environmental impacts The checklist consists of background information, a list of environmental impacts, and a determination by the lead agency of the project's potential impacts on the environment, and the type of CEQA document that will be prepared A discussion of the items checked on the form is located in Section 4 0 SECTION 4 0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS LAND USE PLANNING stated previously, the current zoning and land use designation of the subject site is Parking (P) This designation is consistent with the previous use of the site which was a parking lot The _-csed land use designation and zoning of the site is 124 Specific Plan (124'" SP), which allow development of a mint-storage facility (and its ancillary office and residential uses), as e as a City Water Well and Water Treatment Budding (as an option) The applicant's stated ecuve of the proposed 124'^ SP is to expand the City s economic base by providing alternative etepment within an underutil¢ed area Specifically the 124th SP is based on a ten -year co for development and growth of pnmaNy warehouse /storage uses within the Specific Plan a,ea The 124th SP will provide land use policies, development standards and guidelines for the rc ec, area which will replace the current Parking (P) land use policies, development standards ar� cwdehnes currently governing the site However should the 124th SP fail to provide s;a ^lords or guidelines for a specific use the development standards for the Urban Mixed -Use N,D-h (MU -N) Zone shall apply The 124' SP proposes a maximum FAR of either 0 47 1 0 (with the development of the City :'aier Facility) or 0 54 1 0 (without the City Water Facility) The current Parking designation does nc : ontarn provisions for Floor Area Ratio since structures (other than parking structures) are not permitted 3 - 06R The Specific Plan area is located in an urbanized area with well - established infrastructure and public utilities Project operation of the mini-storage facility would employ three persons, which represents a negligible increase (less than D 1 percent) in the City's employment (daytime) population Construction of the mini- storage facility would involve using contractors from within the existing Los Angeles area labor pool, therefore, the project is not anticipated to induce substantial growth in any area, either directly or indirectly Additionally, project implementation would not involve the displacement of housing, especially affordable housing, since no housing units exist on the project site Based on the above factors no impact is anticipated 3 GEOLOGICAL PROBLEMS As shown on Exhibit PS -1 in the Safety Element of the City's General Plan, three active,lpotentially active faults (Newport- Inglewood Fault, Palos Verdes Fault and Malibu -Santa Monica Fault) are located near the City, therefore, future development in the Specific Plan area wculd be exposed to seismic risks just as other developments of comparable size in the vicinity would be should an earthquake occur along these faults Fault rupture or seismic ground snaking could occur, however, the effects are mitigated because any development within the Specific Plan area will be required to comply with the latest Uniform Budding Code (UBC) recuire-nents for seismic safety Compliance with the UBC will reduce the impacts of fault .c,ure c� arounc shaving to below a level of significance Tr o areas of the City have a high potential for liquefaction during an earthquake the extreme e_ e,r ccrtion o` the City parallel to the coastline along Vista del Mar and, the northeast cc-,cr of the City from Aviation Boulevard, northwest to Imperial Highway, just west of SCcjiveda Boulevard Since the subject site is not located within these two areas, no impact is ant cicated n_ :c the Safety Element of the City s General Plan, the southwestern portion of the City e �: ast Land adjacent portions of the City of Los Angeles further north) are identified as e cne anc tsunami hazard areas, however the subject site is about 2 5 miles east of the Ocean therefore, no impacts due to these natural hazards are anticipated S= e co^ ent within the Specific Plan would involve minimal grading since the site is flat and ceer, previously graded and paved The issuance of a grading permit is a standard =cj cement in the City and will ensure slope stability and erosion control during construction S cr,f ca -t changes in the topography of the site is not anticipated to occur, however, some --s cf srte soil may occur during ccnstruction This impact is considered short-term in -I-. as the site would eventually be landscaped and would contain hardscape surfaces upon =—D'e! ion of development Nonetheless soil erosion will be controlled with application of the '. s Storm Water and Urban Run -off Pollution Prevention Control Ordinance (No 1235) and comb, lance with this Ordinance will reduce the impacts of sod erosion from project grading -,:�t, i1,es to below a level of significance Tne suoiect site is completely paved and located in an urbanized environment No known . ^,cue geologic or physical features exist on the site, therefore, no impacts to unique geologic c- pays cal features are anticipated As stated above, the project site is not located in an area •.nicn has a potential for seismic ground failure and liquefaction, therefore, the possibility of 5 069 While the proposed development would represent a continuation of the region's urbanizing trend, it would not result in significant impacts to ocean or groundwater quality, absorption rates, drainage patterns or surface water run -off However, the project may impact groundwater availability since an aquifer has recently been identified 400 feet below the surface of the site by the Public Works Division The aquifer is reported to be several miles wide, situated between Sepulveda Boulevard and Prairie Avenue (outside the City limits) If unmitigated, this may result in a substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater available for public water supplies Therefore, in order to mitigate this potential impact, the applicant will be required to reserve (and offer for sale) approximately 13,325 square feet (65 feet x 205 feet) of the land to the City of El Segundo for the purpose of constructing a water well and water treatment plant An initial study evaluating the impacts of the water well site and its location will be discussed at the appropriate time No other impacts to water are anticipated and no additional mitigation measures are required 5 AIR QUALITY The land uses permitted in the Specific Plan area (warehouse /storage and residential) would not be expected to produce any significant changes in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in the vicinity The Specific Plan permits a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 0 59 1 or 93,000 net square feet of bwld ng area During construction of the mini- storage facility, a less than significant amount of criteria --o'lutanis and,or odor may be dispersed into the air This might be due to the delivery of consiru;tion materials, travel by construction workers, and /or application of architectural coatings or other building materials, such as paint or other weather - proofing chemicals Furthermore minimal grading on the site may result in fugitive construction dust, however, due the small scale of the project [the threshold of potential significance for air quality (as ce e-mined by the SCAQMD) during construction begins at 1,102.520 square feet of gross floor a,ea only a less than significant amount of impact is anticipated, therefore, no mitigation is recwred D -- ng the operation of the mini- storage facility negligible amounts of air pollutants associated r,^ vehicle traffic may occur, however no air quality standards would be exceeded as a result crolect implementation Furthermore the development or operation of the mini- storage tac t, will not alter air movement moisture or temperature, or cause changes in climate since inese types of facilities are not known to cause or affect such changes Therefore, there will be -mpac' and no mitigation will be required for the construction and operation of the facilities o TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION H Traffic Report was prepared for the proposed 124th Specific Plan The Traffic study =st mated that the traffic generation for the proposed use would be a total of 202 trips per day Dased on Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) rates Approximately 13 trips are projected for the mornmg peak hour and approximately 23 trips for the evening peak hour According to the traffic report and with concurrence from the City's Traffic Engineer, the project trip generation is nominal and would not result in significant increases to vehicle trips along adjacent roadways 7 _ -- n70 7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES There are no known rare, unique or endangered plant or animal species associated with the proposed 124th Specific Plan area or within the immediate vicinity The Specific Plan area is completely paved and devoid of vegetation Development of the Plan area would include landscaping which would consist of plant species which readily adapt to urban environments and drought tolerant plant species as required by City regulations Therefore, the proposed Specific Plan will not produce significant changes to the number of rare or endangered plant species in the project area (including trees, shrubs grass, crops, and micro flora) since none exist on the site No impact is anticipated and no mitigation is necessary The Specific Plan area and immediate locale are not known to contain any rare or endangered animal species Since the Plan area is completely paved, devoid of vegetation and is located within a highly developed urban area, the potential for animal life on -site is very limited and may only include species that have adapted to such environments Development in the Specific Plan area would represent a continuation of a regional urbanizing trend which has permanently altered wildlife habitat in the area Given the very limited animal life on -site, the proposed 124th Scecific Plan would not produce significant impacts to the number of rare or endangered scenes or specimens in the project area, nor would result in significant changes in the diversity c spec es reduction in numbers, or deterioration of valuable animal habitats There are no r sown natural communities of wildlife, wetlands or migration areas in the Specific Plan area ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Development in the Specific Plan area would result in the slight increase and consumption of renewable and non - renewable natural resources during construction (budding materials, water. css ijels, and project operation During project operation it is anticipated that consumption of e c t, water and natural gas would be marginal and would be considered insignificant _ to cumulative consumption volumes throughout the City of El Segundo and the airport a-ea as a whole All future development within the Specific Plan area will comply with all acct caoie statutes and regulations set forth In the Uniform Budding Code, and all applicable e resource conservation measures Therefore the proposal will not use non - renewable 2 --ces in a wasteful manner Additionally the proposed 124" Specific Plan will not conflict accpted energy conservation plans or result in the loss of availability of a known mineral _s ce No mitigation is required H,Zo�RDS T,e 2=' Specific Plan anticipates that development would result in a less than significant a-rcunt of hazardous substances being dispersed into the air during construction, from the a --pucation of architectural coatings paint or other weather - proofing chemicals However, due ;c :re relatively small scale of the project, no significant impacts are anticipated and no - ,t,gat,en is required Tne Specific Plan area would be accessible to emergency vehicles via a proposed access easement at 124th Street/ Grand Avenue extension and Aviation Boulevard, and at El Segundo Boulevard The Specific Plan proposes a one -way, U- shaped, 20 -foot wide driveway for the 9 071 protect will not significantly impact municipal services in the area (police, fire, water, school, sewage, parks or public facilities), and no mitigation measures are required, other than the standard Fire, Police and Library service mitigation fees The project will also be subject to a traffic impact fee to offset certain identified needed traffic improvements, pursuant to Resolution No 3969 12 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS The 124th Specific Plan area would necessitate new utility connections Existing utility infrastructure beneath El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard includes electricity, natural gas, telephone, cable television, water, sewer and storm drain lines Utility services would be provided by the appropriate purveyors, including Southern California Edison Company, The Gas Company, Pacific Bell, Paragon Cable, and the City of El Segundo Water and Wastewater Division Solid waste disposal is provided to commercial and industrial users by a variety of private haulers Development within the Specific Plan Area would contract with a provider Landfill capacity for the planning term (15 years) is adequate for assumed population and commercial growth within Los Angeles County The 124th Specific Plan would not exceed anv assumptions for either population or commercial growth in the region Development in the SDecific Plan area would submit all registration forms required for service connections, and v,oLlc adhere to all applicable utility permit guidelines and restrictions .;s stated elsewhere in this Initial Study, the proposed project includes the possible de"elooment cf a 13 325 square foot City water facility on the site The project would include a -ater well which would enhance the availability of local water supplies and a water treatment Du e ng for local treatment and distribution The subject site has been deemed suitable for such a water facility since it is within the path of the aquifer which is located approximately 400 'ee' below the surface To mitigate the potential impact the project could have on the City's a•e- treatment or distribution facilities or water supplies, the applicant will be required to - =se' 'e and offer for sale) approximately 13,325 square feet (65 feet x 205 feet) of the land to "rtv of El Segundo for the purpose of constructing a water well and water treatment plant n ual study evaluating the impacts of the water well site and its location will be discussed at ne app- oDnate time No other mitigation measures are required AESTHETICS ^e preposed 124th Specific Plan development standards assure conformity with aesthetic r ancalds in effect throughout the entire City This will minimize any visual impact on a ^bo nc properties Thus there are no significant adverse impacts and no mitigation is ^ecessary Development of the Specific Plan area would result in the creation of new light or glare to the surrounding area At the time of building plan check, a complete lighting plan and photometric stucv .vill be required to be submitted to assess the amount of off -site illumination generated by the new structure(s) If needed, the light and glare will be required to be minimized but must sill' comply with the Police Department s recommendations Light emitted from the building(s) be required to be compatible with, and comparable to, the existing lighting surrounding the Specific Plan area and the adjacent area, so that it would not significantly alter the illumination 11 072 SECTION 5 0 SOURCES 1 Initial Study Apolicant Questionnaire and Application for the 124" Specific Plan, January, 1999 and March 1999 2 Traffic Analysis for Extra Space Management Proiect at El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard, Crain & Associates, January 13, 1999 and March 2 1999 3 El Segundo Self Storage Fac +l tv Parking Demand Estimate, Thomas S Montomery, P E , January, 18, 1999 and March 2, 1999 4 The City of El Segundo General Plan 1992 13 073 BACKGROUND ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Project # EA- 472IGPA 99 -12C 99 -1/ZTA 99.1 1 Project Title 1241h Specific Plan/ City Water Well Project 2 Lead Agency Name and Address City of El Segundo, 350 Main Street El Segundo CA 90245 3 Contact Person and Phone Number Hannah L Brondial Bowen AICP, Planning and Building Safety Department (310) 322 -4670 extension 412 4 Project Location 401 Aviation Boulevard (north of El Segundo Boulevard west of Aviation Boulevard and south of 124th Street/Grand Avenue extension) 5 Project Sponsor's Name and Address Bruce Kaufman Extra Space Storage of Studio City LLC, 13920 Otsego Scree, Sherman Oaks CA 91423 6 General Plan Designation Existing Parkin Proposee '24th Specific Plan 7 Zoning Existing Parking (P) Proposed 1241111 Specific Plan (124th SP) Description of Project (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation Attach additional sheets if necessary) The oroposed project is a request to establish a Specific Plan area which encourages the development of (primarily) -are house, mini-storage uses anaBary resioential uses (ie caretakers unit) and a City Water Well and Water Treatment Budding in the Plan area (as an option) The current zoning and land use designation of the project site is �arkmg and the proposal is to redesignate the site to 124th Specific Plan (124th SP) in the General Plan Zoning Liao and Zonino Code Development of the Specific Plan area would involve the construction of either a 73 500 seiare foot mini-storage facility or an 84 530 square foot facility depending on whether the option to build a water °e4 and water treatment facility is exercised by the Qty If the City chooses to build the water facility it would have e —oss floor area of approximatefv 9 500 square feet and would occupy approximately 13 325 square feet of land "ne mini- storage facility would include storage units (614 units without the water facility, 675 units with the water family) a 980 so It (approx ) office and an 1 100 sq ft Iapprox ) caretaker's residence Public access to the site v ould be through a 7 050 square foot access easement at the north end of the property through an at -grade railroad c-cssmg at 124th Street' Grand Avenue extension and Aviation Boulevard Only Fire Department emergency access would be permitted from El Segundo Boulevard Surrounding Land Uses and Setting (Briefly describe the project's surroundings) The project site is a narrow 3 93 gross acre rectangular- shaped parcel situated along the eastern border of the City north of El Segundo Boulevard and south of 12410 StreeUGrand Avenue extension west of Aviation Boulevard and adjacent to the railroad tracks The prior use of the land was for a parking lot for the nearby Northrop Grumman aerospace facility for non - required overflow employee parking The site is paved with asphalt and devoid of vegetation Three shuttle shelters (associated with the previous use of the site) are the only structures on the property Nearby land uses include the US Air Force Base to the immediate west and southeast (across Aviation and El Segundo Boulevards) a parking lot to the immediate north the Northrop Grumman aerospace facility further north and northwest 074 IV ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all answers are required on attached sheets). In75 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than ISSUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mrttgatton Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1 Land Use Planning Would the proposal a) Conflict with general plan designation or X zoning bl Conflict with applicable environmental plans or X policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction I over the project? X C Be incompatible with existing land use in the . icinrty'� C Affect agricultural resources or operations le g X impacts to sods or farmlands or impacts from ncorrpahble land uses)-2 c C's'uo• or givige the oCvsica! arrangement of an X es,aoiisned community (include a low- income or - , corrmurnty)" 2 Population and Housing b^dould the proposal _—^ iat,veiy exceed official regional or local X gcoulalton prolectionsl E s„ostar;,ai growth in an area either X _., o- ndirectly ie g through projects in an Ceve oped area or extension of major as •ucturelr sc a_e exisurc rousing especialiv affordable I X _s, Seciogic Problems v ^✓ould the proposal result in or 1 =•pose geoole'o ootenhal impacts involving ! c :rer X Se s" tic around snaking? X Sr s c cro.ine failure including liquefaction? X S- tsunami or volcanic hazards X _a -csl des or mudf1ows? X Erosion changes in topography or unstable sod I X conditions from excavation grading or fill'? Subs,dence of the lands X r j Expansive soils - X In75 _ Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than ISSUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact C) Inadequate emergency access or access to I I X nearby uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? X e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or X brcvchsts? fl Conflicts with adopted policies supporting X alternative transportation (e g , bus turnouts bicycle racks)? d) Rail waterborne or air traffic impacts? X 7 Biological Resources Would the proposal result in mpacts to a, Ercareered tnreatened or rare species o* their X �ar a,s mc uc ^c out not limited to plants r,sr msens animals and birds)? _ _ccali, cesionateo species (e g hentaoe X lees cesldnated natural communities to g X oak forest coastal habitat etc )? e a -d racitat (e g marsn riparian and vernal i X ^oo e c re e,soersal or migration corridors? X E Energy and Mineral Resources Would the _caasa, i .- ic vnt) adopted energy conservation I X - a-s' I I 'S= "0^ erewat)le resources in a wastetu arc X c er Tanner? Resun in the loss of availability of a known X ­ ne-al resource that would be of future value to re region and the resicents of the State? 9 Hazards bvoulo the proposal involve A ns,, of accidental explosion or release of X t}aZarepus suostances (including but not ItmrteC I to W peshades chemicals, or radiation)? - Possible interference with an emergency I X response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 076 077 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than ISSUES (and Supporting Information Sources) Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Create light or glare? X 14 Cultural Resources Would the proposal a) Disturb paleontological resources? X lb) Disturb archaeological resources? X cl Affect historical resources? I X dl Have the potential to cause a physical change X which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within X the potential impact area? 15 Recreation Would the proposal Ircrease the demand Tor neighborhood or X reo,ora, parKS or other recreational facilities? E `ecl exisund recreational opportunities? X 16 Mandatory Findings of Significance a Does the protect have the potential to degrade X 1 ^e cuality of the environment, substantially r =vice 'me nabitat of a fish or wildlife species a ,�sn or wildlife population to drop below s- s,aininc levels threaten to eliminate a I -,P-' o- animal community reduce the number c es'r c the range of a rare or endangered - a- o- an,rna' or eliminate important examples c .ne malor periods of California history or j storv? Does the project have the potential to achieve l X s-on -term to the disadvantage of long -term =Mental coals? l Does Ine project have impacts that are X rco cuallv hmited but cumulatively „crs,eerabie? ( Cumulatively considerable Teas that the incremental effects of a project a-e considerable when viewed in conjunction v n the eftects of past projects the effects of c:ne, current projects and the effects of orooable future projects ) Does the project have environmental effects X which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly? 077 1 310 954 3777 PSOYAS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND B APPLICATION FOR A PROdECTNC: GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, The Applicant c /e= Bruce Kaufman Q002 354 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 3z"W o FAX (310) 322 -4167 )MENT EA -472 Revised 3/2199 Date. 1/13199 E)f ra Space Storage of Studio City, L.L.C. 13920 Otsego Street, Sheaoan Oaks, CA 91423 Name Address Phone (918) 759 -9526 (Check One) Owner X Lessee Agent Property Owner_ a space Storage of Studio City, L.L.C., same as above Name Address Phone Property Situated at 401 Av-atsen Boulevard, please see attached "Legal Description." (Exact legal description. Provide attachment if necessary) General Location 401 Aviation Boulevard betweenEl Segundo Blvd. and 124th Street Address or Street/ Avenue Street/ Avenue StreeV Avenue Existing General Plan Land Use Designation: Park-inc (P) to 124th Specific Pian Cescnbe the proposed amendment and/or proposed land use redesignation that is requested with this application PPdpsl9natl0n frtm Parking (P) per the General Plan to 124th Specific Plan (124thSP). Coes public necessity require the proposed amendment and/or proposed land use redesignation? (Fully explain your answer, considering the surrounding pmpertres as well as the subject property) Public necessity does require the proposed mange because current storage facilities wzth.Ln allocrdble zoning districts are fully utilized, leaving the public under served. The use w-ll be beneficial to the cammuttty as it provides accessible storage facil:tres in an area which will not be heavily impacted. The current site is most suitable for the proposed use because it is In an area which n5 currently unproductive, and the surrounding uses are compatible. -- 078 01/05/99 09:07 FAZ 110 954 5777 FSOXAS �ao1 Is the property involved in the proposed land use redesignation and/or amendment more sUjtable and consistent with the purposes, objectives, goals and policies, of the applicable General Plan Elements than the present designation? (Answer completely. Give all reasons for your answer and specifica4y cite applicable General Plan sections.) yes, the proposed land use redesignation will clement the surrounding uses of the area. The majority of the northeast quadrant of the city as designated either Corporate Office or Urban Mixed -Use North, winch allows for a mixture of uses, including office, hotels, retail, and lignt industrial. The proposed use is more suitable than the existing use since theme is a lack of parking demand for that area. The proposed use wall further the objectives of the Land Use Element Section (GP p.3 -10, 3 -11) as well as complement the Economic Goals of the General Plan (p.2 -14). Would the use(s) permitted by the proposed land use redeslgnation and/or amendment be detnmental in any way to the surrounding properties (Explain reasons supporting your answers.) No, the proposed use will not be detrimental to sTM nziding properties because the site is located near corporate office areas, including the A'i.r Force Base and the aerospace industrial facility to the test. Furthermore, residential properties are located more than 150 feet away to the east of the project site. Also, new land - scaping will be provided as a buffer along E1 Segundo Boulevard to shield the public frcn activities associated with the site. Are there any deed or other restncbons concerning the type and class of uses on the property involved') It so, grve expiration date of the restrictions and attach a copy of the restrictions. NI" Fx: a,'I now the proposed redesignatton and/or amendment woUld be integrated, intemally consistent and compaLbie with all of the Elements of the General Plan, as a whole. (Cite specific applicable General Plan sections) .-ie proposed Specific Plan area is consistent and compatible with all elements c: tie Gene_ -al Plan since it seeks to further the Economic Goals and integrate within e s --o mdirtg area in compliance with the Land Use Element section of the General a- Proposed activities within the area will not negatively impact the ce==ity and c" iv with all elements of the General Plan as apprujz A e. No activities in e specific Plan area will produce significantly detrimental effects for traffic, �c_se, or other envirorm ental ooncesns. Appropriate mitigation measures will be under - - ens p that the redesi&nation of the area maintains the aublxc's welfare OWNER'S AFF1DAVrr Vic ' —a Smace storage of studio City, L.L.C. r being duly sworn depose and say that I/We - OWNER of the property involved in this application and that I /we have familiarized myself (ourselves) with .,lc'' arc regulation(s) of the City of El Segundo with respect to preparing and filing this application and that r " .e-- r_ stzternents herein contained and the informabon on documents and all plans attached hereto are in e piss True and correct to the best of� /our knowledge and belief 'zE4 ,19 9� Si aiure Date e -;,r, Or CALIFORNIA, ) . _ntv C Los Angeles )ss 070 03/09/99 09:08 PAZ 310 954 3777 PSORAS Q004 PUBUC On this \ t-\ dayof _ C ,19 _ A before me, 1h *AdeAigoaCdNoi�TPublcic ry nd for said county and State, personally appeared rYA�% known I ie to be the person whose name 4:S subscribe to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/kkie executed the same. stvnroBJ;AW /V owrt*mf MUM myRM —camp I Notary Public in and for saidQCunty and State �ArM.is Can* tr _ _ n . — _ - - r _i , , AGENT AUTHORIZATION I hereby authorize Joel b• Mi t l er to act for me in all matters relevant to this application. I understand that t person ill be the exclusive contact on the project and will be sent all information and correspondence. Owners Signatur AGENT AFFIDAVIT I we 3Oe= E • M l l er being duly swum depose and say that Me am the AGENT of the property involved in this application and that Uwe have familiarized myself (ourselves) with try vies and regulaton of the City of Ei Segundo with respect to preparing and filing this application and that the I )ing statements herein contained and the information on documents and ail plans, attached hereto are in all re__acts true and correct to the best of my /o V-W& ,7sI7 Signature Date Z'A'E C- CA:JFCRNIA, ) Co,iry cf Los Angeles )ss On if 20 -5L day of JaQ I a ^c for said County and State, personally apr mL tz be the person whose name and acknowl ,7 NE3S my hand and rocedures for filing application CINDY J MCAALES Contrntston Y n2235: NMary PuNc — CaftrNs Lm Ngdes Countr — MYOmM.FspnsJrrn 15.24m1 before The, the undersigned Notary Public 12 a l f i2✓ known subscribe to the within same Notary Public in jknd for said County and State Fie apolication properly completed in the office of the Planning Division Signature of the owner, owners, lessee, and /or agent shall be notarized before a Notary Public. Applicant shall provide all information, drawings and other materials as requested by the Planning Division. Pay filing fee :1 03/03/99 09:08 FAX 310 954 3777 FSOHAS 0005 4. Applicant and affected property owners will be notified of time of hearing. 5 Applicant must be present at the hearing and may offer additional evidence to support his/her request. 6. There shall be an additional fee for filing an appeal. pv�wv Planning Staff: Date received E Ar T Signature G.PA. - revised 08104W 4 n81 . e . -- C 4 � . � 1 C�♦ 3T. ]:� revised 08104W 4 n81 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING SAFETY APPLICATION FOR ZONE CHANGE PROJECT NO. GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, EA -472 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 322 -4670 FAX (310) 322 -4167 Revised 3/2/99 Date 1/13/99 The Applicant: c /o: Bruce Kaufman Ecc a Soace Storage of Studio City, L.L.C. 13920 Otsego Street, Sherman Oaks, C4 91423 Name Address Phone(818) 759 -9526 (Check One Owner v Lessee Agent Propertx Owner E=� - .._ace Stnrace of Studio City, L.L.C., same as above Name Address Phone P- uerty Sauatedat. 4C Aviation Boulevard, of Ease see attached "Legal Descriotior". (Exact legal description. Provide attachment if necessary) ratio Boulevard El Segundo Blvd. and 124th Street I : iatic.. _oration - between Address and Street, Avenue Street, Avenue _xistinaZonino Par<.:nc (P) to 124th ScErif±c Plan ;eeuest Under the provisions of Tile 20, Section 20 86 of the Municipal Code, application for consideration of a Zone Change for the above described property D.-es public necessity require the proposed chance? Is there a real need in the community for more of the V,ves of uses permitted by the Zone requested that can be accommodated in the areas already for such zones? (Fully explain your answer, considering the surrounding property as well as the property proposed •c be reclassified) c necessity does require tze proposed change because current storage facilities ..itn:r. allowable zoning districts are fully utilized, leaving the public under served. T'e use will be beneficial to the comiminity as it provides accessible storage -----,!_ties in an area which will not be heavily impacted. The current site is most _ -,itaele for the proposed use because it is in an area which is currently unproductive, and the surrounding uses are compatible , r�AR - 21999 „I .1r, D f 111 *t N 1: Is the property involved in the proposed reclassification more suitable for the purposes permitted in the proposed zone than for the purposes permitted in the present classification? (Answer completely; give all reasons for your answer) Yes, the property is currently designated as parking per the General Plan, and was previously used as overflow parking for Northrup Gr imian employees, which is locates to the west of the subject property. There is currently no parking demand at the location nor is the site needed to satisfy code parking. Therefore, the proposed use will provide a more productive and economically viable use of the lot for tie owner and the city. Would the uses permitted by the proposed zone change be detrimental in any way to the surrouneinc property? (Explain reasons supporting your answers ) t;o, the proposed use will not be detrimental to surrounding properties because the site is located near corporate office areas, including the Air Force Base and the ae-espace industrial facility to the west. Furthermore, residential properties_ are lc,cated more than 150 fee*_ away to the east of the project site. Also, new land - scap—,= will be provided as a buffer along E1 Segundo Boulevard to shield the puclic f -cr act vities associated with the site. W-1a' were the original deed restrictions, if any, concerning the type and class of uses on the property r,.olvec'� Give expiration date of these restrictions (You may attach a copy of these restrictions, after p-ccenv unaerscoring the portions that are in answer to this question.) OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT ScacF Sacra =e of Stndlc Cit} , L.L.C. being duly swam dispose and say that I/W e OWNER c' the property involved in this application and that Ilwe have familiarized myself (ourselves) with e_ a, -.c rec.;lc•,on of the City of Ej Segundo with respect to preparing and filing this application and that the -; statements herein contained and the Information on documents and all plans attached hereto are in all •-je and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and be of Signature V Date - -_ Zz :�ALIFDRNIA, ) Lis Angeles )ss STEVEN DELGADO NO ARY PUBLIC day of UY1 19 before me the ttersrgaed Notary Public r ;„" Salo county and State, personally appear r u c yo w-v^ known to .` to the person whose name r C, subscribe to the within instrument, acvcrowleaged to me that he /sfie executed he same N ESS my hand and official seat MCAM 3 -v Cammom0 105MM wirrr act — caron,e r, W oar wbbIi �m S Notary Public in for said County and state - 083 AGENT AUTHORIZATION I nereby authorize Joel B. M2-Ilex to act for me to all matters relevant to this application. I understand that �Ierson will be the exclusive contact on the project and will be sent all information and correspondence. wnel's Signature AGENT AFFIDAVIT We Joel B. M3.1ler being duly swom dispose and say that I/We am the AGENT of the property involved in this application and that I/we have familiarized myself (ourselves) with +he rules and regulation of the City of El Segundo with respect to preparing and filing this application and that the -oregomg statements herein contained and the Information on documents and all plans, attached hereto are to all -esDects true and correct to the best of my /our knowle an el7 i'%�. &A, //J0 Signature Date STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) ::ounrJ of Los Angeles )ss his Z y aay of JuV`L�n_ ,I 19 1 r7 before me, the undersigned Notary Public fcr saic county and State, personally appeared Joel �Yn i I l ey known to c be the person whose name 15 subscribe to the within instrument, ,c aCKnowledoed to me tlptlili--` ia, 1— CINDY J MORALES f -fdE � rnV nand and O _ CINDY PL is 1722352 _ L�4 d /L�WSJ ..:a Notary Pudic— Gelanw ��/l. Los Angeles County Notary Public in and for said County and state MY Comm E�p,res Jan 15 2001 ry rocedures for filing application Fie acolication properly completed in the office of the Planning Division Signature of the owner, owners, lessee, and /or agent shall be notarized before a Notary Public. A,;ol cant shall provide all information, drawings and other materials as requested by the Planning Division gay filing fee Aoollcant and affected property owners will be notified of time of hearing A-- chcant must be present at the heanng and may offer additional evidence to support his/her request There shall be an additional fee for filing an appeal ZC APP -nnmg Staff• Date received Signature _ E.A. Z- C. =—?- ZC q�.I LANINING DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING 350 Main Street AND BUILDING SAFETY El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 322 -4670 FAX (310) 322 -4167 INITIAL STUDY APPLICANT QUESTIONNAIRE GENERAL INFORMATION 1 Name, address and phone number of current property owner Bruce Kaufman, Extra Space Storage cf Studio City, L.L.C. 13920 Otsego Street, Sherman Oaks, CA 91423 (818) 906 -8713. (Note. Property Owner's signature is required an Page 6 and 7) 2 Address of project 401 Aviation Boulevard Assessor's Block and Lot No 4138- 002 -801 , 4138- 002 -802, 4138- 002 -806 Na-ie, address, and telephone number of acpltcant, including name of person to be contacted concerning this project 01 d,ffe,e ^t from Property Owner) cav a =_ Zhoye (Note Applicant's signature is required an Page 7) L st anc eescnoe any other related permits anc other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional, state, and federal agencies Zone Change, General Plan Amendment, Adoption c' cce^,fic '_Ian .e s -c zoning district. Parking (P) <_ed use of site (project for which this form is filed) 10 self storac7e buildings and related including an office and care - taker's apartment (please see attached .'a. Study Section 2.0). DES CR I PTION Use additional sheets as necessary S.,e size 3.93 acres -c.a sc are footage of builamg(s) or structure(s) 63,A 60 /666iii { If4-i 9 3 , 0 0 0 s . f revised 3/2/99 NLrnce, of floors of construction 2 floors for 1 building, 1 floor' / for a-11 others Amot-nt of on -site parking provided , �� /��� /]lRG;aYt�][f1r7 /� /di�l�eiy g�¢fi�55 21 spaces, plus �•oocsedscheduling as soon as possible 1 disabled and 1 loading Associated projects and relationship to larger project or series of projects City of El Segundo 124t:•. Scecific Plan (Please se=_ attached Initial Study). If resiaential, include the number of units, scnedule of unit sizes, range of sale price or rents, and type of household size expected E If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of budding area, and nature of loading facilities provided See attached Initial Study Section 2.0, Project No. EA 47L rigs 9 If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and nature of loading facilities 10 If Institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, nature of loading facilities provided and community benefit to be derived from the project. 17 If the project requires a variance, conditional use penult or rezoning application, state this and Indicate clearly why the application is required Zone Change is required. Please refer to attacned Initial Studv Section 4.0. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Descnde the project site as it exists before the project, Including Information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures Attach photographs of the site Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted _'_ease see attacned Initial Study Section 3.0. __c -ee the surrounding properties, including Information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or sce ^.c aspects Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc), Intensity of land use (one - family, aca ,invent houses, shops, department stores, etc ), and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, e•z ) Attach photographs of the vicinity Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted =lease see attached Irutial Studv Section 3.0. EN "IFONNIENTAL IMPACTS Brief explanations of all answers are required on attached sheets, or refer to previous ___c- =_es tc Items S and C above YES MAYBE NO Land Use Planning. Would the proposal z Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? X Conflict with applicable environmental plans or X policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c Be incompatible with existing land use in the X vicinity? ` () 8 6 2 2 3 1 YES MAYBE NO d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g X impacts to sods or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an X established community (include a low-income or mmorny community)'? Population and Housing. Would the proposal a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local X population profections7 b) induce substantial growth in an area either X directly or indirectly (e.g, through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? C) Displace existing housing, especially affordable X housing'? Geologic Problems Would the proposal result in or exocse people to potential impacts involving, a\ Fault rupturev X t Sesmic around shakmg7 X c; Se smic ground failure, including liquefaction's X d Se che, tsunami, or volcanic hazard' X e Landshoes or mudflows7 =' f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable sod X conditions from excavation, grading, or fill's Su; siaence of :he lands X r Expansive sails? X Unique geologic or physical features? X Water Would the proposal result in a Changes in absorption rates, drainaae patterns, X or the rate and amount of surface runoT2 t Exposure of people or property to water related X hazaras such as flooding? ,. Discharge into surface waters or other alteration X of surface water quality (e g , temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? Chances in the amount of surface water in any X water body? X e Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? X r, Chance in the quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifier by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capacity> -- X g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? 1 5. P 0819 YES MAYBE NO X hy Impacts to groundwater quality? i] Substantial reduction in the amount of X groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? Air Duality. Would the proposal. a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an X existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants X C) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or X cause any changes in climate) X d) Create objectionable odors? Transportation/Circulation Would the proposal result in. a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestions _yam b) Hazards to safety from design features (e g , X sharp curves or dangerous intersections or incompatible uses (e g, farm equipment)? C Inadequate emergency access or access to X nearov uses? di Insufficent parking capacity on -site or off -site? X _ e Hazards or bamers for pedestrians or bicycfists'i X Conflicts with acoptec policies supporting X alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? c Rau, watemome or air traffic impacts? X Siotomcal Resources Would the proposal result in caccs :o a Endancered, threatened, orrare species or their X habitats (including, but not limited to, plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ., Locally designated species (e g , hentape trees)7 X .. Locally designated natural communities (e.g, oak X forest, coastal habitat, etc)? _ Wetland habitat (e g ,marsh, riparian and vernal X pool)? e Wildlife dispersal or migration comdors? X Energy and Mineral Resources Would the proposal a Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X b Use non - renewable resources in a wasteful and X inefficient manner c; Result in the loss of availability of a known X mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? 0819 9. 10 11 3 08f YES MAYBE NO hazards. Would the proposal involve a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of X hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)9 X b) Possible interference with an emergency _ response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X C) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of X potential health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable X brush, grass, or trees? Noise Would the proposal result in a) Increases in existing noise levels? X b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X Public Services Would the proposal have an effect uccr., or result in a need for new or altered government services ir, env of the following areas - a, Fire protection'? X bi Police protection' X c Sc"ocls° X d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads'? X e Cther governmental services'? X Utilities and Service Systems Would the proposal result X ,- = -eed to new systems or supplies, or substantial a =-aeons to the following utilities X E Power or natural oas7 _ t Communications systems? X Local or regional water treatment or distribution X faahhes? d, Sewer or septic tanks? X E Storm water drainage? X Solid waste disposal? X Local or regional water supplies'? X Aesthetics Would the proposal. a Affect a scenic vista or scenic highways X tl Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect'? X C) Create light or glare9 X Cultural Resources Would the proposal a) Disturb paleontological resources? _- X b) Disturb archaeological resources? X 08f YES MAYBE NO c) Affect historical resources? X d) Have the potential to cause a physical change X which would affect unique ethnic cultural values' e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within X the potential impact area? 15. Recreation. Would the proposal a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or X regional parks or other recreational facilities'r a) Affect existing recreational apportunrtiesl X 16, Mandatory Findings of Significance. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the X quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory b Does the project have the potential to achieve X short-term, to the disadvantage of long -term, environmental goals'r C Does the project have impacts that are X individually limited, but cumulatively considerable'7 ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in conjunction with the efrects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects ) c Does the project have environmental effects X which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT _a Space Storage of Studio City, L.L.C. am (are) the OWNER(S) of the property involved in this ca cr, (we; have familiarized myself (ourselves) with the rules and regulation of the City of El Segundo with respect to preparing f,c •r s aoolicatien, and the information on all documents and all plans is true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge and Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Date Date WE OWNER'S AUTHORIZATION 1 hereby au6onzed Joel B. M11ler to act for mein all matters relevant to this application I understand that this person will be the primary contact on the project and will be sent all information and correspondence Owns &Signature Date APPLICANT AFFIDAVIT !, (We) Joel B. Miller am are the APPLICANT (S) of the property (are) p p ny involved in this applcaton, I (we) have familiarized myself (ourselves) with the rules and regulation of the City of Ei Segunco with respect to nrecanna and filing this application, and the information on all docum is and ail plans is true and correct to the best of my (our) knowlecge and belief Applicant's Signature Date Applicant's Signature FOR PLANNING DIVISION USE ONLY _ :;ccies ars Fee /Deposit Received$ ['c:`cz:, C-, "lac Date Fled , 19_ _ c =__ .. .tine, Lace's Received By, _ ____ .. 7 Fos,age _ S.:oz,emental Into Sheets Date n91 V'_, 61 1599 _'1:514 1- 865 -483 -9393 THOMAS S. MONTGOMEF', F..UE u= Transportation & Traffic Engineering Consultant March 2, 1999 Mr Don Wilkins DON WILKINS ARCHITECT & ASSOCIATES 22241 Pacific Coast Highway Malibu, Ca 90265 RE El Segundo Self Storage Facility Parking Demand Estimate Dear Don As requested, 1 have conducted an analysis of the subject proposed self storage facility to determine the total amount of parking that would be required to accommodate peak site parking demands This brief letter report contains the findings and conclusions of my analysis with all necessary supportive data. In general, I have concluded that a maximum of 13 on site parking spaces would accommodate normal peax parking demands for this proposed 744 storage unit facility. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed self storage facility would be located on the northwest corner of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard in El Segundo This proposed facility would contain 744 storage units in nine one -story and one two -story buildings with a total gross building area of 93,000 square feet Parking would be provided on site for a total of 22 vehicles 1153 Mooring Walk . Oxnard . California 93030 . (805) 483 -9393 . c'A 47s- _ r✓ P14(9�r -( Fax (805) 483 -9393 nya Lip 01,1999 :1.54 1-865- 483 -9393 THOMF,S S. MGNTGOMEF, F..GE SITE PARKING DEMANDS Peak site parking demands were estimated based on data obtained from parking surveys conducted by me at four existing self storage facilities in the West Los Angeles area in the summer of 1996 The facilities selected for this parking demand survey were Public Storage, containing 1756 storage units, located at 315 South 4th Avenue in the City of Santa Monica; Storage USA, with 1300 storage units, located at 4095 Glencoe Avenue in the City of Los Angeles; Marina Redwood Storage, with 1000 units, located at 4211 Redwood Avenue in the City of Los Angeles; and Neighborhood U Stor, with 431 units, located at 11802 Washington Boulevard in Culver City. The procedure used in this parking demand survey was to visit each if the four saes twice on Wednesday, July 31,1996, and Saturday, August 3, 1996, and record the total number of vehicles parked in the designated parking areas near these existing self storage facility administration offices and onsite adjacent to the storage unit areas where appropriate. The results of the parking demand survey are summarized in Table 1, on the following page. Based on the parking demand survey conducted at the four existing self storage facilities in the vicinity of the study site, existing parking demand rates (in numbers of vehicles per storage unit! ranged from 0.002 to 0.017 with a "weighted overall average" for the 16 specific field observations of 0 008 vehicles per storage unt Applying the average and maximum existing parking demand rates from the survey to the proposed 744 storage unit facility in El Segundo indicates a potential range in normal peak parking demands of six to 13 vehicles Since the subject self storage facility would contain 22 parking spaces, it is readily apparent that peak on site parking demands would be well below the parking capacity provided 2 093 ..1 1493 _1' S4 1-805- 453 -3343 THOMAS S. MONTGOME°i *TABLE 1 SELF STORAGE FACILITIES PARKING DEMAND SURVEY It has been a pleasure to serve you on this interesting project If you have any questions concerning the findings and conclusions of my analysis, or require any `urther input at this time, please contact me at your convenience. Very truly yours, THOMAS S MONTGOMERY, P E Thomas S Montgomery TSM Ilm No 997 Exp. 7131109 Project No- 990101 094 fley & Tom* f(ftber efi Detneed 1%ab Site 1,Pwkrd ::Nafdelw lfatlioleelStaulpe Witi � Wed .7,131/96 @ 11 55 AM 10 0 006 Public Storage. @ 12 40 PM 10 0 006 315 South 4th Avenue Sat . 8/3196 4 0,002 @ 11.50 AM @12.45 PM 14 0 008 Wed . 7131196 @ 12 10 PM 20 0.015 Storage USA, @ 1 00 PM 22 0 017 4095 Glencoe Avenue 8,3196 Sat . @12 10 PM 21 01015 @ 1 00 PM 15 0 012 Wed . 7131196 @ 12.15 PM 9 0.009 Marine Redwood Storage, @ 1 00 PM 6 0.006 4211 Redwood Avenue Set . 813/96 @ 12 15 PM 4 0 004 @ 1 05 PM 4 0 004 Wed . 7/31,96 @ 12 30 PM 1 0 002 Neighborhood U Stor, @ 1 10 PM 1 0 002 11802 Washington Boulevard Sat.. 8.13/96 @ 12 20 PM 3 0.007 @ 1 10 PM 1 0.002 It has been a pleasure to serve you on this interesting project If you have any questions concerning the findings and conclusions of my analysis, or require any `urther input at this time, please contact me at your convenience. Very truly yours, THOMAS S MONTGOMERY, P E Thomas S Montgomery TSM Ilm No 997 Exp. 7131109 Project No- 990101 094 C 4r of e%yu do Inter - Departmental Correspondence March 18, 1999 To: Bret B Bernard, AICP, Director Planning and Budding Safety From: Tim Grimmond, Chief of Poli Subject: Environmental Assessment E -472, General Plan Amendment 99 -1 and Zone Change 99 -1 124th Specific Plan Address, 401 Aviation Blvd Applicant/Property Owner Bruce Kaufman, Extra Storage of Studio City, LLC , Public storage facilities are notorious for their history of burglarizes As Extra Storage has selected a remote location, hidden by a large berm /railroad track which limits all visibility by passersby and patrol, the Police Department makes the following recommendations The steel tubular fence should be 8 feet high instead of 6 feet All cross sections should be at the top and bottom of the fence If the fence remains at 6 feet, there should be 2 feet of razor wire on the top The gap between the bottom of the fence and the ground should be reduced from 6 inches to no more than 3 inches The portion of the fencing on the east side which abuts to the berm should be extended even higher by fencing or razor wire to deter it's easy access Is there a gate and fencing which closes off the north side of the property? Will it be closed at all times and entry accessible only by key cards or access codes? There should be security cameras monitoring and recording activity on the premises at, but not limited to, the entry/exit, entrances to the buildings and in the building's hallways The addressing should be a minimum of 4 to 6 inches Numerals should be visible from the street, of contrasting color to the back - ground and illuminated during hours of darkness All landscaping should be low profile especially around the perimeter fencing, windows, doors and entry ways taking special care not to limit visibility or provide climbing access Floral or grass ground cover is recommended Bushes should be trimmed to 2 to 3 feet Dense bushes should not be grouped together, as this provides a hiding place for criminal activity Trees should be trimmed up to 7 feet 095 The entry doors should be of solid core construction with a minimum thickness of 1 3/4 inches thick Entry doors shall have a deadbolt locking device The deadbolt throw should have a 1 inch projection The cylinder guard should be of case hardened steel, with the outer edge angled or tapered and free spinning The exterior part of the lock should be connected to the inside portion of the lock with bolts at least 1/4 inch in diameter and constructed of steel The locking mechanism should contain a minimum of a 5 pin tumbler Aisles, passageways, recesses related to and within the complex, open parking lots, and guest parking shall be illuminated with an intensity of at least a maintained minimum of one footcandle of light on the surface during hours of darkness Wall packs should be one footcandle minimum maintained Lighting devices shall be protected by weather and vandal resistant covers Building entries and storage units should have automated access or alarmed security to deter unlawful entry Storage units should have shackle guards or disk type locks 096 aty of & eS waad9 Inter - Departmental Correspondence June 14, 1999 To: Bret B. Bernard, AICP, Director of Planning and Building Safety From: Tim Gnmmond, Chief of Police Subject: Environmental Assessment EA -472, General Plan Amendment 99 -1 and Zone Text Amendment ZTA 99 -1 124th Specific Plan /City Water Well Project Address- 401 Aviation Blvd Applicant/Property Owner. Bruce Kaufman Extra Storage of Studio City, LLC The Police Department has reviewed the revised plans and stands by all recomb- mends made in the memo dated March 18, 1999 With the addition of the water tank and the water treatment budding (which appears to abut to the perimeter fencing at the facility's weakest point""), the perimeter fencing details will be especially important in maintaining security at Extra Storage Fencing details from the March 18, 1999 are included below. The steel tubular fence should be 8 feet high instead of 6 feet. All cross sections should only be at the top and bottom of the fence If the fence remains at 6 feet, there should be 2 feet of razor wire on the top 'NOTE: The cross section on the perimeter fencing should be removed, it provides burglars with a place to gain momentum when climbing over. The gap between the bottom of the fence and the ground should be reduced from 6 inches to no more than 3 inches "The portion of the fencing on the east side which abuts to the berm should be extended even higher by fencing or razor wire to deter it's easy access Is there a gate and fencing which closes off the north side of the property'? Will it be closed at all times and entry accessible only by key cards or access codes? M Crain bL Asscchtcs Of %cutherr C1111cguta HAND DELIVERED =— June 14 1999 Mr Bret Bernard Director Department of Planning and Building Safety Cnv Hall 350 Main Street El Se°_und0, California 90245 -0989 z Z sr 3 (rlb ,e r y/ tN 2007 Sawtelle Boulevard, Suite 4 Los Angeles, California 90025 Telephone (3 1 0) 473 -6508 Facsimile (310) 444 -9771 RE Revised Traffic Analysts for Extra Space Management Project at El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard. Including City Water Treatment Facility Dear Bret This letter summarizes the results of an updated traffic analysis conducted for the proposed Extra Space Management self - storage project to be located at the northwest corner of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard The analysis contained herein reflects revisions to the project description and site plan following comments by City staffs and a proposal by the City to uulve a portion of the site to construct a new water pumping and treatment facility However, as described in detail in the following pages, the proposed project will continue to be consistent x +ith the intended uses of the proposed 124th Specific Plan which will govern the site if it is adopted b\ the City Even without the adoption of the proposed 124th Specific Plan, the project Qonsistent with the current development in the surrounding vicinity Further, the project generates only nominal traffic volumes, and w ill not result in significant traffic impacts in the project vicinity Project Description The proposed project location consists of the proposed 124th Specific Plan area, which covers an approximate 3 93 acre rectangular parcel of land located at the northeast comer of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard The site is bounded by El Segundo Boulevard on the south, bs existing railroad tracks on the east, and by 124th street on the north The Extra Space Management project will consist of a total of approximately 73,530 gross square feet of office /storage space, with approximately 614 self- storage units A single (2 bedroom) apartment unit is also proposed at the north end of the site, for use by the on -site facility manager The City of El Segundo is also proposing to construct an approximately 7,500 square foot water pumping 1W xtENLO PARK LOS ANGELES SEATTLE CRAW & ASSOCIATES 17 EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT Loa A 6elesga�le Boulevard PROJECT SITE LAYOUT ) (310) 473 -6506 : Transportation Planning Traffic Engineering 099 L �14-- tfaM • fRllT 1- i 1 • > 1 O :nl i LE Q < > MOM + o r _ I i= F � z If F-r �1j x Pk i L t.LUwpa • ♦�__ [ FIGURE 1 CRAW & ASSOCIATES 17 EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT Loa A 6elesga�le Boulevard PROJECT SITE LAYOUT ) (310) 473 -6506 : Transportation Planning Traffic Engineering 099 Letter to Mr Bret Bernard June 14. 1999 Page Three and treatment building and an approximately 2,000 square foot cylindrical water storage tank on the property However, there is a possibility that the City's water treatment facility will not be constructed In this event, the Extra Space Management storage facility would expand to add one more storage building, resulting in a total project size of approximately 84,530 squire feet, containing 675 storage units plus the manager's apartment Access to the project under either conflguravon will be from 124th street as would be required by the proposed 124th Specific Plan Access to the City's water treatment facility will be provided from within the proposed project No access can or will be provided from either El Segundo Boulevard or Aviation Boulevard, except for emergency vehicle access to /from El Segundo Boulevard The project site was formerly utilized by Northrup Grumman as non - required overflow parking for its employees However this use was recently discontinued, and the project site is thus currently vacant The proposed 124th Specific Plan calls for any development within its boundaries to be compatihle w ith surrounding and adjacent uses Adjacent uses include light manufacturing puhhc facilities and commercial office Single and multi -family residences exist to the east of the project site but are shielded from the project site by the slopes adjacent to the existing railroad tray ks The project site is currently zoned for parking under the City of El Segundo General Plan However the proposed 124th Specific Plan calls for a rezoning of the parcel, to encourage primarily the development of proposed warehouse and storage uses. The proposed Extra Space Management project is thus consistent with the intended usage of the parcel I rip Generation The project trip generation was estimated by using the trip rates contained in the most current, (uh Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual This puhhi ation contains data on self - storage facilities (Land Use 151 Mini Warehouse) Adduionalh the potential trips resulting from the single apartment unit provided for the on -site taLiliues manager were also estimated using the iTE trip rates (Land Use 220 Apartments) The trip rates used in this analysts are listed in Table I Table I Project Component Trip Rates \lira - Warehouse - (per storage unit) Daily Ln(T) = 0 983 Ln (U) - 1 227 AM Peak Hour Ln(T) = 1 349 Ln .(U) - 6 473 I/B = 59 %, O/B = 41 %r PM Peak Hour Ln(T) = 0 831 Ln (U) - 2 407 I/B = 51 %, O/B = 49 %n Apartment - (per dwelling unit) Dash T = 6 63 (DU) AM Peak Hour T = 0 5 1 (DU), I/B = 16 %r, O/B = 84% _ - Plv1 Peak Hour T = 0 62 (DU) I/B = 67 %, O/B = 33% 1 0 0 Letter to Mr Bret Bernard June 14, 1999 Page Four Using the tnp rates shown in Table 1, the potential traffic generation for the project was calculated Potential traffic generation for the City's proposed water treatment facility was estimated to be nominal, with only four to five tnps per day to and from the site This amount of traffic is not considered to be significant, and was not included in trip estimates for the site The total estimated traffic volumes for the site are summarized in Table 2 As a companson, tnp generation for the potential alternative project, eliminating the City's water treatment facility and increasing the number of project storage units to 675, was also calculated These tnp estimates are summarized in Table 3, and indicate that the differences in potential trip generation between the proposed project and the alternative is 15 daily tnps, one AM peak hour tnp, and one PM peak hour trip These differences are not significant, and as such, no detailed analysis of the alternau%e project was conducted Table 2 Extra Space Management Project Trip Generation AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour L se,'Size Dailv I/B OB I/B OB 614 -unit Self Storage 162 5 4 10 9 1 Apartment 7 0 1 1 0 Cm \k ater Treatment negligible Total 169 5 5 11 9 10 20 Table 3 Extra Space Management Project No Water Treatment Facility Alternative Trip Generation AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Lse /Size Daily I/B O/B I/B -Q/B- 675 -unit Self Storage 177 6 4 10 10 I Apartment 7 0 1 1 0 Total 184 6 5 11 10 11 21 101 Letter to Mr Bret Bernard June 14, 1999 Page Five As shown in Table 2, the proposed project is expected to be a nominal trip generator, w ith approximately 169 trips occurring throughout the day Approximately 10 of these trips would occur during the AM peak hour, and 20 trips would occur during the PM peak hour As noted previously the project site is currently vacant. and no existing trip "credits" against the project's estimated trip generation shown in Table 2 were taken Protect Trip Distribution and Assignment The distribution of trips to and from the project was based on the location of potential patrons of the site, and the proposed access location In general, the geographic percentage of trips is as follow s North 15% South 20 %r East 30% West 35% Total 100% As described previously, all site access will be from 124th street, via Aviation Boulevard lniertiecoon Analvsisflmoacts Thy project-adjacent intersection of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard was anal\zed in detail to determine the existing and projected future operations at this location Trathc count data were obtained from several other recently completed area traffic studies pertormed bN Crain & Associates "' in order to be consistent with recently approved City analyses The existine (1997) traffic volumes at this location are shown in Figures 2(a) and 2(b) The protect is proposed to be developed and completed in the immediate future However, to Birder to ensure that the project is fully occupied the future horizon year analysts was assumed to he the %ear 2005, which again is consistent with previous traffic analyses reviewed by the City for the study area Ambient traffic growth was estimated by applying a one percent annual _m%%th factor to the existing intersection volumes Additionally, potential traffic generated by wmulative development was also considered Listings of these "related projects" can be found in the two Crain & Associates traffic studies referenced above This "cumulative" analysts is discussed later in this document "Traffic Study for the Grand Avenue Corporate Center and Sports Training/Recreation Facility Development in the City of El Segundo' Crain & Associates, Revised March 1998, and "Traffic Stud} for a Proposed Federal Express Facility South of Imperial Highway in the City of El Segundo,' Crain & Associates Revised August 1998 102 El EXISTING (1998) c m L290 N m —1 53 ndo J i r222 86-1 r t r- 84 m � WITHOUT PROJECT (2005) --340 —1.802 Blvd Et Segundo J + L i-280 101, —I t F 483 ON GAS DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES mm PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES nr agaNOn- a \m,vs -w EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT PROJECT CRAIN & ASSOCIATES EL SEGUNDO BLVD. /AVIATION BLVD. �' 1ua Angel eetelle, Boulevard I TRAFFIC VOLUMES — AM PEAK HOUR 1a�an Planning Tr 08 J TranaparteUq�r plsnnmp Tnffic Engineering 6 103 EXISTING (1998) PROJECT DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES H Ri� Seaunao J i L 25%- I INBOUND OUTBOUND Q m WITHOUT PROJECT (2005) `—tfA Nan V n N —596 El Segundo J i r234 Blvd. 142-1 t r 1.455— r N PROJECT DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES H Ri� Seaunao J i L 25%- I INBOUND OUTBOUND Q m WITHOUT PROJECT (2005) El PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH PROJECT (2005) m L 15D —698 El Segundo J i L x274 Blvd 1s9, 'l t r b n � FIGURE 2(b) I 0 NORTH M � w�6 \1MN: -NI EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT PROJECT CRAIN & ASSOCIATES EL SEGUNDO BLVD. /AVIATION BLVD. r \�'� Los °f° g«""Reiitorn 760025 TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PM PEAK HOUR v Iaf°� ing Tr °e Tranapartetmu- Plenma� Traffic Engineering 7 104 L748 Vim^ —698 b N El Segundo .I i L F274 Blvd 1ss,7tr 1,745— El PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH PROJECT (2005) m L 15D —698 El Segundo J i L x274 Blvd 1s9, 'l t r b n � FIGURE 2(b) I 0 NORTH M � w�6 \1MN: -NI EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT PROJECT CRAIN & ASSOCIATES EL SEGUNDO BLVD. /AVIATION BLVD. r \�'� Los °f° g«""Reiitorn 760025 TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PM PEAK HOUR v Iaf°� ing Tr °e Tranapartetmu- Plenma� Traffic Engineering 7 104 Letter to Mr Bret Bernard June 14, 1999 Page Eight Lastly, the project traffic volumes estimated previously to Table 2 were assigned to the area roadway system as described earlier in this report The future year Without Project, With Project and With Project Cumulative Development traffic volumes at the intersection of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard are also shown in Figures 2(a) and 2(b) The intersection analyses was performed using the Critical Movement Analysts (CMA) technique described in Circular 212, published by the Transportation Research Board (TRB), and is consistent with both the City of El Segundo's traffic analysts procedures and previous analyses in the study area The results of the CMA intersection analysts are summarized to Table 4 Table 4 Summary of Existing and Future Traffic Conditions -\, ,ho" n in Table 4 the project - adjacent intersection currently operates at poor levels of service LOS) dunng both the AM and PM peak hours and is projected to worsen to LOS F operation dunng both peak hours in the future However, the project's nominal traffic generation is not expected to significantly impact this intersection A significant impact is defined by the City of El Scgundo as an increase in the CMA salue, due to project traffic, of +0 020 (two percent) or more \� hen the final "With Project" level of seri ice is LOS E or LOS F The analysts summarized in Table 4 indicates that the project will not result in any significant impacts at the intersection in quc,tion with nominal impacts during both peak hours ( emulative Development and Area Improvements a� described above, the project itself will not produce any significant traffic impacts in the study area However on -going or proposed development throughout the City of El Segundo could add traffic to the intersection of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard Approximately 25 projects in the City and surrounding jurisdictions have been identified in previous traffic studies Many of these projects are large, or speculative, or both, and may not be completed by the study year All of these projects, however, have been assumed as part of the cumulative analysts, to produce a project "worst case" assessment of potential traffic operations at the study intersection 105 Future (2005) Peak Existme 1997 Without Protect With Project intersection Period CMA LOS CMA LOS CMA LOS Impact El ScLwndo Boulevard/ AM 0858 D 1 006 F 1 008 F +0002 -\\wtion Boulevard PM 0 924 E 1 084 F 1 084 F +0000 -\, ,ho" n in Table 4 the project - adjacent intersection currently operates at poor levels of service LOS) dunng both the AM and PM peak hours and is projected to worsen to LOS F operation dunng both peak hours in the future However, the project's nominal traffic generation is not expected to significantly impact this intersection A significant impact is defined by the City of El Scgundo as an increase in the CMA salue, due to project traffic, of +0 020 (two percent) or more \� hen the final "With Project" level of seri ice is LOS E or LOS F The analysts summarized in Table 4 indicates that the project will not result in any significant impacts at the intersection in quc,tion with nominal impacts during both peak hours ( emulative Development and Area Improvements a� described above, the project itself will not produce any significant traffic impacts in the study area However on -going or proposed development throughout the City of El Segundo could add traffic to the intersection of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard Approximately 25 projects in the City and surrounding jurisdictions have been identified in previous traffic studies Many of these projects are large, or speculative, or both, and may not be completed by the study year All of these projects, however, have been assumed as part of the cumulative analysts, to produce a project "worst case" assessment of potential traffic operations at the study intersection 105 Letter to Mr Bret Bernard June 14, 1999 Page Nine Traffic from these "related projects" was assigned based on the previous traffic study analyses and are shown in Figures 3(a) and 3(b) Finally, the related project's traffic was added to the previously analyzed "With Project" traffic volumes, to produce the final estimated future (year 2005) traffic conditions at the intersection of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulez ard, also shown in Figures 3(a) and 3(b) In addition to the expected traffic growth at the study intersection, due both to ambient increases in traffic and specific nearby developments, the intersection of El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boule\ ard is scheduled for improvement by the County of Los Angeles, beginning early in 1999 This scheduled improvement, which is designed and fully funded, will widen both sides of A% tanon Boulevard north and south of the intersection, to add another through lane in both the north -and southbound directions Future \ear traffic conditions at the study intersections were evaluated for the cumulative deg elopment scenano in the same manner as for the earlier "With Project" analyses summarized in Tahlc 3 Further since it is likely that the County improvement at the study intersection will be in place h% the time the proposed Extra Space Management project is completed, and will most zertainly be in place by the time the assumed cumulative developments will be built and fully icy upied a supplemental "With Project Plus Improvement" analysts was performed The "With Ptu cat Plus Cumulative Development" scenario assumes the County improvement as a h.t,kLynund conditions These analyses are summanzed in Table 5 Table 5 A� shown in Table 5 the County improvement to the intersection will result in enhanced capacity and improved conditions for the projected "With Project" conditions However, even a ith this improvement, cumulative development will cause the intersection to operate at unacceptable conditions during both peal. hours 106 Critical Movement Analvsis Assuming Cumulative Development and Countv Improvement With Cumulative Without With With Project Plus Development Plus Peak Proiect Protect Countv Improvement Countv Improvement Intencction Hour CMA LOS (1\1 A LOS Impact CMA LOS Impact CMA LOS Impact El Segundo BI B AM 1 006 F 1 009 F +0003 0 895 D -0111 1 150 F +0 144 A� ration Blvd PM 1 084 F 1 085 F +0001 0 965 E -0 119 1 292 F +0208 A� shown in Table 5 the County improvement to the intersection will result in enhanced capacity and improved conditions for the projected "With Project" conditions However, even a ith this improvement, cumulative development will cause the intersection to operate at unacceptable conditions during both peal. hours 106 WITHOUT PROJECT (2005) WITH PROJECT (2005) CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES s]�J WITH PROJECT PLUS CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES (2005) L340 L341 e!n�! o,no —1.802 "'n° —1.802 EI Segundo .J i L f-260 Blvd El Segundo J + L r260 7 1 1- 101 17 } F— 102, 463— m o N 463— Nm^ m o r 96 —� m 147 -� o CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES s]�J WITH PROJECT PLUS CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES (2005) 3(a) n -m A NORTH a /2/iMa 1 M IlIISYn 35\6alY "T —m EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT PROJECT CRAW & ASSOCIATES 2007 Sawtelle Boulevard EL SEGUNDO BLVD. /AVIATION BLVD. Ln' hulel o1 Cal forma CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO - AM PEAK HOUR Tranrportatim Planning Traffic Engineering 10 1 ()7 L40 L351 in nr� mom —515 1 a —2.317 = Sec_u ^ao J + L r75 Blvd El Segundo _.l { L F335 12—' 7 1 r 114-j –I 1 1- 236— o$° 699- "Ono '� 49 -� m 147 -� o 3(a) n -m A NORTH a /2/iMa 1 M IlIISYn 35\6alY "T —m EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT PROJECT CRAW & ASSOCIATES 2007 Sawtelle Boulevard EL SEGUNDO BLVD. /AVIATION BLVD. Ln' hulel o1 Cal forma CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO - AM PEAK HOUR Tranrportatim Planning Traffic Engineering 10 1 ()7 WITHOUT PROJECT (2005) "Car, a 1-14a .- m N —699 El Segundo J i F-274 166-1 7 T —r- 1.705— u n° WITH PROJECT (2005) Yc,a 1-15o r. N --699 Blvd El Segundo J i r274 169J 7 f f 1,705— 139–+ ^nN CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES ^ ° —302 N Y n Seaundo J i L f- 55 22 J —1 f f 656— 113- AM El FIGURE 3(b) am WITH PROJECT PLUS CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES (2005) L o�m I1,0 m rut -1 ao J + r329 191-jh f I 2361— nou^i 252--j Non 0 NORTH EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT PROJECT CRAIN & ASSOCIATES EL SEGUNDO BLVD. /AVIATION BLVD. �' Las °Ang lee`California "9°025 (3101 473 -6506 CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO - PM PEAK HOUR Trensparta4or Planning TrattlC Engineering u 10R Letter to Mr Bret Bernard June 14 1999 Page Twelve Mitigation As described previously, the proposed project will not result in any significant traffic impacts in the study area, and as such, no off -site mitigations are required However, as shown in Table 5 cumulative area development, including the proposed project will cause the study intersection to operate at unacceptable levels, even with an improvements to capacity to be installed by the County of Los Angeles in order to address these cumulative impacts, the City of El Segundo has recently implemented the Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee Ordinance, which assesses trip fees to projects within the City, to be used for local area and regional transportation improvements The list of specific improvements and supporting analyses are contained in the traffic studies performed as part of the Ordinance but overall these improvements are designed to add capacity throughout the City and to �onvtruct extensions of various existing roadways to rehev a the tiaffic congestion at key luc atii ins All of the related projects will contribute to the Traffic Fee Ordinance, based upon thi it mdi%idual trip generation characteristics and locations within the City As for the proposed p' ilea elthou_h no specific off -sue mitigation is requited the project must also contribute to the 1 rip Fee Ordmam e The Ordinance specifies that the p *oject, located in "Zone 3. east of Sepulveda Boulevard" as designed in the Traffic Fee Mitigation Ordinance. is required to pay �, 1 40', per PM peak hour trip Based on the proposed project's trip generation summarized in T,ihle ' the project v, ill generate approximateh 20 PM peak hour trips, and thus be Subject to 1 rath� Mitigation Fees of $28,060 If the alternative, No City Water Facility Water project is uinstructed the Mitigation Fee amount would increase to $29,463, due to the single extra PM peak hour trip Paikino The City of El Segundo specifies parking requirements for storage uses as follows One space per 1,000 square feet for the first 20 000 square feet, One space per 2,000 square feet or the second 20,000 square feet, and One space per 4,000 feet for area in excess of 40.000 square feet Based upon the proposed 72,390 gross square foot project description (not including the 1,140 square foot on -site manager's apartment) the storage facility would require 20 spaces for the first 20 000 square feet, 10 spaces for the next 20,000 square feet, and 8 spaces for the remaining 32,390 square feet, for a total of 38 spaces Additionally, two spaces are assumed to be necessary for the on -site facility manager's apartment, for a total site parking requirement of 40 spaces Preliminary project designs call for a total of approximately 24 marked spaces plus one 109 Letter to Mr Bret Bernard June 14, 1999 Page Thirteen loadmg zone area to be provided Two additional parking spaces are also provided for the exclusive use of the City's water treatment facility While less than Code required parking, the proposed number of project parking spaces is expected to be more than sufficient to meet the project s parking demand, based on the expected low traffic generation (and thus low on -site parking accumulation) for the project as shown in either Table 2 or Table 3 For this reason, the 124th Specific Plan recommends the reduced parking requirement, which if adopted would supersede the City's Zoning Code A review of the site plan also indicates substantial parking a\ ailability in the unmarked areas surrounding the site structures Internal circulation is provided primarily by a two -way drive aisle between and along side of the eight project structures and City water treatment facility, although one -way circulation exists ,hound the southernmost structure on the site (Building H) to provide a convenient turn - around .urea for %ehicles This configuration will provide acceptable internal circulation and loadin2iunloadmg areas Summan The proposed protect is not expected to result in anv sigmhcant traffic, parking or circulation impact, and no mitigation other than payment of the mandated Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee of S28 060 is required It \ Diu here am questions or comments regarding the preceding analysis, please call me Sincerely, Ron Hirsch RH mk Transportation Planner C7144 .ntaLhments L� Bruce Kaufman Robert Manford Joel Miller 110 CRAIN AND ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION: 1, EL SEGUNDO BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD DATE- 06 -02 -1999 INITIALS: RRH PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE. EXISTING (1997) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 222 1538 290 0 EASTBOUND 86 395 0 84 NORTHBOUND 223 689 104 0 SOUTHBOUND 89 268 67 43 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 2 0 2 1 0 0 5 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 122 N/A 609 609 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 86 N/A 132 N/A 0 N/A NORTHBOUND 223 N/A 396 396 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 69 N/A 134 N/A 67 N/A EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES .... ..... .... 695 NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES ...... ..... 485 THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES ... ...... . . 1180 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS 4 CMA VALUE ..... ....... . ...... ..... 0.858 LEVEL OF SERVICE .. . ... ............ D K \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RR1 06 -02 -1999, 3:31 PM 111 CRAIN AND ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION: 1, EL SEGUNDO BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD DATE: 06 -02 -1999 INITIALS• RRH PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE- EXISTING (1997) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 234 596 126 0 EASTBOUND 142 1455 0 119 NORTHBOUND 141 623 219 0 SOUTHBOUND 236 597 0 122 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 2 0 2 1 0 0 5 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED iESTB0UND 129 N/A 241 241 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 142 N/A 485 N/A 0 N/A NORTHBOUND 141 N/A 421 421 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 236 N/A 298 N/A 0 N/A EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES . ....... .... . 614 NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES .. ..... 657 THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES ..... ........ 1271 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS ... 4 CMA VALUE .... ............ 0.924 LEVEL OF SERVICE . ..... .... E K \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RR5 06 -02 -1999, 3:31 PM 112 CRAIN AND ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION: 1, EL SEGUNDO BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD DATE- 06 -02 -1999 INITIALS: RRH PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE- FUTURE (2005) WITHOUT PROJECT (EXISTING PLUS 21 AMBIENT GROWTH) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT ** RIGHT TURNS ** TOTAL LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 260 1802 340 0 EASTBOUND 101 463 0 98 NORTHBOUND 261 807 122 0 SOUTHBOUND 104 314 79 50 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 2 0 2 1 0 0 5 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUHBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 143 N/A 714 714 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 101 N/A 154 N/A 0 N/A NORTHBOUND 261 N/A 464 464 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 104 N/A 157 N/A 79 N/A EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES .. . ........ . 815 NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES ........ ..... 568 THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES . . ....... .. 1383 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS ... 4 CMA VALUE ...... . ....... ............. 1.006 LEVEL OF SERVICE ........ .............. F K \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RR2 06 -02 -1999, 3:31 PM 113 CRAIN AND ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION: 1, EL SEGUNDO BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD DATE: 06 -02 -1999 INITIALS: RRH PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2005) WITHOUT PROJECT (EXISTING PLUS 2% AMBIENT GROWTH) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT SHARED THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 274 N/A 698 282 148 0 EASTBOUND 166 N/A 1705 N/A 0 139 NORTHBOUND 165 N/A 730 494 257 0 SOUTHBOUND 277 N/A 699 N/A 0 143 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 2 0 2 1 0 0 5 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 151 N/A 282 282 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 166 N/A 568 N/A 0 N/A NORTHBOUND 165 N/A 494 494 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 277 N/A 350 N/A 0 N/A EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES ........ ...... NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES ... . ... .. THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES ....... . -- 719 771 1490 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS ... 4 CMA VALUE ... - . .. ............... 1.084 LEVEL OF SERVICE . ... . ...... ... F K \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RR6 06 -02 -1999, 3:31 PM 114 CRAIN AND ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION: 1, EL SEGUND0 BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD DATE: 06 -02 -1999 INITIALS: RRH PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR RIGHT CASE: FUTURE (2005) WITH PROJECT SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND ** INPUT VOLUMES ** 714 N/A N/A APPROACH 102 N/A 154 ** 0 RIGHT TURNS ** 261 LEFT 465 THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 260 N/A 1802 N/A 341 N/A 0 EASTBOUND 102 463 0 98 NORTHBOUND 261 808 122 0 SOUTHBOUND 105 315 79 51 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 2 0 2 1 0 0 5 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUT'riBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 143 N/A 714 714 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 102 N/A 154 N/A 0 N/A NORTHBOUND 261 N/A 465 465 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 105 N/A 156 N/A 79 N/A EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES ............ ... NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES ... ......... THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES . ..... ..... 816 570 1386 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS .... 4 CMA VALUE ..... . . ... ............ 1.008 LEVEL OF SERVICE . ........ .... F K \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RR3 06 -02 -1999, 3:31 PM 115 CRAIN AND ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION: 1, EL SEGUND0 BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD DATE: 06 -02 -1999 INITIALS: RRH PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2005) WITH PROJECT ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH 719 NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES ** RIGHT TURNS ** NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 274 698 150 0 EASTBOUND 169 1705 0 139 NORTHBOUND 165 732 257 0 SOUTHBOUND 278 701 0 145 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 2 0 2 1 0 0 5 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SO=HBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED �:ESTBOUND 151 N/A 283 283 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 169 N/A 568 N/A 0 N/A NORTHBOUND 165 N/A 494 494 N/A N/A SO:,'TrIBOUND 278 N/A 350 N/A 0 N/A EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES .. ..... ...... 719 NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES 772 THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES ... ..... 1491 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS 4 CMA VALUE .... . .............. ... 1.084 LEVEL OF SERVICE .............. F K \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RR7 06 -02 -1999, 3.31 PM 116 CRAIN AND ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION: 1, EL SEGUNDO BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD DATE: 06 -02 -1999 INITIALS: RRH PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2005) WITH PROJECT PLUS COUNTY INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 260 1802 341 0 EASTBOUND 102 463 0 98 NORTHBOUND 261 808 122 0 SOUTHBOUND 105 315 79 51 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 2 0 2 1 0 0 5 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 NORTHBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 SO=fIBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 143 N/A 714 714 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 102 N/A 154 N/A 0 N/A NORTHBOUND 261 N/A 310 310 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 105 N/A 105 N/A 79 N/A EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES . .............. 816 NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES .............. 415 THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES ....... .. ... 1231 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS .... 4 CMA VALUE .... .. ..... ............... 0.895 LEVEL OF SERVICE . . .... ............... D K \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RR4 06 -02 -1999, 3:31 PM 117 CRAIN AND ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION: 1, EL SEGUNDO BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD DATE: 06 -02 -1999 INITIALS: RRH PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE- FUTURE (2005) WITH PROJECT PLUS COUNTY INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** NUMBER OF LANES ** ** RIGHT TURNS ** ONLY LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 274 698 150 0 EASTBOUND 169 1705 0 139 NORTHBOUND 165 732 257 0 SOUTHBOUND 278 701 0 145 APPROACH WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND � 61;! WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES ...... . NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES ..... . THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES ... .. .. NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS ... CMA VALUE .... . ... LEVEL OF SERVICE K \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RR8 06 -02 -1999, 3:31 PM L /T /R SHARED 0 0 0 0 RIGHT ONLY N/A 0 N/A 0 719 608 1327 4 0.965 E TOTAL LANES 5 5 4 5 L /T /R SHARED N/A N/A N/A N/A I18 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY 2 0 2 1 0 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 3 0 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED 151 N/A 283 283 169 N/A 568 N/A 165 N/A 330 330 278 N/A 234 N/A EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES ...... . NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES ..... . THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES ... .. .. NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS ... CMA VALUE .... . ... LEVEL OF SERVICE K \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RR8 06 -02 -1999, 3:31 PM L /T /R SHARED 0 0 0 0 RIGHT ONLY N/A 0 N/A 0 719 608 1327 4 0.965 E TOTAL LANES 5 5 4 5 L /T /R SHARED N/A N/A N/A N/A I18 CRAIN AND ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION: 1, EL SEGUNDO BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD DATE- 06 -02 -1999 INITIALS: RRH PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2005) WITH PROJECT PLUS CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT PLUS COUNTY INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT ** INPUT VOLUMES ** RIGHT L /T /R APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** ONLY LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 335 2317 381 0 EASTBOUND 114 699 0 147 NORTHBOUND 362 1088 138 0 SOUTHBOUND 159 590 111 57 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 2 0 2 1 0 0 5 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 NORTHBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 184 N/A 899 899 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 114 N/A 233 N/A 0 N/A NCPTHBOUND 362 N/A 409 409 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 159 N/A 197 N/A 111 N/A EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES ............... 1013 NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES .. 568 THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES ............... NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS .... 4 CMA VALUE ..... .. .................... 1.150 LEVEL OF SERVICE ..... ............... F K: \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RR4 06 -02 -1999, 3:31 PM 119 CRAIN AND ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION: 1, EL SEGUNDO BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD DATE: 06 -02 -1999 INITIALS: RRH PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2005) WITH PROJECT PLUS CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT PLUS COUNTY INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT ** RIGHT TURNS ** TOTAL LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 329 1000 200 0 EASTBOUND 191 2361 37 215 NORTHBOUND 235 1006 353 0 SOUTHBOUND 356 1138 0 166 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 2 0 2 1 0 0 5 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 NORTHBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 3 0 1 0 5 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L /T /R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 181 N/A 400 400 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 191 N/A 787 N/A 37 N/A NORTHBOUND 235 N/A 453 453 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 356 N/A 379 N/A 0 N/A EAST -WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES . ........ .... 968 NORTH -SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES .. .... ..... 809 THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES . . ...... ... 1777 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS ... 4 CMA VALUE ...... ... ........ ............. 1.292 LEVEL OF SERVICE .......... ............... F K: \ICAP4 \EXTRA SPACE MANAGEMENT \STORAGE RRS 06 -02 -1999, 3 :31 PM 120 wursw�ro EFCl�M1110N E0110 WASTE MMYOEMEN COUNTY SANITATION 1955 Workman M,II Road Whittle CA 90601 1400 Madmg Address PO Box 4998 Whinier CA 90607499E ieiepnone (562) 600 741 1 FAX )562; 699 5422 MAR rq99 Mr Bret B Bernard, AICP Director of Planning and Building Safety City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 Dear Mr Bernard 7 5 6 yt�V, DISTRICTS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY CHARLES W CARRY C' ,e' E -0 wee- c--of Genera ae- March 17, 1999 File No 05 -00 00 -00 Environmental Assessment EA472, General Plan Amendment 99 -1 Zone Chance 99 -1. 124'" Specific Plan, 401 Aviation Boulevard This is in reply to your notice which was received by the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Districts) on March 11, 1999 The proposed development is located withm the Jurisdictional boundaries of District No 5 We offer the following comments regarding sewerage service The wastewater flow originating from the proposed project will discharge directly to the Districts' Aviation Boulevard Trunk Sewer, Section 3, located in Aviation Boulevard between El Segundo Boulevard and 124' Street This 18 -mch diameter trunk sewer has a peak capacity of 2 2 million gallons per day (mgd) and conveyed a peak flow of 0 8 mgd when last measured in 1998 A direct connection to a Districts' trunk sewer requires a Trunk Sewer Connection Permit, issued by the Districts For information regarding the permit, please contact Mr Charles Ryee at (562) 699-7411, extension 1205 The wastewater generated by the proposed project will be treated at the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant ( JWPCP) located in the City of Carson The JWPCP has a design capacity of 385 0 mgd and currently processes an average flow of 342 1 mgd The expected average wastewater flow from the project site is 2,325 gallons per day 4 The Districts are empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to charge a fee for the privilege of connecting (directly or indirectly) to the Districts' Sewerage System or increasing the existing strength and/or quantity of wastewater attributable to a particular parcel or operation already connected This connection fee is required to construct an incremental expansion of the Sewerage System to accommodate the proposed project which will mitigate the Impact of this project on the present Sewerage System Payment of a connection fee will be required before a permit to connect to the sewer is issued 121 Ivfr Bret B Bernard RIC eg March 17, 1999 The design capacities of the Districts' wastewater treatment facilities are based on population forecasts adopted in the Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) 1994 Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) The RCPG is part of the 1994 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) The AQMP and RCPG are jointly prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and SCAG as a requirement of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) In order to conform with the AQMP, all expansions of Districts' facilities must be sized and service phased in a manner which will be consistent with the Growth Management Element of the RCPG The Growth Management Element contains a regional growth forecast for the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial which was prepared by SCAG Specific policies included in the RCPG which deal with the management of growth will be incorporated into the AQMP strategies to improve air quality in the South Coast Air Basin The available capacity of the Districts' treatment facilities will, therefore, be limited to levels associated with approved growth identified in the RCPG As such, this letter does not constitute a guarantee of wastewater service, but is to advise you that the Districts intend to provide this service up to the levels which are legally permitted and to inform you of the currently existing capacity and any proposed expansion of the Districts' facilities If }ou have any questions, please contact the undersigned at (562) 699 -7411, extension 2717 Very truly yours, Charles W Carry L1, J -ate Ruth I Charles Engineering Technician Planning & Property Management Section 1 ?? Segundo Boulevard). Corporate offices exist to the east (across Aviation Boulevard) -and residential uses exist further northeast, outside the City limits, in Los Angeles County. The project has been analyzed for its environmental impacts and an initial study has been prepared pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is proposed for this project pursuant to Section 15070 of the CEQA [Please Note: This project is being recirculated since it has changed substantially with the inclusion of the City Water Well and Water Treatment Building on the project site.] Attached for your review are the applications, architectural plans, Specific Plan document, and Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the proposed project Please check one of the following boxes below as it relates to the project's potential for having an environmental impact, in your area of responsibility. Please return this form, and any additional comments you may have, to the project planner, Hannah L Brondial Bowen, AICP, by Fnday. June 11, 1999 Should you have any questions, please contact Hannah L. Brondial Bowen at Extension No 412 DEPARTMENT FINDINGS, concur with draft Initial Study findings as submitted substantially concur with draft Initial Study findings and request additional language be added as described below request additional information before we can make adequate determination. See comments below have concerns about the project's potential environmental impact as described below and request an interdepartmental meeting before proceeding with review. COMMENTS «/c' G✓i/ / n/L: ED ti if2o r-✓ ✓HEM =� �]jf/� �=I2 i+�yOQR ti%S �oc.ari0'Kf - 7 / +L� Fs2` GA.uE c./1-i/ IYW9 IC Ta 24 c✓rD� r/y Die A tiTS /92� LocgTC1�- Reviewed By 6— /0-7c' Signature and Title Date Encl Draft 124th Specific Plan, draft Initial Study, architectural plans, applications xc Sandra Massa - Lavitt, Contract Planner EA -472 File P \Projects a514751ea472Vdc 1?' Segundo Boulevard) Corporate offices exist to the east (across Aviation Boulevard) -and residential uses exist further northeast, outside the City limits, in Los Angeles County. The project has been analyzed for its environmental Impacts and an Initial study has been prepared pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CECA) A Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is proposed for this project pursuant to Sectl 15070 of the CEQA [Please Note: This project is being re- circulated since it has changed substantially with the inclusion of the City Water Well and Water Treatment Building on the i project site.] Attached for your review are the applications, architectural plans, Specific Plan document, and Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the proposed project Please check one of the following boxes below as it relates to the project's potential for having an environmental Impact, in your area of responsibility. Please return this form, and any additional comments you may have, to the project planner, Hannah L. Brondial Bowen, AICP, by Fnday. June 11 1999 Should you have any questions, pleclse contact Hannah L. Brondial Bowen at Extension No 412 DE ARTMENT FINDINGS: concur with draft Initial Study findings as submitted i substantially concur with draft Initial Study findings and request additional language be added as described below request additional Information before we can make adequate determination See comments below have concerns about the project's potential environmental Impact as described below and request an Interdepartmental meeting before proceeding with review COMMENTS OR- I I� P,e�iewed 8 Signature and Title U Date Eric' Draft 1201 Specific Plan, draft Initial Study, architectural plans, applications Sandra Massa- Lavitt, Contract Planner Fla -472 File P 1pro)eatsk5l- 4Mea- 472Hdc 12 ............. ............................... CITY OF EL SEGUNDO . FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS .............. ............................... REPORT NUMBER COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS PROPOSED vs EXISTINNG DEVELOPMENT 1 0 DATE ANALYSIS PREPARED 2 0 PROJECT NAME 3 0 ANNUAL REVENUES ($000) -- PROPERTY TAX SALES AND USE TAX BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEE FRANCHISE TAX TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX STATE SUBVENTIONS TOTAL March 4, 1999 Self Storage 19 175 156 4 0 ANNUAL COSTS (5000) -- MARGINAL EXISTING PROPOSED FISCAL CONDITIONS DEVELOPMENT IMPACT 19 36 19 00 00 00 00 112 112 00 25 25 00 00 00 00 00 00 19 175 156 4 0 ANNUAL COSTS (5000) -- POLICE 00 05 05 FIRE 00 03 03 PUBLIC WORKS 00 03 03 BUILDING SAFETY 00 00 00 LIBRARY 00 01 01 PARKS AND RECREATION 00 04 04 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 00 02 02 VACANT LAND (ALL COSTS INCLUDED) 00 N/A 00 TOTAL 00 1 9 1 9 5 0 NET FISCAL IMPACT ($000) 19 156 137 1 ?5 ........................................ CITY OF EL SEGUNDO . FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS ............. ............................... REPORT NUMBER PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT -- USE Selt Storage 1 0 DATE ANALYSIS PREPARED March 4, 1999 2 0 PROJECT NAME Selt Storage 3 0 YEAR PROJECT FIRST OCCUPIED 1999 4 0 POPULATION /EMPLOYMENT -- NEW RESIDENT POPULATION- -TOTAL NEW PERMANENT EMPLOYMENT - -TOTAL 5 0 DEVELOPMENT VALUE ESTIMATE ($000)- - LAND VALUE TOTAL VALUE OF IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL DEVELOPMENT VALUE ($000) 6 C REVENUE GENERATION ($000) -- PROPERTY TAX SALES AND USE TAX BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEE- - FRANCHISE TAX TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX STATE SUBVENTIONS ONE - TIME FEES -- FIRE POLICE LIBRARY TRAFFIC TOTAL C CITY COSTS OF SERVICES ($000) 0 3 2,941 2,489 5,430 TOTAL 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 181 35 35 36 37 38 02 00 00 00 0.0 00 562 112 112 112 112 112 119 23 23 24 24 25 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 130 130 N/A N/A N/A N/A 102 102 N/A N/A N/A N/A 28 28 N/A N/A N/A N/A 913 913 N/A N/A N/A N/A ---- -- 2036 - ---- 1344 - ---- 171 ---- 173 ----- 174 175 POLICE 25 05 05 05 05 05 FIRE 13 03 03 03 03 03 PUBLIC WORKS 14 03 03 03 03 03 BUILDING SAFETY 0 1 00 00 00 00 00 LIBRARY 06 01 al 01 01 01 PARKS AND RECREATION 20 04 04 04 04 04 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 10 02 02 02 02 02 TOTAL ------- 89 ---- 1 7 ---'- 1 7 •---- 1 8 ----- 18 ..... 1 9 8 0 NET FISCAL IMPACT ($000) 1947 1327 154 155 155 156 90 CUMULATIVE FISCALIMPACT(S000) 1327 1481 1636 1791 1947 I 1 / ............................................ CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ' ' FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS ' REPORT NUMBER PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT - SUMMARY BY USE 1 0 DATE ANALYSIS PREPARED March 4, 1999 2 0 PROJECT NAME Self Storage - ----------- ----------- ------------ TOTAL 1999 2000 ------------'----------- 2001 --'--------- 2002 2003 0 REVENUE GENERATION ($000) -- ------------- --------------- '- ------ ----------- Self Storage 2036 1344 171 173 174 175 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 TOTAL ____________ ------------------------- 2036 1344 ___ 171 ___ ______ 173 ------ ----- ------------- 174 175 4 0 CITY COSTS OF SERVICES ($000) — Self Storage 89 17 17 1 8 18 1 9 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 TOTAL _____ ______ ------------ 89 17 ____ 17 ___.__.___.__._---- 18 ---- 18 ----- '__ 19 5 0 NET FISCAL IMPACT ($000) 1947 1327 154 155 155 15.6 60 CUMULATIVE FISCAL IMPACT (S000) 1327 1481 1636 1791 1947 - -------_-- --- - ------- __-- _- _-- _- ___- _- _ - - - -_- 0 MEMO --- .--- _ - - - -_ _____ - - - -_- _— _ —____ __________ __ _______ -___ - ____- - -__._ DEVELOPMENT VALUE ($000) -- SelfStorao_e 5430 5430 5,430 5430 5430 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5,430 5,430 5 430 5,430 5 430 NEW PERMANENT EMPLOYEES - Self Storage 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 3 3 3 3 NUMBER OF BUSINESSES -- Self Storage 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL ----- 1 ----- 1 ..... 1 ----- 1 ..... 1 EMPL SUBJECT TO EMPLOYEE TAX -- Self Storage (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL (7) (7) (7) (7) (7) 1 ( , C ' EL SEGUNDO FISCAL IMPAL ALYSIS 4 DATA ENTRY FORM - PROPOSED PROJECT • PRESS ALT -A TO START THE MODEL ' 10 GENERAL INFORMATION it DATE ANALYSIS PREPARED March 4 1999 12 PROJECT NAME EA -4T2 13 ZONING CLASSIFICATION P Zone 1 a PROPOSED USE Sell Storage 15 GROSS ACREAGE 393 1 6 NET SITE AREA (ESTIMATE) INCLUDING PRIVATE STREETS 3 78 1 1 NUMBER OF BUILDINGS 10 18 YEAR PROJECT FIRST OCCUPIED 1999 1 9 LIST PROJECT USES ?Use Name Cannot Eseeo 10 Characters) 191 FIRST USE Sell Storage 192 SECOND USE 193 THIRD USE PRESS ALT B TO CONTINUE LRO46 U46 C LAND USE Set Storage Set Storage Sol Storage CONSTANT 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2 3 STRUCTURE TYPES AND VOLUMES B 1 FLOOR SPACE GROSS BUILDING AREA - ,ONREStDENTIALBWLDINGSONLY 930CC 93000 93000 93(I00 93000 93000 2 2 RESTAURANT ONLY (NOT PART OF A HOTEL - TOTAL FLOOR AREA 2- RETAIL ONLY NUMBER OF SQUARE FEET DEVOTED TO RETAIL USE 93000 93000 93000 93000 93000 93000 • NZ EILVOTEL ONLY NUMBER OF ROOMS 25 RESIDENTIAL ONLY - NUMBER OF UNITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 PER CENT OF PROJECT OCCUPIED 85 85 85 as 85 85 3 9 POPULATIONEMPLOYMENT ., NUMBER OF SQUARE FEET PER EMPLOYEE - Haler 10 Taoie A 2l 31 000 31 000 31 000 31 000 31 000 31 000 32 HOTEL1IOTEL ONLY NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES 25 ROOMS 1Reterlo T4LBAL WA NA N/A N/A N/A 33 RESIDENTIAL ONLY AVERAGE HOUSEHOLDSIZE IReW 1. Tacie A 21 N/A N/A WA N/A N/A 4 C DEVELOPMENT VALUE ESTIMATE O1 LAND VALUE 2941196 2941196 2941196 29411% 2901196 29011% 4 2 TOTAL VALUE OF IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING PARAING STRUCTURE) 2488825 2488625 2488825 2488825 2488825 2488625 5 0 DEVELOPMENT REVENUE GENERATION 5 1 PROPERTY TAX 5 t 1 PREVAILING BASIC PROPERTY TAX RATE (FIRST CONSTANT COLUMN - ONLY) 1ReNrlRTa0II A3) 100 100 100 100 100 100 5 2 CITY SHARE PER TAX RATE AREA 12 (FIRST CONSTANT COLUMN ONLY C Pe m 1^ Tenrn A 52 SALES AND USE TAX 521 RETAIL ONLY - SALES PER SQUARE FOOT (S) v 522 RESTAURANT ONLY (NOT PART OF A HOTEL -SALES PER SQUARE FOOT (S) 523 RESIDENTIAL ONLY-- LOCAL ANNUAL TAXABLE EXPEDITURES (Refer to Table A 4) 53 BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEE 531 NUMBER OFTENANTS/BUSINESSES 532 NUMBER OF TENANTSIBUSINESSES EXEMPT FROM BUS REGISTRATION FEE 5 3 3 EMPLOYEE TAX(HEAD TAX( Table A 5 5 3 a TOTAL BUILDING SO FT EXEMPT FROM ASSESSMENT FEE - (Table A 5) 5 3 5 BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEE FOR MISCELLANEOUS USES S 3 6 TOTAL DOLLAR VALUE OF EXEMPTIONS 5 4 FRANCHISE TAX 541 ELECTRICITY KW HR /SO ET NR (Refer 10 Table A 6) 5 4 2 ELECTRICITY COST PER KW HR (Refer to Table A 61 5 4 2 NATURAL GAS C F ,SO FT NR rReler U Table A E 5 4 4 NATURAL GAS COST PER C F (Refer to Table A 6, 5 T PANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX (HlOTEUMOTELON.Y -. ROOM RATE ISM AT OCCUPANCY 552 PER CENT OCCUPANCY _ . 3 PER CENT EXEMPTIONS _ _ a HOTEUMOTFL LOCATIONFAOTOR - Reler to Table A ), 56 STATE SUBVENTIONS (RESIDENTIAL ONLY_Reler to Table A 6) FINES ANO FORPETURES E: MOTOR VECH4E IN LIEU TAX 5 6 3 CIGARETTE TAX 564 GAS TAX 60 CITY COSTS OF SERVICES (Refer to Tame A 9) E 1 LIBRARY 62 PARKS &RECREATION 6 3 PUBLIC WORKS 6 4 PUBLIC SAFETY 641 POLICE 6411 ANNUAL COSTS'EMPLOYEE(RESIDENT) 6 4 1 2 ONE TIME FEE (Par Square FgXj 642 6 4 2 1 4 2 1 ANNUAL O0STSIEMPLOYEEIRESIDEN T I 6 4 2 2 ONE TIME FEE (Per Square Fool 6 5 BUILDING SAFETY 66 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 WA NIA WA WA WA WA NIA N/A NIA WA NIA 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 109 109 109 109 109 5 000 5 000 5 000 5 000 5 000 5 000 %44 N/A WA N/A WA WA 0140 N/A WA N/A WA WA 4 35 WA N/A NIA N/A WA 01240 WA N/A WA WA WA 2400 WA WA WA WA N/A 00 �2 WA NIA N/A WA N/A WA NIA NIA WA WA WA WA WA WA WA N/A WA WA WA WA WA N/A NIA N/A NIA WA NIA N/A NIA WA NIA N/A NIA NIA WA N/A N/A N/A WA WA -193 N/A N/A N/A N/A WA 14050 N/A N/A N/A WA WA 9660 NIA NIA N/A N/A WA 18233 WA WA WA WA WA 0110 NIA WA WA WA WA %44 WA WA WA WA WA 0140 WA N/A WA - WA WA 995 N/A WA WA WA WA 70 12 N/A N/A WA N/A WA 12" PRESS ALT-C IF A SECOND USE I IMSE PRESS ALT E TO CONTINUE R EXISTING CONDITIONS e B 0 GENERAL INFORMATION B 1 UST PROJECT USES (Use Name Cannot Exceed 10 Characters) S 1 1 FIRST USE B 12 SECOND USE B 1 3 THIRD USE - _ USE SPECIFIC INFORMATION 90 STRUCTURE TYPES AND VOLUMES 9 1 IS THE PROJECT SITE CURRENTLY VACANT -(B YES refer to Table A 10 ano enter corresoonaing ligure It NO enter 01 92 FLOOR SPACE GROSS BUILDABLE AREA 93 RESIDENTIAL ONLY NUMBER OF UNITS IC POPULATION E 1n'_OYMENT -O-AL NUMEER Co E' P_C /EES 2 RESICENTI..L ONLY A.ERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE (Pere tc Tame A 2 DEVELOP•d Er T LALUE ESTIMATE 11 TOTAL LAND VALUE C TCTA. VALUE OF IMPROVEMENTS :., DEVELOPMENT REVENUE GENERATION 12 SALES AND USE TAX NOS RESICEI.TIA- ONLY TOTA- POINT OF $ALE REVEIUES 2 RE9DEhTIA -01. y LOCALANNUAL TAXABLE eyoEO.TURES Ira's 'C Tame A C 2: BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEE .. 'OTAL BJSI`.E 55 REGISTRATION FEE 123 FRANCHISE TAX 12 3' ELECTRICIr K W HR /SO FT /YP IRelb to Table A 61 12 31 ELECTRICITY COST PER KW HR (Real to 111 A 6 1233 NATURALGAS CF /SOFTNR (Refer to Table A 6 12 34 NATURAL GAS COST PEP C F (Refer to Table A 61 124 TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX IHOTEUMOTEL ONLY) 12 A 1 TOTAL TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX 12 4 2 HOTEUMOTEL LOCATION FACTOR (Refer 10 Table A 7) r. pa Aing lot EXI STING U SES to - -_ -_ -_- -_ - - Parking 3712 N/A N/A 2941196 2911196 2941196 29111% 29"1196 2901196 13( (RESIDENTIAL ONLY -Refer lo 1 -8) 1251 RNES AND FORFEITURES 12 5 2 MOTOR VECHLE IN -LIEU TAX 1253 CIGARETTE TAX 12 5 4 GAS TAX 130 CITY COSTS OF SERVICES FACTOR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEARS IReleT 10 TeCIe A 9) 00 7 1017 1034 1052 1070 1085 131 LIBRARY 087 087 087 087 087 087 132 PARKS & RECREATION 6 13 613 613 613 6 13 613 133 PUBLIC WORKS 2675 2575 28 75 2575 2675 2875 13 4 PUBLIC SAFETY 0 0 0 0 0 1341 POLICE 6344 6344 6344 6344 6344 63 a< 13 4 2 FIRE 61780 61780 61780 61780 61780 61780 135 BUILDING SAFETY 1336 1336 1336 1336 1336 1336 136 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 2130 2130 2130 2130 2130 2130 PRESS ALT G TO CONTINUE IOTA, 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 REV V U COS' 14F. r. TIO% FACTORS 13i FACTOR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR YEARS RE, ENUEE 00 7 1017 1034 1052 1070 1085 E= CC STS 0029 1029 1059 1090 1121 1154 PRESS ALT H TO CONTINUE EMPLOYEE TRANSACTION 3 3 3 3 3 EMPLOYEE HOTEVMOTEL 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL EMPLOYEES 3 3 3 3 3 E' "RLOYEES NOT SUBLECT-0 EMP TAX 10 10 10 10 10 PROPERTY TAX TRANSACTION 002 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IOTA, 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 _ REJENUES. TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE 5430021 5430021 5430021 5430021 5430021 TOTAL PROPERTY TAX REVENUE 51-6 3A75 3475 3475 305 3475 EMPLOYEE TRANSACTION 3 3 3 3 3 EMPLOYEE HOTEUM07EL 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL EMPLOYEES 3 3 3 3 3 EMPLOYEE PURCHASES 224 1224 1224 1224 1224 ON SITE SALES 2399 2399 2399 2399 2399 FOODS BEVERAGE REVENUE HOTEL 0 0 0 0 0 0 FOOD 5 BEVERAGE REVENUE RESTAURANT 1 0 0 0 0 0 RESIDENTIAL REVENUE C 0 0 0 0 C TOTAL SALES AND USE TAX +e 36 36 36 36 36 TENANT /BUSINESS FEE Be BB Be 08 88 EMPLOYEE TAX C 0 0 0 0 ASSESSMENT FEE 11 160 11 160 11 160 11 160 11 160 TOTAL BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEE 56240 11246 11240 11248 11248 X1248 FRANCHISE TAX ELECTRICITY 25062+ 50164 50164 50164 50164 50164 FRANCHISE TAX NATURAL GAS 124 992 24 998 24 998 24 998 24 998 24 998 FRANCHISE TAX WATER 32039 6408 6408 6405 6408 6408 TOTAL FRANCHISE TAX 11274 2255 2255 2255 2255 2255 TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX TRANSACT 1 0 0 0 0 0 TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX TRANSACT 2 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX 0 0 0 0 0 0 STATE SUBVENTIONS FINES 6 FORFEIT 0 0 0 0 0 0 STATE SUBVENTONS MOTOR VEHICLE 0 0 0 0 0 0 STATE SUBVENTIONS CIGARETTE 0 0 0 0 _: 0 0 STATE SUBVENTIONS GASOLINE 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL STATE SUBVENTIONS 0 0 0 0 0 0 ONE TIME FEE POLICE 1C 230 10230 N4 W. Na N4 13i ONE TIME FF- LIBRARY 2790 2790 ONE TIME F - RAFFIC 0 0 TOTAL PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT REVENUES 111112 43054 COSTS. 107 107 RESIDENTIAL POPULATION 350 0 TOTAL LIBRARY COSTS 535 107 TOTAL PARKS 6 RECREATION COSTS 1 791 356 PUBLIC WORKS TRANSACTION 0 252 PUBLIC WORKS TRANSACTION 2 252 0 TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS COSTS 1 258 252 POLICMAP17A TRANSACTION 1 465 465 POLICEICAPITA TRANSACTION2 0 0 TOTAL POLICE/CAPITA 2325 465 TOTAL POLICE COSTS 2 325 465 FIREICAPITA TRANSACTION 1 465 246 FIREICAPITA - TRANSACTION 2 246 0 TOTAL FIRE/CAPITA 1 230 246 TOTAL FIRE COSTS 1 230 246 BUILDING SAFETY TRANSACTION 246 25 BUILDING SAFETY TRANSACTION 2 246 0 TOTAL BUILDING SAFETY COSTS 12' 25 GENERAL GOVERNMENT TRANSACTION 179 GENERAL GOVERNMENT TRANSACTION 0 TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT COSTS 694 179 TOTAL PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT COSTS 8159 1632 17014 17014 17014 17014 0 0 0 0 107 107 107 107 358 350 356 358 2S2 252 252 252 0 0 0 0 252 252 252 252 AS$ 465 46S 465 0 0 0 0 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 465 246 246 246 246 0 0 0 0 246 246 246 246 246 246 246 246 25 25 25 25 0 0 0 0 25 25 25 25 179 179 179 179 0 0 0 C 179 179 179 179 1 632 1 632 1 632 1 632 132 RESOLUTION NO. 2440 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EA -472, DENIAL OF THE CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND DENIAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 99 -1, ZONE CHANGE 99 -1, AND ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT 99 -1 FOR THE 124'" SPECIFIC PLAN AT 401 AVIATION BOULEVARD. PETITIONED BY: BRUCE KAUFMAN, EXTRA SPACE STORAGE OF STUDIO CITY, LLC. WHEREAS, applications have been received from Bruce Kaufman of Extra Space Storage of Studio City, LLC, requesting said approvals, WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment (EA -472), including a Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the proposed use, has been prepared and circulated to all interested parties, staff, and affected public agencies for review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the application and supporting evidence with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act, State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of El Segundo Guidelines for the Implementation of the Calrforma Environmental Quality Act (Resolution No 3805), WHEREAS, on April 6, 1999, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, a duly aevertised public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hail, 350 Main Street and notice of the public hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by la, WHEREAS, on June 24, 1999, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, a cjj� advertised public hearing on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main _e and notice of the public hearing was given in the time, form and manner prescribed by WHEREAS, on June 28, 1999 the Planning Commission Adopted Resolution No 2440, re�cmrnending to the City Council Denial of the proposed protect WHEREAS, opportunity was given to all persons present to speak for or against the f ndings of Environmental Assessment EA -472, GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1, and, WHEREAS, at said hearings the follow rig facts were established The project site is a 3 93 gross acre (3 62 net acres) narrow, rectangular- shaped parcel located approximately 100 feet west from the northwest comer of Aviation Boulevard and LI Segundo Boulevard, immed alely west of the BNSF & ATSF railroad tracks, between El Segundo Boulevard and 124" Street (Grand Avenue extension) The request is to establish a Specific Plan area on the protect site such that the Land Use designation and Zoning of the site would be changed from Parking to 124'" Specific Plan (124i" SP) in the General Plan and Zoning Code 3 The protect site is paved, devoid of vegetation and contains no structures except for three shuttle shelters which were used in conjunction with the prior use of the site 1 - 133 4 The (not current) previous use of the site was for a parking lot, for non - required overflow parking for Northrop Grumman employees 5- The topography of the project site is relatively flat and there are no known notable geologic features, rare or endangered animal species, or significant cultural or historical features on the site and in the immediate locale. 6 Nearby land uses include the U S Air Force Base in the Public Facility (PF) Zone to the immediate west and southeast (across Aviation and El Segundo Boulevards), a parking lot to the immediate north zoned Parking (P), the Northrop Grumman aerospace facility located further north and northwest in the Urban Mixed -Use North (MU -N) Zone, and, the Aerospace Corporation facility to the south (across El Segundo Boulevard) in the Light Industrial (M -1) Zone The Lockheed Martin offices and the Entenmann's /Orowheat bakery outlet exist to the east (across Aviation Boulevard) in the Corporate Office (CO) Zone and residential uses exist further northeast, outside the City limits, in Los Angeles County 7 Primary (permitted) uses in the Specific Plan area would include warehousing and storage Ancillary uses would include a limited residential use, such as a caretaker's residence, and the potential option to develop and operate a City Water Facility (Water Well and Water Treatment Budding) 6 The maximum budding area allowed within the Specific Plan area would be 73,500 square feet with the Water Facility or 84.530 square feet without the Water Facility o The revised Traffic Report prepared for the project estimates that the proposed uses would generate a total of 169 trips per day Approximately 10 trips are projected for the morning peak hour and approximately 23 trips for the evening peak hour The Report concludes that the projected trip generation would be nominal and would not result in signdicant increases to vehicle trips along adjacent roadways 10 The Parking Demand Study prepared for the project (dated March 2, 1999) concluded that 13 parking spaces would be sufficient to meet the on -site peak parking demand, however, the City's Consulting Traffic Engineer recommended that 22 spaces would be more appropriate Twenty -four (24) parking spaces plus one (1) loading space are proposed for the Specific Plan area, however two (2) additional spaces would be provided for the exclusive use of the City if the Water Facility is developed The Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by the City concluded that development of the Specific Plan area into a mini-storage facility would have a positive net fiscal impact to the City in the first year, (albeit a small amount) due to the one -time impact fees, which would decrease substantially in following years The City, acting as the lead agency has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is the appropriate environmental review for this project Potentially significant impacts were identified with regards to Water and Utilities and Services Systems however, mitigation measures are proposed which would reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level The Water Facility will have to undergo the standard CEOA review once the project is initiated by the City, if it is initiated since the construction, development and operation of the facility was not addressed in the study 2 1iC 14. The Ponce Department commented that mint- storage facilities are popular targets for burglaries. Due to the site's unusual location next to a large bemVrailroad track, visibility by Police and passersby would be limited so the Police Department made several recommendations which would help to minimize this problem Moreover, if the site is developed with a water facility, the Police Department indicated that perimeter fencing would be important for the security of the storage facility. 15 At the Planning Commission Public Hearing on June 24, 1999, the Planning Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed project and determined the following A The project site is a "gateway" to the City, and the proposed project is not consistent with its vision for a "gateway' use, including Land Use Objective LU 1 -5 of the General Plan, 6 The proposed project is a land use decision that will have long term future implications which are inconsistent with future vision as expressed in the General Plan, C The project site is adjacent to Aviation Boulevard which is a major thoroughfare with a large volume of traffic, D The proposed project has limited net fiscal benefit to the City, E The Police Chief identified that mini- storage uses are targets for crime, which the Commission believes could impact Police services, F The City already has several large mini- storage projects and an additional project is not essential to serve the community, G The proposed project is not the best use for the site from a land use perspective, for the following, including but not limited to, reason; in that the use is not a mixed -use as contemplated by the General Plan; including Objective LU 4 -4; and, H It is anticipated that this site and surrounding sites will transition to other uses in the tutu re, and this project may be inconsistent with and potentially hinder that transition NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after considering the above facts, the testimony ,resented at the public hearings, and study of proposed Environmental Assessment EA -472, 99 -1, ZC 99 -1, and ZTA 99 -1 the Planning Commission makes the following findings and recommends the City Council Deny the certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental Impacts for Environmental Assessment EA -472 and to Deny the adoption of the 2 Specific Plan (GPA 99 -1, ZC 99 -1 and ZTA 99 -1) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT The Draft Initial Study was made available to all local and affected agencies and for public review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law As the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Zone Text Amendments are recommended for Denial, the Planning Commission additionally recommends that the City Council Deny the certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration 135 GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY 1. That the proposed use is not consistent with the following General Plan goals, policies, and objectives A The proposed General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning for the site is 124'" Specific Plan (124" SP) The proposed 124'" Specific Plan designation is not compatible with the surrounding Public Facility, Light Industrial, Urban Mixed -Use North, and Corporate Office land use designations B The proposed project is not in conformance with the following General Plan goals, policies and objectives Economic Development Policies ED 1 -1 1, ED 1 -1.2, ED 1- 2 2, ED 2 -1 2, and ED 2 -1 4 and Objective ED 1 -2, are in conflict with this project since they refer to the Importance of promoting economic development, improving the tax base, maximizing revenues, Investing In an Infrastructure that encourages commercial and Industrial development, and diversifying industries to create jobs and increase growth potential and fiscal Impact, and, Land Use Element Policy LU 1.5.5, Land Use Element Goal LU 5, and Land Use Element Objectives LU 1 -5, LU 4 -4, LU 5 -1, LU 5 -2, LU 5 -6, and LU 7 -2 are in conflict with the project since they emphasize the Importance of developing an active program to beautify the major entrances to the City, providing a stable tax base, being economically beneficial, promoting the City appearance, and encouraging mixed -use developments NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends tnat the City Council Deny Environmental Assessment EA-472, GPA 99 -1, ZC 99- 1 ano ZTA 99.1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that according to the El Segundo Municipal Code, a copy of this Resolution shall be mailed to the applicant at the address shown on the application and to any olner person requesting a copy of same. PAS D, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of June 1999. 5ret „mar AICP Bran Crowl y, Chairma Director of Planning and Building of the Planning Commission Safetv and, Secretary of the Planning of the City of El Segundo, -omm ssion of the City California -' El Segundo California MOTES lov iey (Chair) - Aye Uycoff (Vice - Chair) - Aye Boulgarldes - Aye .C,c Eller - Nay Palmer - Nay P Iprojectsi451- 475iea.41,Mesolution of Denial 13 F EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE July 6, 1999 `AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING Committees, Commissions & Boards A E DA 50CIl Report of the City/School Sub - Committee on agreement for assistance R M N D COUNCIL ACTION Conceptually approve plan for City assistance for certain school functions and direct staff to prepare an Agreement IN IM TION AND BA R UND The City /School Sub - Committee of the Council has been meeting with El Segundo Unified School District representatives The purpose has been to review past agreements between the agencies and potential agreements in the future Financial assistance for the 1999 -2000 year is being examined in the form of additional field maintenance, library staffing and water provision by the City DISCUSSION A formal request for the City to take over certain school functions was received on March 29, 1999 The School District's letter included a list of functions that could be transferred to the city and the potential savings to the District The list was comprised of items that the community could perceive as a benefit The City then analyzed the request and prepared reports on operational issues and costs to the City The Sub - Committee recognizes that the City is still early in its own budgetary process But the Sub - Committee felt that it would be worthwhile for staff to come up with a potential package of financial assistance that would result in a maximum of 5250 000 of cost avoidance to the District, and of benefit to the community Recently, a joint meeting of the staff from the School District and City honed in on three types of assistance Absorb the remaining school library functions, pay for the School District's water, and take over field maintenance It would be necessary for the School District to bring the fields up to City standards and make substantial equipment investments prior to the take over by the City In addition, the City's assumption of the water cost would need to be reviewed The overall cost to the City would be 5325 000 due to differing service standards, particularly in field maintenance ATTACHED SUPPORTIN DOCUMENT FISCAL IMPACT Operating Budget Capital Improvement Budget Amount Requested Project/Account Budget Project/Account Balance Account Number Project Phase Appropriation Required Up to $325,000 to be budgeted in the 1999 -2000 fiscal year �� -3 REVIEWED BY � Date' EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT MEETING DATE: July 6,1999 AGENDA HEADING: Committee Reports AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Selection of an architectural team to design the Plaza improvements RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION- Select team of Spitz/Denton and direct staff to negotiate a design contract INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: On April 6, 1999, the City Council authorized staff to enter Into a contract to retain William Llskamm to coordinate the Civic Center Plaza design competition Following the Issuance of a Request For Proposal, the City received 13 applications Mr Llskamm reviewed the proposals and selected three teams Campbell & Campbell, AIJK Architecture & City Design, and the team of Katherine Spitz & Associates and David Denton A "charette" competition was conducted by Mr Liskamm from May 20 — 22, 1999 in the Civic Center that included two public workshops, a public reception, and a three hour presentation of plans by the three competing architectural firms to a )ury of design professionals comprised of Juhanna Riley, President, Southern California Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects, Scott Reese, Assistant Director, Department of Parks and Recreation, City of Glendale, and Guillermo Aguilar, architect Following one hour presentations by each design team commencing at 10 00 a m on Saturday, May 22, on the Plaza, the jury met for three hours and ranked the plans in this order is- Katherine Spitz/David Denton 20C John Kaliski, AIJK Architecture & City Design 3r0- Douglas Campbell, Campbell & Campbell All of the plans along with the related budgets and jury comments, have been on display In the lobby outside the City Council Chambers for the past five weeks In an effort to maximize community input, staff also held a special public meeting to review the plans with the public on June 30" DISCUSSION. Following selection of the architectural team, staff will negotiate a design contract and return to the City Council for final approval within the next month It should be noted that once the architectural firm is selected, the actual plans for the Plaza will be developed as a result of considerable public involvement over a number of months The final plans may well include a number of modifications based upon suggestions by the public. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS FISCAL IMPACT- (Approximately $65,000 with the exact amount to be determined as part of the contract ) Operating Budget, Capital Improvement Budget Amount Requested Project/Account Budget Project/Account Balance Account Number: Project Phase, Appropriation Required REVIEWED BY: $225 000 (Civic Center Improvements) NIA Date* Design Development N/A Date: Date: Mary Strenn CM Manager ACTION TAKEN = 1 ^c, ;§! > a!i m " &k ` 7@ ` or- 2 § = 2 -_ q § rE! ||2 ƒ 0 \ \( !! § % 2 !! §!a! ! ._ ! ;� |!} �° _,, ■ -! ; 77 ° ! E !®� �I \; \�)\ \� OF }} \!93 » i }(i\ �} (� ) 2 }()( ! -J ! % ! ( (! _ - , !. | ( }!!_| �f ) ! ! } \ \ \ \ \ \ } _ } ®a ) §) ! - 2 | I ) a!!B!§ ■! ■! §!§23;23 :!! ■! § )! !2§§l��a,,2!$ §4 |2 |a\ M, mow § 'jjz lm %zMm m j 8(;m! | ;= � � ! , §51CMA ON } # /} § ®;§� k) %)\)- 2°° \ \) \» \ |§ :)2: ;z�7 ! &. (6zzW f ,m§ & / ] ` \ ?�� \ &k j3 \ ?�� \ § § 2 § k 0 140 5 \) } CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER 06/0411999 THROUGH 06/1711999 Date 6/4/99 6/10199 6110199 6/11/99 6/16/99 6/14/99 6/16/99 Payee Amount Description Wells Fargo West Basin Municipal Health Comp Fed Reserve Bank of K C Health Comp IRS Employment Development DATE OF RATIFICATION 07/06/99 TOTAL PAYMENTS BY WIRE. Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by 33,000 00 Golf Course Payroll - TPT 777,165 20 H2O Payment 311 16 Weekly eligible claims 6/4 40000 Employee Savings Bonds 1,77905 Weekly eligible claims 6/11 153,940 99 Federal Taxes PR25 28,746 03 State Taxes PR25 995,342,43 Deputy Treasurer ro lr —) -)'1 c ._ & Date Finance Director City Manager Date Date 995,342 43 Information on actual expenditures is available in the City Treasurer's Office of the City of El Segundo 141 D O S m D 4 A O° rt 0� yyrC ti m m A O a D c y A m n m m a .}' z m O n N o dm O Z o T n # 1 O S m m A °' d qAq m Ngr> m y d ml m� O m zzm O 0 m$ O H T U g S c m c § !I z Z q D 3 3 m� e� °0—'9 N Sn x Z m o � m z a m 'o m s u m m m ^ o o m A Jr fJN o n q m? A m O H m n u a c m n m o p d a r m 0 o D; x x n v n s a w� 00N+{iia= '° O y r 6 3 0 3 m 3 S D n A A Z y>A v m m Z 9 m p N m m mCc. ArCC gym2 rMi y m pyp Y a O mm (yi 2 A x y 0 a CZ ccz 3 c3i ✓. 2O m N -Ni00m r mZw rs902 Z Z Z mD N m H d c y o Oo 0 z O y '� y m c Q n m < m 3 m a r 0 3 m a v m a m 3 3 m p c Er a °Nam - d $ g z N P N mp n d O p N T Z m o ° ° m o n v a N i.+%n NN co gi a m �N�a °J m y H ° �iOUO� +�i r m Y� u,b u�wut�n mgv T NIO 1Y W AN INO Y' O> NOIN +W >+ A umi v, a \ N 0 0 0< `o °n m v O O m N n n n 0 x S S m \^ n 0 n v llyy z �c x ° N N N A O O O p c c c < m m m o O s o r o m Z z N n y 9 y A Z c c m z C N O O Z m m m A b m .° f 2 m m x A 14: �n N O Om r r m N c m C <Z ' O z 2 0 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER 0611811999 THROUGH 0613011999 Date 5/23/99 6/28/1999 6/30/99 6/30/99 Payee Amount Health Comp IRS Employment Development City of Los Angeles DATE OF RATIFICATION: 07106199 TOTAL PAYMENTS BY WIRE. coo 41,149 05 28,652 76 904,590 00 974,391.81 CrediUCorrection taken from Payroll 24 payments ratified 6/15/99 Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by Description Weekly eligible claims 6/18 Federal Taxes PR26 State Taxes PR26 Sewer System Charges 97 -98 974,391.81 Deputy Treasurer Date Finance Director tY /l4 1,4Z Date City Manager la Date Information on actual expenditures is available in the City Treasurer's Office of the City of El Segundo 1143