Loading...
2000 JUN 20 CC PACKETx AGENDA 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 Before speaking to the City Council, please come to the podium and state Your name and residence and the organization you represent, if desired Please respect the time limits Members of the Public may place items on the Agenda by submitting 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, JUNE 20, 2000 - 5:00 P.M. Next Resolution # 4166 Next Ordinance # 1319 5.00 PM Session CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CLOSED SESSION: The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code §54950, et sue.) 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 matters covered under Gov't Code §54957 (Personnel), and/or conferring with the City's Labor Negotiators as follows: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov't Code §54956 9(a)) 1. City of El Segundo v Bd. of Airport Commissioners, et al , LASC Case No BC 220609 4 2 Ralston v. El Segundo, LASC Case No YC 036223 3 Hill v. El Segundo, USDC No CV 98- 1463- LGB(SHX) 4 Valone Williams v. Brian D. Evanski, et al , LASC Case No 99CO2571 5 Venegas v. El Segundo, LASC Case No BC207136 6 In re Randall's Island Family Golf Centers, Inc , U S Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 00 -41065 7 City of El Segundo v. Stardust, LASC Case No. YC031364 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Gov't Code §54956 9(b): -1- potential case (no further public statement is required at this time); Initiation of litigation pursuant to Gov't Code §54956 9(c) -3- matters DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS (Gov't Code §54957) — None CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR - (Gov't Code §54957 6) — City Representative Mary Strenn and Richard Kopenhefer Employee Organizations City Employees' Association, Supervisory & Professional Employees' Association, El Segundo Firefighters' Association, El Segundo Police Officers' Association, and all unrepresented employees CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956 8) — None z Gtr Y O.t+ 0 AGEND] 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 Before speaking to the City Council, please come to the podium and state Your name and residence and the organization you represent, if desired Please respect the time limits Members of the Public may place items on the Agenda by submitting 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, JUNE 20, 2000 - 7:00 P.M. Next Resolution # 4166 Next Ordinance # 1319 7:00 PM Session CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION — Julie Elkins, United Methodist Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Council Member Nancy Wernick PRESENTATIONS (a) Presentation by Time -Warner regarding proposed upgrade and discussion of other options ROLL CALL 3 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 behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of$250 While all comments are welcome, the Brown Act does not allow Council to take action on any item on the agenda The Council will respond to comments after Public Communications is closed 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 - Public hearing on the Downtown Specific Plan. The Plan area generally encompasses the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street, and abutting properties on Grand Avenue. [Environmental Assessment No. EA -474 (Mitigated Negative Declaration), General Plan Amendment No 99 -2, Zone Change No. 99 -2 and Zone Text Amendment No. 99 -51 Applicant City of El Segundo, Property owners: Various Recommendation — 1. Hold Public Hearing; 2. Discussion; 3. First Reading of Ordinance by title only; 4. Schedule second reading and Adoption for July 18, 2000; and /or, 5. Other possible action/direction C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Request for City Council to set interviews of candidates to the various Committees, Commissions and Boards Recommendation — Set date of interviews a) Council Sub - Committee for the Senior Housing Board — Report on proposed rent increase for Park Vista Recommendation — Review Sub - Committee Report b) Proposal of 3% rent increase at Park Vista for 17 months beginning August 1, 2000 through December 31, 2001. An additional annual 1.5% increase is also proposed from January 1, 2002 through December 2005 Recommendation — Council Discussion and Action 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. 4. Warrant Numbers 2510561 - xxxxxx on Register No 17 in total amount of $1,430,548 65 and Wire Transfers in the amount of $254,213 85 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 xx/xx/00 to xx/xx/00. City Council meeting minutes of June 6, 2000. Recommendation - Approval. An Ordinance of the City of El Segundo, Califorma, amending chapter 8 12 of the El Segundo Municipal Code by adding Section 8.12 160 relating to dog park rules (Second Reading Recommendation — Adopt Ordinance Accept the work as complete for the 1998 -99 Replacement of Water Mains — Project No PW 98 -10 (final contract amount = $325,474.00) Recommendation — 1. Accept the work as complete. 2. Authorize the City Clerk to file the City Engineer's Notice of Completion in the County Recorders office. 8. Renewal of Library's annul periodical subscription list with EBSCO Subscription Services for the period September 1, 2000 - August 31, 2001 Fiscal Impact $13,564 Recommendation — Approve renewal of services with EBSCO Subscription Services. 9. Annual destruction of identified records in accordance with the provisions of Section 34090 of the Government Code of the State of California. The City Attorney has consented to the plan for records destruction Recommendation — Approve Resolution authorizing the destruction of certain records. 10 Renewal of General Services Agreement (GSA) between the City and the County of Los Angeles for another five (5) years commencing on July 1, 2000 for services performed by the County on behalf of the City Recommendation — Approve Contract and authorize the Mayor to execute. W1 11. Award of contract to National Plant Services, Inc , for the cleaning and Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) inspection of sewer lines — Project No.: PW 00 -6 (contract amount = $212,887.72). Recommendation — 1. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, National Plant Services, Inc., in the amount of $212,887.72. 2. Authorize the Mayor to sign the Standard Public Works Construction Agreement after approval as to form by the City Attorney. 12 Resolution of the City Council rescinding Resolution Number 4147, and adopting a new resolution approving a new Conflict of Interest Code Recommendation — Adopt Resolution approving a new Conflict of Interest Code. 13 Acceptance of the installation of chain link fencing for Storm Water Pump Station No. 17 and Dog Park — Protect No. PW 99 -7 (final contract amount $71.484 00) Recommendation — 1. Accept the work as complete. 2. Authorize the City Clerk to file the City Engineer's Notice of Completion in the County Recorder's Office. 14. Examination plans for the Personnel Merit System job classification of License/Permit Recommendation — Approve and Examine Plans CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA F. NEW BUSINESS — 15. Take action necessary to give notice of a special election regarding the implementation of a special tax on narking lot businesses Recommendation — Adopt the four resolutions attached. G. REPORTS - CITY MANAGER - NONE H. REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY - NONE I. REPORTS - CITY CLERK - NONE J. REPORTS - CITY TREASURER - NONE K. REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS 6 6 Council Member McDowell - NONE Council Member Gaines - NONE Council Member Wernick - NONE Mayor Pro Tem 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 behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalf oftheir employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $150 While all comments are welcome, the Brown Act does not allow Council to take action on any item not on the agenda The Council will respond to comments after Public Communications is closed ill I?l� C17: EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Special Orders of Business - Public Hearing AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Public hearing on the Downtown Specific Plan. The Plan area generally encompasses the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street, and abutting properties on Grand Avenue [Environmental Assessment No EA -474 (Mitigated Negative Declaration), General Plan Amendment No. 99 -2, Zone Change No. 99 -2 and Zone Text Amendment No. 99 -51 Applicant. City of El Segundo, Property owners. Various RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION 1) Hold Public Hearing, 2) Discussion; 3) First Reading of Ordinance by title only, 4) Schedule second reading and Adoption for July 18, 2000; and /or, 5) Other possible action /direction. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: (Begins on page 2) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1 Draft City Council Ordinance No 2 Draft Downtown Specific Plan (Distributed as a Separate Document) 3 Planning Commission Staff Report, Selected Attachments and Minutes April 27, and May 11, and 25, 2000 4 Adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 2475 FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number. Project Phase: Appropriation required. See Chapter IX- Implementation and Financing See Chapter IX- Implementation and Financing See Chapter IX- Implementation and Financing See Chapter IX- Implementation and Financing Possibly (See Chapter IX- Implementation and Financing) ORIGINATED. Le BJ Jeer, nior Planner DATE: June 8, 2000 M. Hansen, Director of Community, Economic and Development Services BY- Mary Strenn, City Manager DATE: June 8, 2000 Q 1 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: (continued from page 1) Background The Specific Plan is envisioned to initiate the revitalization and guide future development for the heart of the community, the Downtown. The Plan includes both development and design standards, as well as streetscape Improvements and Incentives which, when Implemented, will create a more walkable and pedestnan - friendly environment The Downtown is seen as the focal point for the community and the Vision intends to enhance this special place that is so highly valued. The Plan area is currently developed with commercial, residential and public uses, which serve the residents, and future development is anticipated to be similar In nature In November of 1998, a Downtown Task Force of community and business leaders appointed by the City Council, presented a summary report entitled "Developing a Vision for Downtown El Segundo." The City Council reviewed the report and recommendations, and later directed staff to begin the preparation of a Downtown Specific Plan to implement the Task Force recommendations. In July 1999, the City Council formed another Downtown Task Force to develop the Specific Plan. The Downtown Task Force conducted numerous meetings, and at its final meeting on February 22, 2000, adopted a Specific Plan Concept Document The draft Specific Plan document was then prepared by staff and presented to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission reviewed the Plan at three public hearings and on May 25, 2000 recommended approval of the Specific Plan to the City Council The Specific Plan will replace the General Plan and Zoning for the area and address development standards (uses, height, density, setbacks, landscaping etc ), design criteria, signs, parking and circulation, street and streetscape design, trees and the implementation and financing for the improvements. Discussion The Downtown Specific Plan Document is divided into the following 9 chapters• I Introduction IL Overview of the Specific Plan Surrounding Area III Relationship of the Specific Plan to the Existing General Plan IV. Specific Plan Districts V. Administration VI Development Standards VII Parking VIII Design Standards IX. Implementation and Financing 2 . 9 The following summarizes and highlights the standards in the Downtown Spec if Plan. The Plan area has been divided into 5 separate Districts, each with their own set of development and design standards. A complete summary, as well as the entire Specific Plan, is included in the Planning Commission staff reports, minutes and other documents previously distributed to the City Council. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: General for all of the Districts Uses • Permit outdoor dining, up to 200 SF in area, except prohibited in North Richmond Street District • Permit outdoor newsstands, coffee carts, flower stands, gathering areas and similar retail uses, up to 200 SF in area, except require an Administrative Use Permit (AUP) in North Richmond Street District. • Encourage alley side and upper level offices • Prohibit drive -thru restaurants, churches, and service stations Residential • Allow upper floor residential units • Increase permitted residential units from 1 to 2 units (12 to 25 dwelling units per acre) per 25 -foot wide lot, minimum 450 SF. Heights • Allow 30 feet (2 stories) in height, providing a two -story street front budding facade and 45 -foot (3 story maximum) height at the rear of lots (measured to the peak of the roof). Setbacks • Require zero setback between building and streets on street level, except for pedestrian oriented plazas or architectural features (10 feet maximum), and handicapped parking, subject to design review. • Allow zero side and rear setbacks, for commercial and residential uses. Density • Maintain 1:1 Floor Area Ratio (FAR); except for one Strategic Site, the City parking lot in the 200 block of Richmond Street, allow 1.5:1. Residential density is in addition to 1:1 FAR. 3 10 Non - Conforming • Permit existing non - conforming uses to continue and be replaced with similar non - conforming uses, unless vacant for 6 months (12 months for the Village), at which time the new use must conform; except the 100, 200 and 500 blocks of Main Street allow existing non - conforming uses to remain without any time limit. • Non - conforming industrial or similar uses may not be replaced with similar uses. • Non - conforming buildings may be expanded 20% or 15,000 square feet, whichever is less, and the addition must comply with current code Main Street District- (300 and 400 blocks Main Street). • Core of Downtown. Resident serving, pedestrian - onented, retail and service uses. • Street - front - Retail, restaurants, recreation, banks less than 500 SF, and outdoor uses less than 200 SF. (The Planning Commission suggested that the City Council may want to look at creative incentives for encouraging new retail uses on the street front.) • Non- street - front- All street -front uses plus, offices and other non - pedestrian oriented uses (clubs, schools, theaters, banks over 500 SF, and union halls) allowed above and behind street level, and adjacent to alleys. • Height -New construction on the street -front must be a minimum of 2 stories or 25 feet • Strategic Sites- Pursell Building (NW corner of Main and Grand) and NW corner of Main and Holly, to City parking lot — Development incentives for target, destination uses only i e — market, restaurant, or similar uses. Main Street Transitional District -000, 200, and 500 blocks Main Street): • Transition and "Gateway' to Downtown Core Link to the Library, High School, park and residential to the north, leading to the retail Downtown Core of the 300 and 400 blocks, and the Chevron Refinery to the south. • Link to Downtown Core with streetscape — trees, signage, and pedestrian - oriented amenities • Allow flexibility and mixture of uses on all areas, no changes to current permitted uses. • Non - conforming industrial or similar uses may be replaced with similar non- conforming uses. • Strategic Site- Strip Mall, 200 block — Potential for adaptive re -use. Target uses, market, restaurant, or similar uses. Provide development incentives. Richmond Street District -000 and 200 blocks Richmond Street): • Maintain, enhance, and preserve historical "Old Town" character of original Downtown Provide incentives to support and dis- incentives if historical character not maintained. 4 1 11 • Allow flexibility and mixture of uses in all areas, encouraging pedestrian orientation, including retail sales and services, antiques, arts and design studios, small bed and breakfast, filming and related uses and offices • Allow "live /work" uses on street level behind street front commercial. Strategic Sites- Anthony's Music Studio and City parking lot- Target uses - antiques, bookstores, arts and crafts, market at the street level, professional /design behind or above street front level. FAR 1 5:1 for City parking lot site Provide development incentives. North Richmond Street District- (300 block west side Richmond Street)- • Maintain existing mixed -use environment, protecting the existing commercial retail- service uses. • Limited residential (2 units per 25 foot wide lot) allowed only above street front commercial. • Allow flexibility and mixture of uses in all areas, encouraging pedestrian orientation, including retail sales and services, antiques, arts and design studios, small bed and breakfast, and offices. • ALIP- Outdoor newsstands, coffee carts, flower stands, gathering areas and similar outdoor retail uses • Prohibited- Outdoor dining, entertainment, and dancing, and outdoor amplified sound (exceeding more than 4 events in one calendar year). Option 2- Multi - family (R -3) Residential- Not recommended by Planning Commission (5 -0) • Allow multi - family residential, with development standards that are generally consistent with the current R -3 development standards No new commercial to compete with Main Street Core Single- family residential or duplexes not considered to be economically feasible, and not compatible with surrounding land uses. Multi - family to provide support customers for the Downtown Option 3- Residential Mixed -use- Not recommended by Plannina Commission (2 -3) • Maintain street -level commercial uses as well as provide opportunity for multi- family residential uses behind and above the commercial uses. Key block (due to size and location) linking the Downtown Core- Main Street District with the Historic Richmond Street District. Link to Main Street, Civic Center, and Richmond Street with two pedestrian oriented alleys (handprint alley and Pursell driveway alley), with Plazas at each end 12 • Create a "village" atmosphere, with resident serving, pedestrian - oriented, mixed -use environment. • Uses allowed on street -front and adjacent to pedestrian access ways - Retail, restaurants, recreation, banks less than 500 SF, bed and breakfast hotel, and outdoor uses less than 200 SF. • Uses allowed in non - street -front areas- Street -front uses plus offices and other non - pedestnan oriented uses (clubs, schools, theaters, banks over 500 SF, and union halls) allowed above and behind street level, and adjacent to alleys • Height- Require variety of heights and allow 2 -floor comer "Towers" to 45 feet. • Lot area and width- Encourage lots under common ownership to be developed under a common cohesive plan. • Strategic Site- Target uses- Market, retail (non- competitive with existing), Hi -tech retail, daytime entertainment and recreation, childcare (only as component of mixed -use), restaurant, bed and breakfast hotel (75 rooms maximum), and mixed -use projects. Provide development incentives. PARKING• • Allow flexibility in parking standards, as follows: • Dwelling units and live /work- 2 spaces for all units, plus guest parking. • Restaurants- 1 space per 75 SF of dining including outdoor over 200 SF, 1 per 250 SF for other areas. Less than 500 SF with no seating, no parking. • Bars- 1 space per 75 SF for entire area. • Public assembly- 1 space per 5 fixed seats or 1 space per 50 SF without fixed seats. • Compact spaces- Not allowed • Parking reductions- Planning Commission approval (for 10 or more spaces) with a parking demand study. • Tandem spaces- 30% (maximum) of required for all uses. Additional with a parking demand study. • Loading- None for commercial less than 15,000 SF. Bed and Breakfast uses- 1 for up to 15,000 SF, 2 for up to 75,000 SF, then sliding scale. Size 12' by 25'. • Joint - use /shared /off -site parking on private or public property- No maximum percentage. Planning Commission approval (for 10 or more spaces) with a parking demand study. • Permitted uses- Continue allowing uses to change from one use to any other permitted uses without increasing parking, if existing parking is maintained. • Handicapped parking- No parking, except handicapped, between building and street. 6 1 -1 Parking Management Options, Short-term • Create Visitor Parking Information Guide /Map. • Implement a shared parking program. Establish centrally located joint use /shared parking between businesses and the City, including off -site, to encourage and provide the opportunity for new development. Develop well signed, non - segmented, consolidated, circulation oriented, alley parking Investigate joint/shared use of Chevron and other private parking sites • Conduct a parking demand and land use survey, and establish baseline parking ratios for the Downtown as a whole and monitor over time. • Enhance directional signage. Improve and standardize signage that welcomes visitors to Downtown and directs to alley and other parking Mid -term Implement trial period shared valet parking program during peak season. Add angled on- street parking on Grand Avenue, and on Holly and Pine Avenues as one -way streets Longer -term • Consider installing parking meters to manage parking turnover and raise revenues for parking improvements (The Planning Commission was opposed to parking meters.) • While implementing parking management strategies, continue to investigate costs and feasibility of added parking. Added parking could include the following• • Consider providing a parking structure on Holly for off -site joint -use parking. • Consider double - decking the City parking lot at Holly /Standard, as it maximizes use of the existing grade differential for multilevel or subterranean parking. DESIGN STANDARDS: • Require design review at staff level for all modifications to existing buildings and new construction, to ensure consistency with Plan goals. • Require historic design criteria for the 100 -200 blocks of Richmond Street. Require window treatments that are open, inviting, and visible to pedestrians, for retail uses. Require quality signage. Provide Downtown Gateways enhanced with landscaping and signage: • Main Street and Grand Avenue • Concord Street and Grand Avenue 14 • Main Street and Manposa Avenue • Grand Avenue and Eucalyptus Drive • Enhance handpnnt alley by connection to the Civic Center Plaza with a mid -block crosswalk and a small Plaza at the opposite end. Enhance Pursell alley /driveway and create a Plaza at the west end of the area IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCING• • Business Improvement District (300 -500 Blocks Main Street) • Streets and streetscape: • Main Street- Reconfigure Main Street with a three -lane configuration that will slow, but not restrict vehicular traffic through Downtown. Provide 1 through lane in each direction, a center left -tum lane, and parallel parking on both sides. In Phase I, the existing street (100 -500 blocks) will be re- striped and the 12 foot wide sidewalks and street trees maintained In Phase II, sidewalks will be widened to 16.5 feet (300 -400 blocks only), to encourage pedestrian activity, and the street trees will be replaced • Grand Avenue- Reconfigure Grand Avenue, between Main and Concord, to eliminate the center island parking and provide angled parking adjacent to the curb with 2 through lanes in each direction • Pedestrian amenities to include benches, trash receptacles, bus stops, bike racks, street lighting. • Textured accent pavers on sidewalks and walkways, for aesthetics, to slow traffic, reduce tripping hazard and for ease and cost effectiveness of repair • Planters at curb — extensions and /or mid -block crosswalks- (300 -400 blocks Main Street) • Gateway landscaping and signage • 'Twinkle" or other street tree lighting- (300-400 Blocks of Main Street) • Street trees- (All Districts) • Provide phased removal and replacement of street trees. • Use a variety of trees and sizes to serve unique functions. • Street trees in front of shops should be open canopies so that signs may be easily seen and historical facades are not hidden. Large trees with dense foliage may be desirable in areas where shade is needed. • Use tree grates, irrigation, and structured soil. • Civic Center Plaza • Public events, activities and programming • Marketing, advertising and promotion • Development incentives • Historic Preservation • Fagade Improvement Program • Live/Work development standards • Financing options 8 15 PHASING- • High priority- 300, 400 & 500 blocks Main Street and former Ralph's site. • High priority- Trim street trees to open up /lace out, then install 'Twinkle" or other lights for Downtown street trees. • High priority- Clean sidewalks regularly • Form a Business Improvement District (B.I D ) for parking, sidewalk and streetscape improvements. Commence Civic Center Plaza improvements P \Planning & Budding Safety\PROJECTS \DOWNTOWN \CC -SR -1 doc 16 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 474 (EA -474), AND ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 99 -2 (GPA 99- 2), ZONE CHANGE NO. 99 -2 (ZC 99 -2), AND ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 99.5 (ZTA 99 -5) FOR THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN, IN THE 100 -500 BLOCKS OF MAIN STREET, THE 100 -300 BLOCKS OF RICHMOND STREET AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES ON GRAND AVENUE. PETITIONED BY: THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO. WHEREAS, an application was initiated by the City Council of the City of El Segundo to prepare a Downtown Specific Plan, and, WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA"), Cal. Public Resources Code Section 21000 et sea The Initial Study demonstrated that the project would not cause any significant environmental impacts Accordingly, a Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND ") was prepared and circulated for public review and comment between April 21, 2000 and May 11, 2000; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the project 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 3805), and, WHEREAS, on April 27, 2000, May 11, 2000 and May 25, 2000, the Planning Commission did hold, pursuant to law, duly advertised public hearings on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street, and notice of the public hearings were given in the time, form and manner prescribed by law, and on May 25, 2000 adopted Resolution No. 2475, recommending approval of EA No 474, GPA No. 99 -2, ZC No 99 -2, and. ZTA No. 99 -5, and, WHEREAS, at the duly scheduled meeting of the City Council of the City of El Segundo on June 20, 2000, a duly advertised public hearing was held on this matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street, and, WHEREAS, opportunity was given to all persons present to speak for or against the findings of EA No. 474, GPA No 99 -24, ZC No 99 -2, and. ZTA No. 99-5, and, WHEREAS, at said hearings the following facts were established: The Downtown Specific Plan area is located in the northwest quadrant of the City of El Segundo. The General Plan land use designation and zoning for the site is Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities. ORDINANCE NO APPROVING EA NO 474 615100 4.09 PM 17 Surrounding land uses in the area are generally residential in nature, one to three stories in height The surrounding area and protect area is a fully developed urban environment The EI Segundo High School campus, the Library and Library Park are located north of the Specific Plan area on Main Street To the east and west of the 500 block of Main Street (on Richmond and Standards Streets) is a Two -Family Residential (R -2) Zone, developed mainly with duplexes and two- family dwellings To the west of the balance of the Specific Plan boundary (on Richmond and Concord Streets) Is mainly Mulb -Family Residential (R -3) zoning, which is developed with small (3 -12 unit) apartment and condominium complexes Further beyond the R -2 and R -3 Zones (on Concord and Virginia Streets) is Single - Family (R -1) Residential zoning and development To the west of the Specific Plan area there are also a few parcels zoned Downtown Commercial (C -RS), and Neighborhood Commercial (C -2) on Grand Avenue, and Parking (P) on El Segundo Boulevard. The development on these sites is also consistent with the zoning, and includes one to two story, low- density (0 5 to 1 0 floor area ratio) commercial construction, and a surface parking lot 6 To the east of the 400 block of Main Street is a Two -Family Residential (R -2) Zone on Standard Street, again developed consistent with the zoning designation 7 To the east of the 300 block of Main Street is largely Multi -Family Residential (R- 3), developed similarly to the areas to the west of the Specific Plan boundary Additionally, there are a few parcels zoned and developed as Parking (P), on Standard Street, and Downtown Commercial (C -RS), on Grand Avenue, similar to the west of the Plan area. 8 To the east side of the 200 block of Main Street, on Standard Street, is an area that is also zoned and developed as Downtown Commercial (C -RS), again with similar commercial uses and densities 9 To the east of the 100 block of Main Street, on Standard Street, Is a small industrial zone within the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area with a zoning designation of Small Business (SB) The land uses in this area (light industrial, warehousing etc.) are consistent with the zoning. South of El Segundo Boulevard Is the Chevron Refinery, which is zoned Heavy Industrial (M -2), consistent with the land use 10 The majority of the 100 block of the east side of Richmond Street is a surface parking lot for the Chevron Refinery Immediately to the south. Smaller Chevron parking lots also occupy the west side of Richmond and the 100 block of Main Street There are four small City owned surface parking lots with a total of approximately 115 parking spaces, which are open and free to the public, within and immediately adjacent to the Plan area 2 ORDINANCE NO APPROVING EA NO 474 6!5100 2-20 PM 11 Plant species present are those that are commonly used for landscaping purposes or which have adapted to urban environments There is no known rare or endangered animal species associated with the Project site, or project locale NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED that after considering the above facts, the testimony presented at the public hearings, and the facts and study of proposed EA No 474, GPA No 99 -2, ZC No 99 -2, and ZTA No. 99 -5, the City Council makes the following findings ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT That the City of El Segundo has prepared an Initial Study and, an accompanying Mitigated Negative Declaration which was made available to all local and affected agencies and for public review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law The 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 was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 2 That when considering the whole record, there is no evidence that the project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends, because the project is in -fill development in a built -out urban environment That the City Council hereby authorizes and directs the Director of Community, Economic and Development Services to file with any appropriate agencies a Certificate of Fee Exemption and de minimus finding pursuant to California Assembly Bill (AB) No. 3158 and the California Code of Regulations. Within twenty -four hours of this approval by the City Council, 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 AND ZONING CONSISTENCY That the proposed use is consistent with the following General Plan goals, policies, programs, and objectives A The proposed General Plan Land Use designation for the site, as well as the proposed zoning, is Downtown Specific Plan (DSP). The Downtown Specific Plan designation is compatible with the surrounding residential, and commercial land use designations. B The proposed Downtown Specific Plan designation is designed to allow a maximum floor area (FAR) ratio of 1.0, except for one 17,500 square foot City owned parcel, currently developed as a surface parking lot, which would allow an FAR of 1.5. Additionally, the residential density is proposed to Increase from 1 dwelling unit per 3500 square foot lot to 2 dwelling units per 3500 square foot lot While this would permit a greater amount of development than the existing land use designation, the total build out of the Plan area would be an insignificant increase in density when compared to the total allowed density in the entire City 3 ORDINANCE NO APPROVING EA NO. 474 6!5!00 220 PM I 19 . C The proposed project is in conformance with many General Plan goals, policies, and objectives related to Economic Development, Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Conservation and Noise. The following Economic Development goal, objective, and policies are consistent with the project ED 3, ED 3 -1, ED 3 -11, ED 3 -1.2, ED 3 -1.3, ED 3 -1.4, and ED 3 -1.5, since the Plan strives to preserve and improve the business environment, stabilize the economic viability of the Downtown, improve the appearance of Downtown, improve vehicular circulation, parking and streetscape and enhance the pedestrian environment while providing the opportunity for a mix of commercial services D Many Land Use goals, policies and objectives are consistent with the project including LU 1, LU 1 -4, LU 1 -5, LU 1 -5.1, LU 1 -5.2, LU 1 -5.3, LU 1 -5.4, LU 1 -5.5, LU 1 -5 6, LU 1 -5.9, LU 2, LU 2 -1, LU 2 -1.1, LU 2 -2, LU2 -2.1, LU2 -2 1A, LU 2- 2 1 B, LU 4, LU 4 -2, LU 4 -21, LU 4 -2.2, LU 4 -2.3, LU 4 -2 4, LU4 -2 5, LU 4 -2 5A, LU 4 -2.6, LU 4 -2 7, LU 4 -2.8, LU 4 -2.9, LU 7, LU 7 -1, LU 7 -1.3, LU7 -2, and LU7- 2 5 The Plan is consistent with the Land Use Element since, one of the Plan's goals is to maintain the "small town" atmosphere. The Plan also strives to preserve the Downtown's historic areas, create a sense of place, provide for citizen input through the Downtown Task Force, and Planning Commission and City Council public hearings, provide sign regulations, encourage street trees, landscaping, and entry statements, provide CEQA review and prohibit dnve -thru restaurants. The Plan also encourages preservation and enhancement of the Downtown's cultural and historical resources, in that the Implementation and Design Standards sections of the Plan propose the establishment of Historic Preservation cntena for the 100 and 200 blocks of Richmond Street, with incentives and disincentives to encourage the preservation and enhancement of the historical buildings in this area. The Specific Plan provides the opportunity to enhance and further stabilize the existing Downtown tax base within a mixed -use environment The Plan strives to create Downtown as the focal point of the community, enhancing the aesthetic environment and upgrading public spaces for Downtown activities The Plan addresses provisions for adequate parking, low - scale, pedestnan - onented architecture and evaluation and mitigation of traffic impacts. Lastly, the Plan provides for quality infrastructure in that improved sidewalks, streets, street lighting, and other streetscape infrastructure improvements are proposed E Circulation Element goals, policies and objectives also are consistent with the proposal Including; C 1, C 1 -1, C1 -1.6, C1 -1 8, C1 -1.14, C1 -2, C1 -2.1, C 2, C 2- 1, C 2 -1.6, C2 -1.7, C 2 -2, C 2 -21,C 2 -3, C 2 -3.1, C 2 -3.2, C 2 -3 4, C 3, C 3 -1, C 3 -1.1, C 3 -1.3, C 3-17, C 3 -2, C 3 -2 1, C 3 -2.2, C 4-3, and C 4 -3.1, in that the circulation system In the Downtown area Is safe, convenient and cost effective. The three -lane proposal on Main Street has been evaluated and can accommodate the circulation needs with minor intersection Improvements and the circulation system will continue to provide emergency vehicle access. The Plan provides a pedestrian- onented environment, which is consistent with the General Plan provisions for alternative modes of transportation The widened and enhanced sidewalks will further enhance pedestrian activity The Plan continues to provide bicycle and transit system access, consistent with the General Plan, while encouraging more bicycle parking facilities The Plan also addresses 4 ORDINANCE NO APPROVING EA NO 474 6 /5100 2:20 PM ?(I development of circulation policies that are consistent with other City policies This section of the Specific Plan clearly Indicates the consistency of the Plan with all of the applicable Elements (Economic Development, Land Use, Circulation, Conservation, and Noise) The Plan provides for the upgrading of streets to maintain the level of service, transit planning is addressed, pedestrian and bicycle access is enhanced, parking is managed and potential funding sources are Identified F The goals, policies, programs, and objectives which the proposed protect are consistent with are contained within the Housing Element including, H 4, H 4 -1, and 1-14 -1 1 The Specific Plan is consistent with the Housing Element in that residential uses will continue to be permitted, and increased densities will be allowed, providing the opportunity for a diversity of housing types, prices and tenure G The goal and policies which the proposed project is consistent with are contained within the Conservation Element, CN 5, CN 5-1, and CN 5 -2 The Downtown Specific Plan is consistent with the urban landscape provisions of the Conservation Element. The Plan protects and enhances the quality of the urban landscape of the Downtown, particularly the characteristics and qualities identified by the community, through the Task Force, as being valued H The final goal, objective, policy and program which the protect is consistent with relates to the Noise Element including, N 1, N 1 -2, and N 1 -21A The Downtown Specific Plan is consistent with the applicable Noise Element in that the Plan requires that the current noise regulations of the Municipal Code be adhered to which address and mitigate any potential noise conflicts NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Council hereby adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approves EA No 474, GPA No 99-2, ZC No. 99 -2, and ZTA No 99 -5, 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) Gasses of use zones Intended to be used within the boundaries of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan These zones include- 5 ORDINANCE NO APPROVING EA NO 474 &&00 2:20 PM 21 GAC - Grand Avenue Commercial Zone. MDR - Medium Density Residential Zone. SB - Small Business Zone MM - Medium Manufacturing Zone. 2. 124' Street Specific Plan There is one (1) zone intended to be used within the boundaries of the 124' Street Specific Plan This zone is 124"' Street SP 120 Street Specific Plan 3. Aviation Specific Plan There is one (1) use zone intended to be used within the boundaries of the Aviation Specific Plan This zone is ASP - Aviation Specific Plan Zone 4 Downtown Specific Plan There are five (5) classes of use districts intended to be used with the boundaries of the Downtown Specific Plan. These districts include MSD Main Street District MSTD Main Street Transitional District RSD Richmond Street District NRSD North Richmond Street District V The Village 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 Downtown 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 and Public Use designations) and the proposed Land Use Plan (northwest quadrant) of the Land Use Element are hereby amended to reflect the change of a portion of the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street and the adjacent properties on the 100 -200 blocks of west Grand Avenue from Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities to Downtown 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 Bwldout (Exhibit LU- 3) of the Land Use Element is hereby amended to reflect the change of the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street and the adjacent properties on the 100 -200 blocks of west Grand Avenue from Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities designations to Downtown 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 for the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street and the adjacent 6 ORDINANCE NO APPROVING EA NO 474 615100 2.20 PM 22 properties in the 100 -200 blocks of west Grand Avenue from Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities designations to Downtown 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 for the 100- 500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street and the adjacent properties on the 100 -200 blocks of west Grand Avenue from Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities designations to Downtown Specific Plan 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 SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall become effective at midnight on the thirtieth (30) day from and after the final passage and adoption hereof SECTION 8. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance, shall cause the same to be entered in the book of original ordinances of said City, shall make a note of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted, and, shall within 15 days after the passage or adoption thereof cause the same to be published or posted in accordance with the law. 7 ORDINANCE NO APPROVING EA NO 474 6/5100 2.20 PM ,� PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ,th day of July 2000. Mike Gordon, Mayor ATTEST' STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing Ordinance No _ was duly introduced by said City Council at a regular meeting held on the 20th day of June, 2000, and 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 18th day of July, 2000, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM Mark D ey, Attome U ORDINANCE NO APPROVING EA NO 474 815100 2.22 PM ?4 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT "Al COPY AVAILABLE IN CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 25 3 Land Use Element CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT B acre All lots to be developed as multi - family residential must be a minimum of 2.5 acres in size or one complete block, whichever is greater However, existing lots less than 2.5 acres in size, which are totally surrounded by other land use designations and confined by existing streets shall be allowed to develop as multi - family residential without a variance from the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Urban Mixed -Use North Permits a mixture of office, research and development, retail, and hotel uses. Light industrial uses conducted within a fully enclosed building shall be permitted if approved with a discretionary application. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is limited to 13 (Ord 1272, GPA 97- 1, 6/17/97). Urban Mixed -Use South Permits a mixture of office, research and development, retail, and hotel uses Light industrial uses conducted within a fully enclosed building and adult - onented businesses shall be permitted if approved with a discretionary application The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is linuted to 1.3 (Ord. 1272, GPA 97 -1, 6/17/97) Parking Permits areas for parking automobiles, motorcycles, and bicycles in surface or structured parking. Specific properties have been designated as parking to insure that adequate long -term parking space will be available. 124th Street Specific Plan Permits warehousing and mini - storage uses (with an appurtenant custodial convenience unit). Also permits a Water Facility. The maximum FAR is 0 47:1 (with the Water Facility) and 0.54:1 (without the Water Facility). (Ord 1309, GPA 99 -1, 8/17/99) Aviation Specific Plan Permits warehouse "mini- storage" and storage uses with limited ancillary and support uses. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is limited to 0 22 (Ord. 1314, GPA 97 -4, 12/7/99) T H E C I T Y OF EL S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 3 -8 3 Land Use Elemem CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT B industrial Designations Light Industrial Permits light manufacturing, warehousing, research and development, and office. Light manufacturing is defined as the assembly, packaging, fabrication, and processing of materials into finished products, rather than the conversion or extraction of raw materials The light industrial activity shall be conducted primarily within structures, outside storage areas and assembly activity should be limited The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) allowed is 0.6. Other compatible uses and additional FAR may be permitted for individual protects by the approval of a Specific Plan with supplemental environmental analysis Alternative methods of calculating FAR may be permitted, subject to the provisions in the Zoning Code (Ord. 1249, GPA 96 -1, 4/2/96) Heavy Industrial Permits heavy manufacturing uses such as construction yards, factories, generating stations, extraction of raw materials, and refining. All uses must conform to the policies of the Hazardous Materials Element. The maximum allowed floor area ratio (FAR) is 0 6 Institutional Public Facilities Designations Permits publicly owned facilities such as schools, maintenance yards, Utilities, the Gi-k-tcierftr, and the Library. 'Ie Civic Center is included in the Downtown Specific Plan area. Federal Government Permits a U.S Goverment facility that is consistent with sur- rounding uses. Open Space Open Space Designations Permits passive or active use of areas preserved as useable or visual open space both publicly- and privately -owned These areas include the El Segundo Blue Butterfly preserve, utility easements, and the existing flood control sumps Parks Permits passive or active use of areas developed as parks, for community and recreational uses. Designated park areas are publicly - owned. Proposed Land Use Plan The following is a discussion of the 1992 Land Use Plan, which T H E C I T Y OF EL S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 3 -9 3 Land Use Element (Appkcable excerpts) CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT B discretionary application The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is limited to 1.3 (Ord. 1272, GPA 97 -1, 6/17/97) Parking Pernuts areas for parking automobiles, motorcycles, and bicycles in surface or structured parking Specific properties have been designated as parking to insure that adequate long -term parking space will be available 124th Street Specific Plan Permits warehousing and mmi- storage uses (with an appurtenant custodial convenience unit) Also permits a Water Facility The maximum FAR is 0.47:1 (with the Water Facility) and 0 54.1 (without the Water Facility). (Ord. 1309, GPA 99 -1, 8/17/99) Aviation Specific Plan Permits warehouse "tmm- storage" and storage uses with limited ancillary and support uses. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is limited to 0.22. (Ord 1314, GPA 97-4, 12/7/99) Industrial Designations Light Industrial Permits light manufacturing, warehousing, research and development, and office. Light manufacturing is defined as the assembly, packaging, fabrication, and processing of materials into finished products, rather than the conversion or extraction of raw materials The light industrial activity shall be conducted primarily within structures; outside storage areas and assembly activity should be limited. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) allowed is 0.6. Other compatible uses and additional FAR may be permitted for individual projects by the approval of a Specific Plan with supplemental environmental analysis Alternative methods of calculating FAR may be permitted, subject to the provisions in the Zoning Code. (Ord. 1249, GPA 96-1, 412/96). Heavy Industrial Permits heavy manufacturing uses such as construction yards, factories, generating stations, extraction of raw materials, and refining. All uses must conform to the policies of the Hazardous Materials Element. The maximum allowed floor area ratio (FAR) is 0.6. T H E C I T Y OF EL S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 3.8 '�'3 3 Land Use Element (Applicable excerpts) CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT B Institutional Public Facilities Designations Permits Publicly owned facilities such as schools, maintenance yards, utilities, tlie-G44e49enteF and the Library. The Civic Center is included in the Downtown Specific Plan area. Federal Government Pernats a U.S Government facility that is consistent with sur- rounding uses Open Space open Space Designations Permits passive or active use of areas preserved as useable or visual open space both publicly- and privately -owned These areas include the El Segundo Blue Butterfly preserve, utility easements, and the existing flood control sumps. Parks Permits passive or active use of areas developed as parks, for community and recreational uses. Designated park areas are publicly - owned. Proposed Land Use Plan The following is a discussion of the 1992 Land Use Plan, which indicates future land uses for the entire City. For ease of discussion, the City is divided into four quadrants and the proposed land use designations within that quadrant are discussed. To know what is allowed under each designation, please reference the land use definitions listed above Northwest Quadrant The northwest quadrant of the City has the most vaned mix of uses within the City. All of the City's residential units, the Downtown area, the Civic Center, and the older mdustnal area of Smoky Hollow, are located in this quadrant The 1992 Plan retains the three residential designations found on the old Plan: single - family, two - family, and multi- family, plus a new designation of Planned Residential Development. The Plan shows 357.2 acres of single - family, 57.4 acres of two - family, 119.3 acres of multi- family and 5.7 acres of planned residential development. This includes the re- designation of Imperial Avenue School, which is no longer used for educational purposes, from Public Facility to Planned Residential Development. The total number of dwelling units projected by the Plan is 7,674. One of the major goals of the 1992 Plan is to preserve the residential neighborhoods. (Ord 1209, GPA 93 -1, 11/2/93; Ord. 1244, 2/6/96; Ord. 1272, GPA 97 -1, T H E C I T Y OF EL S E G U N D * G E N E R A L L P L A N 3-9 70 4 � 3 Land Use Element (Applicable excerpts) CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT B 6/17/97, Ord. 1279, 10/7/97). The Smoky Hollow area, which houses many of the City's older industrial uses, has been designated Smoky Hollow Mixed -Use, in recognition of the existing Smoky Hollow Specific Plan The Specific Plan allows a combination of industrial, retail, office, and residential uses The Smoky Hollow area is approximately 92.2 acres. (Ord 1272, GPA 97 -1, 6/17/97, Ord 1279, 10/7/97) The 395 -aet a Downtown area is designated as Downtown Commercial (8.8 acres) and Downtown Specific Plan (25.8 acres), where existing uses are already of a commumty -servmg nature. There are also 7.1 acres designated for Neighborhood Commercial uses along Grand and Imperial Avenues and at Manposa and Center Streets These have been designated only where there are existing neighborhood -servmg commercial uses (Ord. 1279, 10/7/97) The public schools, private schools, Give *A - Library, and other public uses are all shown as Public Facilities. The Civic Center is mcluded in the Downtown Specific Plan area. In addition, each of the existing public parks are designated as such. The open space areas under utility transmission corridors and the preserve for the Blue Butterfly are designated as Open Space. The areas designated for parking on the Plan include public- and pnvately -owned lots which are necessary to serve existing businesses and the Downtown area. The southwest comer of Sepulveda Boulevard and Imperial Avenue is designated Corporate Office (17.8 ac) allowing a mix of office uses, similar to what exists there now, with retail in the lobby. There are General Commercial uses indicated along Sepulveda Boulevard, where there are existing commercial uses including the Hacienda Hotel There is also one General Commercial area along Imperial Avenue, where the Crown Sterling Suites Hotel now exists. Southwest Quadrant The Southwest Quadrant has only three designations: heavy industrial, parking, and open space. The heavy industrial area covers the entire Chevron Refinery, as well as the Southern California Edison Generating Station These uses total 958 acres The parking designation is an existing surface lot in the southwest T H E C I T Y OF EL S E G U N D * G E N E R A L L P L A N 3 -f0 30 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT C 1992 General Plan Summary of Existing Trends Buildout Land Use Category A Acres D Dwelling Units S Square Footage Single- Family Residential 3 357.2 2 2,858 Two - Family Residential 5 574 9 934 - - -- Planned Residential 5 57 6 65 - - Multi- Family Residential 1 119.7 3 3,389 - - -- Neighborhood Commercial 7 7.1 8 85 1 1 100,000 Downtown Commercial 8 8.8 1 18 3 383,328 General Commercial 4 443 - -- 1 1,930,000 Corporate Office 2 211.2 - - -- 1 12.351,000 Smoky Hollow 9 94.1 2 268 2 2,019,454 Urban Mixed -Use North 2 279.0 - - -- 1 15,799,212 Urban Mixed -Use South 7 706 - - -- 3 3,997,936 124th Street Specific Plan 3 3.9 1 1 7 73,530 Aviation Specific Plan 5 54 — — 6 66,000- Downtown Specific Plan 2 258 5 552 1 1,123,848 Parking 1 118 - -- Light Industnal 3 3561 — — 1 18,529,000 Heavy Industrial 1 1,086.8 - -- - - -- 2 Public Facilities 8 87.9 - - -- - - -- Federal Government 9 906 - -- — — Open Space 7 78.3 — — - - -- Parks S Soo — — Street & Railroad R O. W 4 4426 — — - -- Totals 3 3,494.3 8 8,170 5 56,373,308 Population Projection 1 18,345 Existing construction and recently meuuucted, romwted mmmarnai can an and legal nordmHolmmp resrdantial uses at demaws that are wnamly higher Own all"ad by 00 land use deagnetwns in this plan will not rulubrally be converted to mixed commMaWnsWSmml uses and them buildings am expected to remain for the We of the Plan 2 The heavy industrial shown on tha plan includes the Chevron Refinery, Southern Gamma Edam Gmveraoon Station, Ar Products and Allied Chem" facilities Them Isoldrm have processing equti ent and tanks rather than buildings and are expected to remain for the Ida of the Plan Therefore, no asumaled building square footage R shown Source City of El Segundo Planning Depadmant and The Lightfoot Planning Group Amendments Ord 1209, GPA 93.1, t 112!93, Ord 1244 GPA 95-1 2!6196 Ord 1272, GPA 97 -1, 611T197, Ord 1279, GPA 9T -2 10!7197 Ord 1309 GPA 9 &1 6117199 Ord 1314 GPA 97.3 1217199, Ord __ GPA 99.2 XX/Xx2000 I CITY OF EL SEGUNDO . GENERAL PLAN I 1992 General Plan exhibit Summary of Existing Trends Buildout LU -3 31 City Council Ordinance No. Exhibit D Downtown Commercial and Public Facilties to Downtown Specific Plan MARIPOSA AVE PINE AVE HO AVE General Plan Amendment Map 0 Specific Plan Boundary 0 500 1000 Feet O 32+ s City Council Ordinance No. Exhibit E MARIPOSA AVE =' _ I _4 I r 7 —� 71, PINE C -RS and PF Zones to DSP w w z i NI GRAND AVE uw C w � W S F N F Zone Change Map AVE EL SEGUNDO BLVD 0 Specific Plan Boundary 0 500 1000 Feet rc D N jaw +E IS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PUBLIC HEARING: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: REQUEST: PROPERTY INVOLVED: Introduction April 27, 2000. Environmental Assessment No. 474, General Plan Amendment No. 99 -2, Zone Change No. 99 -2, and Zone Text Amendment No. 99 -5 City of El Segundo Various Downtown Specific Plan 100 -500 Blocks Main Street, 100 -300 Blocks Richmond Street (excluding R-3 portion), and 100 -200 Blocks West Grand Avenue The proposed project is a Specific Plan for the Downtown area of El Segundo for the revitalization and future development of the core area of the City. The Plan encompasses both development standards and capital improvements which, when implemented, will have a positive impact on the community making the Downtown more walkable and "livable" and implement the adopted Vision Statement. The Plan envisions a ten -year horizon for planning and development purposes. The project includes a General Plan Amendment (GPA No. 99 -2), a Zone Change (ZC No. 99 -2), and a Zone Text Amendment (ZTA No. 99 -5). The Downtown Specific Plan includes the majority of the Downtown Commercial (C- RS) Zone, as well as the Civic Center Complex, which is zoned Public Facilities (P -F) The General Plan designations for the Plan area are consistent with the zoning. The Plan area is currently developed with commercial, residential and public uses, and f_:ure development is anticipated to be similar in nature. 2 P\ pbs \protects\downtown\ocstaffraport 013 1f. Recommendation Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing and take public input, discuss the proposed Speck Plan, and provide direction to staff or adopt a resolution recommending approval of the Downtown Specific Plan to the City Council III. Background In November of 1998, a Downtown Task Force of community and business leaders appointed by the City Council, presented a summary report entitled "Developing a Vision for Downtown El Segundo." The City Council reviewed the report and recommendations, and later directed staff to begin the preparation of a Downtown Specific Plan to implement the Task Force recommendations. In July 1999, the City Council re- formed the Downtown Task Force to develop a Specific Plan and Vision Statement for future development of the Downtown area. The Downtown Task Force conducted numerous meetings, and at its final meeting on February 22, 2000, adopted a Spec Plan Concept Document, including a Vision Statement. The draft Specific Plan document being presented to the Planning Commission was developed from the Task Force concept document. The Speck Plan will replace the General Plan and Zoning for the area and address development standards, (uses, height, density, setbacks, landscaping etc.), design criteria, signs, parking and circulation, street and streetscape design, trees and the implementation and financing for the improvements. The following is the Vision Statement for the Downtown Specfic Plan adopted by the Task Force* Downtown is the heart of El Segundo. It is the focal point for the community and one of the cohesive elements that ties the community together. The Vision for the Downtown is to: • Provide a better ba lance of uses. • Create a more thoughtful and creative use of public space. • Organize creative and consistent programming of events and public activities. • Create a consistent public- private partnership to market El Segundo's assets to investors and customers. • Strengthen commitment to the strategic use of key parcels in the Downtown. • Create more attractive landscaping and street furnishings. • Improve signage. 35 P1 pbs�orotectsWowntownWcstaffreport 014 Analysis Specific Plan A speck plan is a regulatory plan, which will serve as the General Plan designation and 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, subdivisions and other development approvals within the project area must be consistent with the specific plan Projects consistent with an adopted speck plan are automatically deemed to be consistent with the General Plan. The Downtown Specific Plan Document is divided into the following 9 chapters I. Introduction It Overview of the Specific Plan Surrounding Area 111. Relationship of the Specific Plan to the Existing General Plan IV Specific Plan Districts V Administration VI. Development Standards VII. Parking VIII. Design Standards IX. Implementation and Financing Chapters I and II give a description of the Speck Plan, its purpose, the statutory authority for adopting the Plan and a physical description of the area. Chapter III discusses the current Specific Plan and its relationship to the Speck Plan Area. Since a Speck Plan supercedes the zoning ordinance the Specific Plan must be in conformance with the General Plan. Chapter IV describes the Speck Plan districts and Chapter V references the State and Municipal codes. Chapter VI, Development Standards, is the heart of the document. This chapter describes permitted uses and standards that will be used to guide future development in the Downtown area. Chapter VII discusses proposed parking requirements and parking needs. Chapter VIII lists the design standards that will be used as development occurs in the Downtown including proposed street and sidewalk improvements on Main Street and finally the last chapter reviews the cost of proposed improvements and an implementation schedule. The document is comprehensive and incorporates all the recommendations of the Downtown Task Force. It is proposed to guide development for the next ten years. It has a goal of making the Downtown more resident oriented, encouraging people to walk from one area to the other. The Plan includes the improvements to the Civic Center Plaza and the integration of this open space into fabric of Main Street. P\ pbs \pro)ectsldowntown\pcsteffreport 015 .46 Overview of the proposed Specific Plan standards The following summarizes and highlights the standards in the Downtown Specific Plan. The Plan area has been divided into 5 separate Districts, each with their own set of development and design standards. Additionally, in some areas staffs specific recommendations, as provided within the document, may differ slightly than the general guidelines provided by the Task Force. However, in all instances staff believes that the Specific Plan document reflects the intent and spirit of the Task Force vision DOWNTOWN PHILOSOPHY AND CONCEPT' • Service residents, local employees, and visitors (such as hotel guests). • Maintain a safe and secure environment. • Maintain archttectura! and economic diversity with a mix of retail, office, service and residential. • Maintain and enhance pedestrian friendly environment. • Enhance the "village" character. • Enhance the "Midwest -feel and the Gaslamp" (San Diego) character. • Consolidate retail to encourage synergy between businesses and to facilitate pedestrian access. • Shrink Downtown retail area if supported by market analysis, converting non - core areas to a mix of offices and multi - family residential, to avoid the blight of vacancies. • Encourage a mixture of uses and "target" uses at strategic sites through financial incentives and pro-active marketing and advertising. • Encourage preservation of historically significant buildings on Richmond Street. • Enhance Civic Center Plaza, as the focal point of Downtown. • Continue to support and expand the farmers market, and other Downtown events • Use design review process to achieve aesthetic goals. • Establish a Business Improvement District (B.I.D) — 300, 400 & 500 blocks of Main Street DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: General for all of the Districts: Uses • Permit outdoor dining, up to 200 SF in area, except prohibited in North Richmond Street District. • Permit outdoor newsstands, coffee carts, flower stands, gathering areas and similar retail uses, up to 200 SF in area, except require an Adminstrative Use Permit (AUP) in North Richmond Street District. • Encourage alley side and upper level offices, for daytime customer base and pedestrian traffic • Require an AUP for video arcades with 3 or less machines, alcohol sales at restaurants and retail, and outdoor dining and retail uses over 200 SF in area. • Require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for video arcades with four or more machines, outdoor entertainment, dancing and amplified sound (over 4 Pt pbstprotectsWowntom\pcstatfrepon 37 016 events per calendar year) and bars. • Prohibit drive -thru restaurants, churches, and service stations. Residential • Allow upper floor residential units, for 24 hour security and customer base. • Increase permitted residential units from 1 to 2 units (12 to 25 dwelling units per acre) per 25 -foot wide lot. • Minimum residential square footage of 450 SF. Heights • Allow 45 -foot (3 story maximum) height (measured to the peak of the roof), require minimum 5 foot setback for portions of new structures above 30 feet (2 stories) in height, providing a two -story street front building facade. Setbacks • Require zero setback between building and streets on street level, except for pedestrian oriented plazas or architectural features (10 ft' max), and handicapped parking, subject to design review. • Allow zero side and rear setbacks, for commercial and residential uses. Densi • Maintain 1:1 Floor Area Ratio (FAR); except for one Strategic Site, the City parking lot in the 200 block of Richmond Street. Residential density is in addition to 1.1 FA. R. Non - Conforming • Permit existing non - conforming uses to continue and be replaced with similar non - conforming uses, unless vacant for 6 months, (or 12 months for the Village only), at which time the new use must conform; except the 100, 200 and 500 blocks of Main Street allow existing non - conforming uses to remain without any time limit. • Non - conforming industrial or similar uses may not be replaced with similar uses. • Non - conforming buildings may be expanded 20% or 15,000 square feet, whichever is less, and the addition must comply with current code. Main Street District -(300 and 400 blocks of Main Street): • Core of Downtown. Resident serving, pedestrian- oriented, retail and service uses. • Street - front - Retail, restaurants, recreation, banks less than 500 SF, and outdoor uses less than 200 SF only on street level. • Non - street -front- Offices and other non - pedestrian oriented uses (clubs, schools, theaters, banks over 500 SF, and union halls) allowed above and behind street level, and adjacent to alleys • Height -New construction on the street -front must be a minimum of 2 stories or 25 feet • Prohibited- Tattoo parlors. • Strategic Sites- Purcell Budding (NW comer of Main and Grand) and NW P1pbs 1projectsWowntownlpcstaRreport 38 017 comer of Main and Holly, to City parking lot — Development incentives for target uses, destination uses only i.e. — market, restaurant or similar use. Main Street Transitional District - (100.200. and 500 blocks Main Street): • Transition and "Gateway" to Downtown Core. Link to the Library, High school, park and residential to the north, leading to the retail Downtown Core of the 300 and 400 blocks, and the Chevron Refinery to the south. • Link to Downtown Core with streetscape — trees, signage, and pedestrian - oriented amenities. • Allow flexibility and mixture of uses on all areas, no changes to currently permitted uses • Non - conforming industrial or similar uses may be replaced with similar non- conforming uses. • Strategic Site- Strip Mall, 200 block — Potential for adaptive re -use. Target uses, market, restaurant, or similar uses. Provide development incentives Richmond Street District -000 and 200 blocks Richmond Street): - • Maintain, enhance, and preserve historical "Old Town" character of original Downtown Provide incentives to support and dis- incentives if historical character not maintained. • Establish historical design standards for new construction in order to blend with the old. • Allow flexibility and mixture of uses in all areas, encouraging pedestrian orientation, including retail sales and services, antiques, arts and design studios, small bed and breakfast, and offices • Encourage and support filming and related uses. • Allow "live /work" uses on street level behind street front commercial. • Strategic Sites- Anthony's Music Studio and City parking lot- Target uses - antiques, bookstores, arts and crafts, market at the street level, professional /design behind or above street front level. FAR 1.5:1 for City parking lot site. Provide development incentives. North Richmond Street District -(300 block West Side Richmond Street): Option 1. Commercial Mixed -use • Maintain existing mixed- use environment, protecting the existing commercial retail- service uses • Limited residential (2 units per 25 foot wide lot) allowed only above street front commercial. • Allow flexibility and mixture of uses in all areas, encouraging pedestrian orientation, including retail sales and services, antiques, arts and design studios, small bed and breakfast, and offices. • AUP- Outdoor newsstands, coffee carts, flower stands, gathering areas and similar retail uses • Prohibited- Outdoor dining, entertainment, and dancing, and outdoor amplified sound (exceeding more than 4 events in one calendar year). 39 P\pbslprolecLsWowntown\pcsta ((report 018 Option 2 Multi family (R -3) Residential • Allow multi - family residential, with a 3 -story height limit. No new commercial to compete with Main Street Core. Single- family residential or duplexes not considered to be economically feasible, and not compatible with surrounding land uses. Multi- family to provide support customers for the Downtown. • Development standards are generally consistent with the current R -3 development standards. • Uses allowed include condominiums, apartments, day care centers, and private clubs. • CUP- Senior housing, churches, private schools, mobile homes parks. Option 3 Residential Mixed -use • Maintain street -level commercial uses as well as provide opportunity for multi- family residential uses behind and above the commercial uses. • Require commercial uses to be a minimum of 500, and a maximum of 1000 SF • Residential density- 2 units per 25 -foot wide lot. • AUP- Outdoor newsstands, coffee carts, flower stands, gathering areas and similar retail uses. • Prohibited- Outdoor dining, entertainment, and dancing, and outdoor amplified sound (exceeding more than 4 events in one calendar year). The Village -(300 block east side Richmond Street - former Ralph's market and adiacent lots: • Key block (due to size and location) linking the Downtown Core- Main Street District with the Historic Richmond Street District. • Link to Main Street, Civic Center, and Richmond Street with two pedestrian oriented alleys (handprint alley and Purcell driveway alley), with Plazas at each end • Create a "village" atmosphere, with resident serving, pedestrian- oriented, mixed -use environment. • Street -front and adjacent to pedestrian access ways- Retail, restaurants, recreation, banks less than 500 SF, bed and breakfast hotel, and outdoor uses less than 200 SF only on street level. • Non - street - front- Offices and other non - pedestrian oriented uses (clubs, schools, theaters, banks over 500 SF, union halls) allowed above and behind street level, and adjacent to alleys. • No handicapped parking between budding and street. • Height- Require variety of heights. • Lot area and width- Require lots under common ownership to be developed under a common cohesive plan. • Strategic Site- Target uses- Market (not necessarily a "specialty" market), retail (non - competitive with existing), Hi -tech retail, daytime entertainment and recreation, childcare (only as component of mixed -use), restaurant, bed and breakfast hotel (75 rooms maximum), and mixed -use projects. Provide development incentives. out P1pbs\protectsWowntown\pcstaffieport 019 PARKING AND CIRCULATION: • Allow flexibility in parking standards, as follows: • Dwelling units and live /work -1 space for studios and 1- bedroom, 2 for larger units, plus guest parking • Restaurants -1 space per 75 SF of dining including outdoor over 200 SF, 1 per 250 SF for other areas. Less than 500 SF with no seating, no parking. • Bars-1 space per 75 SF for entire area. • Public assembly -1 space per 5 fixed seats or 1 space per 50 SF without fixed seats. • Compact- 20% for all uses. Additional with a parking demand study. • Parking reductions - Directors approval with a parking demand study. • Tandem- 30% for all uses Additional with a parking demand study. • Loading -none for commercial less than 15,000 SF. Bed and Breakfast uses 1 for up to 15,000 SF, 2 for up to 75,000 SF, then sliding scale. Size 12' by 25'. • Joint - use /shared /off -site- No maximum percentage. Directors' approval with a parking demand study. Can document with other than a standard agreement if approved by Director. • Permitted uses- Continue allowing uses to change from one use to any other permitted uses without increasing parking, if existing parking is maintained. • Handicapped parking- No parking, except handicapped, between budding and street • Main Street- Develop circulation plans with a three -lane configuration that will slow, but not restrict vehicular traffic through Downtown Main Street in the 300 -400 blocks will provide 1 through lane in each direction, a center left -turn lane, and parallel parking on both sides. Sidewalks will be widened to 16 5 feet to encourage outdoor uses. • Grand Avenue- Re- configure Grand Avenue, between Main and Concord, to eliminate the center island parking and provide angled parking adjacent to the curb with 2 through lanes in each direction. Parking Management Options - Short-term: • Create Visitor Parking Information Guide /map • Implement a shared parking program. Establish centrally located joint use /shared parking between businesses and the City, including off -site, to encourage and provide the opportunity for new development. Develop well signed, non - segmented, consolidated, circulation oriented, alley parking. Investigate joint/shared use of Chevron and other private parking sites. • Conduct a parking demand and land use survey, and establish baseline parking ratios for the Downtown as a whole and monitor over time. • Enhance directional signage. Improve and standardize signage that welcomes visitors to Downtown and directs to alley and other parking. PtpbslproiectsWomtown\pcstaffreport 020 41 Mid -term: • Implement trial period shared valet parking program during peak season. • Add angled on- street parking, on Grand Avenue, and Holly and Pine Avenues as one -way streets Longer -term. • Consider installing parking meters to manage parking turnover and raise revenues for parking improvements. • While implementing parking management strategies, continue to investigate costs and feasibility of added parking. Added parking could include the following: Consider providing a parking structure on Holly for off -site joint -use. Consider double -deck City Holly /Standard parking lot, as it has a significant grade differential, and maximizes use of existing grades for multi -level or subterranean parking. DESIGN STANDARDS: • Require design review at staff level for all modifications to existing buildings and new construction, to ensure consistency with goals. • Require historic design criteria for the 100 -200 blocks of Richmond Street. • Require minimum percentage of store front as windows • Require window treatments that are open, inviting, and visible to pedestrians, for retail uses. • Require quality signage. • Clean sidewalks regularly • Provide facade improvements, architectural guidelines, enhance window treatments • Improve lighting and provide "twinkle" lights in street trees. • Provide Downtown Gateways enhanced with landscaping and signage: Main Street and Grand Avenue Concord Street and Grand Avenue Main Street and Manposa Avenue Grand Avenue and Eucalyptus Drive • Enhance handprint alley by connection to the Civic Center Plaza with a mid - block crosswalk and a small Plaza at the opposite end. Enhance Purcell alley /driveway and create a Plaza at the west end of the area. IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCING: • Business Improvement District (300 -500 Blocks Main Street) • Streets and Streetscape • Streetscape improvements — (All Districts) Purpose is to increase use of local businesses, provide a pedestrian- friendly environment, continue to provide a location for filming and provide services for residents. Enhance overall streetscaping, create inviting retail shop fronts, and aesthetic facade treatments. Pedestrian amenities to include benches, trash receptacles, bus stops, bike racks, street lighting. Pl pbsipro iectsWowntownlpcstaffreport 021 Ore Q , Use textured accent pavers or a mixture of pavers and concrete on sidewalks and walkways, for aesthetics, to slow traffic, reduce tripping hazard and liability, and for ease and cost effectiveness of repair if root damage in future. Planters at Curb — extensions and /or mid -block crosswalk (300 -400 Blocks Main Street) Gateway Landscaping and Signage — (Various Locations) Twinkle lights- (300 -400 Blocks of Main Street) Street Trees- (All Districts) Provide phased removal and replacement of street trees as budget and Downtown development dictate. Use a variety of trees and sizes to serve unique functions. Street trees in front of shops should be open canopies so that signs may be easily seen and historical facades are not hidden. Large trees with dense foliage may be desirable in areas where shade is needed. The use of tree grates, irrigation, and structured soil are recommended. Civic Center Plaza Public Events, Activities and Programming Marketing, Advertising and Promotion Development Incentives Expedited and reduced cost entitlements Local tax reductions and rebates Removal of Non - conforming Signs • Historic Preservation Regulatory Incentives Parking Budding Permit and Planning Application Fees Business License Fees Additions to Historic Commercial Structures Setback Flexibility State Historic Building Code Rehabilitation Tax Credit Conservation or Fagade Easements • Financial Incentives Mills Act Contracts — Property Tax Reductions Fagade Improvement Program Rehabilitation Loans, Grants and Matching Funds Demolition Disincentives • Fagade Improvement Program • Live/Work Development Standards • Financing and Funding Sources PHASING: • Highest priority — 300, 400 & 500 blocks Main Street and former Ralph's site. • Highest ' prionty - Trim street trees to open up /lace out, then install 'Twinkle" lights for Downtown street trees • Form a Business Improvement District (B.I.D.) for parking, sidewalk and streetscape improvements. • Commence Plaza improvement (budget to be determined). P\pbs 1proieetstdowntownlpcsta*eport 022 °- 43 Specific Plan Criteria Section 65450 of the State Government Code authorizes Cities to adopt speck plans for the systematic implementation of the General Plan for all or part of the area covered by the General Plan. The adoption of a Speck 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. The City must, in approving a Specific Plan, make findings related to the following two (2) areas: 1. The California Environmental Quality Act; and, 2. The consistency of the action with the City's General Plan. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Consistency The application has been prepared in accordance with CEQA, the state CEQA Guidelines, and local CEQA Guidelines. 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 Downtown Speck Plan, with mitigation. General Plan Consistency State law authorizes the City to adopt specific plans in order to implement the General Plan. The Specific Plan will be consistent with the new land use designation in the General Plan. The proposed Downtown Specific Plan includes a General Plan Amendment (GPA No. 99 -2) to revise the Land Use Map in order to depict the change in land use designation from Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities to Downtown Specific Plan. Additionally, the Master Plan of Streets and the roadway classification standards in the Circulation Element will be revised with the adoption of the Circulation Element revisions which are underway as a separate project This would be the first General Plan Amendment approved during the 2000 calendar year. The General Plan may be amended a maximum of four times per year. The Specific Plan contains a detailed analysis of its conformance with the General Plan. The Economic Development, Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Conservation, and Noise Elements of the General Plan are discussed. The Plan is in conformance with numerous goals, policies, objectives, and programs of these Elements of the General Plan. The current allowed density of 1.0:1 is not proposed to be changed, with the exception of one Strategic Site, the City parking lot in the 200 block of Richmond Street. The residential density is proposed to be increased from one to two dwelling units per 25 -foot wide lot Additionally, one of three options proposed for the 300 block west side of Richmond Street would allow Multi - Family (R -3) Residential development. If the residential density for the Downtown is revised then revisions to tables, text and calculations in the Housing Element will be necessary. These will be accomplished though the Housing Element update which is also currently underway as a separate project. Due to the P1pbskpro }ectskdowntown�pcstaffraW t 023 _ limited area of the Specific Plan these changes are not significant compared to the overall density allowed in the City. Staff believes that the proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the City's 1992 General Plan, as amended. Zoning Code Criteria The application also includes a request to amend the Zoning Map to show the change in Zoning from Downtown Commercial (C -RS) and Public Facilities (P -F) to Downtown Specific Plan. This is required to ensure that the Zoning Map is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map. The proposed Specific Plan contains a set of new development standards which would apply to the property, which would be approved through a Zone Text Amendment. These standards are designed to implement the Vision for the Downtown as developed by the Downtown Task Force. The development standards have been written to consider the existing Downtown Commercial Zoning of the area and create standards that are in concert with the existing standards while still implementing the Goals of the Plan. Interdepartmental Comments Planning staff worked closely with many departments to develop the Speck Plan including the Public Works, Recreation and Parks, Police and Fire Departments, as well as the Building Safety and Economic Development Divisions, to solicit their input on the Plan The Public Works Department specifically expressed concerns with the curb extensions, proposed to be located at key intersections. Their concerns are that trash can collect in these areas and a street sweeper can not maneuver into these spaces, drainage problems such as ponding could occur, particularly since Main Street is a relatively flat, the curb extensions will slightly reduce the number of on- street parking stalls and bus maneuvering around the extensions could be difficult Staff has consulted with and incorporated other department comments into the document during the development. However, the other City departments have not had an opportunity to review and comment on the final draft, which the Planning Commission has before them, and further comments and revisions may be forthcoming V. Environmental Review A Draft Initial Study was prepared by staff for the project, which identified potential adverse environmental impacts related to transportation /circulation. No significant adverse environmental impacts were identified which could not be mitigated to an insignificant level, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is proposed. The Draft Initial Study is being circulated for inter - departmental review and comments, as required by City Council Resolution No. 3805 and State -CEQA guidelines. All departments are still in the process of reviewing the document and their comments will be incorporated into the Mitigated Negative Declaration as well as the Specific Plan as appropriate Any comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission at its next meeting P1pbs 1protectsloowntownVcstaBreport n Z V 4 r. Transportation /Circulation The roadways and intersections within the Speck Plan area, currently operate at Level of Service (LOS) A, B and C. As evaluated in the Circulation Element update, even with increased density, maximum build -out, and reconfiguration of Main Street from four to three lanes, the roadways and intersections will not have a significant impact, with mitigation. One intersection, Imperial Highway and Main Street (outside of the Plan area), would require intersection mitigation, including striping, signalization modifications, and possibly other minor improvements, only when the level of new development dictates that it is necessary in order to mitigate project impacts The westbound left -tum and eastbound nght -tum volumes currently are very high so this intersection currently operates at LOS E. The increase in density in the Downtown would slightly worsen this condition. The Specific Plan proposes a three -lane configuration for the 300 -400 blocks of Main Street. With a three -lane configuration, one through lane would be provided in each direction and the third lane would be a center left turn lane. A two -lane configuration was evaluated but is not proposed, as there are potentially significant impacts with two - lanes. Additionally, the Circulation Element evaluates the possibility of reclassifying Main Street from EI Segundo Boulevard to Grand Avenue from secondary arterial to collector street The evaluation concludes that it would be appropriate instead to identify a new street classification, "commercial collector," as the existing roadway for the entire length of Main Street is inconsistent with the existing classifications. Main Street is currently designated as a four -lane collector from Grand Avenue to Imperial Avenue, with a curb to curb width of 56 feet and a right -of way width of 80 feet The new classification would only be for Main Street and would accommodate the proposed three -lane configuration as well as the existing four - lane configuration, which will remain outside of the Specific Plan area. The traffic analysis that was prepared for the Circulation Element is considered to be worse case scenario as the entire C -RS zone was evaluated, not just the Plan area. The reclassification will be implemented with the Circulation Element revisions. VI. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive public comment on the Plan, and provide direction to staff or adopt a resolution making a recommendation that the City Council adopt the Specific Plan. P \Pbs \Proiec \domtownlpcstaffrepOR n 2 5 VII. Exhibits 1. Draft Specific Plan- dated April 21, 2000 2. American Planning Association- News and Views, January 2000- BIDs: Making Business Districts More Competitive 3. Draft Resolution No. 2475 4 Comments from the El Segundo Chamber of Commerce -dated April 18, 2000 (IJ j F , ,p d Laune B. Jester, Senior Planner ames M Hansen, Direi4tor of Community, Economic and Development Services P\ pbs \profectsWowntown\pcstattreport nos 47 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION NEWS AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION CONTENTS S BIDS Making Business Districts More Competitive 1 Downtown New York's BID Rebound 2' Important Information on the i Economic Development Sessions -, v Newyork 13, Other Notable Economic Development Sessions 133 Calendar of Economic Development Conferences 1 New Members .1 News from the APA Divisions ~ Council Meeting ..:.. -1 Ediroi's Note Peanue articles jot this edition of Nees & Views uddiess Business Improtenient Disntcts Conatbmors include Bind Segal Pt esidenr of Pt ogt essive Urban Management assoctuies and former Senior Du ectot of the Datunoon Denver Pat inei ship and Tristan Ashbv Duectoi of Economic la:ennve Piogiams at the 41hance loi Dmtntoun Nen Yak :ginning with the April 1999 edition, News & Views is published online at the Economic Development Division's webpage- www.mindspring.comk, — ecdevapa C_C �A VIEWS �-h NISI 1�wLU JANUARY 2000 BIU& Making Business Districts More 6o'inpetitive by M Bradlev Segal To remain competitive in a dynamic marketplace, business districts are redefining themselves Downtowns, main streets and outdated commercial corridors are discovering that unique multi- dunensional business environments can successfully capture a lucrative market niche separate from conventional and new competitors such as power centers, on -line shopping services and "retail resort" shopping malls Business improvement districts (BIDs) can be a critical component of an overall revitalization strategy for a business district BIDS make a business district competitive by providing a managed environment BIDS have been proven to create both the revenue and political will to keep commercial streets clean, safe and economically vibrant A business improvement district is typically a non -profit organization funded primarily through a special tax assessment on properties within a central business district The revenue is used to provide a variety of improvements and services that enhance, not replace existing municipal services Typically, BIDS are formed by an ordinance or resolution of local government and decisions affecting BID revenues are usually made by a board consisting of private property and business owners. To deliver day -to -day services, a BID will contract with a business district management organization Management organizations are generally independent private non -profit business organizations, or, in some cases, a department of local government. Downtown Denver Partnership (BID) Workers Scrubbing Sidewalks Photo Courtesy of Downtown Denver Partnership 4S NEWS & VIEWS Segal (Conttnuecl front Page 1) Common BID service options include- 4 Maintenance BIDs provide maintenance services over and above those provided by local government, including frequent sidewalk sweeping, trash and debris removal, periodic power washing of sidewalks and immediate removal of graffiti from buildings and public amenities ♦ Security BIDS provide extra security to augment services from local police departments Types of security services range from conventional security patrols to "ambassadors" that have extensive customer service training to help customers navigate through a business district BID Street Scrubber on the 16th Street Mall in Denver. Photo Courtesy of the Downtown Denver Partnership ♦ Marketing and Promotions: Marketing programs aim to improve the overall image of business districts and position them as regional destinations through forming collaborative promotional strategies, undertaking market research and working with the media ♦ Special Events: Special events reinforce the business district's drawing power as a de t t o 4 c kets that typically underutdize it Many BIDS manage a yearly events calendar that maintains an active schedule of lively attractions ♦ Parking and Transportation: BIDs help manage and/or expand the parking supply within a business district, mcludmg validation programs, management of municipal garages, sponsorship of local shuttles and advocacy to implement regional transit. ♦ Business Recruitment and Retention: Many BIDS provide services to attract fobs and investment to business districts, including undertaking market analysts, developing databases and structuring public /private financing for redevelopment projects ♦ Human Services: BIDS are becoming active partners with human service agencies to help address the issues of the homeless and other streetpopulatrons ExampiesofBiD- sponsored initiatives include maintenance programs that employ homeless persons and community service coordinators that direct street populations to services ♦ Capital Improvements: BID improvement options include visible amenities such as street lights, benches, kiosks and public art Many BIDs have the capability to issue bonds that allow for ambitious pubhe/pnvate capital improvement programs. Advantages of BIDs A BID establishes a self - imposed and self - governed property tax or assessment that must be supported by private sector business and property owners Since the fast BID was established in New Orleans in the early 1970s, the International Downtown Association estimates that more than 1,200 have been formed in business districts m the U.S. and Canada. The BID phenomenon has not been limited to large central cities —BIDs are now found in suburban business districts, rural Main Streets and along automobile - oriented commercial corridors. A BID works much in the same way as a common 4 9 area maintenance (CAM) provision found in most tenant s mat t n, o en targeting onsumer mar (See Seal opt Pa¢e S) Segal (Continued from Page 4) leases within suburban shopping malls and office parks When a shopping center tenants pay CAM charges, they arc paying an extra fee for an enhanced level of services within the common areas of the mall These services often include extra maintenance crews, mall security patrols and cooperative advertismg in local newspapers Similar to uniform operating hours and merchandising standards, CAMS are standard practice for shopping malls, made possible by single owners that generally hold and manage these properties A BID is a CAM for downtown. Unlike a shopping mall, downtowns, main streets and older commercial corridors have multiple ownerships, making the lease covenants found in a shopping mall problematic A BID provides a mechanism by which all property and/or business owners must pay an assessment to support services in the common areas of a busixiess district Once formed, all property and/or business owners are required to pay to support a BID, however, unlike a mall, BIDS allow property and/or busmess owners to retain their own individual standards of operation This is an important distinction since many property owners and merchants remain in downtown or on main street in order to be entrepreneurial and not be constrained by the rules and regulations of the mall Ultimately, it is the collective energy of diverse entrepreneurs that give downtown, main street or a commercial corridor its vitality and competitive advantages The services and activities of BIDS are tailored to meet the specific needs identified by the local busmess community that funds them. BIDS can bring about a number of local benefits, many of which extend far beyond their actual service boundaries These benefits include ♦ Create a cleaner, safer and more attractive business district. BID ambassador programs have been documented to reduce rates of crime and aggressive street behavior from 25% to 75% in a variety of markets BID maintenance programs provide a consistent standard of cleanliness throughout a business district Perception surveys find that property owners, employees and visitors all perceive business districts are significantly safer and cleaner after a BID has been established JANUARY 2000 BID Seating Area on Denver's 16th Street Matl Photo Courtesy of the Downtown Denver Partnership Establish a stable and predictable resource base One of the most attractive attributes of a BID to a business or property owner is consolidating annual downtown improvement fees into one payment, as opposed to supporting multiple organizations, promotions, events and services ♦ Provide non - bureaucratic, innovative and accountable management Most BIDS are governed by boards of property and business owners, and services are delivered by private non - profit organizations, offering private sector management and accountability ♦ Respond quickly to market changes and community needs. BIDS are flexible tools As markets change, the nature of BID financed services can change For instance, many communities initially stabilize a downtown environment with clean and safe services, and then increase BID - financed marketing and promotions as the market improves ♦ Help to increase sales, occupancy rates and property values Denver and Milwaukee have found that BIDS enhance property values and sales, however, they are among a handful of cities that have undertaken formal economic impact studies There is strong qualitative evidence that BIDS improve local markets The renewal rate for BIDS is nearly 100 % —a compelling vote of x i (See Segal on page 6) NEWS & VIEWS Segal (Continued from Page 5) confidence for the value of BIDS to affected property and business owners ♦ CrmLe a unified private sector voice. The mandatory tax or assessment instituted by a BID is extremely effective at engaging property and business owners in the future of their business districts BIDs are inherently fair since everyone pays, even absentee or disinterested property owners BIDs create a unified voice for a business distnct, providing more effective advocacy to advance local issues. The bottom line on BIDs is that they can effectively complement a business district revitalization program, but they are not a panacea in and of themselves. A BID provides funds to mange the environment of a business district It can help stabilize a deteriorating market or guide a strong market A BED will not, however, change the underlying dynamics of the marketplace It should be viewed as a market stabilizer or sweetener and enables the private sector to take a stronger role in the development of business districts Can A BID Work In Our Community? Despite their demonstrated advantages, BIDs are not a solution for every community. Many communities have tried to establish BIDs only to somehow fail in the process, sometimes resulting in a political stigma that prohibits another attempt at creating a BID for a decade or more Before embarking on the process to form a BID, generally the following elements must be in place within the business district information, money and staff expertise Many BIDs have been killed by an overzealous government that is skeptically viewed by property and business owners as too quick to increase taxes On the other end of the spectnim, a disinterested local government can also kill a BID formation effort by fueling concerns that existing government services will be withdrawn ♦ Staff and Financial Resources Formation ofa BID is a people intensive process that, depending upon the business district, can take from 9 to 18 months Stages of forming a BID include initial feasibility, service plan development and a political campaign to carry the BID through a petition process and/or City Council approval Financial resources are needed for computer hardware and software, marketing materials, BID consultants, legal counsel and unforeseen expenses Staff support is required to compile property and/or business owner databases, create marketing materials, manage consultants and coordinate volunteers Public/PrivatePartnership The success of a BID formation effort is founded upon a viable public/ private partnership Formal, or informal, the partnership should morally atm to be inclusive of all interests in the business district. Private sector leaders should be out in front of the BID formation effort with a supportive local government that is visibly at the table With the preceding elements in place, a community can begin the process of investigating the formation of a BID ♦ Private Sector Leadership- BIDs are most BID Applications: Beyond Big City "Clean and successful and effective when the process is Safe" driven by private sector leaders within a business district. A BID involves the imposition of an Most of the publicity surrounding the BID movement assessment, or tax, upon property and/or has been generated by the highly successful "clean and business owners Peer to peer encouragement is safe" programs in America's largest cities For the most effective way to "sell" the BID concept instance, more than 40 BIDs to New York City have Private sector leadership must be evidenced been partially responsible for a dramatic reduction in within a business district, either through an crime. Downtown turnarounds in Baltimore, existing business organization or through an Philadelphia and Houston have all benefitted from informal network of key stakeholders sophisticated downtown management organizations ♦ Supportive Local Government. Local fueled by well capitalized BIDs Emerging "24- hour" government is best cast as a low key, yet downtowns, such as Seattle, Portland and Denver have eJ 1 dependable supporter in the drive to form a BID Local goverrur ent can provide resources including (See Segal on page 7) ^ (Continuer) from Page 6) supported BIDS for 10 to 20 years The BID phenomenon has also taken root in large sun belt cities including Los Angeles, Phoenix and Atlanta Beyond the big cities, BIDs are also playing a strong role in the revitalization of downtowns, main streets, commercial corridors and suburban "edge cities" The following case studies illustrate the recent use of BIDS to advance revitalization in more "unconventional" business districts Boulder, Colorado: A Pre - Emptive Strike to Remain Competitive Boulder, Colorado, is a quaint college town of about 100,000 persons nestled in the Rocky Mountain foothills about 25 miles northwest of Denver Boulder's Pearl Street Mall, a downtown pedestrian mall constructed in 1976, is one of the nation's top urban success stones Pearl Street is a well- designed congenial public gathering space lined with vibrant retail stores that pay in excess of $50 per square foot in annual rent for the privilege of being on the pedestrian mall. Despite Boulder's prosperity, downtown property owners decided in 1999 to begin taxing themselves more than $620,000 per year through a new BID. The BID tax is in addition to an existing parking district tax that has been in place since creation of the pedestrian mall. The new Boulder BID is a pre- emptive strike to strengthen downtown's competitiveness in a rapidly changing marketplace Less than a 15 minute drive from the Pearl Sheet Mall, a new 1.5 million square foot regional shopping center is currently under construction opening in November of 2000. Five minutes from downtown, an existing mall is being remodeled to a town center shopping format. The Boulder BID will provide new resources to more aggressively market the downtown. Half of the new BID funds will be directed to consumer marketing activities, effectively increasing marketing resources for Boulder's downtown association by a factor of 15. Remaining funds will be allocated to enhanced maintenance to hft the entire downtown to the standards of Pearl. Street For more information, contact Marilyn Haas, Downtown Boulderinc,(303)449 -3774. JANUARY 2000 El Cajon, California: Creating an Image for a Suburban Downtown El Cajon, California, a suburban community of about 100,000 persons located 20 miles east of San Diego El Cajon's downtown has struggled over the past 30 years, a victim of an aggressive redevelopment strategy that removed much of the area's historic core, lower income demographics resulting from the highest concentration of apartments in the San Diego region and a county social services center that has attracted a surprisingly high concentration of street populations In 1996, El Cajon became one of the first cities in California to establish a property -based BID The BID was seen by civic leaders, property and business owners as the foundation for a new downtown revitalization strategy that included stabilizing the -downtown environment, attracting new businesses and investment and creating a new image for one of the last historic downtowns in the vast East County area of San Diego, a growing market area with a population exceeding 350,000. Today, led by the non - profit Downtown El Cajon, Inc, and financed by it's $366,000 BID, El Cajon is rapidly making strides toward renewal. Key program elements of the Downtown El Cajon BID include: ♦ Clean & Safe: About one -third of the BID budget is allocated to clean and safe services to stabilize the downtown environment. Enhanced security is provided by a contract patrol that offers 14 to 16 hours of coverage each day. A downtown Clean Team has been created by an innovative partnership between the BID and a local school for developmentally disabled adults ♦ Marketing, To combat El Cajon's image of the past and promote new business and investment opportunities, one -third of the BID budget is allocated to marketing activities A new image is being crafted through an aggressive schedule of special events, new identity package for downtown, banners, downtown directory, market research and advertising Downtown El Cajon has also retained the services of a public relations consultant, resulting in increased visibility and coverage in the local media (See Segal on page 8) 52 91 NEWS & VIEWS (COntniuedfrom page 7) Facade Incentive Program. Beginning in 1999, the Downtown E1 Cajon BID is allocating S80,000 per year for a matching fund for building improvements Ehgible improvements include facades, signs, landscaping and alley enhancements To leverage BID assessments, Downtown El Cajon Inc is currently fonnmg a 501(c)(3) subsidiary to help attract project grants and philanthropic contributions Foi more information, contact Claire Carpenter, Downtown El Cajon Inc , (619) 401 -8858. Buckhead, Georgia Photo Courtesy Buckhead Coalition, Inc. Buckhead, Georgia: Bringing Order to Edge City Chaos Marketed as the "Beverly Hills of the East ", Buckhead is the most affluent community within Atlanta and serves as the city's second downtown. With most of its development occurring in the past 30 years, Buckhead's assets include more than 15 million square feet of office space, two upscale shopping malls, strong residential demographics and Atlanta's most vital entertainment district Like most of the Atlanta metropolitan area, Buckhead is literally choking on its own success Traffic dams and congestion are of monumental proportions. While a regional transportation authority was recently established, solutions to the area's traffic management challenges will take years, if not decades, to implement In 1998, Buckhead property owners decided to take an active role to advancing transportation improvements and created the Buckhead Community Improvement Distnct (CID) The CID will raise nearly $1.9 million each year to finance a variety of transportation improvements aimed to reduce traffic congestion and improve mobility Program options include ♦ Roadway improvements through design and engineering work to accelerate the installation of left turn signals, complete ramps and access roads and widen selected roads ♦ Pedestrian improvements to improve pedestrian mobility throughout the business district, including the design and installation of pedestrian pathways, bridges and lighting ♦ Transportation management activities such as ongoing support for the Buckhead Transportation Management Authority, support for a business district shuttle service and undertaking traffic studies and analyis to improve mobility throughout the business district Buckhead CID supporters were inspired by success in the Cumberland CID, a nearby and newer office and retail community in suburban Atlanta Formed m 1987, Cumberland CID assessments have financed the design and engineering of new roads, effectively lifting their pnonty ranking for state and federal highway funds. Over ten years, Cumberland CID assessments have been leveraged by a ratio of 10.1, resulting in $200 million m new roadways including a major freeway interchange and loop road. For more information contact Sam Massell, Buckhead Coalition, (404) 233 -2228 About the author: Brad Segal is president ofPi ogresst ve Urban Management Associates, Inc, a Denver -based consulting, firm specializing in the creation of business improvement districts, downtown management organizations and market -based downtown plaits Mr Segal has consulted to BIDS, local governments and downtown management organizations in 17 states, Canada and Jamaica Prior to establishing P. U.MA , he served as the senior director of the Downtown Denver Partnership He can be reached directly via email at pumaman@hx netcom com, or visit the company's webpage atwwwpiamworldhq com 53 April 19. 2000 Mr James M Hansen Director of Community. City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 Economic and Development Services Re Downtov n Specific Plan Concept Document Dear Jim RECEIVED APR 19 BUILDING SAFETY DEPT. The Downtoi%m El Segundo Committee of the Chamber of Commerce (DESI) met on April 12 to review the Downtov--n Specific Plan Concept Document dated March 1, 2000 In attendance at the meeting were Chris Ketz and Laurie Jester of } our staff We had distributed the document at our March DESI meettns and asked _.emone to be prepared to respond to it at the April 12 meeting In addition, the Chamber of Commerce staff hand delivered copies of the document, and invitations to our April meeting. to downtown businesses I explained at our meeting that the first draft of the Downtown Specific Plan was still being prepared b% the City staff based upon the recommendations contained in the Concept Document. and that the draft would not be available until April 21 We encouraged people to obtain a copy of the draft plan and re% tell that document as hell prior to the Planning Commission hearing on the 27' As to the Do.vnto..n Specific Plan Concept Document, DESI endorses the document with the follo.rmg qualifications ♦ There is strong objection to the prohibition against office uses on the ground floor frontage in the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street It was the consensus of the property owners and business representati. es in attendance at our meeting that this places an unreasonable hardship on propert} owners ♦ The prohibition on "outdoor dining and gathering areas" in the 300 block of West Richmond 'trees should be revised and clantied to prohibit only outdoor dining, wh"e permitting outdoor gathering and outdoor retail displa% by Administrative Use Permit ..Ithin stated guidelines Specifically, the existing uses by Studio Antiques and FatryTale Parties should be allo..ed to continue and similar uses should be permitted by A U.P. 54 EL SEGUNDO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE • 427 MAIN STREET • EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA 90245 • (310) 322 -1220 - FAX (310) 322 -6PW ♦ We would encourage any streetscape improvement program to include consideration of the public alleys west of the 200. 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street as these ha. a the potential to also become active pedestrian areas linking various downtown elements ♦ We would discourage the use of palm trees within the downtown street tree program as we find them to be out of character -with e- isting historic elements ♦ We would encourage the first priority, of any implementation plan to be the streetscape improvements in the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street with other streets to follow as soon as practicable We feel these improvements would greatly help to attract desirable businesses to the downtown DESI wishes to thank the City staff and City Council for their diligence and leadership in undertaking this planning effort NVe encourage the Planning Commission to adopt a-Specific Plan consistent w ith the Concept Document and the modifications a e've noted in order to ad. ante this important process as rapidly as possible Sincerely, Bill CnQOer Chairman Downtown El Segundo Committee cc Mayor Mike Gordon Councilman Kelly McDowell Chris Ketz Laurie Jester Elyse Rothstein DESI Membership .2. 55 option 6, west Side orthe 300 Bbeh of o' -hmond Street, Downtown SpecWc Pim Concept Dome^', dN 03/012000 [� z T —F --'?p April 24, 2000 APR 2 4 ZUOII To the Planning Commission, City of El Segundo For over 37 years, I have owned, lived in, and conducted a business on a property on pmrt %;ua ^r the street in the 300 block of Richmond Street in El Segundo. I understand that one of the options(Option B) offered in the "Downtown Specific Plan Concept Document", submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration, is to rezone the west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street to Multi- family (R -3) Residential. I am opposed to the rezoning to Multi- family R -3 of the 300 block, west side, of Richmond Street The only reason given, in the document, for this rezoning(Option B) is "No new commercial to compete with the Main Core ". A strange reason, to say the least, in a free market economy! Sepulveda Boulevard took Bank of America from the downtown ares. Sepulveda Boulevard took the Ralph's Market from the downtown area. Rosecrans Avenue(Target & Manhattan Mall) took Jerry' Shoes. Rosecrans Avenue(Barns & Noble & Crown Books) took Scholar's Bookstore. Rosecrans Avenue(Home Depot) took Rea's Har ware Rosecrans Avenue(Office Depot & Staples) took Forest Stati onary. Grand Avenue(Rite Aid) took RB Drug. I do not know of one example where the west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street presented any real competition for Main Street. The way to overcome competition is to "compete more effectively". I was also told, that another reason for rezoning of the west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street was to "concentrate" the commercial into the "core area ", ie. the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street. The west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street is approximately 100 yards from the center of gravity of the "core area ". Other that the 200 and 500 hundred blocks of Main Street, no other commercial part of the city is closer to the center of the "core area ". The 100 and 200 blocks of Richmond Street; the 200, and 300 blocks of West Grand Avenue; the 200, 300, and 400 blocks of East Grand; the 100 block of Main Street; and the 200 block of Standard Street are all further from the center of gravity of the "core area ". Would not rezoning of one or more of those distant areas have a greater effect of "concentrating" the commercial into the "core area"? The west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street represents a very good example of transitional zoning for transiting from commerciallindustrial to residential use, when the property is developed according to existing code. This avoids the city's involvement in the kinds of conflicts which have occurred in the Stookey Hollow area, where in many instances the commercial/industrial meets bead on with R -3 residential usage with the city right in the middle via their public streets! Since the meeting place for commercial and residential, in the C -RS zone, is within the borders of private property, the resolution of such conflicts rest with the property owner not the city! The aesthetics of the transition are obvious. Thank you for your consideration. ack R. Buckingham 333 Richmond Street, #8 El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 322 1948 56 fQ 0 -TO Cons Pa s CJ r l/C l" C9 /L e 2 d l3A" 3GZ`1 G - -nev.c `32Z 331 716 Y5'y�/, 3070 Co►�eo(� G� aos� � e a X8935 (Sa&7 Ara ys z a�� y EL fe G VNpu or- 9r,24 � `/�S �kc-k ✓ (? e f aSY11sT L MAM LA- �, AZ 42 s i�'" �� ytn H.$ —rlt ,4).0,�LL s F5" sl'� 31C 322 72(, Cc a)tQ _,Sl £s zo,2 C /jd/ -� �z 57 comer of Main and Holly, to City parking lot — Development incentives for target uses, destination uses only i.e. — market, restaurant or similar use. Main Street Transitional District - (100.200. and 500 blocks Main Street): • Transition and "Gateway" to Downtown Core. Link to the Library, High school, park and residential to the north, leading to the retail Downtown Core of the 300 and 400 blocks, and the Chevron Refinery to the south. • Link to Downtown Core with streetscape — trees, signage, and pedestrian - oriented amenities. • Allow flexibility and mixture of uses on all areas, no changes to currently permitted uses • Non - conforming industrial or similar uses may be replaced with similar non- conforming uses. • Strategic Site- Strip Mall, 200 block — Potential for adaptive re -use. Target uses, market, restaurant, or similar uses. Provide development incentives Richmond Street District -000 and 200 blocks Richmond Street): - • Maintain, enhance, and preserve historical "Old Town" character of original Downtown Provide incentives to support and dis- incentives if historical character not maintained. • Establish historical design standards for new construction in order to blend with the old. • Allow flexibility and mixture of uses in all areas, encouraging pedestrian orientation, including retail sales and services, antiques, arts and design studios, small bed and breakfast, and offices • Encourage and support filming and related uses. • Allow "live /work" uses on street level behind street front commercial. • Strategic Sites- Anthony's Music Studio and City parking lot- Target uses - antiques, bookstores, arts and crafts, market at the street level, professional /design behind or above street front level. FAR 1.5:1 for City parking lot site. Provide development incentives. North Richmond Street District -(300 block West Side Richmond Street): Option 1. Commercial Mixed -use • Maintain existing mixed- use environment, protecting the existing commercial retail- service uses • Limited residential (2 units per 25 foot wide lot) allowed only above street front commercial. • Allow flexibility and mixture of uses in all areas, encouraging pedestrian orientation, including retail sales and services, antiques, arts and design studios, small bed and breakfast, and offices. • AUP- Outdoor newsstands, coffee carts, flower stands, gathering areas and similar retail uses • Prohibited- Outdoor dining, entertainment, and dancing, and outdoor amplified sound (exceeding more than 4 events in one calendar year). 39 P\pbslprolecLsWowntown\pcsta ((report 018 Option 2 Multi family (R -3) Residential • Allow multi - family residential, with a 3 -story height limit. No new commercial to compete with Main Street Core. Single- family residential or duplexes not considered to be economically feasible, and not compatible with surrounding land uses. Multi- family to provide support customers for the Downtown. • Development standards are generally consistent with the current R -3 development standards. • Uses allowed include condominiums, apartments, day care centers, and private clubs. • CUP- Senior housing, churches, private schools, mobile homes parks. Option 3 Residential Mixed -use • Maintain street -level commercial uses as well as provide opportunity for multi- family residential uses behind and above the commercial uses. • Require commercial uses to be a minimum of 500, and a maximum of 1000 SF • Residential density- 2 units per 25 -foot wide lot. • AUP- Outdoor newsstands, coffee carts, flower stands, gathering areas and similar retail uses. • Prohibited- Outdoor dining, entertainment, and dancing, and outdoor amplified sound (exceeding more than 4 events in one calendar year). The Village -(300 block east side Richmond Street - former Ralph's market and adiacent lots: • Key block (due to size and location) linking the Downtown Core- Main Street District with the Historic Richmond Street District. • Link to Main Street, Civic Center, and Richmond Street with two pedestrian oriented alleys (handprint alley and Purcell driveway alley), with Plazas at each end • Create a "village" atmosphere, with resident serving, pedestrian- oriented, mixed -use environment. • Street -front and adjacent to pedestrian access ways- Retail, restaurants, recreation, banks less than 500 SF, bed and breakfast hotel, and outdoor uses less than 200 SF only on street level. • Non - street - front- Offices and other non - pedestrian oriented uses (clubs, schools, theaters, banks over 500 SF, union halls) allowed above and behind street level, and adjacent to alleys. • No handicapped parking between budding and street. • Height- Require variety of heights. • Lot area and width- Require lots under common ownership to be developed under a common cohesive plan. • Strategic Site- Target uses- Market (not necessarily a "specialty" market), retail (non - competitive with existing), Hi -tech retail, daytime entertainment and recreation, childcare (only as component of mixed -use), restaurant, bed and breakfast hotel (75 rooms maximum), and mixed -use projects. Provide development incentives. out P1pbs\protectsWowntown\pcstaffieport 019 PARKING AND CIRCULATION: • Allow flexibility in parking standards, as follows: • Dwelling units and live /work -1 space for studios and 1- bedroom, 2 for larger units, plus guest parking • Restaurants -1 space per 75 SF of dining including outdoor over 200 SF, 1 per 250 SF for other areas. Less than 500 SF with no seating, no parking. • Bars-1 space per 75 SF for entire area. • Public assembly -1 space per 5 fixed seats or 1 space per 50 SF without fixed seats. • Compact- 20% for all uses. Additional with a parking demand study. • Parking reductions - Directors approval with a parking demand study. • Tandem- 30% for all uses Additional with a parking demand study. • Loading -none for commercial less than 15,000 SF. Bed and Breakfast uses 1 for up to 15,000 SF, 2 for up to 75,000 SF, then sliding scale. Size 12' by 25'. • Joint - use /shared /off -site- No maximum percentage. Directors' approval with a parking demand study. Can document with other than a standard agreement if approved by Director. • Permitted uses- Continue allowing uses to change from one use to any other permitted uses without increasing parking, if existing parking is maintained. • Handicapped parking- No parking, except handicapped, between budding and street • Main Street- Develop circulation plans with a three -lane configuration that will slow, but not restrict vehicular traffic through Downtown Main Street in the 300 -400 blocks will provide 1 through lane in each direction, a center left -turn lane, and parallel parking on both sides. Sidewalks will be widened to 16 5 feet to encourage outdoor uses. • Grand Avenue- Re- configure Grand Avenue, between Main and Concord, to eliminate the center island parking and provide angled parking adjacent to the curb with 2 through lanes in each direction. Parking Management Options - Short-term: • Create Visitor Parking Information Guide /map • Implement a shared parking program. Establish centrally located joint use /shared parking between businesses and the City, including off -site, to encourage and provide the opportunity for new development. Develop well signed, non - segmented, consolidated, circulation oriented, alley parking. Investigate joint/shared use of Chevron and other private parking sites. • Conduct a parking demand and land use survey, and establish baseline parking ratios for the Downtown as a whole and monitor over time. • Enhance directional signage. Improve and standardize signage that welcomes visitors to Downtown and directs to alley and other parking. PtpbslproiectsWomtown\pcstaffreport 020 41 Mid -term: • Implement trial period shared valet parking program during peak season. • Add angled on- street parking, on Grand Avenue, and Holly and Pine Avenues as one -way streets Longer -term. • Consider installing parking meters to manage parking turnover and raise revenues for parking improvements. • While implementing parking management strategies, continue to investigate costs and feasibility of added parking. Added parking could include the following: Consider providing a parking structure on Holly for off -site joint -use. Consider double -deck City Holly /Standard parking lot, as it has a significant grade differential, and maximizes use of existing grades for multi -level or subterranean parking. DESIGN STANDARDS: • Require design review at staff level for all modifications to existing buildings and new construction, to ensure consistency with goals. • Require historic design criteria for the 100 -200 blocks of Richmond Street. • Require minimum percentage of store front as windows • Require window treatments that are open, inviting, and visible to pedestrians, for retail uses. • Require quality signage. • Clean sidewalks regularly • Provide facade improvements, architectural guidelines, enhance window treatments • Improve lighting and provide "twinkle" lights in street trees. • Provide Downtown Gateways enhanced with landscaping and signage: Main Street and Grand Avenue Concord Street and Grand Avenue Main Street and Manposa Avenue Grand Avenue and Eucalyptus Drive • Enhance handprint alley by connection to the Civic Center Plaza with a mid - block crosswalk and a small Plaza at the opposite end. Enhance Purcell alley /driveway and create a Plaza at the west end of the area. IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCING: • Business Improvement District (300 -500 Blocks Main Street) • Streets and Streetscape • Streetscape improvements — (All Districts) Purpose is to increase use of local businesses, provide a pedestrian- friendly environment, continue to provide a location for filming and provide services for residents. Enhance overall streetscaping, create inviting retail shop fronts, and aesthetic facade treatments. Pedestrian amenities to include benches, trash receptacles, bus stops, bike racks, street lighting. Pl pbsipro iectsWowntownlpcstaffreport 021 Ore Q , Use textured accent pavers or a mixture of pavers and concrete on sidewalks and walkways, for aesthetics, to slow traffic, reduce tripping hazard and liability, and for ease and cost effectiveness of repair if root damage in future. Planters at Curb — extensions and /or mid -block crosswalk (300 -400 Blocks Main Street) Gateway Landscaping and Signage — (Various Locations) Twinkle lights- (300 -400 Blocks of Main Street) Street Trees- (All Districts) Provide phased removal and replacement of street trees as budget and Downtown development dictate. Use a variety of trees and sizes to serve unique functions. Street trees in front of shops should be open canopies so that signs may be easily seen and historical facades are not hidden. Large trees with dense foliage may be desirable in areas where shade is needed. The use of tree grates, irrigation, and structured soil are recommended. Civic Center Plaza Public Events, Activities and Programming Marketing, Advertising and Promotion Development Incentives Expedited and reduced cost entitlements Local tax reductions and rebates Removal of Non - conforming Signs • Historic Preservation Regulatory Incentives Parking Budding Permit and Planning Application Fees Business License Fees Additions to Historic Commercial Structures Setback Flexibility State Historic Building Code Rehabilitation Tax Credit Conservation or Fagade Easements • Financial Incentives Mills Act Contracts — Property Tax Reductions Fagade Improvement Program Rehabilitation Loans, Grants and Matching Funds Demolition Disincentives • Fagade Improvement Program • Live/Work Development Standards • Financing and Funding Sources PHASING: • Highest priority — 300, 400 & 500 blocks Main Street and former Ralph's site. • Highest ' prionty - Trim street trees to open up /lace out, then install 'Twinkle" lights for Downtown street trees • Form a Business Improvement District (B.I.D.) for parking, sidewalk and streetscape improvements. • Commence Plaza improvement (budget to be determined). P\pbs 1proieetstdowntownlpcsta*eport 022 °- 43 Specific Plan Criteria Section 65450 of the State Government Code authorizes Cities to adopt speck plans for the systematic implementation of the General Plan for all or part of the area covered by the General Plan. The adoption of a Speck 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. The City must, in approving a Specific Plan, make findings related to the following two (2) areas: 1. The California Environmental Quality Act; and, 2. The consistency of the action with the City's General Plan. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Consistency The application has been prepared in accordance with CEQA, the state CEQA Guidelines, and local CEQA Guidelines. 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 Downtown Speck Plan, with mitigation. General Plan Consistency State law authorizes the City to adopt specific plans in order to implement the General Plan. The Specific Plan will be consistent with the new land use designation in the General Plan. The proposed Downtown Specific Plan includes a General Plan Amendment (GPA No. 99 -2) to revise the Land Use Map in order to depict the change in land use designation from Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities to Downtown Specific Plan. Additionally, the Master Plan of Streets and the roadway classification standards in the Circulation Element will be revised with the adoption of the Circulation Element revisions which are underway as a separate project This would be the first General Plan Amendment approved during the 2000 calendar year. The General Plan may be amended a maximum of four times per year. The Specific Plan contains a detailed analysis of its conformance with the General Plan. The Economic Development, Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Conservation, and Noise Elements of the General Plan are discussed. The Plan is in conformance with numerous goals, policies, objectives, and programs of these Elements of the General Plan. The current allowed density of 1.0:1 is not proposed to be changed, with the exception of one Strategic Site, the City parking lot in the 200 block of Richmond Street. The residential density is proposed to be increased from one to two dwelling units per 25 -foot wide lot Additionally, one of three options proposed for the 300 block west side of Richmond Street would allow Multi - Family (R -3) Residential development. If the residential density for the Downtown is revised then revisions to tables, text and calculations in the Housing Element will be necessary. These will be accomplished though the Housing Element update which is also currently underway as a separate project. Due to the P1pbskpro }ectskdowntown�pcstaffraW t 023 _ limited area of the Specific Plan these changes are not significant compared to the overall density allowed in the City. Staff believes that the proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the City's 1992 General Plan, as amended. Zoning Code Criteria The application also includes a request to amend the Zoning Map to show the change in Zoning from Downtown Commercial (C -RS) and Public Facilities (P -F) to Downtown Specific Plan. This is required to ensure that the Zoning Map is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map. The proposed Specific Plan contains a set of new development standards which would apply to the property, which would be approved through a Zone Text Amendment. These standards are designed to implement the Vision for the Downtown as developed by the Downtown Task Force. The development standards have been written to consider the existing Downtown Commercial Zoning of the area and create standards that are in concert with the existing standards while still implementing the Goals of the Plan. Interdepartmental Comments Planning staff worked closely with many departments to develop the Speck Plan including the Public Works, Recreation and Parks, Police and Fire Departments, as well as the Building Safety and Economic Development Divisions, to solicit their input on the Plan The Public Works Department specifically expressed concerns with the curb extensions, proposed to be located at key intersections. Their concerns are that trash can collect in these areas and a street sweeper can not maneuver into these spaces, drainage problems such as ponding could occur, particularly since Main Street is a relatively flat, the curb extensions will slightly reduce the number of on- street parking stalls and bus maneuvering around the extensions could be difficult Staff has consulted with and incorporated other department comments into the document during the development. However, the other City departments have not had an opportunity to review and comment on the final draft, which the Planning Commission has before them, and further comments and revisions may be forthcoming V. Environmental Review A Draft Initial Study was prepared by staff for the project, which identified potential adverse environmental impacts related to transportation /circulation. No significant adverse environmental impacts were identified which could not be mitigated to an insignificant level, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is proposed. The Draft Initial Study is being circulated for inter - departmental review and comments, as required by City Council Resolution No. 3805 and State -CEQA guidelines. All departments are still in the process of reviewing the document and their comments will be incorporated into the Mitigated Negative Declaration as well as the Specific Plan as appropriate Any comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission at its next meeting P1pbs 1protectsloowntownVcstaBreport n Z V 4 r. Transportation /Circulation The roadways and intersections within the Speck Plan area, currently operate at Level of Service (LOS) A, B and C. As evaluated in the Circulation Element update, even with increased density, maximum build -out, and reconfiguration of Main Street from four to three lanes, the roadways and intersections will not have a significant impact, with mitigation. One intersection, Imperial Highway and Main Street (outside of the Plan area), would require intersection mitigation, including striping, signalization modifications, and possibly other minor improvements, only when the level of new development dictates that it is necessary in order to mitigate project impacts The westbound left -tum and eastbound nght -tum volumes currently are very high so this intersection currently operates at LOS E. The increase in density in the Downtown would slightly worsen this condition. The Specific Plan proposes a three -lane configuration for the 300 -400 blocks of Main Street. With a three -lane configuration, one through lane would be provided in each direction and the third lane would be a center left turn lane. A two -lane configuration was evaluated but is not proposed, as there are potentially significant impacts with two - lanes. Additionally, the Circulation Element evaluates the possibility of reclassifying Main Street from EI Segundo Boulevard to Grand Avenue from secondary arterial to collector street The evaluation concludes that it would be appropriate instead to identify a new street classification, "commercial collector," as the existing roadway for the entire length of Main Street is inconsistent with the existing classifications. Main Street is currently designated as a four -lane collector from Grand Avenue to Imperial Avenue, with a curb to curb width of 56 feet and a right -of way width of 80 feet The new classification would only be for Main Street and would accommodate the proposed three -lane configuration as well as the existing four - lane configuration, which will remain outside of the Specific Plan area. The traffic analysis that was prepared for the Circulation Element is considered to be worse case scenario as the entire C -RS zone was evaluated, not just the Plan area. The reclassification will be implemented with the Circulation Element revisions. VI. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive public comment on the Plan, and provide direction to staff or adopt a resolution making a recommendation that the City Council adopt the Specific Plan. P \Pbs \Proiec \domtownlpcstaffrepOR n 2 5 VII. Exhibits 1. Draft Specific Plan- dated April 21, 2000 2. American Planning Association- News and Views, January 2000- BIDs: Making Business Districts More Competitive 3. Draft Resolution No. 2475 4 Comments from the El Segundo Chamber of Commerce -dated April 18, 2000 (IJ j F , ,p d Laune B. Jester, Senior Planner ames M Hansen, Direi4tor of Community, Economic and Development Services P\ pbs \profectsWowntown\pcstattreport nos 47 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION NEWS AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION CONTENTS S BIDS Making Business Districts More Competitive 1 Downtown New York's BID Rebound 2' Important Information on the i Economic Development Sessions -, v Newyork 13, Other Notable Economic Development Sessions 133 Calendar of Economic Development Conferences 1 New Members .1 News from the APA Divisions ~ Council Meeting ..:.. -1 Ediroi's Note Peanue articles jot this edition of Nees & Views uddiess Business Improtenient Disntcts Conatbmors include Bind Segal Pt esidenr of Pt ogt essive Urban Management assoctuies and former Senior Du ectot of the Datunoon Denver Pat inei ship and Tristan Ashbv Duectoi of Economic la:ennve Piogiams at the 41hance loi Dmtntoun Nen Yak :ginning with the April 1999 edition, News & Views is published online at the Economic Development Division's webpage- www.mindspring.comk, — ecdevapa C_C �A VIEWS �-h NISI 1�wLU JANUARY 2000 BIU& Making Business Districts More 6o'inpetitive by M Bradlev Segal To remain competitive in a dynamic marketplace, business districts are redefining themselves Downtowns, main streets and outdated commercial corridors are discovering that unique multi- dunensional business environments can successfully capture a lucrative market niche separate from conventional and new competitors such as power centers, on -line shopping services and "retail resort" shopping malls Business improvement districts (BIDs) can be a critical component of an overall revitalization strategy for a business district BIDS make a business district competitive by providing a managed environment BIDS have been proven to create both the revenue and political will to keep commercial streets clean, safe and economically vibrant A business improvement district is typically a non -profit organization funded primarily through a special tax assessment on properties within a central business district The revenue is used to provide a variety of improvements and services that enhance, not replace existing municipal services Typically, BIDS are formed by an ordinance or resolution of local government and decisions affecting BID revenues are usually made by a board consisting of private property and business owners. To deliver day -to -day services, a BID will contract with a business district management organization Management organizations are generally independent private non -profit business organizations, or, in some cases, a department of local government. Downtown Denver Partnership (BID) Workers Scrubbing Sidewalks Photo Courtesy of Downtown Denver Partnership 4S NEWS & VIEWS Segal (Conttnuecl front Page 1) Common BID service options include- 4 Maintenance BIDs provide maintenance services over and above those provided by local government, including frequent sidewalk sweeping, trash and debris removal, periodic power washing of sidewalks and immediate removal of graffiti from buildings and public amenities ♦ Security BIDS provide extra security to augment services from local police departments Types of security services range from conventional security patrols to "ambassadors" that have extensive customer service training to help customers navigate through a business district BID Street Scrubber on the 16th Street Mall in Denver. Photo Courtesy of the Downtown Denver Partnership ♦ Marketing and Promotions: Marketing programs aim to improve the overall image of business districts and position them as regional destinations through forming collaborative promotional strategies, undertaking market research and working with the media ♦ Special Events: Special events reinforce the business district's drawing power as a de t t o 4 c kets that typically underutdize it Many BIDS manage a yearly events calendar that maintains an active schedule of lively attractions ♦ Parking and Transportation: BIDs help manage and/or expand the parking supply within a business district, mcludmg validation programs, management of municipal garages, sponsorship of local shuttles and advocacy to implement regional transit. ♦ Business Recruitment and Retention: Many BIDS provide services to attract fobs and investment to business districts, including undertaking market analysts, developing databases and structuring public /private financing for redevelopment projects ♦ Human Services: BIDS are becoming active partners with human service agencies to help address the issues of the homeless and other streetpopulatrons ExampiesofBiD- sponsored initiatives include maintenance programs that employ homeless persons and community service coordinators that direct street populations to services ♦ Capital Improvements: BID improvement options include visible amenities such as street lights, benches, kiosks and public art Many BIDs have the capability to issue bonds that allow for ambitious pubhe/pnvate capital improvement programs. Advantages of BIDs A BID establishes a self - imposed and self - governed property tax or assessment that must be supported by private sector business and property owners Since the fast BID was established in New Orleans in the early 1970s, the International Downtown Association estimates that more than 1,200 have been formed in business districts m the U.S. and Canada. The BID phenomenon has not been limited to large central cities —BIDs are now found in suburban business districts, rural Main Streets and along automobile - oriented commercial corridors. A BID works much in the same way as a common 4 9 area maintenance (CAM) provision found in most tenant s mat t n, o en targeting onsumer mar (See Seal opt Pa¢e S) Segal (Continued from Page 4) leases within suburban shopping malls and office parks When a shopping center tenants pay CAM charges, they arc paying an extra fee for an enhanced level of services within the common areas of the mall These services often include extra maintenance crews, mall security patrols and cooperative advertismg in local newspapers Similar to uniform operating hours and merchandising standards, CAMS are standard practice for shopping malls, made possible by single owners that generally hold and manage these properties A BID is a CAM for downtown. Unlike a shopping mall, downtowns, main streets and older commercial corridors have multiple ownerships, making the lease covenants found in a shopping mall problematic A BID provides a mechanism by which all property and/or business owners must pay an assessment to support services in the common areas of a busixiess district Once formed, all property and/or business owners are required to pay to support a BID, however, unlike a mall, BIDS allow property and/or busmess owners to retain their own individual standards of operation This is an important distinction since many property owners and merchants remain in downtown or on main street in order to be entrepreneurial and not be constrained by the rules and regulations of the mall Ultimately, it is the collective energy of diverse entrepreneurs that give downtown, main street or a commercial corridor its vitality and competitive advantages The services and activities of BIDS are tailored to meet the specific needs identified by the local busmess community that funds them. BIDS can bring about a number of local benefits, many of which extend far beyond their actual service boundaries These benefits include ♦ Create a cleaner, safer and more attractive business district. BID ambassador programs have been documented to reduce rates of crime and aggressive street behavior from 25% to 75% in a variety of markets BID maintenance programs provide a consistent standard of cleanliness throughout a business district Perception surveys find that property owners, employees and visitors all perceive business districts are significantly safer and cleaner after a BID has been established JANUARY 2000 BID Seating Area on Denver's 16th Street Matl Photo Courtesy of the Downtown Denver Partnership Establish a stable and predictable resource base One of the most attractive attributes of a BID to a business or property owner is consolidating annual downtown improvement fees into one payment, as opposed to supporting multiple organizations, promotions, events and services ♦ Provide non - bureaucratic, innovative and accountable management Most BIDS are governed by boards of property and business owners, and services are delivered by private non - profit organizations, offering private sector management and accountability ♦ Respond quickly to market changes and community needs. BIDS are flexible tools As markets change, the nature of BID financed services can change For instance, many communities initially stabilize a downtown environment with clean and safe services, and then increase BID - financed marketing and promotions as the market improves ♦ Help to increase sales, occupancy rates and property values Denver and Milwaukee have found that BIDS enhance property values and sales, however, they are among a handful of cities that have undertaken formal economic impact studies There is strong qualitative evidence that BIDS improve local markets The renewal rate for BIDS is nearly 100 % —a compelling vote of x i (See Segal on page 6) NEWS & VIEWS Segal (Continued from Page 5) confidence for the value of BIDS to affected property and business owners ♦ CrmLe a unified private sector voice. The mandatory tax or assessment instituted by a BID is extremely effective at engaging property and business owners in the future of their business districts BIDs are inherently fair since everyone pays, even absentee or disinterested property owners BIDs create a unified voice for a business distnct, providing more effective advocacy to advance local issues. The bottom line on BIDs is that they can effectively complement a business district revitalization program, but they are not a panacea in and of themselves. A BID provides funds to mange the environment of a business district It can help stabilize a deteriorating market or guide a strong market A BED will not, however, change the underlying dynamics of the marketplace It should be viewed as a market stabilizer or sweetener and enables the private sector to take a stronger role in the development of business districts Can A BID Work In Our Community? Despite their demonstrated advantages, BIDs are not a solution for every community. Many communities have tried to establish BIDs only to somehow fail in the process, sometimes resulting in a political stigma that prohibits another attempt at creating a BID for a decade or more Before embarking on the process to form a BID, generally the following elements must be in place within the business district information, money and staff expertise Many BIDs have been killed by an overzealous government that is skeptically viewed by property and business owners as too quick to increase taxes On the other end of the spectnim, a disinterested local government can also kill a BID formation effort by fueling concerns that existing government services will be withdrawn ♦ Staff and Financial Resources Formation ofa BID is a people intensive process that, depending upon the business district, can take from 9 to 18 months Stages of forming a BID include initial feasibility, service plan development and a political campaign to carry the BID through a petition process and/or City Council approval Financial resources are needed for computer hardware and software, marketing materials, BID consultants, legal counsel and unforeseen expenses Staff support is required to compile property and/or business owner databases, create marketing materials, manage consultants and coordinate volunteers Public/PrivatePartnership The success of a BID formation effort is founded upon a viable public/ private partnership Formal, or informal, the partnership should morally atm to be inclusive of all interests in the business district. Private sector leaders should be out in front of the BID formation effort with a supportive local government that is visibly at the table With the preceding elements in place, a community can begin the process of investigating the formation of a BID ♦ Private Sector Leadership- BIDs are most BID Applications: Beyond Big City "Clean and successful and effective when the process is Safe" driven by private sector leaders within a business district. A BID involves the imposition of an Most of the publicity surrounding the BID movement assessment, or tax, upon property and/or has been generated by the highly successful "clean and business owners Peer to peer encouragement is safe" programs in America's largest cities For the most effective way to "sell" the BID concept instance, more than 40 BIDs to New York City have Private sector leadership must be evidenced been partially responsible for a dramatic reduction in within a business district, either through an crime. Downtown turnarounds in Baltimore, existing business organization or through an Philadelphia and Houston have all benefitted from informal network of key stakeholders sophisticated downtown management organizations ♦ Supportive Local Government. Local fueled by well capitalized BIDs Emerging "24- hour" government is best cast as a low key, yet downtowns, such as Seattle, Portland and Denver have eJ 1 dependable supporter in the drive to form a BID Local goverrur ent can provide resources including (See Segal on page 7) ^ (Continuer) from Page 6) supported BIDS for 10 to 20 years The BID phenomenon has also taken root in large sun belt cities including Los Angeles, Phoenix and Atlanta Beyond the big cities, BIDs are also playing a strong role in the revitalization of downtowns, main streets, commercial corridors and suburban "edge cities" The following case studies illustrate the recent use of BIDS to advance revitalization in more "unconventional" business districts Boulder, Colorado: A Pre - Emptive Strike to Remain Competitive Boulder, Colorado, is a quaint college town of about 100,000 persons nestled in the Rocky Mountain foothills about 25 miles northwest of Denver Boulder's Pearl Street Mall, a downtown pedestrian mall constructed in 1976, is one of the nation's top urban success stones Pearl Street is a well- designed congenial public gathering space lined with vibrant retail stores that pay in excess of $50 per square foot in annual rent for the privilege of being on the pedestrian mall. Despite Boulder's prosperity, downtown property owners decided in 1999 to begin taxing themselves more than $620,000 per year through a new BID. The BID tax is in addition to an existing parking district tax that has been in place since creation of the pedestrian mall. The new Boulder BID is a pre- emptive strike to strengthen downtown's competitiveness in a rapidly changing marketplace Less than a 15 minute drive from the Pearl Sheet Mall, a new 1.5 million square foot regional shopping center is currently under construction opening in November of 2000. Five minutes from downtown, an existing mall is being remodeled to a town center shopping format. The Boulder BID will provide new resources to more aggressively market the downtown. Half of the new BID funds will be directed to consumer marketing activities, effectively increasing marketing resources for Boulder's downtown association by a factor of 15. Remaining funds will be allocated to enhanced maintenance to hft the entire downtown to the standards of Pearl. Street For more information, contact Marilyn Haas, Downtown Boulderinc,(303)449 -3774. JANUARY 2000 El Cajon, California: Creating an Image for a Suburban Downtown El Cajon, California, a suburban community of about 100,000 persons located 20 miles east of San Diego El Cajon's downtown has struggled over the past 30 years, a victim of an aggressive redevelopment strategy that removed much of the area's historic core, lower income demographics resulting from the highest concentration of apartments in the San Diego region and a county social services center that has attracted a surprisingly high concentration of street populations In 1996, El Cajon became one of the first cities in California to establish a property -based BID The BID was seen by civic leaders, property and business owners as the foundation for a new downtown revitalization strategy that included stabilizing the -downtown environment, attracting new businesses and investment and creating a new image for one of the last historic downtowns in the vast East County area of San Diego, a growing market area with a population exceeding 350,000. Today, led by the non - profit Downtown El Cajon, Inc, and financed by it's $366,000 BID, El Cajon is rapidly making strides toward renewal. Key program elements of the Downtown El Cajon BID include: ♦ Clean & Safe: About one -third of the BID budget is allocated to clean and safe services to stabilize the downtown environment. Enhanced security is provided by a contract patrol that offers 14 to 16 hours of coverage each day. A downtown Clean Team has been created by an innovative partnership between the BID and a local school for developmentally disabled adults ♦ Marketing, To combat El Cajon's image of the past and promote new business and investment opportunities, one -third of the BID budget is allocated to marketing activities A new image is being crafted through an aggressive schedule of special events, new identity package for downtown, banners, downtown directory, market research and advertising Downtown El Cajon has also retained the services of a public relations consultant, resulting in increased visibility and coverage in the local media (See Segal on page 8) 52 91 NEWS & VIEWS (COntniuedfrom page 7) Facade Incentive Program. Beginning in 1999, the Downtown E1 Cajon BID is allocating S80,000 per year for a matching fund for building improvements Ehgible improvements include facades, signs, landscaping and alley enhancements To leverage BID assessments, Downtown El Cajon Inc is currently fonnmg a 501(c)(3) subsidiary to help attract project grants and philanthropic contributions Foi more information, contact Claire Carpenter, Downtown El Cajon Inc , (619) 401 -8858. Buckhead, Georgia Photo Courtesy Buckhead Coalition, Inc. Buckhead, Georgia: Bringing Order to Edge City Chaos Marketed as the "Beverly Hills of the East ", Buckhead is the most affluent community within Atlanta and serves as the city's second downtown. With most of its development occurring in the past 30 years, Buckhead's assets include more than 15 million square feet of office space, two upscale shopping malls, strong residential demographics and Atlanta's most vital entertainment district Like most of the Atlanta metropolitan area, Buckhead is literally choking on its own success Traffic dams and congestion are of monumental proportions. While a regional transportation authority was recently established, solutions to the area's traffic management challenges will take years, if not decades, to implement In 1998, Buckhead property owners decided to take an active role to advancing transportation improvements and created the Buckhead Community Improvement Distnct (CID) The CID will raise nearly $1.9 million each year to finance a variety of transportation improvements aimed to reduce traffic congestion and improve mobility Program options include ♦ Roadway improvements through design and engineering work to accelerate the installation of left turn signals, complete ramps and access roads and widen selected roads ♦ Pedestrian improvements to improve pedestrian mobility throughout the business district, including the design and installation of pedestrian pathways, bridges and lighting ♦ Transportation management activities such as ongoing support for the Buckhead Transportation Management Authority, support for a business district shuttle service and undertaking traffic studies and analyis to improve mobility throughout the business district Buckhead CID supporters were inspired by success in the Cumberland CID, a nearby and newer office and retail community in suburban Atlanta Formed m 1987, Cumberland CID assessments have financed the design and engineering of new roads, effectively lifting their pnonty ranking for state and federal highway funds. Over ten years, Cumberland CID assessments have been leveraged by a ratio of 10.1, resulting in $200 million m new roadways including a major freeway interchange and loop road. For more information contact Sam Massell, Buckhead Coalition, (404) 233 -2228 About the author: Brad Segal is president ofPi ogresst ve Urban Management Associates, Inc, a Denver -based consulting, firm specializing in the creation of business improvement districts, downtown management organizations and market -based downtown plaits Mr Segal has consulted to BIDS, local governments and downtown management organizations in 17 states, Canada and Jamaica Prior to establishing P. U.MA , he served as the senior director of the Downtown Denver Partnership He can be reached directly via email at pumaman@hx netcom com, or visit the company's webpage atwwwpiamworldhq com 53 April 19. 2000 Mr James M Hansen Director of Community. City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 Economic and Development Services Re Downtov n Specific Plan Concept Document Dear Jim RECEIVED APR 19 BUILDING SAFETY DEPT. The Downtoi%m El Segundo Committee of the Chamber of Commerce (DESI) met on April 12 to review the Downtov--n Specific Plan Concept Document dated March 1, 2000 In attendance at the meeting were Chris Ketz and Laurie Jester of } our staff We had distributed the document at our March DESI meettns and asked _.emone to be prepared to respond to it at the April 12 meeting In addition, the Chamber of Commerce staff hand delivered copies of the document, and invitations to our April meeting. to downtown businesses I explained at our meeting that the first draft of the Downtown Specific Plan was still being prepared b% the City staff based upon the recommendations contained in the Concept Document. and that the draft would not be available until April 21 We encouraged people to obtain a copy of the draft plan and re% tell that document as hell prior to the Planning Commission hearing on the 27' As to the Do.vnto..n Specific Plan Concept Document, DESI endorses the document with the follo.rmg qualifications ♦ There is strong objection to the prohibition against office uses on the ground floor frontage in the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street It was the consensus of the property owners and business representati. es in attendance at our meeting that this places an unreasonable hardship on propert} owners ♦ The prohibition on "outdoor dining and gathering areas" in the 300 block of West Richmond 'trees should be revised and clantied to prohibit only outdoor dining, wh"e permitting outdoor gathering and outdoor retail displa% by Administrative Use Permit ..Ithin stated guidelines Specifically, the existing uses by Studio Antiques and FatryTale Parties should be allo..ed to continue and similar uses should be permitted by A U.P. 54 EL SEGUNDO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE • 427 MAIN STREET • EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA 90245 • (310) 322 -1220 - FAX (310) 322 -6PW ♦ We would encourage any streetscape improvement program to include consideration of the public alleys west of the 200. 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street as these ha. a the potential to also become active pedestrian areas linking various downtown elements ♦ We would discourage the use of palm trees within the downtown street tree program as we find them to be out of character -with e- isting historic elements ♦ We would encourage the first priority, of any implementation plan to be the streetscape improvements in the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street with other streets to follow as soon as practicable We feel these improvements would greatly help to attract desirable businesses to the downtown DESI wishes to thank the City staff and City Council for their diligence and leadership in undertaking this planning effort NVe encourage the Planning Commission to adopt a-Specific Plan consistent w ith the Concept Document and the modifications a e've noted in order to ad. ante this important process as rapidly as possible Sincerely, Bill CnQOer Chairman Downtown El Segundo Committee cc Mayor Mike Gordon Councilman Kelly McDowell Chris Ketz Laurie Jester Elyse Rothstein DESI Membership .2. 55 option 6, west Side orthe 300 Bbeh of o' -hmond Street, Downtown SpecWc Pim Concept Dome^', dN 03/012000 [� z T —F --'?p April 24, 2000 APR 2 4 ZUOII To the Planning Commission, City of El Segundo For over 37 years, I have owned, lived in, and conducted a business on a property on pmrt %;ua ^r the street in the 300 block of Richmond Street in El Segundo. I understand that one of the options(Option B) offered in the "Downtown Specific Plan Concept Document", submitted to the Planning Commission for consideration, is to rezone the west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street to Multi- family (R -3) Residential. I am opposed to the rezoning to Multi- family R -3 of the 300 block, west side, of Richmond Street The only reason given, in the document, for this rezoning(Option B) is "No new commercial to compete with the Main Core ". A strange reason, to say the least, in a free market economy! Sepulveda Boulevard took Bank of America from the downtown ares. Sepulveda Boulevard took the Ralph's Market from the downtown area. Rosecrans Avenue(Target & Manhattan Mall) took Jerry' Shoes. Rosecrans Avenue(Barns & Noble & Crown Books) took Scholar's Bookstore. Rosecrans Avenue(Home Depot) took Rea's Har ware Rosecrans Avenue(Office Depot & Staples) took Forest Stati onary. Grand Avenue(Rite Aid) took RB Drug. I do not know of one example where the west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street presented any real competition for Main Street. The way to overcome competition is to "compete more effectively". I was also told, that another reason for rezoning of the west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street was to "concentrate" the commercial into the "core area ", ie. the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street. The west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street is approximately 100 yards from the center of gravity of the "core area ". Other that the 200 and 500 hundred blocks of Main Street, no other commercial part of the city is closer to the center of the "core area ". The 100 and 200 blocks of Richmond Street; the 200, and 300 blocks of West Grand Avenue; the 200, 300, and 400 blocks of East Grand; the 100 block of Main Street; and the 200 block of Standard Street are all further from the center of gravity of the "core area ". Would not rezoning of one or more of those distant areas have a greater effect of "concentrating" the commercial into the "core area"? The west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street represents a very good example of transitional zoning for transiting from commerciallindustrial to residential use, when the property is developed according to existing code. This avoids the city's involvement in the kinds of conflicts which have occurred in the Stookey Hollow area, where in many instances the commercial/industrial meets bead on with R -3 residential usage with the city right in the middle via their public streets! Since the meeting place for commercial and residential, in the C -RS zone, is within the borders of private property, the resolution of such conflicts rest with the property owner not the city! The aesthetics of the transition are obvious. Thank you for your consideration. ack R. Buckingham 333 Richmond Street, #8 El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 322 1948 56 fQ 0 -TO Cons Pa s CJ r l/C l" C9 /L e 2 d l3A" 3GZ`1 G - -nev.c `32Z 331 716 Y5'y�/, 3070 Co►�eo(� G� aos� � e a X8935 (Sa&7 Ara ys z a�� y EL fe G VNpu or- 9r,24 � `/�S �kc-k ✓ (? e f aSY11sT L MAM LA- �, AZ 42 s i�'" �� ytn H.$ —rlt ,4).0,�LL s F5" sl'� 31C 322 72(, Cc a)tQ _,Sl £s zo,2 C /jd/ -� �z 57 VAJ Qs: �Al� C1Lr7�� T r ;}t�v�p[ S E-Y. 502Ns 01G� �JN -11— r �S ��Z7 Sr �oe�O�1 .4a14�{ �029 Z^JJ� lad /7vv9A �o.vr� c� %1t, t.� i u hJ ���t u srecA✓d ��i�3 �{ry� J7az �'1• tr rezya �sz,iewsK� 5'321 w 12-4' P�• ita"tt^+++� 9° O S 4-z •�clt�av+ J-�l}v� �`{ i%➢n�; cs_. 9oZSt �Y14ti..►�w. F./��14*�i )Gy2 EUss YL�) l q Cq gOr536 J TtILtF� �nlnlERfcv �(se'/ r?RfALIAl vIJN 51 ?7 JL eAV �S;t oN� ��� x.511 C`���o-w� C>.,� . L� � l� �� • � °`�' o Q �' LVmca,,-b \ Rozj 'Zfc& 9C)a77 42�sVlcru& Ice 58 VIA- ml?!-"A- �f�{ C?S </ <YD� -S c!D 27 y ' i VAJ Qs: �Al� C1Lr7�� T r ;}t�v�p[ S E-Y. 502Ns 01G� �JN -11— r �S ��Z7 Sr �oe�O�1 .4a14�{ �029 Z^JJ� lad /7vv9A �o.vr� c� %1t, t.� i u hJ ���t u srecA✓d ��i�3 �{ry� J7az �'1• tr rezya �sz,iewsK� 5'321 w 12-4' P�• ita"tt^+++� 9° O S 4-z •�clt�av+ J-�l}v� �`{ i%➢n�; cs_. 9oZSt �Y14ti..►�w. F./��14*�i )Gy2 EUss YL�) l q Cq gOr536 J TtILtF� �nlnlERfcv �(se'/ r?RfALIAl vIJN 51 ?7 JL eAV �S;t oN� ��� x.511 C`���o-w� C>.,� . L� � l� �� • � °`�' o Q �' LVmca,,-b \ Rozj 'Zfc& 9C)a77 42�sVlcru& Ice 58 VIA- ml?!-"A- �f�{ C?S </ <YD� -S c!D 27 y ' i I�ITQ Ac �7ccw �ticC�Z c�i ✓k— I� G-Q-7, 5 52Z-(,771 Ic,N �y�1� iy,551�N w�JQ �qy� 1 qs/ /Yay 1) R LBnra,l/!fil Seyu -`�0- 310 tp o G�i� v 4vk-' 3i0 J 93 - 2 v c� `flu �i/m }� jinx la ve t 2o1 5 L3 Ae ?,7 5r- fNoUC4 @s 310 - 393 -7be 3>U 7f56 C� 3az -79s7, w�- 8lrr��fi•o�z ��0 6 e7- 76 W rR t� poi w 25 !3a4 LJ,Q.�s Ott&A,7AO �rtirl�ig- SiSi N141'41" Piz. L 13 SoSu3- u it �a16 N N6o E a -;t 5 Botly —" 40046. 311 Le,4ez cv' 4A 311 a' xc,A- St *,4 5 -gV / (9 on � �'s ilt'ria S�°`otaG 23i ;Ilk 5r Y2i S,utia tZ z v1' c .0 , 0 9,? q s: ej-L�j. I"r��- %x�ca 9ol(ov LL S {5.rr�v 9o2YS' 717-15 Ok 64"LlAw tUdlinek. C.4 VSZ>4 -7-7-71;'- VuL CafAL" rbdn� CA- 1'162'ir S�z n.bG % t 2Y� 59 All O, vim./ 9d) 10 it L/, �60 �45' •ste- tl �i a aO w #R J U4 qoo25 tLie CA '7 go� 5 I Plkn TO,- rarl(C C4gO Q3 - - -,\�� .l7 I•' \e`,rc r.�u.. 1 °`7 /V Old' Id <-I ��r, l{> l J,,x•o an Ch S � Gl`-�. -TrI t,A- 01,Jdhv« 41rp 22,�; m )&4- 7a/ 33A CA 9ozG� -3vz� II t p� {oLi I ZU 0 �'2f�ehv�/ C q 'At (� 'cn SC o q4 1ZZ- �L�FG�. 'VIIZ R&96✓ld0 \�CaN 1Dom-2X r �il�� �az�lrn Zip% Grr,�,� �s� • G l� �� «o l,�- yo�s CA &VL � 1 I S,ycc 5 os� SV�acNN CjOq E LPL SEGupOu FL 40zys 71T VIc-k/ //Cdlt4ll Z/l 71) Cdr G�/ r �� `� /�- 9a2yz q D� 4ass c„ rrq SLC., PC 41- // g S 9 o zYs' s��f vc �` � Tell / Cfi =z s �3s 5� e 64f Zy H r/ 14, B- %OZf`l �'i33 -s- °113.35 Ioa-,t I L-),45 c /'d av& ` I �- 31��lM•�� , oM Att" �1- #(,n fS . CA 560L/S- 8>6 3 ��� l�nouuFP N Sl qiaoll 3z! 1/is St j/, & c'zu (i-4.1c lLCL e,,— CQi �f- �go2yS lcsa� 62 r, J 00 /Ll a� Nt�kSlr `Fero 33/ Picr�/�/4dD gG 333 e S q�zts 333 PtcLalc�J iLlu &.j 702 y� s��f vc �` � Tell / Cfi =z s �3s 5� e 64f Zy H r/ 14, B- %OZf`l �'i33 -s- °113.35 Ioa-,t I L-),45 c /'d av& ` I �- 31��lM•�� , oM Att" �1- #(,n fS . CA 560L/S- 8>6 3 ��� l�nouuFP N Sl qiaoll 3z! 1/is St j/, & c'zu (i-4.1c lLCL e,,— CQi �f- �go2yS lcsa� 62 r, J 00 /Ll a� Nt�kSlr `Fero s��f vc �` � Tell / Cfi =z s �3s 5� e 64f Zy H r/ 14, B- %OZf`l �'i33 -s- °113.35 Ioa-,t I L-),45 c /'d av& ` I �- 31��lM•�� , oM Att" �1- #(,n fS . CA 560L/S- 8>6 3 ��� l�nouuFP N Sl qiaoll 3z! 1/is St j/, & c'zu (i-4.1c lLCL e,,— CQi �f- �go2yS lcsa� 62 r, 1140 Qy 2 i ' i� as9i% /haw l i31 6� ss � �r�nnt�vis 2011+ M`+�� l rd� y 3 � 7 91 .C, 11-1 Oki CO 3:35`7- wl w kc lit. -. J3 9 °a66 - m- 1115 Fon( A e gyp ? 79x -9237 �cloKn/6 (31o) �qb gD37 �},�� U ` i CA .., L, 90 Zed J� flShc senzre_.. wcAn"+s+ ZT t� �c1 9r %(cc w C ooc Ff4eey 3,;� a— /)y 3q' _ 3,3D 4 v °y P v�9 r&t�tp cq I'ZVi1��16L 5aZ �Sri� wtP, ag^ck', t5• °1o24S - 1%9-ol63 G0 Y�MnF�! �a•..0.d.,,. o,.,, 2.32(0 / bm- �9-+nrawl2 CA l(a2- Vgoz-n scofh ffioO�J`L(xr.$ / �G �. <nSEF�c yr/ At fRm 5vAtin 95o Uvj �v"c, fS 902 Y e-4Y 9So ulk?6,1, IJio 6s Slog YS- 5Z) s �a L d a ,.��. uk 9o3NPC6 Gl 2�3 Cad �l� d� �a dnd o irk, goZl;:) �4le 6 r] Los eles, cA yooL15- �G,'X� -,� �i�✓�s� /y3z e. [ev>A�f,A Cdr- 4)1 J/ PgL4d 13 0,(/ 415a3w oa3e NCv -fuarwz c 902sc) J a,- (oil 9k Ufuot- ova L R, c/abfs� u ?Cl Z-r7� 07 CY/JlPSS Pf 154.�c k, fr,. 2 j �qNL/ ftl �tii `t j C 40-464 Si�A`�D 122 a✓�n y3en t Jam„_ . ,COQ, �2c 4 91k e�lflf&al /pa: LL 120( er"e4 W 1�5 f�-A Segw«3 o'�f/C�cul/(a+ IV ChLcevd (3ac ll� F $anC� Mon cc� �I V iC/ ee, gn HaL rje,-) /P`�at G3 027.E yam'''/° WA bo W, N�GNfS ll`fbo wasF/IV6 rol/ Fawn Ao fazf�S sa ctl l2-a -y 124 9 el Z- z '71t Al--C X0`8 1;70� -7 flat, i (-A"\k P�GCYI gU��7 �Or) N Redondurx� CB Qazs? 65 r' ahem *V-aao��, V,qm ya Hsw¢laRjr �D� aaTBQ„��„aA.4a� "a47 w TUr ,�c.nc r 90,C 1 b 2, g0. q OJ, � to a, 9 r2z� A.(af-,eL .4k� � gozvj- J r PlclVA8 Ave LANG BC-4c n e L^A 9'ogo8 Pula, Job nSt)o 1) I/tryj_ kLam "Pi. ?1-110 o�elsS� � VJ-o'c.l\v, C � oaLlr -- 2, 4 L�Eaa C6y C70z7� L3 ,. 66 91 �;Iv /a 1•/ Z 3 000 + /ou 2woJ /�,�s>, Vrl fJ�/' ��G, � w.eg Wrar,N4�br�1 '1tS %/.,zc¢, ar4 E- r�tt� ��lo ✓GAYYIVe% 287- 2, 3uq(31v, CHAVe� �Vw o.%, sDyL( AM- &Or- 71 7'R Mgvt/ J D �f,�IS� �� l�1 U�.�ZS6122 L e. 1 ,s a9 N,LIc� -es7 L t � 3yIJ, /60- 1020 w Or/orLt Pf CC S�Oju��io L L w, /Kr cA 10'7 yy I2 /o Utti„ti.e � #2C$ UP""c�C�h 1p2� �l C 67 C� ,� U%4 N rz off/ C26 wL Go- (F ,2e, (/o �-> -?j ,5 Goo - /oc.12n10 �� sr- W 9.39 13-,; /, A 97vxz I�9LlkrS�2a.1..,/ Ny � /�-pt lv1W� Vlvvnz,)�0. Q 'D-�)S 5 61 O GA 1'�'1V 2 -2 Gr�L�• 3aa -�yl� 3 CHA1^c a �'�U Po %4 3DS--( ®GY - (oer' 717 3 10 i�4L,kll� -i s-�� NiLGches7" 3`rtriGo- CC S7Eru'k,•.v . ,�z s .� L /0uo iv Od ar-t fk INS )wt. CA 907YI n y� 1 t Z /2 /o Uu�+ce �� 20$ U."cL CA 102-11 Ec "F4 u.N,p c�Cau< 6P t D ® fi le S 5 w l-: K� cL ,s ge&a z�Dn Gam! 9c��S/ n A4 Y� ('CCa0 c� c,4 J ­771nel-o � L K..r tie: , C...0'- 100t y s ' •�c CdKR�N' C+OE � /1��• Mme._ /'Vf• CA 9S R N M A) -tl O / 4/t ti M, -- AJ f i � C�a 9025 as C (�cacv �Q L:,00, C!A `ia A lvm NN ti - ELM60 1 10 Zd5 �- r►� .� 33 � kw--tt �.,�� Cat 9oays 701 �. -�4d ,q- vnoLe / Mig; i lk nq" f ,Cc S6-L46 0/" J4° X � / 81.Z /Pic� fl'+A-C q jR4fs,)q 70 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA April 27, 2000 Chairman Crowley called the regular meeting of the El Segundo CALL TO ORDER Planning Commission to order at 6:04 p.m, in the Council Chamber of the City of El Segundo City Hall, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California Commissioner Kretzmer led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PLEDGE TO FLAG PRESENT. BOULGARIDES, CROWLEY, KRETZMER, ROLL CALL MAHLER, WYCOFF Chairman Crowley presented the Consent Calendar. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Wycoff pulled Item D1. Commissioner Wycoff requested a correction on the March 23, 2000, CALL ITEMS FROM Minutes, Page 1, Master Page 5, last paragraph to read 'Vice -Chair CONSENT CALENDAR Wycoff presented Item 14 ." Vice -Chair Wycoff moved, seconded by Commissioner Mahler, to MOTION approve the March 23, 2000, Minutes as amended Passed 4 -0, with Chairman Crowley abstaining. None PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS Director Hansen stated that copies of signed petitions related to the WRITTEN Downtown Specific Plan were distributed to the Planning COMMUNICATIONS Commission The one -page petition reflects signatures of individuals interested in a food market locating on the former Ralph's site. The other petition reflects signatures of individuals interested in keeping the west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street as commercial use only, not as R -3. None PUBLIC HEARINGS, CONTINUED HEARINGS El Segundo Planning Comaussion Minutes Apn127,2000 Page 1 of.lZ I,9 Chairman Crowley presented Item 1 -2, Environmental Assessment No. 474, General Plan Amendment No 99 -2, Zone Change Amendment No 99 -5, Downtown Specific Plan. Address. 100 -500 blocks of Main Street and 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street Applicant. City of El Segundo. Property Owners- Various. Director Hansen explained that the draft Downtown Specific Plan is an Instrument to accomplish several key improvements, especially those Improvements over the long term; and expressed his appreciation for the tremendous efforts of all those individuals who have participated in this lengthy process. He noted that the legal department has begun to go through this lengthy draft page by page, and that staff will Incorporate the City Attorney's comments Into the final report before the Planning Commission's last review Senior Planner Jester reviewed the staff report as outlined in the Agenda packet Chairman Crowley opened the Public Hearing. Jack Pursell, representing the owners of the following properties: 105 to 113 West Grand and 301 to 315 Main Street Mr Pursell requested that the Planning Commission temporarily table the Issue with regard to the zone change, particularly on the prohibition of new office uses on the ground floor in the 300 -400 blocks of Main street. He noted the uncertainty of what will be happening to the former Ralph's site; stated that traffic has dropped off with the closure of Ralph's; and that Implementing a zone change at this point in time would not be in the town's best Interest. Mr. Pursell commented on the difficulty in obtaining tenants for some of the retail spaces. Mr Pursell stated that while he is delighted with the overall concept of the plan, he encouraged the Planning Commission to delete any change to the 300 and 400 block of Main Street and to leave the usage open until it is determined what will be done to the former Ralph's site. Mr. Pursell commented on the need for additional merchant and employee parking. Bill Crigger, Chairman of the Downtown El Segundo Committee (DESI) of the El Segundo Chamber of Commerce Mr Crigger noted that DESI is in support of the draft document but that DESI, as a Committee, has not yet had an opportunity to meet and review this Downtown Draft Speck Plan and that DESI would appreciate an additional opportunity to comment on the plan. Mr. Crigger stated that DESI is strongly opposed to the prohibition on PUBLIC HEARINGS, NEW BUSINESS EA-474 El Segundo Planning Conmssion Mmutes Apn127,2000 Page 2 of 12 72 office uses at the ground floor frontage in the 300 and 400 block of Main Street, fearing that the alternative to retail space would be vacancy in today's Downtown market — pointing out that DESI does not want to see Downtown convert to all office usage and potentially lose the opportunity of being a retail center for El Segundo Mr Crigger stated that DESI believes tnat at this point in time, the market is dictating that until there are some significant improvements in the Downtown area, that to expect retail to fill up the vacancies is unrealistic and would result in significant financial hardships for the merchants, and noted that in terms of priority of implementation, DES[ believes that streetscape improvements should have the highest priority, believing that this is a substantial improvement which may encourage more retail space occupancy. Mr Cngger noted his support for the current sidewalk operations for Studio Antiques and Fairytale Parties on Richmond Street; and requested that the language be more definitive as to allowing these businesses to continue to operate as they currently do Mr. Cngger commented on the streetscape improvements that are being proposed; and stated that DES) would encourage those improvements on the alleyway between the former Ralph's site and the 300 and 400 block of Main Street He stated that DESI intends to go through the draft carefully at its May 10, 2000, meeting and that additional comments will be provided at the next public hearing In response to Vice -Chair Wycoffs inquiry, Mr Cngger stated that DESI would prefer that the first priority for streetscaping occur on the 300 and 400 block of Main Street. Sally and Laurence Martin, owners of Studio Antiques, Richmond Street Ms Martin urged the Planning Commission to support the continuance of her sidewalk displays; commented on her aggressive advertising efforts in the 12 years she has been doing business at this site, and noted the benefits of people being able to view her merchandise on the sidewalk as they drive by her facility, believing that the sidewalk displays help to bring people into her business Ms. Martin mentioned that the petitions (of record) provided to the Planning Commission reflect that people are interested in maintaining the current business environment on Richmond Street. Chairman Crowley questioned whether the current language in the draft is adequate to permit sidewalk displays and requested that staff develop alternative wording to more specifically reflect what is and is not permitted El Segundo Plantung Commission Mmutes Apn127,2000 Page 3 of 12 73 Responding to Commissioner Kretzmer's inquiry, Mr. Martin estimated that approximately 25 -30 percent of their business is generated from individuals driving by and seeing the sidewalk displays; and noted the increased importance of attracting customers into this area since the closure of Ralph's Fred Hickey, business owner at 135 Main Street Mr. Hickey expressed his support of the draft plan; commented on his concerns with empty stores, and stated that office rentals should be considered during this transition period. With regard to Master Page 20, Parking and Circulation, Mr. Hickey encouraged the City to consider angled parking on the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street, stating that parallel parking slows traffic. Janice Cruickshank, El Segundo resident Ms Cruickshank highlighted the April 13, 2000, front -page newspaper article of the El Segundo Herald, "Commercial Activity on Main Street at AN -Time High," noting her concerns with the article addressing the dwindling of mom - and -pop type businesses on Main Street. Ms Cruickshank stated that she has had an antique shop in Manhattan Beach for the past 18 years and that for the last two years, she has attempted to obtain a shop on Main Street in El Segundo but that she believes the rents are too high for small businesses. Ms. Cruickshank expressed her belief that El Segundo residents would prefer to see retail shops on Main Street, and noted the necessity of making City Hall more user - friendly. She urged the City to maintain the aesthetics of a small -town atmosphere, suggesting that flower gardens be placed in the Plaza area of City Hall and that directional signage be erected. She noted that her main concern is the proposed rezoning on the 300 block on Richmond Street to residential, believing that it will change the entire street and drive out the small retail businesses Joan Parker, 419'/2 Standard Street, El Segundo resident Ms Parker addressed her concerns with the need for additional parking in the Downtown area, noting her support of angled parking and the erection of a multi -story parking structure She addressed her neighbors' concerns with the proposed parking structure on Holly Street and the effect it will have upon alley traffic conditions; and urged the City to not remove any of the trees on Holly Street if there is to be the construction of a parking structure. El Segundo Platuung Commussion Mmutes Apn127,2000 Page 4 of 12 74 Director Hansen noted that the reference to a parking structure on Holly Street is merely In concept form and that no refinement to this concept has been made at this point in time. Senior Planner Jester explained for Chairman Crowley that the issue of the parking structure concept is addressed in the Implementation section as an option to consider down the road if the demand for additional parking in the area increases With respect to the multi -level parking structure concept to service all of the Downtown area, Commissioner Kretzmer commented on the Downtown Revitalization Committee's discussion of closing down Holly Street between Main Street and the alley. Norman Le Beau, commercial and residential real estate Mr Le Beau stated that he is proposing to build six condominiums at 345 and 347 Richmond Street; and expressed his belief that in order to strengthen the Downtown core, the City should consider allowing alternate uses on the 300 block of Richmond Street than what is currently allowed, more specifically, the west side of Richmond Street. With regard to Master Page 173, Option B, Mr. Le Beau urged the Commission to strongly consider allowing condominium development, believing that condominium development would enrich this area of Richmond Street, improve the appeal of the block, and provide more local customers for the Downtown area He stated that residential is the predominant use of the 300 block of Richmond Street. In response to Commissioner Boulgaddes' inquiry, Mr Le Beau stated that he is a resident of Manhattan Beach. Peggy Tyrell, El Segundo resident Ms Tyrell expressed her concern with any proposed narrowing of Main Street, noted her belief that pedestrians on sidewalks feel safer when street traffic is slower, questioned the necessity of widening the sidewalks, and noted her support of the special events which are conducted on the Plaza area of City Hall, Elyse Rothstein, Industrial Lock and Security Screen Ms Rothstein expressed her belief that angled parking along Main Street would create a more quaint environment; that it would slow the traffic down on Main Street and create a situation whereby drivers /passengers would be able to look around and see the shops El Segundo Planning Coninusston Minutes Apnl27,2000 Page 5 of 12 75 on Main Street while waiting for a car to back out of a parking space; and expressed her support of widening the sidewalks There being no further input from the audience members, Chairman Crowley closed the public hearing Chairman Crowley requested the following changes to the draft plan: • Master Page 63, 2A -iii, that verbiage be added to specifically define "Recreational Use", Master Page 63, Item 2A -vi, that verbiage be added to specifically define "newsstands "; • Master Page 63, Item 2A -vii, stated that it is not clear what the difference is between this item and Item 2A -1, suggesting to strike the words "retail- service uses "; • Master Page 63, Item 2B -vii, expressed his opinion that a large bank would be more appropriate at the street - front, noting that it would add more foot traffic on the street; • Master Page 65, Item 7d -ii, suggested more specific language such as "There shall be no setback." Responding to Commissioner Boulgarides' inquiry with regard to Master Page 64, Item 6d, Tattoo Parlors, Assistant City Attorney Wohlenberg explained that the Attorney's Office will be revising the "Prohibited Uses" sections of this draft plan, noting that a list of specific permitted uses would be more appropriate. Vice -Chair Wycoff requested, echoed by Commissioner Kretzmer, that staff provide a thorough set/glossary of definitions for each element at the back of the Specific Plan and that this list-of definitions be kept updated. Senior Planner Jester advised that approximately 95 percent of what is in the draft plan has already been defined in the current zoning code sections, and mentioned that staff will write new definitions for the few uses /terms which are not currently defined by the zoning code Assistant City Attorney Wohlenberg addressed the legal department's desire to make sure all the definitions match the terms which are used in the zoning ordinance and the Specific Plan; and noted for Commissioner Kretzmer that he anticipates his office will complete El Segundo Planning Comwssion Mmutes Apn127,2000 Page 6 019 the review of this draft plan by the next Planning Commission meeting In response to Chairman Crowley's suggestion, Senior Planner Jester explained that the order in which the issues are addressed in the draft plan are identical to the order of the zoning code sections; and that this was done for purposes of consistency. Ms. Jester noted for Chairman Crowley that lot width is defined by the current Zoning Code In response to Chairman Crowley's Inquiry with regard to Master Page 65, Item 7G, Assistant City Attorney Wohlenberg advised that the City may not dictate how many people may occupy a particular sized dwelling, noting that State building code preempts cities With regard to Master Page 66, Item 2 -iv, "Governmental Buildings," Chairman Crowley expressed his opposition to allowing a storage facility to be located on Main Street, stated that he would only support a governmental office on Main Street which has foot traffic; and suggested that the word "buildings" be replaced with the word "offices." He questioned the redundancy of Item 2A-v, "General Offices" whether this would fall under the same heading, noting that the same wording should apply to all of the various districts mentioned in the draft report Chairman Crowley questioned the intention of the floor area ratio of 1 5.1 on Master Page 71, Item 9B -i. Chairman Crowley re- opened the public hearing. Jack Pursell Mr. Pursell stated that only one parking lot exists in the Downtown area which is in excess of two hours, noting that five hours is not adequate, and stated that merchants and employees should have alternate places to park, suggesting a sticker permit system. Vice -Chair Wycoff expressed his belief that overall City parking is too limited; and pointed out that providing additional off -site parking for merchants and employees could free up on -site parking for potential customers With regard to Master Page 72, Item 3A, "Permitted Accessory Uses," Chairman Crowley questioned whether the wording as proposed is strong enough to protect the current merchants to continue displaying their wares on the sidewalk. El Segundo Planning Commission Mmutes Apn127,2000 Page 7 of 12 77 in response to Chairman Crowley's comment, Commissioner Kretzmer suggested that the current merchants on the west 300 block of Richmond Street should be grandfathered as far as their use of the facility In response to Chairman Crowley's concern, Senior Planner Jester noted that there are currently non - conforming provisions in the zoning codes and that staff is proposing non - conforming provisions to continue that would allow anything that is currently and legally existing on Richmond Street Chairman Crowley recessed the meeting at 8.00 P.M. and reconvened the meeting at 8;15 P.M. With regard to Master Page 71, North Richmond Street District, Chairman Crowley expressed his preference that the City initially start off with Option 1 -- Commercial Mixed Use -- believing that this option would be the most appropriate at this point in time, and expressed his preference that residential properties face like residential properties and the same for commercial properties facing commercial properties. Chairman Crowley stated that he doesn't like the idea of giving up on commercial use on North RichmonJ Street at this point in time. Vice -Chair Wycoff expressed his opinion that having a combination of commercial and residential uses would offer a flexible plan to adapt to the future interpretation of conditions; and stated that having a storefront with living space above or behind it seems to be gaining favor, especially in the revitalization of downtown areas having this type of capability. Commissioner Kretzmer expressed his preference for Option 3 — Residentiai Mixed Use — stating that it is an appropriate transitional element, and addressed his concern with supporting the continuance of complete commercial on this part of Main Street, noting that the information provided reflects retail use only, cannot be supported along the street at this point in time The Planning Commission expressed its concurrence that Option 2 — Multi- Family (R -3) Residential -- is the least attractive option to consider at this time Vice -Chair Wycoff stated that Option 3 -- Residential Mixed Use -- more closely aligns with the way he sees things going and that it is the more flexible option for consideration El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes Apn127, 2WO Page 8 of 12 7 g Commissioner Boulgandes expressed his support for Option 1 -- Commercial Mixed Use — and he expressed his strong opposition to Option 2, stated that he is not in favor of additional condominium projects; and noted his support of sidewalk dining. Commissioner Boulgarides expressed his strong desire that El Segundo maintain its small -town atmosphere and single - family residential uses. Commissioner Mahler expressed his support for Option 1 — Commercial Mixed Use — stating that the elements can support forward - visioning of where this town will be in five or ten years Commissioner Mahler addressed the need to attract businesses which will support the needs of the type of people moving into the City; and highlighted the increasing real estate values which have been observed in the City Because there seems to be a growing demand for additional housing, Chairman Crowley stated that he would prefer to expand more R -1 designations, and that he believes Option 1 is the only viable option to maintain a small -town atmosphere Vice -Chair Wycoff concurred with the idea of increasing R -1 designations The Planning Commission encouraged those residents at home to send any comments or inquiries to City staff with regard to this draft plan Senior Planner Jester advised that the draft plan can be E- mailed to those who request a copy Commissioner Boulgarides expressed his desire that the Downtown Specific Plan benefit the current residents in this City and the current business owners in this City. Commissioner Kretzmer highlighted the need to draw families into the Downtown area, noting the benefit of providing entertainment for children, and addressed the importance of creating more physical improvements to the Downtown area Vice -Chair Wycoff requested that staff use a strikeout method to identify what changes are being proposed in each section of the plan. Senior Planner Jester advised that staff will provide side notes or redline /strikeout in each section to identify which changes are being proposed EI Segundo Planning Comnussion Minutes April 27, 2000 Page 9 of 12 7° Chairman Crowley suggested the following changes to the draft plan: • With regard to Master Page 92, Item 1F -1, requested that signage be placed to show the direction of Handprint Alley and to reflect that the alley goes through Main Street; • With regard to Master Page 92, Item 1F- I(bb), suggested that architecturaltmood lighting be considered; • With regard to Master Page 93, Item 3, "Streetscape," suggested that decorative sidewalk paving be utilized in the Downtown area, • With regard to Master Page 94, Item 313-11, "Bus Stops," suggested that bus schedules be posted at the bus stops for the convenience of those who use the bus for transportation; • With regard to Master Page 94, Item 313-iii, "Bicycles," requested that the bicycle storage be located in a well -lit, easily viewable location but not blocking pedestrian access; • With regard to Master Page 95, Item 3D -I, "Street Lighting," suggested that the street lighting have interesting architectural value to enhance the aesthetics of the buildings and the immediate area, • With regard to Master Page 97, Item CI -(aa), "Storefront Signs," requested that the word "equal" be replaced with "shall be "; With regard to Master Page 97, Item C -v, "Address Signs," commented on the importance of being able to clearly identify the numbers on address signage. Chairman Crowley addressed his concern with large vehicles blocking his view when backing out of angled parking stalls, Commissioner Boulgandes expressed his belief that the narrow lanes on Main Street create a hazardous situation; and noted his support for angled parking on Main Street. Senior Planner Jester explained that Main Street is not wide enough to .,;commodate angled parking on both sides; and briefly addressee consideration of implementing angled parking on Grand Avenue. Vice -Chair Wycoff expressed his belief that angled parking in the Downtown area will create a more quaint atmosphere and that the traffic will be forced to move more slowly and safely. El Segundo Plannmg Comnnssion Minutes April 27,2000 Page 10 of 12 FO Senior Planner Jester noted for Vice -Chair Wycoff that the current sidewalk on Main Street is 12 feet wide, with 4 -foot tree - wells, leaving only 8 feet clearance for pedestrians; and addressed the proposal to increase the sidewalk area, which will provide room for more pedestrian access, outdoor dining, and store displays. Commissioner Boulgarides noted his opposition to parking meters. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that parking meters not be permitted in the Downtown area. Chairman Crowley re- opened the public hearing Jack Pursell Mr. Pursell noted that metered parking would not be a favorable option for the business owners, believing that parking meters would negatively impact the Downtown area. Mr Pursell expressed his support of angled parking on Main Street, and cited the attractive angled parking which has been implemented in the area of Hollywood Riviera Vice -Chair Wycoff requested that staff take another look at angled parking on Main Street, considering various options of limiting the size of tree -wells and sidewalks Chairman Crowley expressed his belief that pedestrians feel safer walking on sidewalks which have parked cars between them and the moving traffic With regard to Master Page 101, 3B, Chairman Crowley expressed some concern with the requirement of extensive landscaping in the alley fagade In response to Chairman Crowley's comment, Senior Planner Jester noted that the landscaping along the alley fagade will be used to screen the service uses which are off the alley; and she clarified that Item 4A is more of an introduction to B and C which follows. With regard to Master Page 101, E -1, Chairman Crowley noted the necessity that the Plaza area at City Hall become more user friendly; and stated that he does not want any improvements of the Plaza to obscure City Hall Director Hansen addressed some of the studies which are occurring at City Hall to make it more user friendly, such as better space El Segundo Planning Comnussion Minutes April 27, 2000 Page 11 of 12 8, 1 utilization, improved ingress /egress, improvement in front door identification, and implementation of directional signage. Vice -Chair Wycoff commended the Planning Division on the new layout of the Department, noting that it is very inviting. With regard to Master Page 103, Chairman Crowley suggested the inclusion of architectural lighting at the four Gateway intersections, and suggested that the bell tower at El Segundo High School be lit with creative architectural lighting. Brief comment was made with regard to creating better aesthetics at the gateways to the City, such as Main Street and Imperial Highway Commissioner Kretzmer moved, seconded by Commissioner Mahler, MOTION to continue the public hearing to the next Planning Commission meeting, May 11, 2000 Passed 5 -0 None REPORTFROM DIRECTOR Chairman Crowley noted his pleasure with the removal of the fencing PLANNING between the Washington Mutual building and Ralph's; and briefly COMMISSOINERS addressed a recent newspaper article about Los Angeles' concern COMMENTS over its lack of control of wireless communications Commissioner Kretzmer stated that the views reflected in last week's newspaper article on Downtown were not necessarily the views of the Downtown Task Force but that of one individual. There being no further discussion, Commissioner Kretzmer moved, ADJOURNMENT seconded by Vice -Chair Wycoff, to adjourn the meeting at 10:05 P.M. to the regular meeting of May 11, 2000, at 6:00 P.M. Passed 5 -0. PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 11th DAY OF May, 2000 rn Hansen, Director D ctor of Community, Economic and Development City of El Segundo, California ian Crowle , C airman of the Planning Commission City of El Segundo, California El Segundo Planning Comnnssion Minutes Apnl27,2000 Page 12 of 12 R? CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PUBLIC HEARING: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: REQUEST: PROPERTY INVOLVED: Introduction May 11, 2000. Environmental Assessment No. 474, General Plan Amendment No. 99 -2, Zone Change No. 99 -2, and Zone Text Amendment No. 99 -5 City of El Segundo Various Downtown Specific Plan 100 -500 Blocks Main Street, 100 -300 Blocks Richmond Street (excluding R -3 portion), and 100-200 Blocks West Grand Avenue The proposed project is a Specific Plan for the Downtown the revitalization and future development of the core are encompasses both development standards and capita when implemented, will have a positive impact on the Downtown more walkable and "livable ", consistent wi Statement. II. Recommendation area of El Segundo for a of the City. The Plan I improvements which, community making the th the adopted Vision Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission open th public hearing, take public input, discuss the proposed Specific Plan, resolution recommending approval of the Downtown Specific Plan Council. e continued and adopt a to the City 2 17 83 Ill. Background On April 27, 2000 the Planning Commission opened the public hearing, took testimony, discussed the project and provided direction to staff on several issues. Staff revised the Plan based on direction from the Commission. All new text in the Plan is shown as double underlined and deleted text is shown as stoke -eat. Additionally, staff has done further editing of the format and text. In areas where substantive changes were made staff has also shown these areas as double underlined and strike -out text. IV. Analysis The Commission requested that staff add definitions for particular uses that are currently not defined within the Zoning Code. Staff has added these new definitions as Section F. of Chapter VI, Development Standards. Since the Specific Plan, when adopted, will be incorporated into the Zoning Code, all of the current definitions in Chapter 20.08 will also apply to the Speck Plan area. Additionally, the Design Standards criteria of the Speck Plan will regulate the architecture and design of any new construction. These standards will ensure that new structures are compatible with the surrounding environment. The prohibited uses sections within Chapter IV. Development Standards and other sections will be revised based on input from the City Attorney's office For the North Richmond Street District, the consensus of the Commission was that Option 2- Multi- family (R -3) Residential was not a recommended option and therefore this Option has been deleted from the document. The Commission also discussed a new option, Option 4- Single- Family (R -1) Residential, as a possibility for North Richmond Street. Staff would not recommend this option as single family residential would not be compatible with the existing Multi -Family Residential Zoning and uses to the north and west of the site, or the commercial to the east. Throughout the City the sequence of zoning is from less intense residential (R -1), to more dense residential (R -2 and R -3), then to commercial and mixed uses. Single -Family Residential would be inconsistent and incompatible with this land use pattern. The Commission requested information in Chapter VII, Parking, on how the proposed standards compare to the existing parking standards. Staff has provided iiibold]jj notes in this Chapter to identify the substantive changes. Signage was another issue discussed by the Commission, in that some members felt that stronger language, using "shall" instead of "should ", may be appropriate in some areas However, there was no consensus or direction to staff, so no changes were incorporated Regarding the minimum lettering height for addressing (page 61), the Uniform Fire Code requires a minimum 6 inch lettering for commercial uses. Staff also noted the Commission's opposition to parking meters in the Downtown The Commission discussed different on- street angled parking options for the Main Street District- (300 -400 blocks Main Street.) Conceptual sketches for various options are included in Chapter IX- Implementation and Financing, Section B.1. Sidewalk Widening /Street Narrowing. Bullet points on the pros and cons of each alternative are included on the sketches. Additionally, input was requested from the traffic engineer, and the Fire, Police, Public Works, and Recreation and Parks Department on the configurations. The City's traffic engineer has reviewed the possibility of angled parking on both sides of the street and has determined that there would not be adequate width unless the sidewalks are narrowed, which is contrary to the goals of the Speck Plan of creating a pedestrian - onented environment. The total right -of -way width in the 300 -400 blocks of Main Street is 80 feet. A minimum of 66 feet of curb to curb width would be required for 30 degree angled parking on both sides, which would narrow the sidewalks from 12 to 7 feet on each side A curb to curb width of 68 feet would be required for 45 degree angled parking on both sides which would narrow the existing 12 -foot sidewalks to 6 feet. There is adequate right -of- way width to accommodate angled parking on one side of the street, preferably the west side as there are more commercial uses and only one curb cut on the west side. However, this configuration would still not provide a center left -tum lane, the street would be an asymmetrical design, and the sidewalks would only be widened 1 5 to 2 5 feet, from 12 feet to 13.5 feet for 45 degree parking and 14.5 feet for 30 degree parking Currently there are 33 on- street parking spaces provided on the west side of these two blocks of Main Street. If angled parking were provided on the west side of the street, a rough estimate indicates that approximately 42 standard size spaces could be provided. The Fire Department indicated that that they have concerns with any type of angled parking, particularly as it relates to the elimination of the center left -tum lane. The center left -turn lane provides the opportunity for emergency vehicles to pass even if there is traffic on both sides of the street blocking the flow If traffic were blocking both directions, then emergency personnel would have to go out of their way around the block, which would take more time and potentially compromise life- safety. The Police Department Traffic Division is also opposed to any type of angled street parking on Main Street, as they believe that it would result in traffic congestion The Public Works Department has expressed concern with angled parking with angled, not straight, curb lines These concerns are the same as they previously expressed with curb extensions They believe that trash would collect along the curbs, as street sweepers can not access these angled areas. They also have a concern for potential drainage problems particularly since Main Street is very flat. And finally, they believe that there would be bus maneuvering difficulties. The Recreation and Parks Department indicated that they would recommend the three -lar,,� configuration, as angled parking on one side of the street would ;,reate an asymmetrical and off- balanced streetscape design, which aesthetically is less appealing. They felt that the other angled options would be inconsistent with the goal of creating a pedestrian - oriented environment, as the sidewalks would need to be narrowed substantially New sections have been added to the Appendix and to the Implementation and Financing sections to address financing options. When reviewing the Implementation section the Commission should focus their attention and 8 519 discussion on the concepts of the various programs and projects, and provide direction to staff on a conceptual level. The City Council has the role of identifying appropriate funding sources and allocating funds, so their focus will be on funding the programs and projects recommended by the Commission. Additionally, the Finance Department is in the process of reviewing different funding options and will provide this information to the City Council. Section 67- page 77, Twinkle lights, has been modified to provide a revised cost estimate for lighting the existing as well as the proposed new trees. If lights are installed prior to any streetscape improvements, the electrical infrastructure could potentially be reused, depending on the street and street tree configuration. Interdepartmental Comments Planning staff worked closely with many departments to develop the Speck Plan including the Public Works, Recreation and Parks, Police and Fire Departments, as well as the Building Safety and Economic Development Divisions, to solicit their input on the Plan. Staff has consulted with and incorporated other department comments into the document during the development. However, the other City departments are still in the process of reviewing and commenting on the final draft, which the Planning Commission has before them, and further comments and revisions may be forthcoming V. Environmental Review A Draft Initial Study was prepared by staff for the protect, which identified potential adverse environmental impacts related to transportation /circulation. No significant adverse environmental impacts were identified which could not be mitigated to an insignificant level, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is proposed. However, if a two -lane configuration (required for angled parking) instead of three -lanes is recommended for Main Street, the traffic analysis indicates there will be significant traffic impacts, as defined by CEQA. The City could still approve the two -lane configuration, however a Statement of Overriding Considerations and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would need to be adopted. As the two -lane configuration has already been analyzed in the Circulation Element EIR, this CEQA document would be the vehicle for approving this configuration The Draft Initial Study is being circulated for inter - departmental review and comments, as required by City Council Resolution No. 3805 and State CEQA guidelines. All departments are still in the process of reviewir-c- the document and their comments will be incorporated into the Mitigated Negative Declaration as well as the Speck Plan as appropriate Any comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission as soon as they are received. t 8E. 20 VI. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive public comment on the Plan, and adopt a resolution making a recommendation that the City Council adopt the Speck Plan VII. Exhibits 1. Draft Speck Plan- dated May 11, 2000 2. American Planning Association- News and Views, January 2000- BIDs- Making Business Districts More Competitive 3. Draft Resolution No. 2475 4 Summary of Commercial versus Residential Usage -West side of the 300 block of Richmond Street, Prepared by Jack Buckingham- dated April 27, 2000 L �)- Ib_ - Laurie B Jester Senior Planner 46mqs M Hansen, it for of Community, Economic and Development Services P \Planning & Building SaFWKetz\PCstaftport -5-71 doc 8721 { s T �) A � �E 0 / E, � \� / \ ! � � ci Cs $|2 §$41 vt 94 Vx P. V3 � k ! -- ff . }2- �-- � - - -.- 7 ! $2§§§ §§m�° !f- ��' � � R vs» � II -- # k §{(k /����` r §J�a/IS0 q X22 ® )# $ /k nom`■ A�a2K2rd! /��--- © -� - -a \\ �K � Qc�f e # C%$ � kew « a � ■J� §2 CL cr g ■40 - � �I £ � ! «: �a \gig 2� �k k� 2 ■ /2 a �' 8a � z CL cr - � �I £ � ! «: �a \gig 2� �k k� 2 ■ /2 a �' 8a � z 1 tk- jllj.L _l_.J )AY iJ l311YIIJG %ELI ING fIQllltJl ;;;;11.1%1111 I NEWS, TRENDS AND CONSUMER ADVICE L)-1- fNSfDE Iroperty 111 HMN 1, III.. lux• Ids to His I'ingdom I'll IhwNnn Rhtln.l iJJ..I nunh.I bona ,L.. ..I In%uL lu... it 1 111 �nl. 1 nI� p u.l u .L 111.1 p1up. 111 uI . nl Im , nuryn .,1 m II ul.l. .1. u1 .h lu I. II 1 ..0 uuuem I, . nn Iron ..1 111,.1 µ1,t WNry In nnnun 11.111„ ph., uw m1 Ins lnnl Jl.k, III Iwuu ,1hn II, pIII, .1. AI ddm pu.puu.- o uul btu u uI 11111 61111 wnunl .1, IIU.I pun... wn. ., nl Ih LLLh I till, 'ImI nu tnnl Nl lh, Ikvuly m d w hndA m kinhbu nuJde ,nu .d \lu haJ 1 u. 111.1 huN11 111 nN d.unl II (I ulehula lit see "of Preeerly. KS )f Putting inked n Plastic s- Housing IM % 1V Should .NO I•n n1uuS wilt nvtau i 1101 1 ,• l YNl htl .,p UP i rs Downstairs stars . m WRW M-18WATAWOMME NNW., 41 Y.ISIIIIL L.IIII.. 1. 4Y. is Ix.x a limw0ra \umnnr l u..wwre en the lmirnuy nl howl uINJl 11.11x111 tlrc Nagmrl 14.411 Y.duu %hY Noe, !Mixed -u:+e nelghhol hood, with Icsuieni-es above ground -level shorn dIr ntdkulg d conlehdkl, Ily &1111111 N 1111111 %cu nl In 1w Inn, hu1 Nrnp,m le 1111 I, w ,1IN1 Sul uum 1 0. N,., n d +•Y el.% 1,. 1 dt It , .1+\ .Ind 61 ad I.n h.m1, d. .1111 M11 It i\, lu 11. lu%l up ant 111011 ill d ill . L. 61 . .1 I I at.aeu.. Ilk 1, m, 1 1111 %!11.14, l 1 14.4 Salon nor nl +I\ tit I'll 1n•uI I% ohr. In1 aLul. Ihl a +Lop, nn 111. lull 1J.n k ,.1 IISI Sou I Set L l,d I tt urn 111,0 11 1 . Ili' n • I t Ins %pmr aho\1 111. o amly , imt uI Calls(1++.111 4 nl hu ,1 top%lu 1, n nu% u. .111l1g.1 Sln.dl +oh nn ill I n ell III 111. Ill r S11u t Lye hall nw non il,6, neuma111% uuhul till It u I 1 I11.111111 , ml 11. 111 11 it1111111g 111 1,.11 11 ,IIm I,I III1 .lad 111 n,.u1 Iola 111 our ,w+polp 1111(l It t1mlg and S.t \ill)• la.w+l uwnoul; Ilivil m %eel busuu„ If % Ilk, a 11111" 1 un. p, ml llllag+ I mmil le S uLtgh "I eewilln a \vtthm bulh0odl%.11111mvh,uk Ivalkmgdlslaurc I I Iht 11,IV +1N IulI %Wp 'All go dour tit l lL malls and au101noh111 S streLi for a Lit]' 0l when it %va% t,wilit 1'.] people In tits 111 ul((CL Illy b11ddulgS ahm. 'Imp, Ill du LV4n th111g ti❑ I11.11 Inn d 111ui satin•% (0111 111."I a 110% Inr. ALun Nut., t but I don) take it nul Lush onghhudnOOis nu,L11 •• have hu unu Iu1 m Isle IIIIIICII 11.11", Is SUZANNE FIIIAa1011E 11'111 111 a Im. .1111•, .••I ,, m., I.. lad,,, wt Is a% ,111% I1,111+ISM and NaW t)tiva 1, ohrre city duv1111, +1111 lulls:\ IIIIId11] a11d apaill14r1+, Illy .111 L k•dlm9 gum Vsµ Sion,. pubs and wdu t T,IAct, nn tht Stu 1 I l," l 'Ihr 111%m m nuuL-0 Ili Nuns Sb, rn Was dulls Ills die grillind Ill,." nl Illlll.l Ings and .glarunenl, till du %euuul RINK, saki Rnlserl 16unS, Horn 1111 sit gtaAnate pmgmins m arlhurlmre m fISC "W6 part of out Iumm111111011.11:, but n•s uutcusillgly disappeared Uudng die 2001 cenulty, nl0st ulk"k m COMIM1Ill" „x111 the Way of lh Nry;. (.armty and lns Angdts Ihpy Ire, nn, dense• business only urbal hill)% su1 r0unded by snbnrinn sprm,l r fly pi ,I m rs del W LILar Ime% %LP.u.uillg 1111%m e%, (roil resldauhd atvas Ilu•re w.IS an .Ixumpnlm Ihal p.1, III,- Ilanled It, hIt• ill Ibl %tihudn ill. hams ill nnillg W.I% la k11 p 1111hke u,. , Please see Mixed Use, g10 KID SUNDAY, MAY 1 1000 '1 m running law Is It OIO' 1 my, 'Sure, fine. I'll be hem anyvray' In bdw clads. she con do mmudorms U"W Benhaaasans a WWV* ad dmnb% htrLgf up her w WimxlL After haot she W. of ..dos and she semen onside has living mom will wattle the Pmsm- by pl kn mound dot ornupm e "Waal 1 go alit IF tlmrcr I Jun walk to my favorite could rwwurmL Eric disputes, thin bank—pvary drugs wilun adiung daanm I son IS tloan Ws wnm for a (UP of oo(kne and pkk up a OIL l try w do cverplungan fmL I Iavc a Mew car, lint 1 and I take it Out much Sim Iagldla, Tsty Shan asdwL Ilya above o gig imp and red OR mm Office in a env -llary, budthng in- armed by a nlbmdN atucmw ur Newodmni Enrich Quvwr "ErW L moan like spaamcot W. ,itg Them's no yard spas, and pan%= mkt 'BW uw., vn far oawsdgll [he dmdvantagm I like the hunts and bustle during the day, and at night it quie s down and you're In your awn Hare wo1kL 'it's a fan amt 1 Jun walk to the market, the bank and 30 different rrumuloms 1 can walk to the uman a the hay " Upping In a business disadcs Im t for everyone, but boosters of mind =vmnng coy It woks v/IIh people of the right IempemumnL "Snme People my, who would wand tp Bvo dowmi ter But everybody's not Bin amne," USC's Is. mid 'A lea of people enjoy living dedin ow, o;rady, snit a oil mom want to They're fed up with living at a dmmttw from wham they walk end the things they like le do, like going to conmsm and wellbmry "If only, 1% of the population fumed nut to be Interested in Inv Ing In downlawm LA. we wwldnl know where in put ahem all" he mid roar her pan, Einmom has no complaints about living on the greet wham she wads ' 1 meet shirk of any; she sold This is the hnppust I m ever ben' Kathryn field or a fpeefnum writer uamt ,I Bandla Swim Mo/grmar Site ten be machad m U.1,10 hanapnn 4 'sal PrcrenNng Seenaa FrtNx✓, �a mulignrolmoi t /lean WnYMmtiy rI kviery /Nip[ /!eG/ /rplV ape /r m C"juira Thuae hm mu detaebr� ✓ugle /mmly bums✓ of u/m-arla tovo.,Glry plaru range m ✓sae no 66edna nu rn up M 4,991 ✓quart fat wth attOge Lit ✓ra<✓ of 11,8W.,qurutfed Fra[!wlp 3 -mid 4anr Storages, foxury onmsutw ohmmd, Jnlns Jpncunu mo✓hr 101I d/!d gonna fort enbvr to large decnntnrc nutnm mulAm11 overkarkinq mngm/ntnta/ens, GrrLbadJ nor pienotghuu eaughb,/rhwsd u ono Senta Gtatar Em It • a — BROM RE i./W E S' Drmlrndc Lu. From the H (7ap) bat -MO ,u °t4- SoVaCaIXw mmChaewtR Mixed -Use -I- of narrate sad m Nuvpnn nae.b met she s.old Ner smldure had to mere mm Coarnuod tram Al me evil, and residtMlal requhe- apzn.^ Ilarns said "And in The mantis for umpmq, the mfe[y, days when indusay was 4uae nos- and parking. The city Mquares two coos It wets o gad Idea parking "Mina Ian 2A00 squ In the Just couple of Jludrs, m front midenms and four spars for land heLatne ecome and amag 1 BW -square-fool commercial belching Industrial plants moved sties, an Finamme needed room 11,11 of life Cmcs udan plJnn4-rs for ax parking spou. 1, It Slnwan g1L1LLa nlmen+l m ere Site made anal far parking be- ,unrp ..used rise aeon where po-a- hmd tar building where palm. Ph too rind work ten park m land. SPa. Iwo I lams served m mamma of lire Juan deep abtdt L patmtuw by Downtown Sna4-gu IlLnong the sly mid 1 unlimited for Ib4- en of Ins Mn I mmnore lm pan ur her re gl It Ii app inn"I I plao ni 1g9d on tail span In ihna Malhj, an mlkss promote Heed um in "allies Mul who has eprned a gallery on than ueli-s of camnrer'.1 stews nt Ins ire mtied Petit Ldlera BNIL fin Angeles IILWYCL III till oVIIIIla Of ardam s nonlmma, arahl lumnma ulmmtrtnl bwldings sill the Blanco andbar; her works m l inn 'if..."'I' of"nkllnAt rinM1 Sedan r sum, nosed 1114- pminn Jre JI Since moving if lot Nawnsher, Flatly 111 PI LLL and a Ina Inn. ort f manners lots found her live -work mmup, dung ILL mud arm Ilessxmlhumfwlalaherpm- I hurl 1 hnuang above the Mir hfe Salon eusmmers who express Bunn of NLnn Art or Olympic mwresl In her building am Juvmd nnulcv,Id and du brad tented upstairs for a tour At lrk,t oil llnmdnely in nnwnlawn I wwnore s home features ro 1-A 'Ind shove the shops oil Life nnamm moms with French doors I find Streu Promenade to Santa that open onto small balconies blonnj m nano a hw with wraught icon milirlgs, wear DLVCIVPell urn nludLfyotg 11u covered limestone Boon and bodies IIrrIL buildings on 4111 Sorel m I-A with nil rubbed broom futures for 11M, will flalure lines abnw re- an Old World look I'll Ernes on it" Pored BimL i-,. lit C&d use home with Shall pOLkeu Of nosLd me I reach antiques Lveryahnng s nclghhnfl o its oil join be found nuthwmerilly I much, she and In lhrnuglunil OnagL County, w the kildown mantis one or her rancor finding In dnwnlawn ILummgton nc ads A well Iwo coma -I ing 13LI111 San Chancre and Umng,. able Ifer roomer bed and both FS,- M1,11 emmog gives punptc tilt tuPy .Foil of the third OWt tied, uppormmly a live near Ibur work opens onto a;aria deck whore slip I lean Inter a, llLmker l ldl lower Jun lmk rot at me wrwuMulg Jul ei Lis AIII I lu budding his a loge and watch the ten set over diet grotty store and dry dnlmr On scan in [he dbm m th, first Boor own. ten the vat 'People It mounng m Say, and thud and foonb ream and 'Would you build one of Ilwm for tod01 nn the rtnlamng 12 Hows met If r lived in a twdrnlial area I its hnorL Is eight mantes tram no one would be able to ice what Ins efi ce and Lase In reslnnrems I m doing. raamom and ,"ks And 11th" ame"Hols "11', She s I dy Loved Iwo plot vfry Lonveauu hesad Sept. building a Tuscan -nyle home Or cuune it s noisier and if no Follbmok and remodeling a 1pill dun 1 like drvedly, Pin might I ranch style midenm on lads is Ill)( like living dewnwwm We have land an Nanvpon Beach fv4-ry Llhna and nmatme hack - ilvnug wham she works also ground 1 find that fanwmte But Oakes it wake w mn dw mwn t ..thus sent to be Ivuh pelli le Jost ;Ike the fact [lint the mom is an in IIkL thlont. ns wmmn of my home rather than a I nnlmnrL has on nt 20 y4-vrs btnmcss,'shemN itsmureper buynlg Lowfr, and imusts rein sann] If to nWemer calls to my I,ing or rf )LIFId rig Ibun Ihu1 11111119 ,111'] mnvmg u,1 Silt ;Ikea ILL work kin nindi that silt a sun; - mk for tilt Lnnlraslar5 hLUIv- So11 111, 11n1n 1 wort In give rip - _ ,� .. , tilt t till V Wfnt and elfileAly Of wnfknlg is a stylist In I dL'td4-d la " molt Lwrythmg under I'LL pouf IF wad _ I I11aort al"Ied VW ssr'v jot Lift alt be his hunit And s.dnn oil - L dot n"It'll hnlyd was n; fejdy p,It of tilt tannery Voltage business district approved for nLaW uw. by Newport Ilwch In e- Ihr 191101 I14-adltnLS all din l;llnwd of ,ew,al udh4-r unnm4-mal areas of theuly aLludnlgslluarnundllm - It dixul and N,.l I pan I ounnn Im..gtu thL hid Iwo ' YLJ s ngn when it Jun v parking tut I IF tone hrn oil Ipnk m an oquts ustl n, Shots lwmlrn would 111 Oh SUmnm yn.I ahnuld world I nlltlhog here Working with On mdn[wt and mbconlraUnrs splint 10 trades I Inannrf spent tgw olmuhs em- nmg I I rowh 11,41 bmIll., that n.Ifl ILI Intl lilt',dw i I Llw /h9n '1 m running law Is It OIO' 1 my, 'Sure, fine. I'll be hem anyvray' In bdw clads. she con do mmudorms U"W Benhaaasans a WWV* ad dmnb% htrLgf up her w WimxlL After haot she W. of ..dos and she semen onside has living mom will wattle the Pmsm- by pl kn mound dot ornupm e "Waal 1 go alit IF tlmrcr I Jun walk to my favorite could rwwurmL Eric disputes, thin bank—pvary drugs wilun adiung daanm I son IS tloan Ws wnm for a (UP of oo(kne and pkk up a OIL l try w do cverplungan fmL I Iavc a Mew car, lint 1 and I take it Out much Sim Iagldla, Tsty Shan asdwL Ilya above o gig imp and red OR mm Office in a env -llary, budthng in- armed by a nlbmdN atucmw ur Newodmni Enrich Quvwr "ErW L moan like spaamcot W. ,itg Them's no yard spas, and pan%= mkt 'BW uw., vn far oawsdgll [he dmdvantagm I like the hunts and bustle during the day, and at night it quie s down and you're In your awn Hare wo1kL 'it's a fan amt 1 Jun walk to the market, the bank and 30 different rrumuloms 1 can walk to the uman a the hay " Upping In a business disadcs Im t for everyone, but boosters of mind =vmnng coy It woks v/IIh people of the right IempemumnL "Snme People my, who would wand tp Bvo dowmi ter But everybody's not Bin amne," USC's Is. mid 'A lea of people enjoy living dedin ow, o;rady, snit a oil mom want to They're fed up with living at a dmmttw from wham they walk end the things they like le do, like going to conmsm and wellbmry "If only, 1% of the population fumed nut to be Interested in Inv Ing In downlawm LA. we wwldnl know where in put ahem all" he mid roar her pan, Einmom has no complaints about living on the greet wham she wads ' 1 meet shirk of any; she sold This is the hnppust I m ever ben' Kathryn field or a fpeefnum writer uamt ,I Bandla Swim Mo/grmar Site ten be machad m U.1,10 hanapnn 4 'sal PrcrenNng Seenaa FrtNx✓, �a mulignrolmoi t /lean WnYMmtiy rI kviery /Nip[ /!eG/ /rplV ape /r m C"juira Thuae hm mu detaebr� ✓ugle /mmly bums✓ of u/m-arla tovo.,Glry plaru range m ✓sae no 66edna nu rn up M 4,991 ✓quart fat wth attOge Lit ✓ra<✓ of 11,8W.,qurutfed Fra[!wlp 3 -mid 4anr Storages, foxury onmsutw ohmmd, Jnlns Jpncunu mo✓hr 101I d/!d gonna fort enbvr to large decnntnrc nutnm mulAm11 overkarkinq mngm/ntnta/ens, GrrLbadJ nor pienotghuu eaughb,/rhwsd u ono Senta Gtatar Em It • a — BROM RE i./W E S' Drmlrndc Lu. From the H (7ap) bat -MO ,u °t4- LUXURY OCEAN -FRONT APARTMENTS Now AVAILABLE, SILL SILL nom aurlh4-r salon ncarhy a••^ m Nuvpnn nae.b met she s.old r... Prctnitnr exclusive 6lxur hr h -rue residences wltll brmtbtahm orrnn antl city views 8 y 8 8 y Ioll the hutdnlg m4- eight w ILL lump Islay loll, located ul the hint( of Aymmna coastal Sanm Mantra Rentals front rift tti,000'r Indmwerk miry bLkseog rnm i tall III \ s.,1.. r plfnd w 6111 l99'I wnuxa of a I tam -upam feud retml ,room Jun w... /Jn��� 8 8 8.3 Z I ref Onnr inn 2 50 ��� � 3 3.9 5 !' forn Yt o 1 an ptqLn L luiIt pn pu Iv1 IuJa 11 —1I he pLeASC eALI FOR AN NPOINM EW - uvrnS110 nut 11751 alum, f0111 Luxury Orenn -Front Apartments Jlil OChAN AVLNUI SAN1A MUNICA, CA 90401 11 IV IC IIIIIILIdI In hillid 111 a Q ().0 EIV, 5 0 C I A T E S May 8, 2000 Mr. James M. Hansen Director of Community, Economic, and Development Services City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, California 90245 Subject: Downtown Specific Plan Dear Jun. A number of individuals and organizations have expressed their opposition to the exclusion of office uses in the street facing ground floor of structures in the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street as recommended in the draft Downtown Specific Plan. It is our professional opinion and experience that the exclusion of office uses will be essential to the achievement of the community's vision to establish a vibrant, pedestrian- oriented downtown. Without such a prolubition, the critical mass of "pedestrian oriented" uses will be dissipated to the point that the fundamental premise for downtown would be inappropriate. It is the cumulative activity that results from retail, restaurant, and similar uses that generates economic vitality and identity. There are numerous examples of communities that have successfully revitalized or established new downtowns and town centers by prohibiting office uses in the ground floor of strictures. Representative examples include the cities of Culver City (Downtown). Brea (Town Center), Pasadena (Old Pasadena), Santa Monica ('I7rird Street Promenade), Long Beach (Pine Avenue), Monrovia (Downtown), and Burbank (Downtown/Media District). Similarly, there are numerous examples of cities that have failed in their intentions for vital downtowns by permitting office uses to develop along the street frontage. The City of Burbank's efforts to achieve a pedestrian - oriented neighborhood center in the Magnolia Park community failed as over 75 percent of the street frontage has converted to high technology and office toes. MM 2C , 91 EiP ASSOCIATES 11601 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD SUITE 1440 Los ANGELES, CA 90015 Telephone 310 x68 -802 Facs mlir 310 x68.8175 C � E4T, A 5 5 0 C I A T E 5 Mr. James Ni Hansen City of E Segundo May 8, 2000 Page Two The unportance of restricting downtowns to high activity pedestrian oriented uses in lieu of uses that do not exhibit high levels of customer activity, such as offices, is widely accepted as a fundamental principle by professional organizations throughout the nation. Among these are such groups as the Local Government Commission, in their Livable Communities initiatives, Institute for Urban Design, Congress for New Urbanism, in the -Ahwahnee Principles, and Urban Land Institute. Anucipating that downtown El Segundo may, one day, become vital community center that serves its residents, we recommend that the recommended prohibition of office uses in the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street be retained in the Downtown Specific Plan Sincerely, Elwood Tesc r, AIQ' Duector of Urb Planning and Desiga 92 Willard E.W. 'Krick 1414 E. Mariposa Ave. El Segundo, Ca 90245 Members of the El Segundo Planning Commission Dear Commissioners, May 8, 2000 I support the revitalization of Downtown to the point where I think we need a "good" Plan. However, there are several elements which have been proposed that I believe would have a negative impact on our City. I was a member of the last General Plan Advisory Council. In fact, I served, as the chairman. I'm familiar with the relationship between FAR & roadway capacities, (Density vs traffic congestion). Do not increase the FAR above the current allowed downtown anywhere. In fact you may decide it would be wise to reduce it if the new traffic study shows it to be a problem. I suggest that before you widen the sidewalks that you restripe parking for angle parking on Main street. That will automatically reduce traffic from (4) lanes to (2) lanes. After a trial period, if you find we can not live with (2) lanes, it will be easy to return to (4). Also, I've heard the proposal to reduce retail & increase residential in downtown zoning. I am opposed to this. We should be using the funds available to Economic Development for expanding retail in downtown without changing its character. We need to preserve our "small town atmosphere ". We should not have 45 ft. high buildings there, when (2) story is enough. Instead of residential above retail, or in addition to it, we should allow offices on 21d story of buildings. That would add more foot traffic to the area than residential. It is also a good idea to build one or two parking garages downtown. Lastly I recommend that we install the latest in fiber optic cables to attract & support internet & high tech. small businesses in that area. Sincerely, MAY 4 2C Willard E.W. Krick ¢gad, /�►P � h.m�'' 9� Nicky Wisloeky L 6iAl - 8 2000 1208 E Pine Ave, El Segundo CA 90245 Phone/Fax 310 -322 -3078 - Email JoeW10@Juno Subject Downtown Revitalization Proposal I support the Downtown Revitalization Project I have been a member of the original Vision Committee and the more recent Downtown Committee Although I firmly believe we need a Downtown Plan, there were and are several elements of the final proposal I believe should be given more consideration FAR'S VS CIRCULATION ELEMENT A committee of non - professionals is not in a position to judge the impact of FAR's on the Circulation Element of the General Plan As a member of the General Plan Committee we were told that the existing 1 1 FAR was too dense for the traffic on Main Street The traffic consultant recommended a 75 FAR The General Plan Circulation Element before that recommended that Main Street be widened The latest Circulation Element has not been available to the Downtown Committee so we had no way ofludging the recommended FAR's. If the more recent Circulation Element is at odds with the previous two, some additional study should be considered before increasing the FAR and allocating funds to narrow the street Several people advocate angle parking on Main Street Perhaps this should be tried before. widening the sidewalks It would be far less expensive to implement and it would be reversable if proven impractical. In order to accomodate the outdoor dining aspects eliminate the 0 set back on the front of the buildings Permit an incentive setback for outdoor dining on the first level which would not be calculated in the FAR That may make the street frontages more architecturally interesting It would also not create a future conflict over who should pay for widening sidewalks While a wider sidewalk with tables may be of interest to a restaurant owner, the owner of a dress shop may not want to help finance the project If the less costly proposal doesn't work, the City can always go to the sidewalk widening plan. MARKETING ASSISTANCE Marketing assistance is something that could be done right nOw without expending additional funds The funding for advertising property east of Sepulveda could be diverted to Main Street & Richmond Street While individual retailers may not be able to afford their own consultant, the City could employ a marketing consultant to advise retail business owners. The city participation may be a selling point for landlords who are trying to rent their buildings Property owners east of Sepulveda are already competing for vacant property and/or raising their rents There is no further justification for the expenditure of public funds in that area. One recommendation made by the task force is to shrink downtown retail areas "if supported by market analysis." Has such an analysis been made? By whom? If not, why is consideration being given to shrinking the retail areas? I do not recall that the task force recommended an AUP for outdoor uses on Richmond I believe such a requirement may be considered discriminatory As long as Richmond is part of the Downtown Specific Plan, they should be given equal treatment under law that any other street is given 94 I do not, and did not support the 45 foot height limit (page 017). There maybe a differential from the east side of Main to the west side where part of the building is subterranian Anything other than a 2 story street frontage will change the character of downtown. All the consultants and many residents recognize the charm of our "small town atmosphere." Why do we now want 45 foot high buildings there9 I do not support the recommendation that residential units above retail not be counted in the FAR This has the effect of increasing the total FAR downtown and I doubt that this has been taken into consideration in the new Circualtion Element I do not support the increase in permitted residential units from 1 to 2 units (page 017) for 25 foot lots I believe the standard for residential units should be uniform throughout the community In this case preferential treatment is proposed for what promises to be one of the most congested areas of the city If lots are combined, existing standards would permit more density The Council Sub Committee recommended that any residential use be limited to the owner of the retail business below I recommend that the term "The Village" not be applied to the Ralph's site The term will be confused with the Village Shoppiing Center on Mariposa. North Richmond Street For the time being I recommend North Richmond Street be left alone for anything other than cosmentic or marketing improvements If the street is narrowed on Main Street, traffic will be diverted to Richmond Richmond may become more valuable as a retail destination If, and when, the Main Steet/South Richmond Street improvements are completed, further study may be indicated to enhance the North Richmond area The future of North Richmond will be influenced by the future development of the Ralph's site I believe it is premature to tamper with North Richmond at this time I did, and continue to recommend that the most up -to -date fiber optic cables be installed along Main Street to provide an incentive and selling point for second -story office rentals I believe that Main currently has some underground wiring in the alley Building office space on the second flloor over retail will be less costly than building residential. If we have done a marketing survey, a comparison of rental rates for office space vs residential space should have been determined The day -time employees will provide customers for the day -time stores. PARKING The Parking Garage on Holly is a good idea If there is much organized opposition to that plan, I would only remind city officials that there have been plans for a parking sturcture on the existing parking lot south of the fire department Plans may already have been drawn A three story parking structure (one underground for city employees) may be an alternative Sincerely, V1 LCIC41 (D -S I�,cic4,, Nicky Wislocky q5 rections of Arena, Sheldon, Sierra Streets, believing this will p al to traffic congestion; addressed possibly extending tehane-w:y raffic rcufat'on ail the way from EI Segundo Boulev Grand Avenue; d requested that the City conduct a fe ility study to address the types of issues involving Smoky Hollo . Director Hansen, response to Mr Tonno's ments, stated that the City does have in is years budget fun set aside for a study of Smoky Hollow; and led that staff i for ways to provide incentives for growth ar solutions to parking and provide Mr Tonno with the meeting Director I the study this summer, the study, the enform� Commission / evefop t of the area and is looking for ation blems, etc. and stated that he will i rmateon in regard to this matter after xplained that staff anticipates starting vis that once staff obtains the results of will passed along to the Planning Kathryn Lourtie erector of the Chambe f Commerce In response o Mr. Tonno's comment with and to the breakfast meeting, Lourtie clarified that the meeting a Chamber function and tha a Agenda does not provide for discussi of the Downtown being no further input, Chairman public Senior Planner Jester highlighted the following materials which were distributed to the Planning Commission: 1 Letter from EIP Associates regarding the revitalization of Downtown (of record), ­ 2 Letter from Willard E.W. Krick regarding the revitalization of Downtown (of record -- letter read into the record); 3 Letter from Nicky Wislocky regarding the revitalization of Downtown (of record); and 4 Los Angeles Times article regarding mixed -use developmentsineighborhoods (of record). DRAFT WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Crowley presented Item H -2, Environmental Assessment No. PUBLIC HEARINGS, 474, General Plan Amendment No. 99-2, Zone Change Amendment CONTINUED No 99 -5, Downtown Speck Plan. Address: 100 -500 blocks of Main HEARINGS, .reet and 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street. Applicant: City of El EA No. 474 2 El Segundo Planning Commission 02 Qr�' f k Mines, May 11, 2000 Segundo Property Owners Various. Senior Planner Jester reviewed the staff report as outlined in the Agenda packet — pointing out that changes were made throughout the draft report and that the changes are reflected by double underlines and strikeouts; and advised that various definitions may be found on Master Page Nos 83 -85 Chairman Crowley opened the public hearing Bill Crigger, Chairman of the Downtown El Segundo Committee (DES[) of the El Segundo Chamber of Commerce Mr Cngger advised that DESI met yesterday morning to review the Draft Downtown Specific Plan; explained that a number of people are having difficulty understanding the impact of these new standards; questioned how the estimate of 271,000 square feet of new construction in Downtown was arrived at (as indicated in the environmental assessment), believing that this amount of square footage is an enormous amount of square footage and is highly unlikely that the City would ever reach that magnitude of new development Downtown Mr Cngger suggested that an analysis, perhaps block by block, be performed to determine the true implication of these development standards, particularly with regard FAR and parking requirements, questioning whether these requirements will induce new investment/development in the Downtown area Highlighting the 271,000 square feet of additional development referenced in the environmental assessment and highlighting the fact that the traffic analysis was based on this potential, Mr. Cngger explained that DES[ is concerned that the traffic analysis may be skewed to an unrealistically high number; and that DESI believes more analysis is needed to determine what the practical outcome of the development standards will be Mr Cngger advised that DESI is in support of Option No. 1 for Richmond Street. Mr Cngger stated that DESI is concerned with creating 3 -story buildings on Main Street, believing that the topography on certain sections of Main Street from sidewalk level would make it closer to the height of a 4 -story building, noting that the typography on the west side facing the alley slopes off at certain locations along Main Street. He suggested that a formula be developed to determine where the heights are measured from and that this be carefully considered so that people understand what the mass of the building would be at those locations. DRAFT LA 1, AAI 1 3 El Segundo Planning Coniniu :ion d Mums May 11, 2000 DRAFT Mr. Cngger explained that DESI believes more specific design standards with regard to architecture are needed for design review; noted the need to clearly define the image of what the City is aspiring to; and suggested that the City provide some type of photographic representations to clearly reflect the desired design theme and standards for Downtown. Mr. Cngger noted DESI believes that something in the way of the historical buildings currently on Richmond Street is what its members would like to see for a Downtown design theme He stated that these design standards should also be applied to accommodate open parking lots, structures and decks and designed consistently with the design standards and architecture of Downtown buildings, suggesting fencing or landscaping treatments or other elements to complete a streetscape along open parking lots Addressing the village concept at the former Ralph's site, Mr. Cngger stated that DESI believes the development standards need to be more flexible as to how this area is to be planned in order to allow the City to attract the kinds of potential anchor users that might be helpful to the Downtown area and in order for the property to reach its highest and best use; that the City should be open to all ideas for redevelopment of the property for a major anchor, but that there be some form of development review on a project- specific basis rather than to attempt to design a site at this point in time which may preclude a number of potentially desirable uses in the future. Mr Crigger highlighted DESI's belief that an analysis of these design standards needs to be conduchad, how these standards would play out block by block relative to the parking structures and improvements; that thresholds should be clearly established; that a formula be implemented for parking improvements; and that the City provide clear descnptionstformulas as to how or when these improvements will be phased in and according to what standards. Mr Cngger addressed the necessity to provide incentives for Downtown retail users; and stated that at this point in time, DESI is not in favor of prohibiting offices uses on the ground floor level Downtown, addressing concern of eliminating a source of income for the property owners and creating serious implications in terms of potential vacancy and potential of foreclosure for some of the landlords who can't find retail users. Commissioner Kretzmer expressed his appreciation of the work DESI has put into this matter. response to Commissioner Kretzmer's inquiries, Mr. Cngger 4 El Segundo Phnung Commuswn 04 Minutes, May 11, 2000 DRAFT explained that since it is not known what the outcome of these development standards will be, before it is known if it will provide increased /improved development, DESI is not certain whether it favors increased or decreased FAR's, and that if higher densities are needed to achieve increased investment Downtown, then DESI would support higher density. Mr. Cngger noted that DESI would not be in favor of a straight up, monolithic type 3 -story building on Main Street; and noted that DESI is concerned about having smaller shops on the 300 block of Richmond, east side Mr. Cngger noted for Commissioner Kretzmer that DESI believes an anchor retailer would make the best contribution to Downtown, but noted a concern that these proposed standards would preclude a number of potential larger retailers and that these standards are unnecessarily restrictive at this point in time; and pointed out that imposing these strict standards at this point in time may dissuade potential uses. He reiterated the suggestion to provide more flexibility in these standards and that a review process be implemented. Addressing the design theme of Downtown, Mr. Cngger noted for Commissioner Kretzmer that DESI is advocating something similar to the historical buildings on Richmond Street, older brick buildings which display the original character of Downtown Main Street, as opposed to more modern buildings Mr. Cngger suggested a collective vision for development and that applicants be provided photographs to refer to; and stated that DESI will return with some specific ideas /recommendations for the City to consider in providing incentives for retail development Downtown. Mr Cngger, in response to Chairman Crowley's statement, offered his own suggestion /observation that the City might consider parking requirements to be different for office uses versus retail uses, such as only a retail user being able to expand its building, making it more economically attractive to develop retail over office. Mr. Cngger suggested the possibility of discouraging long -term office leases, but stated that simply prohibiting office uses on the ground floor is not a viable option at this point in time. Commissioner Kretzmer expressed his preference that the design standards be more clearly defined; and commented on the task of getting as much of the parking out of the Downtown area to the periphery area so that the pedestrian atmosphere is increased. On behalf of DESI, Mr. Cngger noted his support of pushing the vehicular traffic out to the periphery and making Downtown more pedestrian - onented Mr Cngger noted for Vice -Chair Wycoff that in regard to 3 -story 5 El Segundo Planting Communion Minutes, May 11, 2000 05 o^ ,. r DRAFT buildings on Main Street, that DESI is concerned with the Downtown area which slopes to the west, down to the alley, believing that it would have a greater effect than that of a 3 -story building; and reiterated DESI's recommendation for a block -by -block design standards analysis. Responding to Vice -Chair Wycoffs inquiry, Mr. Crigger advised that DESI would suggest that if a parking structure were to be constructed, that it be located where the topography is best suited, where possibly one might come off one street to the upper level and a different street on a lower level. Vice -Chair Wycoff suggested that the City modernize its electronic /technological infrastructure, bringing in broadband communication capabilities to service the businesses along Main Street, and stated that various types of technological infrastructure improvements are necessary to attract and accommodate modem - thinking, forward - moving businesses Mr Crigger stated that DESI is very supportive of modernizing the City's technological infrastructure, noting that it could help to make Downtown more attractive to the types of businesses the City desires. Mr Crigger pointed out that DESI is mostly concerned with the current .pproach of prohibiting offices on the ground -floor frontage, but that DESI certainly wants to see office development upstairs and behind retail uses, stating that office use is a very important part of the mix. Commissioner Kretzmer suggested that the City may want to consider subsidizing retail use Downtown. Responding to Vice -Chair Wycoffs inquiry, Mr. Crigger noted that most of the property ..owners have expressed concern about what the vacancies are doing to the character of the Downtown area, and expressed a desire that the City provide a more creative and flexible plan to this problem; and suggested that the City start off by implementing streetscape improvements, believing this may help to induce more retailers to the Downtown area Mr Cngger stated for Commissioner Boulgarides that DESI believes people who live in El Segundo are shopping out of town when they could be shopping in the Downtown area if there were more appropriate businesses, more businesses which offered the City's residents what they're looking for and suggested that both lunch and dinner dining could be a primary incentive to acquaint people with Downtown. Mr. ^rigger noted the need to do a better job in attracting potential stomers from the other side of Sepulveda Boulevard, the W. 6 E( Segundo Piaoatag Cow=sswa 06 Minutes, May 11, 2000 daytime /weekday business community. Mr. Crigger pointed out that DRAFT there currently are very successful businesses in Downtown but that more is needed. Addressing Vice -Chair Wycoffs inquiry as to what DESI believes will bring the customers back Downtown, Mr. Crigger noted that uniqueness, quality of service, individuality and personalized service is essential. Vice -Chair Wycoff concurred with Mr. Crigger and stated that the City should attract businesses which offer consumers items or services which they cannot obtain easily /conveniently elsewhere, service/items which conserve the customers' time and money, and that the City needs to attract a good mix of retail uses, but have the flexibility to accommodate changing market conditions, and urged DESI to take these ideas into consideration. Chairman Crowley commented on the possibility of local businesses Providing intemet shopping, providing uniqueness, higher -end items; and noted the importance of the public/business partnership in creating things ideas which work for all concerned, and encouraged DESI to advise the City of what it can do to facilitate business owners and give them an edge in the marketplace. Gary Hamrick, City Traffic Consultant Mr Hamrick highlighted 1) increased density using the approximation of 271,000 square feet of new development; and 2) reducing the current number of lanes on Main Street. Mr. Hamrick stated that going to two lanes would create significant congestion at all of the intersections along Main Street, from Imperial Highway all the way down to El Segundo Boulevard — noting that when density is increased, it makes the outcome even worse. Mr. Hamrick stated that his recommendation at a' very minimum is that the City provide one lane of travel each way, with left- turn lanes at the intersections; noted that when one starts to add angled parking along Main Street, it creates implications for the mid -block area and reduces parking capacity. Mr. Hamnck stated that maintaining one lane of travel each way, plus the left -tum lane, will most likely be effective even with the increased density. He explained that because Downtown Main Street is currently 56 feet curb to curb, the roadway width is insufficient to accommodate angled parking and that a center left -tum lane mid -block would not be possible. Commissioner Boulgarides expressed his concern that taking Main Street down to one lane of travel in each direction will cause too much congestion on Main Street and cause a situation which pushes the 7 El Segundo P humm8 Comansaton 0 7 Minutes, May 11, 2000 99 !, DRAFT vehicular traffic onto the residential streets, thus making this drive unbearable; expressed his belief that left -turn lanes are essential for ease of traffic flow and emergency vehicles; and expressed his concern that taking Main Street down to one lane of travel in each direction could possibly create a negative impact upon pedestrian traffic. Commissioner Boulgaddes suggested that the City consider the implementation of pedestrian signals mid -block on Main Street. Mr Hamrick expressed his opinion that reducing this section of Main Street to one lane in each direction, plus a left -tum lane, will create a considerable amount of congestion, including increased congestion at the intersections; but highlighted some benefits of slower traffic on Main Street and diverting vehicular traffic to some of the side streets. Senior Planner Jester noted for Vice -Chair Wycoff that she will provide information concerning the safety record of the nearby mid -block pedestrian crossings; advised that currently, these crosswalks are striped with paint; and that the Speck Plan will provide a couple of major changes, such as the bulb -outs, landscaping, and colored /textured pavement, which should create a more visual impact upon the pedestrian crossings. Vice -Chair Wycoff noted his support of sidewalk extensions and special caving markers to create further awareness of pedestrian traffic. Mr Hamrick noted for Commissioner Mahler his preference for parallel parking on both sides of Main Street, one lane of traffic each direction, and a center lane, with widened sidewalks which provide the City opportunities for more interesting sidewalk and crosswalk treatments, treatments which reflect to the driver that this is a pedestnan- oriented environment. Mr. Hamrick added that from a circulation perspective, he is not certain whether the center lane should be all the way down the length of Main Street, citing the lack of driveways. Mr Hamrick clamed for Commissioner Kretzmer that his analysis reflects that going to one lane of travel each way, a center turn lane, parallel parking on each side of Main Street will be sufficient even assuming an eventual build -out of approximately 271,000 square feet. Referencing the diagram on Master Page 146, Mr. Hamrick stated for Commissioner Mahler that the City will lose a little bit of parking (approximately 1 or 2 spaces at various points) as one adds the curb extensions, bulb-outs in the mid - block, that traffic will be slowed down; that the sidewalks will be moved further out into the street; that the Rtreet will be narrowed, and that the curbs will be reconstructed. 100 8 El Segundo Pla oung Cotouu uunn Mmutes, May 11, 2000 Commissioner Boulgandes requested that, if possible, the City make DRAFT provisions to facilitate safe bike lanes. Mr. Hamrick stated that the bike lanes could be facilitated by eliminating the middle lane mid -block and striping a five -foot bike lane next to the parallel parking areas. Addressing bike lanes, Commissioner Kretzmer and Vice•Chair Wycoff favored reducing the width of the sidewalk rather than eliminating the center lane Mr Hamrick suggested that instead of initially tearing up the sidewalks, curbs and roadways, that the City do a test -run by first re- striping the area and getting a feel as to whether this plan will be effective. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the area be re- striped first to determine the effectiveness of the plan. Vice -Chair Wycoff concurred with Nicky Wislocky's suggestion that a multi -level parking structure built south of the fire station would be a practical place for this type of structure, if one is needed, rather than on Holly Street Mr Hamrick noted that he would recommend that a baseline analysis /survey of parking supply and demand be conducted at various hours of the day /week; that this analysis /survey be updated every year or two as necessary, stated that at this point in time, he believes there is adequate parking available Downtown; and explained that as this area becomes more successful, the updated analysis /survey will reflect if additional parking is necessary. Senior Planner Jester stated for Commissioner Mahler that the current floor area ratio that is allowed in the Downtown area is 1 to 1; that staff is not proposing any change to that ratio in the Specific Plan; and that the current actual built FAR in Downtown is approximately a .5 FAR, less than half of what is possible. Chairman Crowley recessed the meeting at 8:20 P.M. and reconvened the meeting at 8:38 P.M. Rhett Beavers, landscape architect and planner with EIP Mr Beavers briefly commented on his work with staff with regard to the design guidelines and standards. Senior Planner Jester, in response to Chairman Crowley's comment, 101 stated that there currently is a Master Street Tree Plan for the entire 9 El Segundo Plammg Commission 09 Minutes, May 11, 2000 DRAF A City; advised that the Recreation and Parks Commission, Recreation and Parks Department, West Coast Arborist, and staff have mutually decided that it would be beneficial to separate the Downtown area so that the entire Master Street Tree Plan is not delayed. Ms. Jester noted that the f►cus trees will be removed. Mr. Beavers stated that the advisory panel had previously developed a list of street trees which they believe are appropriate species. Mr Beavers advised of the need to avoid dense trees which block the view into commercial areas; and expressed his preference for the ginkgo tree, noting that it is a strikingly tall, columnar tree which is deciduous Mr. Beavers mentioned that the ginkgo tree is not on the list of street trees which has been developed at this point in time. Senior Planner Jester noted that the list Mr. Beavers is referring to was not included in the Planning Commission Agenda packet; explained that West Coast Arbonst had worked with the Recreation and Parks Commission and Department to develop specific recommendations for acceptable street trees and had provided a short list, stated that staff will confer with West Coast Arbonst about expanding this list; and that staff will provide the Planning Commission at its next meeting a copy of this list, including photographs of the recommended trees and the ossible inclusion of the ginkgo tree, Mr Beavers stated for Chairman Crowley that no irrigation for the street trees has been provided along Main Street at this point in time. Mr Beavers stated for Vice -Chair Wycoff that there is electrical service in the street but that no taps have been provided as of this point in time. Senior Planner Jester explained for Vice -Chair Wycoff that the cost of {providing tree lighting includes the actual trenching and installation of the electrical service, installation of an electrical box at every third tree, the purchase of the lights, the teanng up of concrete, traffic control, and automatic onloff switches. Ms. Jester stated that the cost estimates reflect non - recurring costs; explained that as the trees grow, the lights will have to be moved in order that the lines don't snap; and stated that staff will provide a cost estimate for recurring street tree lighting maintenance at the next Planning Commission meeting. Mr Beavers suggested that palm trees be placed at the main entrances to the community, suggesting a cluster of Washingtonia f►lifera palm trees at the major entrances, a standard and native fan palm which can rzach 50 feet in height. 102 10 El Segundo Ptantung Corm minion Minutes, May 11, 2000 10 DRAFT Chairman Crowley expressed his preference for a unifying theme with landscaping, suggesting that the type of palm trees located near Continental Park be brought to the Downtown area; noted the pleasing aesthetics of bottom4ft tree lighting; and expressed his preference of seeing the same kind of tree on a given street, with the next street having a different tree of the same type along its pathway. Mr Beaver noted for Vice -Chair Wycoff that the following gateways to the City were identified to him as follows: Main and Grand (primary entrance), Grand and Concord, Main and Manposa, with no mayor focal point east of Main Street. Senior Planner Jester added that signage only is proposed for the Grand and Eucalyptus gateway, as the mature ficus is proposed to remain at this time Commissioner Kretzmer suggested that landscaping consideration be given to the area of Main Street and Imperial Highway. Commissioner Boulgarides noted his preference that the City consider constructing a new monument at Main Street and Imperial Highway. With regard to Master Page 97, Item ii) bb, Commissioner Boulgarides expressed his desire that buildings be compatible but that the buildings be interesting and not replicate existing design. In response to Commissioner Boulgandes' request, Mr. Beavers advised that d was not the intent that the buildings be replicated and that the paragraph will be re- worded to so reflect compatibility instead. Vice -Chair Wycoff stated that it would be helpful for the City to provide representative examples for acceptable design guidelines, standards, themes and character and that flexibility be built into the plan. Commissioner Kretzmer commented on creating five different sets of design guidelines /cntena for each district. In response to the Planning Commission's comments, Senior Planner Jester stated that staff will provide more photographs which depict both good and bad examples of design standards. Responding to Senior Planner Jester's comments, Commissioner Kretzmer expressed his preference that these photographs also be accompanied by clearly written /defined guidelines and criteria that the City can implement when someone brings in a design. 103 11 El Segundo Plawimg Comtmssion Mmmes, May 11, 2000 I 1 DRAFT Commissioner Boulgarides expressed his desire to allow for as much flexibility as possible, that the City establish bare minimums. There being no further comment, Chairman Crowley closed the public hearing. Commissioner Kretzmer thanked and commended staff, all the consultants, and everyone involved for all of the work which has gone into this process; reiterated his support for Option No. 3; and stated that allowing first floor office space on Main Street at this point in time is more of an economical issue. Chairman Crowley commended staff for capturing the comments he made at the last Planning Commission meeting and putting them into the draft document; and questioned whether short-term leases could be considered until this current situation improves on Main Street. Addressing Chairman Crowley's inquiry, Assistant City Attorney Wohlenberg expressed his concern with the City dictating terns of contractual relationships between landlords and tenants. Commissioner Boulgandes expressed his desire that Downtown be limited to two stones; noted his opposition to a third floor, even if it is set lack from the main facade; addressed his opposition to allowing residential above the Downtown units; and noted his opposition to allowing a minimum of 450 square feet of livable space for a single residence in the City. Chairman Crowley noted that Downtown is currently zoned to permit residential upstairs and that it is his belief that this allowance has not been exploited up to this point in time. Commissioner Kretzmer expressed his concern that limiting the option of residential may create a burden upon a property owner who wishes to sell his /her property; and expressed his belief that Downtown will not be dominated by rental units. Commissioner Mahler commented on efforts to improve the value of the quality of life for the residents; stated that he is in favor of allowing residential; that he is in favor of limiting the buildings on Main Street to two stones; that he favors re- striping the streets before spending the funds to determine. if this plan works; stated that at this point in time, he is not ready to exclude businesses on the first floor, and noted his support of Option No. 1 for Richmond Street. ;,e -Chair Wycoff reiterated his preference for limiting the buildings to I j P 12 El Segundo Planomg Connunis3on 1 .� Mmutes, May 11, 2000 DRAT T two stories on Main Street; that the City would be best served if it would provide clearly defined guidelines with built -in flexibility; that photos be provided which depict design standards, clearly reflecting numbers, boundaries and conditions; and with regard to first -floor offices, that the City maintain a flexible vision for offices having limited capacity — noting the consideration that a property owner have some income during this difficult period. Vice -Chair Wycoff noted the pleasing aesthetics of landscaping throughout the City and the placement of gateway trees; stated that he is in favor of second floor residential; that he is in favor of re- striping the street first to determine the success of this plan; and that he would be in favor of the City offering incentives for retail businesses to move in Vice -Chair Wycoff encouraged the City to update its technological infrastructure. Commissioner Mahler suggested that upon the completion of this process, that the City put together a task force to deal with drawing more business into the community, taking a more proactive role in this regard Commissioner Boulgandes addressed his concerns that the City's parking standards not be relaxed; stated that he is opposed to compact parking spaces; and noted his desire that parking policies continue to come before the Planning Commission instead of at the sole discretion of the Director It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that parking matters continue to come before the Planning Commission instead of discretionary review by the Director, and concurrence that compact parking spaces be avoided when possible. Senior Planner Jester pointed out that the current compact parking width is the same, as the regular parking space, 8 Y2 feet; that the only difference is the depth — compact (15 feet), standard (18 feet); and advised that the City measures from center line to center line. In response to Chairman Crowley's inquiry, Assistant City Attorney Wohienberg advised that his office is approximately 8o percent done with its legal review of the draft plan and that his comments have yet to be incorporated into the plan; and noted his office's preference that the Planning Commission review their comments before it goes to City Council It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that this matter be continued to the next Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission noted the majority selection for Option No. 1, 13 El Segundo Plaming Communion 1 munueS, May 11, 2000 1(15 l�,r CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PUBLIC HEARING: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: REQUEST: PROPERTY INVOLVED: Introduction May 25, 2000, Environmental Assessment No. 474, General Plan Amendment No. 99 -2, Zone Change No. 99 -2, and Zone Text Amendment No. 99 -5 City of El Segundo Various Downtown Specific Plan 100 -500 Blocks Main Street, 100 -300 Blocks Richmond Street (excluding R -3 portion), and 100 -200 Blocks West Grand Avenue The proposed project is a Specific Plan for the Downtown area of El Segundo for the revitalization and future development of the core area of the City. The Plan encompasses both development standards and capital improvements which, when uriplemented, will have a positive impact on the community making the Downtown more walkable and 'livable ", consistent with the adopted Vision Statement. Recommendation Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the continued public hearing, take public input, discuss the proposed Specific Plan, and adopt a resolution recommending approval of the Downtown Specific Plan to the City Council. �i 113 6 :: the majority selection for limiting two stories on Main Street, and re- striping Main Street before tearing up the concrete. Commissioner Kretzmer requested that more specificity be provided with what the City is recommending with the street, sidewalks, bike lanes, crosswalks. Vice -Chair Wycoff requested that a multi -block sketch be provided of these changestsuggestions. Commissioner Kretzmer requested that consideration be given to incorporating one lane of travel each way in front of the high school, from Manposa and Palm, and that consideration be given to one lane of travel in each direction between Franklin /Main and possibly beyond. In response, Senior Planner Jester stated that staff will confer with the Public Works Department and the traffic engineer in regard to these suggestions Commissioner Mahler moved, seconded by Commissioner Kretzmer, to continue discussion of this matter to the May 25, 2000, Planning Commission meeting Passed 5-0. Planning ager Ketz reviewed the cases which will be coming before he Planning mission; and noted that staff will forward any pertinent articles which m e of interest to the Planning Commission — highlighting the article and to livable spaces which was included in this week's Planning Com ion Agenda packet. Commissioner Kretzmer advised thfift4twill not be able to June 8, 2000, Planning Commission mee Chairman Crowley-thanked Mr. Torino for providin t on Smoky ng. Hollow, noting that it is an idea worth studyi Commissioner Mahler noted that all of the i his evening valuable. Vice -Chair Wycoff noted his app cation of the audience input this evening and that of the written spondence which was provided. There being no furt discussion, Commissioner Mahler moved, seconded by Vice -C Wycoff, to adjourn the meeting at 10:17 P.M. to the regular mee of May 25, 2000, at 6:00 P.M. Passed 5-0. DRAF i MOTION PUBLIC NEW BL PLANNING COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS 14 14 El Segundo Planning Commission Mmures, May 11, 2000 Ill. Background On April 27, 2000 the Planning Commission opened the public hearing, took testimony, discussed the project and provided direction to staff on several issues. Staff revised the Plan based on direction from the Commission, and discussed those revisions and other items at a continued public hearing on May 11, 2000. Staff has further revised the Plan based on the direction provided at the May 11"' meeting. Again, all new text in the Plan is shown as doubig underlined and deleted text is shown as stake -eat. The text that was revised previously is no longer shown as duble underlined and stFike eet. IV. Analysis The following summarizes the Commission's direction on numerous issues. The page numbers shown are the page numbers in the Specific Plan document, not the master page numbers. Office uses in the Main Street District- It was recommended that new offices not be allowed on the street front level in the 300 -400 blocks of Main Street, unless an existing office use is replaced with another office use within 6 months of the existing office vacating the space The Commission also suggested that the City Council may want to look at creative incentives for encouraging new retail uses on the street front level. The Commission was concerned with the possibility of storefront vacancies and that property owners might be put at a financial disadvantage with the new regulations Residential- Two residential units per 3500 square foot lot are proposed to be allowed, only above the street front level. The Commission discussed the proposed 450 square foot minimum dwelling unit size and the reduced parking standards of one space for studio and 1 bedroom units, (Page 50) however no decision was made on these issues. The Commission discussed potentially using 450 square feet as a minimum as there are several existing mixed -use buildings (the Purcell building on the northwest comer of Grand and Main and the Flower shop at'418 Main) which have units of this size. The UBC has no minimum dwelling unit size. The tandem parking provisions have been revised to be consistent with the current Code requirements, which allow tandem parking for residential uses. (Page 52) Building heights- Heights will be limited to a maximum of three stones and 45 feet, measured from existing grade to the peak or highest point of the roof. So that a "canyon" effect will not be created, a two -story 30 -foot maximum building height is allowed for the street front building facade. Any third story or portion of the budding over 30 feet in height, would be required to be setback an additional 5 feet minimum. North Richmond Street District- Option 1- Commercial Mixed -use was the recommended option and therefore the other options, Options 2 and 3, have been deleted from the document. (Pages 38-43) 1 0 7 Compact parkin g- The Commission felt that is was appropriate to not allow any compact parking in the Downtown. The Code currently allows a maximum of 20% 89 compact parking for office and industrial uses only, in ail zones. Compact parking is not allowed for retail uses Compact spaces measure 8' -6" wide by 15' deep while standard stalls are 8' -6" wide by 18' deep. (Page 51) Parking Demand Stud v- The Commission determined that parking demand studies should come to it for review and action instead of the Director of Community, Economic and Development Services. Staff would recommend that if this is the desire of the Commission, that the same standards for parking demand studies be applied to the Downtown as are applied elsewhere in the City Currently the Code allows the Director's approval for any parking demand study for fewer than 10 parking spaces, and any demand study for 10 or more spaces would require Planning Commission action (Pages 51 and 53) Design Standards- The Commission requested that staff work with DESI of the Chamber of Commerce regarding architectural styles and details that are desirable for the Downtown Additional photographs have been added to Chapter VIII, Design Standards (Pages 55 -84) to provide examples of these architectural styles and designs. The Design Standards criteria of the Specific Plan will regulate the architecture and design of any new construction ensuring that new structures are compatible with the surrounding environment and provide desirable architectural styles and details. The photographs have been inserted into the document however the formatting has not been finalized as well as the diagrams will be inserted later. Fiber optics- The Commission suggested that in order to accommodate and encourage high tech and customer service oriented business, that fiber optics facilities be provided Chapter IX, Section B 1, Streets and Streetscape, already includes the cost of the installation of fiber optics for the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street. Staff would suggest that fiber optics instead be installed in the 100- 300 blocks of Richmond Street since this is the area where office and live /work uses are being encouraged, while the 300 -400 block of Main Street is the retail core (Pages 86-87) Main Street re- stnpino- As a Phase I approach, the Commission suggested re- striping the existing street in the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, from El Segundo Boulevard to Manposa Avenue The re- striping would accommodate the same roadway configuration as the Phase II, permanent approach, but without the sidewalk widening. The re- striping would maintain the existing 56 -foot curb to curb width and 12 foot sidewalk width, as a temporary measure to analyze traffic and pedestrian movements. It is anticipated that the re- striping will help to slow vehicular traffic, without causing congestion, while creating a safer environment for pedestrians. The re- striping would provide one through lane in each direction, a center left-turn lane, and parallel parking on both sides of the street. Approximately 8 -10 on- street parking spaces will be lost with the re- striping due to the dedicated left -tum pockets A concept sketch and discussion for this Phase I option are included in Chapter IX, Section B.1. Sidewalk Widening /Street Narrowing (Page 87 and attached concept sketch) The Commission discussed the possibility of providing a bike lane or route with 1 0 8 the Phase I re- striping. A bike lane, path, or route is not shown on the current or proposed Bicycle Master Plan in the General Plan The Phase I re- striping could accommodate the room for bikes, however staff would not recommend actually stripping a bike lane, as it would be in conflict with the General Plan The Phase II permanent roadway configuration could not accommodate a bike lane unless the sidewalks were narrowed. Since one of the main goals of the Speck Plan is to create a pedestnan - onented environment, staff believes that is appropriate to widen the sidewalks in the 300 -400 blocks of Main Street, instead of providing a bike lane. A bike lane could be accommodated in the 100 -200 blocks of Main Street, connecting to the bike route on Grand Avenue. The final Phase II street improvements will include the same general roadway configuration as the Phase I re- stripping, but with narrower through and center left -tum lanes New, wider sidewalks with decorative accent pavement, accommodating new street trees, landscaping, benches, outdoor dining, and outdoor retail activities, as well as comer curb- extensions and mid -block crosswalks with could then be provided, creating a truly pedestrian - onented environment Street Trees- Staff has discussed different options for street trees with the Recreation and Parks Department and the landscape architect from EIP. Photographs and descriptions of several open canopy trees that would possibly be good choices for the Downtown are included as an attachment to Chapter IX, Section B 4, Street Trees These include the Fraxinus oxycarpa `Raywoocr- Raywood Ash, Gingko biloba- Maidenhair tree, Platanus acerfolia- London Plane Tree, and Tabebura chrysotncha- Yellow Trumpet Tree. (Page 95 -102) Gateway Palms- Again, staff discussed various options with the Recreation and Parks Department and EIP. Photographs and descriptions are included as an attachment to Chapter IX, Section B 6, Gateway Landscaping and Signage. These include the Archontopheonix cunninghamiana- King Palm, Arecastrum romanzoffianum- Queen Palm and Washintonia fiftra- California Fan Palm. (Pages 105 -110) Twinkle lights- An estimate for the ongoing maintenance cost for the installation of Twinkle lights in the 300 -400 blocks of Main Street was requested by the Commission. Chapter IX, Section B 7, Twinkle lights, has been revised to provide a rough estimate of these on -going costs. (Page 111) Mid -block crosswalks- The Commission requested information on the accident history for the existing mid -block crosswalks in the Downtown. The Police Department, Traffic Division was contacted and they indicated that there have been no reported accidents at the mid -block crosswalks on Main Street in Downtown in the past 3 years. The Police have issued 15 jaywalking citations in the past 3 years, and last year conducted a "sting" operation for vehicles that were not stopping for pedestrians, in which several citations were issued. Generally, there is a perception that pedestrians must proceed very cautiously at the mid -block crosswalks due to the speed of vehicles as well as the limited visibility, particularly when large vehicles are illegally parked. The Police Department does regularly patrol Main Street, and traffic officers will continue 109 enforcement efforts in the Downtown. 91 City Attorney comments- The following sections have been revised based on input from the City Attorney's office: Prohibited uses- The language has been revised to clarify that only permitted uses are allowed and that the list of prohibited uses is not all inclusive. (Pages 28, 31, 34, 37, and 45) Joint -use and off -site parking- The language has been revised to clarify that the agreement must be recorded with the County Recorder's office. The City Attorney's office will approve as to form the standard agreements. (Page 53- 54) Historic Preservation - Incentives- A map will be developed that identifies the "historically significant" structures and properties as defined within the Plan. These structures will not necessarily be "designated cultural resources," as defined by Chapter 20.52 of the ESMC, but the intent is to acknowledge that their architecture significantly contributes to the character of the District and that they could potentially qualify and meet the criteria as "designated cultural resources." (Pages 127 -129) Disincentives- The "disincentives" have been re- characterized as contractual obligations to properties that have taken advantage of any of the historic preservation incentives. (Pages 129 -130) Other minor non - substantive revisions suggested by the City Attorney's office have been incorporated into the document Interdepartmental Comments Planning staff worked closely with many departments to develop the Specific Plan including the Public Works, Recreation and Parks, Police and Fire Departments, as well as the Budding Safety and Economic Development Divisions, to solicit their input on the Plan. Staff has consulted with and incorporated other department comments into the document during the development of the Plan V. Environmental Review A Draft Initial Study was prepared by staff for the project, which identified potential adverse environmental impacts related to transportation /circulation. No significant adverse environmental impacts were identified which could not be mitigated to an insignificant level, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is proposed. The Draft Initial Study was circulated for inter - departmental review and comments, as required by City Council Resolution No. 3805 and State CEQA guidelines. All departments' comments have been incorporated into the Mitigated Negative Declaration as well as the Specific Plan as appropriate. VI. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive public comment on the Plan, and adopt a resolution making a recommendation that the City Council adopt the Speck Plan 1 1 0 q-) VII. Exhibits 1. Draft Specific Plan- dated May 25, 2000 2. Draft Resolution No. 2475 3 Concept sketch- Phase I Main Street re- striping, 100 -500 blocks I Laurie B, ester, Senior Planner mes M. Hansen, Dlrecior of Community, Economic and Development Services P %Planning 8 SuildIng Safety%*tAPCstaf report- 5.25.doc 171 93 May 20, 2000 _ _ MAYL To the Planning Commission, City of El Segundo, CA Re: Development of Condominiums at 345 & 347 Richmond Street - My name is Jack Buckingham. For approximately 38 years, I have owned the property at 325 - 333 Richmond Street in El Segundo. I also live at that address and have conducted a business at that address for most of those years. I am opposed to the development of six residential condominiums on the 300 block If Richmond Street! Like many of our residents, I do not approve of granting variances or otherwise making adjustments to our downtown zoning code to accommodate residential condominium development at the expense of commercial property! Last year the city approved the development of condominiums on the south east corner of Richmond and Holly Streets. This development of residential condominiums at 345 /347 Richmond Street would be another exception of zoned usage on the block. Each time we approve an exception to the code, it sets further precedence for conversion of downtown property to residential condominiums. It is a little like cutting off the dog's tail a little at a time to ease the pain! At the April 27, 2000 Planning Commission meeting, I heard an individual, apparently the developer, say that it is not possible to make a "fair" investment return by developing this parcel without constructing condominiums. I am a Class B General Contractor(Lic. # 541904) and sometime developer. I know that when we developers say a "fair return", we are using the term subjectively. I believe that it is generally true that the most profit is earned by the development of condominiums. However, this doesn't appear to me to be a justifiable reason for a variance to the code, just to maximize the developers profit! This sets a bad precedence. The developer also indicated that the building of six new residential condominiums would some how improve the health of our downtown district. (This argument might have some merit if the Planning Commission were considering the rezoning of and development of condominiums in Recreation Park!) We just need to encourage the persons who currently reside in the city to shop in the downtown district, to revitalize that area. Not build a new home for each new customer /client. The developer also made comments to the effect that on the west side of the 300 block of Richmond Street "residential is the predominate use". Not true! I have attached a summary of both residentis! and commerciallinstitutional usage of the west side of that block. The mix by both footage and number of units, is approximately 50°/x150 %, with a bias mostly toward commercial. About what one would expect in a CRS zone. 112 MAY ' c The balance on the east side of the 300 block of Richmond Street would probawbe about even - residential and commercial, considering the condomimI'm s`cdfft -4 y being developed on the north end, balanced by the old Ralph's markeTVll91ding. ---- -- If the property, at 345/47 Richmond Street, were to be developed in accordance with current zoning regulations, with commercial and apartments, there would be tenants for both. The current occupant of the property has indicated that they, even now, need more space! If the property is developed as residential condominiums, we would only be driving one more viable business out of town. We should be doing things that keep those businesses, that attract clients and customers, to the downtown district. Not those things that send them out of town looking for more suitable space to house their businesses! If this property was purchased in anticipation of being developed as residential condominiums, the request for a variance should have been sought before the escrow closed'. This is common practice in property investments, where the satisfaction of some contingency is necessary to make the investment profitable. If the property was purchased, ten years ago, in anticipation of being developed under CRS code, then the economics of it's development should be as good, if not better, today as it was when purchased. This being true, because ten years ago we had just entered the real estate depression of the 1990'x! Thank you for your consideration. �;82� Buckingham 333 Richmond Street, #8 El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 322 1948 113 l Ny 0. Q d 01 N b N d W L d i4 d O U w CO G 7 N N c E t K O a m 0 e n m `o m 9 N d tI m0 �' W N O W W 07 Pf rc LL o A W 0 Y N W N W N E m 8 o` � E O V ° z E E U 0000000000 0 000000000 cq m s W W O W a=WOO °.4c vi r.r Vi n vi q N r f- 0 000 W v o moo A f9 � N W O N 1 N F. ° S R J i m W C v C c ° CL.i '� .� O� C c O W Q Z w Y O m �i E e z t N Ee-NVivW W n WO,� a z � o o CO) h l'1 0 tD tp N N I.- eF N o a O to o o co r m O r p N O An T O e N O W CP goo 0 000 u 0 0 {�l W N r L V Z � U d L_ w_ L 3 N 3 d _b tx w W 1'O U V CL L L � V r � U L U t d " L 7 w O 3 w 3 3 b CW 0 C F V d r., 114 Iny i H O�Y 'o � r y ..n Y � � Q1 " N r c N t , h N f ® N r O r f7 (� L -IV 7YAY e3 77 ©y m0 �' W N O W W 07 Pf rc LL o A W 0 Y N W N W N E m 8 o` � E O V ° z E E U 0000000000 0 000000000 cq m s W W O W a=WOO °.4c vi r.r Vi n vi q N r f- 0 000 W v o moo A f9 � N W O N 1 N F. ° S R J i m W C v C c ° CL.i '� .� O� C c O W Q Z w Y O m �i E e z t N Ee-NVivW W n WO,� a z � o o CO) h l'1 0 tD tp N N I.- eF N o a O to o o co r m O r p N O An T O e N O W CP goo 0 000 u 0 0 {�l W N r L V Z � U d L_ w_ L 3 N 3 d _b tx w W 1'O U V CL L L � V r � U L U t d " L 7 w O 3 w 3 3 b CW 0 C F V d r., 114 i m0 �' W N O W W 07 Pf rc LL o A W 0 Y N W N W N E m 8 o` � E O V ° z E E U 0000000000 0 000000000 cq m s W W O W a=WOO °.4c vi r.r Vi n vi q N r f- 0 000 W v o moo A f9 � N W O N 1 N F. ° S R J i m W C v C c ° CL.i '� .� O� C c O W Q Z w Y O m �i E e z t N Ee-NVivW W n WO,� a z � o o CO) h l'1 0 tD tp N N I.- eF N o a O to o o co r m O r p N O An T O e N O W CP goo 0 000 u 0 0 {�l W N r L V Z � U d L_ w_ L 3 N 3 d _b tx w W 1'O U V CL L L � V r � U L U t d " L 7 w O 3 w 3 3 b CW 0 C F V d r., 114 Applicant and Property Owner. Jim Kizirian. Plann' Manager Ketz briefly summarized staff report (of related to is matter. With regard t aster Page 52, Planning Manager Ketz nfirmed for Vice -Chair Wycak that no changes are proposed part of this requested extensiofk Chairman Crowley operXd the public Elizabeth Srour, represen%g Jim Ms Srour requested that the recommendation to grant the Map, noted that the proposed and objectives of the General Smoky Hollow Plan; and stt conditions imposed , i ommission concur with staffs extension on the Tentative Tract is in full compliance with the goals t it meets the stated goals of the it�ie Applicant concurs with the Ms Srour noted for C missioner Boulgand that Mr. Kizirian and his family are fully com ad to developing this ; that he has made a mayor investment to this point in time; and that a believes this to be a commitment t e completion of the project. Chairman C/6wley closed the public microphone. gioner Mahler moved, seconded by Vice -Chair Wyc8k, to adopt on No 2478, concurring with staffs recommendation. 5 -0 Crowley recessed the meeting at 7:53 P.M. and DRAFT MOTION Chairman Crowley presented Item 1 -5, Environmental Assessment No. PUBLIC HEARINGS, 474, General Plan Amendment No. 99 -2, Zone Change No. 99-2 and CONTINUED Zone Text Amendment No. 99 -5, Downtown Specific Plan. Address: HEARINGS, 100 -500 blocks of Main Street and 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street. EA NO. 474 Applicant- City of El Segundo. Property Owners: Various. Senior Planner Jester reviewed staff report (of record) related to this matter. Chairman Crowley expressed his desire that businesses on Main Street have available fiber optic capabilities /hook -ups, giving these businesses an innovative edge in the business community. 9 El Segundo Planning Comnussion Minutes, May 25, 2000 1 1 Commissioner Boulgarides suggested that these types of fiber optic advancements be Implemented throughout the City Senior Planner Jester explained for Commissioners Boulgarides and Kretzmer that following the re- striping on Main Street, there will be adequate room for bike lanes; that staff didn't feel it was appropriate to stripe the bike lanes, as it is inconsistent with the General Plan (not currently shown as a bike route), and explained that there would not be enough room to accommodate a bike lane in the 300 and 400 blocks of Main Street when the sidewalks are widened. Ms. Jester advised that the Public Works Department does have in its budget funds to re -stnpe and slurry seal all of Main Street as part of the Department's annual CIP Street Improvement Program. Commissioner Kretzmer expressed his concern with bike safety and any funneling down into one lane. In response to Commissioner Kretzmer's concern regarding bike safety, Senior Planner Jester explained that the conceptual striping plan that the Public Works Department prepared shows, for instance, that at the intersection of Main and Mariposa, the striping basically transitions from the two through lanes by providing a nght -tum -only lane and a left -tum- only lane at the intersection. Vice -Chair Wycoff thanked and commended staff for providing the multi - block traffic flow drawing. Senior Planner Jester confirmed that the Phase I street re- striping of the existing street will go from El Segundo Boulevard to Mariposa Avenue. Highlighting Master Page 89, Vice -Chair Wycoff noted that it was his intent to limit the building heights to two stories on Main Street; that allowing a third story to be built only five feet back from the setback was not a consideration; that it was his recollection that the Planning Commission agreed that two stories along Main Street would be acceptable, and that in the back, where the lots slope down, there could be a third level. Commissioner Boulgarides stated that his remembrance of the last meeting was an overall agreement that two -story levels were adequate along Main Street, regardless of setback. Commissioner Kretzmer noted his preference to avoid a canyon effect along Main Street ORgF T 1, F" 10 El Segundo Planning Commtsston Minutes, May 25, 2000 116 Commissioner Boulgandes stated that he would prefer limiting the buildings to two stones along Main Street, that the maximum height of the building be measured from the frontage on Main Street; and added that he would prefer seeing a limit of two stones seen from the named street throughout all areas covered by this Plan. Clarifying for staff the Commission's comments, Senior Planner Jester stated that buildings facing any street within the area of this Plan should be no higher than two stones and that the rest of the building levels should go with the flow of the land; and that this would also include the former Ralph's site Commissioner Boulgandes added that decorative /architectural features be exempted from this limit. Chairman Crowley expressed a desire that the codes remain simple and clear, and pointed out that if the Planning Commission limits these dwellings to a figure lower than 45 feet in height, that it may create some existing nonconformdies Senior Planner Jester explained that the City currently measures from existing grades; and addressing the suggestion to limit second -story budding heights to 30 feet on the frontage, she suggested that different criteria be applied to up- sloping lots versus down - sloping lots. Vice -Chair Wycoff concurred with establishing different criteria for these type lots, and clarified his preference that not more than two stories be permitted to face the street frontage. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that no building on street frontage be higher than 30 feet, with a 45 -foot limit at the rear. Commissioner Boulgandes noted his opposition to the City relaxing its parking standards Having received complaints with regard to lack of parking Downtown, Vice -Chair Wycoff agreed with Commissioner Boulgandes' comment about not relaxing parking standards for dwelling units. Addressing the comments concerning relaxed parking standards, Senior Planner Jester advised that contractual parking agreements can be addressed in off -site parking agreements and the Parking Demand Study 40�p q�r Vice -Chair Wycoff and Commissioner Boulgandes both concurred that D/� �QrT there exist off-site parking agreements when parking is limited. 11 El Segundo Planning Conumssion Mmutes, May 25, 2000 1!7 There was concurrence by the Planning Commission that the City maintain the residential parking standards, but that the opportunity for off -site parking arrangements be provided when necessary. Vice -Chair Wycoff expressed his desire that the City incorporate wide band -width capabilities into the infrastructure and not limit it to fiber optics, making it more generic, that this capability be provided within the entire Downtown and not only on Main Street; and expressed his desire to get this City wired into the modem era and attract more business. Chairman Crowley recommended that the City install plastic conduit under the streets in order that installation of different kinds of wires can be easily wired through the system; and he urged businesses to think about what they can do with th;s type of technology and how it can improve business. Commissioner Kretzmer added that the City make sure adequate space underground is available to handle all the different cable needs one might anticipate for the future, be it fiber optics or any other type of cabling Vice -Chair Wycoff stated that what is needed is the capability to put in whatever is necessary to support businesses at any point in time and that this system be flexible enough to quickly and affordably accommodate upgrades. Vice -Chair Wycoff clarified for staff his support of putting in the conduit/piping at a minimum requirement and a later objective of wiring this piping. Chairman Crowley stated that consideration be given to taking the Downtown piping to a large junction where it picks up a major service provider Commissioner Kretzmer addressed his preference that the City's infrastructure be large enough to accommodate any above -ground wiring it currently has Downtown. Chairman Crowley noted that under - grounding all the skyline wires would improve the City's aesthetics; and stated that all new structures should be required to have underground access. It was the Planning Commission's desire that adequate piping/conduit be installed, enough to accommodate any future technologies. qtr Highlighting the Police Department's favorable safety report for mid- ®���� block crosswalks on Downtown Main Street, Vice -Chair Wycoff stated 12 El Segundo Planwng Conumsston Minutes, May 25, 2000 i!8 that additional crosswalk signage and lighting would be a detraction rather than an enhancement; and suggested that special street paving be applied for safety purposes. Chairman Crowley suggested that If additional illumination is to be applied, that it be put more over the sidewalk at the crosswalk path, illuminating this area a bit more than other areas. Addressing Vice -Chair Wycoffs concern with the Ginkgo Biloba tree on Hdlcrest, Senior Planner Jester noted that there are beautiful examples of the tree in West Torrance, pointing out that the climate in West O� Torrance is similar to El Segundo's; and stated that she will provide some pictures of this specimen. �� Commissioner Kretzmer stated that the trees should be properly and routinely maintamedimanicured. Vice -Chair Wycoff stated he is in favor of the London Plane Tree, Golden Trumpet Tree, Queen and King Palms; and that he is opposed to the Washmgtonia filifera due to its tall and skinny trunk. Senior Planner Jester clarified that she was not able to provide a true picture of the Washingtoma filifera; and advised that its trunk is shorter and wider than the palm depicted in the picture presented to the Planning Commission. Vice -Chair Wycoff expressed his concern with the annual maintenance cost of the twinkle lights. Senior Planner Jester commented on other lighting options that may be considered. Director Hansen suggested that the Planning Commission express its general intent and that staff be given the latitude of costing out the various alternatives and taking it forward. Commissioner Kretzmer stated, echoed by Vice -Chair Wycoff, that more broad -based language be utilized to address the enhancement of landscaping through lighting Senior Planner Jester, in response to Vice -Chair Wycoffs inquiry, confirmed that even though there will not be striping for bike lanes, adequate width will be provided to allow for bicycles. Chairman Crowley opened the public microphone. 13 EL Segundo Plammmg Conmmssion Mmutes, May 25, 2000 1 1 g Peggy Tyrell, resident Ms. Tyrell suggested that instead of additional mid -block crosswalk lighting, that the City consider reflective buttons; and noted her support for up- lighting trees if it is more economical than twinkle lights Liz Gamholtz, resident Ms Gamholtz noted her support for the re- striping plans; stated that she is opposed to Main Street being closed off to parking for shop customers during the Farmer's Market activities, noting that it is not favorable to shop owners Downtown, concurred with limiting second -story levels on street frontages; noted her concern with providing wide sidewalks and businesses extending their activities onto the sidewalks and also covering up Heritage Walk markers, commented on the lack of shop owners maintaining clean sidewalks in front of their businesses; and noted her dissatisfaction with the City's tree maintenance in this town. Chairman Crowley stated that he approves of the suggested street trees and added that tree maintenance is essential Responding to Commissioner Xretzmer s concern with palm fronds falling in high winds and injuring people and damaging property, Senior Planner Jester advised that she will confer with the Parks Department and the City arbonst in regard to this issue. Commissioner Bouigarides noted his support for the Gingko Biloba tree and the Washmgtonia filifera In response to Vice -Chair Wycofrs comment regarding sidewalk cleanliness, Senior Planner Jester advised the Plan proposes that a Business Improvement District (BID) would be developed; and that the business owners and property owners would be required to pay for the regular cleaning maintenance of the sidewalks. Commissioner Kretzmer stated that there should be an alternative mechanism for a BID to pay for streetisidewalk maintenance, believing that a BID will not be able to generate sufficient funds to cover this ongoing expense O� Vice -Chair Wycoff stated that if he had to choose, he would prefer the sidewalks be routinely cleaned over the placement of twinkle lights; and requested that the City take a proactive role in maintaining a clean sidewalk program ANA Chairman Crowley suggested that businesses be required, through their I� 14 El Segundo Planomg Comnussion Minutes, May 25, 2000 1 2 0 CUP's, etc., to properly maintain the sidewalks outside their businesses. Chairman Crowley closed the public hearing. Commissioner Kretzmer thanked and commended staff for their work on this Plan, for Incorporating the Planning Commission's comments; and he expressed his appreciation to the Planning Commissioners and all those who provided input from the audience. Commissioner Boulgandes moved, seconded by Commissioner Kretzmer, to approve Resolution No. 2475, with amendments. Passed 5 -0 Director Hansen expressed his appreciation of staff and particularly to Senior Planner Jester for the tremendous effort she has put into this Plan. Because of the small agenda for the June 8, 2000, Planning Commission meeting, Director Hansen suggested that It be carried over to June 22, and he briefly highlighted the matters coming before the next Planning Commission meeting, as reflected on the Agenda (of record). Director Hansen advised that the new Economic Development Manager, Sandra Lane, will be with the City next week. Commissioner Boulgandes thanked and congratulated staff on a job well done, noted his appreciation of his fellow Commissioners; and thanked the audience members, both at the meeting and TV viewers, for their interest in the City. Commissioner Boulgandes stated that he has been hearing good comments from architects working with the Planning and Building Departments, noting that the staff are enjoyable to work with. Commissioner Mahler thanked and commended staff for an excellent lob on this Plan. Vice -Chair Wycoff reiterated his appreciation of the staff member who produced the multi -block traffic flow diagram; stated that the incorporation of the strikeouts and double underlines were tremendously helpful during this process; and noted his appreciation for all of the audience members. 14P MOTION REPORT FROM DIRECTOR PLANNING COMMENTS Commissioner Kretzmer requested that discussion take place in the /\� future to address providing children's activities Downtown. 1, 4 h rP 15 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, May 25, 2000 1 9. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2475 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 474 (EA -474), CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 99 -2, ZONE CHANGE NO. 99 -2, AND ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 99 -5 FOR THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC AT THE 100 -500 BLOCKS OF MAIN STREET, THE 100 -300 BLOCKS OF RICHMOND STREET AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES ON GRAND AVENUE. PETITIONED BY THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO. WHEREAS, an application was initiated by the City Council of the City of El Segundo to prepare a Downtown Specific Plan, and, WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "), Cal Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq The Initial Study demonstrated that the project would not cause any significant environmental impacts. Accordingly, a Mitigated Negative Declaration ( "MND ") was prepared and circulated for public review and comment between April 21, and May 11, 2000, and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the project 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 3805), and, WHEREAS, on April 27, and May 11, 2000 the Planning Comtmssion did hold, pursuant to law, duly advertised public heanngs on such matter in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 350 Main Street, and notice of the public hearings were given in the time, font and manner prescribed by law, and, WHEREAS, opportunity was given to all persons present to speak for or against the findings of Environmental Assessment No. EA -474, GPA No 99 -24, ZC No 99 -2, and ZTA No. 99 -5; and, WHEREAS, at said hearings the following facts were established. The Downtown Specific Plan area is located in the northwest quadrant of the City of El Segundo The General Plan land use designation and zoning for the site is Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities Surrounding land uses in the area are generally residential in nature; one to three stones in height The surrounding area and project area is a fully developed urban environment 3. The El Segundo High School campus, the Library and Library Park are located north of the Specific Plan area on Main Street To the east and west of the 500 block of Main Street (on Richmond and Standards Streets) is a Two - Family Residential (R -2) Zone, developed mainly with duplexes and two - family dwellings. 122 To the west of the balance of the Specific Plan boundary (on Richmond and Concord Streets) is mainly Multi- Family Residential (R -3) zoning, which is developed with small (3 -12 unit) apartment and condominium complexes, Further beyond the R -2 and R -3 Zones on (Concord and Virginia Streets) is Smgle- Family (R -1) Residential zoning and development (Exhibit 4) To the west of the Specific Plan area there are also a few parcels zoned Downtown Commercial (C -RS), and Neighborhood Commercial (C -2) on Grand Avenue, and Parking (P) on El Segundo Boulevard The development on these sites is also consistent with the zoning, and includes one to two story, low - density (0.5 to 10 floor area ratio) commercial construction, and a surface parking lot 6 To the east of the 400 block of Main Street is a Two - Family Residential (R -2) Zone on Standard Street, again developed consistent with the zoning designation. 7 To the east of the 300 block of Main Street is largely Muln- Family Residential (R -3). developed smularly to the areas to the west of the Specific Plan boundary. Additionally, there are a few parcels zoned and developed as Parking (P), on Standard Street, and Downtown Commercial (C -RS), on Grand Avenue, similar to the west of the Plan area 8 To the east side of the 200 block of Main Street, on Standard Street, is an area that is also zoned and developed as Downtown Commercial (C -RS), again with similar commercial uses and densines 9 To the east of the 100 block of Main Street, on Standard Street, is a small industrial zone within the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area with a zoning designation of Small Business (SB). The land uses in this area (light industrial, warehousing etc.) are consistent with the zoning South of El Segundo Boulevard is the Chevron Refinery, which is zoned Heavy Industrial (M -2), consistent with the land use 10 The majority of the 100 block of the east side of Richmond Street is a surface parking lot for the Chevron Refinery immediately to the south Smaller Chevron parking lots also occupy the west side of Richmond and the 100 block of Main Street. There are four small City owned surface parking lots with a total of approximately 115 parking spaces, which are open and free to the public, within and immediately adjacent to the Plan area II Plant species present are those that are commonly used for landscaping purposes or which have adapted to urban environments. There is no known rare or endangered animal species associated with the Project site, or project locale NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that after considering the above facts, the testimony presented at the public hearing, and the facts and study of proposed Environmental Assessment No 474 (EA -474), GPA No 99 -2, ZC No. 99 -2, and. ZTA No. 99 -5 the Planning Commission makes the following findings and recommends the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts of proposed Environmental Assessment No 474 and adopt the Downtown Specific Plan, GPA No 99 -2, ZC No. 99 -2, and ZTA No. 99 -2' z 123 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT That the City of El Segundo has prepared an Initial Study and, an accompanying Mitigated Negative Declaration which was made available to all local and affected agencies and for public review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by law. The 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 was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) That when considering the whole record, there is no evidence that the project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends, because the project is in-fill development in a built -out urban environment That the Planning Commission thereby recommends that the City Council authorize and direct the Director of Community, Economic and Development Services to file with any appropriate agencies a Certificate of Fee Exemption and de minimum finding pursuant to California Assembly Bill (AB) No 3158 and the California Code of Regulations Within twenty -four hours of this approval by the City Council, the applicant shall submit to the City of El Segundo a fee of $25 00 required by the County of Los Angeles for the filing of this certificate along with the required Nonce of Determination As approved in AB 3158, the statutory requirements of CEQA will not be met and no vesting shall occur until this condition is met and the required notice$ and fees are filed with the County GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CONSISTENCY That the proposed use is consistent with the following General Plan goals, policies, programs, and objectives A The proposed General Plan Land Use designation for the site, as well as the proposed zoning, is Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) The Downtown Specific Plan designation is compatible with the surrounding Residential, and Commercial land use designations B The proposed Downtown Specific Plan designation is designed to allow a maximum floor area (FAR) ratio of 1.0, except for one 17,500 square foot City owned parcel, currently developed as a surface parlang lot, which would allow an FAR of I.S. Additionally, the residential density is proposed to increase from I dwelling unit per 3500 square foot lot to 2 dwelling units per 3500 square foot lot While tins would permit a slightly greater amount of development than the existing land use designation, the total build out of the Plan area would be an insignificant increase in density. Findings must be made that the project is in conformance with the goals, policies and objectives of the General Plan in order to approve the project Interpretation of conformity with the applicable provisions of the General Plan is a policy decision that is at the discretion of the Planning Commission and the City Council C The proposed project is in conformance with many General Plan goals, policies, and objectives related to Economic Development, Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Conservation and Norse The following Economic Development goal, objective, and policies apply ED 3, ED 3 -1, ED 3 -1 1, ED 3-12, ED 3 -1.3, ED 3 -14, and ED 3 -1.5 The Plan strives to preserve and improve the business environment, stabilize the economic viability of the Downtown, improve the appearance of Downtown, improve vehicular 3 ]'4 circulation, parking and streetscape and enhance the pedestrian environment while providing the opportunity for a mix of commercial services. D Many Land Use goals, policies and objectives apply including; LU 1, LU 1-4, LU 1 -5, LU 1 -5.1, LU 1 -5.2, LU 1 -5.3, LU 1 -5.4, LU 1 -5.5, LU 1 -5.6, LU 1 -5.9, LU 2, LU 2 -1, LU 2 -1.1, LU 2 -2, LU2 -2 1, LU2 -2 IA, LU 2- 2.113, LU 4, LU 4 -2, LU 4 -2.1, LU 4-2.2, LU 4-2.3, LU 4 -2.4, LU4 -2.5, LU 4 -2.5A, LU 4 -2.6, LU 4 -2.7, LU 4 -2.8, LU 4 -2.9, LU 7, LU 7 -1, LU 7 -1.3, LU7 -2, and LU7 -2.5 One of the Plan's goals is to maintain the "small town" atmosphere The Plan also strives to preserve the Downtown's historic areas, create a sense of place, provide for citizen input through the Downtown Task Force, and Planning Commission and City Council public hearings, provide sign regulations, encourage street trees, landscaping, and entry statements, provide CEQA review and prohibit dnve -thru restaurants. The Plan also encourages preservation and enhancement of the Downtown's cultural and historical resources, in that the Implementation and Design Standards sections of the Plan propose the establishment of Historic Preservation criteria for the 100 and 200 blocks of Richmond Street, with incentives and disincentives to encourage the preservation and enhancement of the historical buildings in this area. The Specific Plan provides the opportunity to enhance and further stabilize the existing Downtown tax base within a mixed -use environment The Plan strives to create Downtown as the focal point of the community, enhancing the aesthetic environment and upgrading public spaces for Downtown activities The Plan addresses provisions for adequate parking, low - scale, pedestrian - onented architecture and evaluation and mitigation of traffic impacts Lastly, the Plan provides for quality infrastructure in that improved sidewalks, streets, street lighting, and other streetscape infrastructure improvements are proposed E Circulation Element goals, policies and objectives also apply to the proposal including, C 1, C 1 -1, C1 -1.6, CI -1.8, CI -1 14, CI -2, Cl -2 1, C 2, C 2 -1, C 2 -1.6, C2 -1.7, C 2 -2, C 2- 2 1,C 2 -3, C 2 -3.1, C 2 -3 2, C 2 -3 4, C 3, C 3 -1, C 3 -1.1, C 3 -1.3, C 3 -1.7, C 3 -2, C 3 -2.1, C 3 -2.2, C 4 -3, and C 4 -3.1, in that the circulation system in the Downtown area is safe, convenient and cost effective The three -lane proposal on Main Street has been evaluated and can accommodate the circulation needs with minor intersection improvements and the circulation system will continue to provide emergency vehicle access. The Plan provides a pedestrian- onented environment, which is consistent with the General Plan provisions for alternative modes of transportation The widened and enhanced sidewalks will further enhance pedestrian activity. The Plan continues to provide bicycle and transit system access, consistent with the General Plan, while encouraging more bicycle parking facilities The Plan also addresses development of circulation policies that are consistent with other City policies This section of the Specific Plan clearly indicates the consistency of the Plan with all of the applicable Elements (Economic Development, Land Use, Circulation, Conservation, and Noise) The Plan provides for the upgrading of streets to maintain the level of service, transit planning is addressed, pedestrian and bicycle access is enhanced, parking is managed and potential funding sources are identified F The goals, policies, programs, and objectives which apply to the proposed project are contained within the Housing Element including, H 4, H 4 -1,and H4-1 I The Specific Plan is consistent with the Housing Element in that residential uses will continue to be permitted, and increased densities will be allowed, providing the opportunity for a diversity of housing types, prices and tenure 4 125 G The goal and policies which apply to the proposed project are contained within the Conservation Element, CN 5, CN 5 -1, and CN 5 -2 The Downtown Specific Plan is also consistent with the urban landscape provisions of the Conservation Element The Plan protects and enhances the quality of the urban landscape of the Downtown, particularly the characteristics and qualities identified by the community, through the Task Force, as being valued. H The final goal, ob3ective, policy and program relate to the Noise Element including, N 1, N 1 -2, and N 1 -2 1 The Downtown Specific Plan is also consistent with the applicable Noise Element in that the Plan requires that the current noise regulations of the Municipal Code be adhered to which address and mitigate any potential noise conflicts NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of Environmental Assessment No EA-474 (EA -474), GPA No 99 -2, ZC No 99 -2, and ZTA No 99 -5 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`" Street Specific Plan There is one (1) zone intended to be used vnthin the boundaries of the 124" Street Specific Plan This zone is. 124d' Street SP 124" Street Specific Plan Aviation Spectfic Plan There is one (1) use zone intended to be used within the boundaries of the Aviation Specific Plan This zone is: ASP - Aviation Specific Plan Zone 5 12G 4 Downtown Specific Plan There are five (5) classes of use districts intended to be used with the boundaries of the Downtown Specific Plan. These districts include: MSD Main Street District MSTD Main Street Transitional District RSD Richmond Street District NRSD North Richmond Stmt District V The Village 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 spectfied Zone SECTION 2 The Downtown Specific Plan is hereby adopted as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by thus reference SECTION 3. The Land Use designations (Commercial and Public Use designations) and the proposed Land Use Plan (northwest quadrant) of the Land Use Element are hereby amended to reflect the change of a portion of the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street and the adjacent property on the 100 -200 blocks of west Grand Avenue from Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities to Downtown 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 of the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street and the adjacent property on the 100 -200 blocks of west Grand Avenue from Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities designations to Downtown Specific Plan The corresponding changes to the Rand 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 for a portion of the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street and the adjacent property on the 100 -200 blocks of west Grand Avenue from Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities designations to Downtown Specific Plan The corresponding changes to the Rand 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 for the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street and the adjacent property on the 100 -200 blocks of west Grand Avenue from Downtown Commercial and Public Facilities designations to Downtown Specific Plan 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 FURTBER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of Environmental Assessment No. EA-474 (EA -474), GPA No 99 -2, ZC No 99 -2, and ZTA No 99 -5 6 I27 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that according to the El Segundo Municipal Code, a copy of tins Resolution shall be trailed 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 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 25th day of May 2000. C /' M 41! •✓1.,_ JaAes M Hansen, Director of Brian Crowley, Chairman Ct- Community, Economic and Development of the Planning Commission Services, and, Secretary of the Planning of the City of El Segundo, California Commission of the City of El Segundo, California VOTES - B Crowley - Aye G Wycoff - Aye J Boulgandes - Aye P Mahler - Aye M Kretzmer - Aye P \Planning & Budding SafetYWROJECfS\DOWNTOWN\PCreso doc -2 7 128 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 6, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS & BOARDS AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Request to City Council to set interviews of candidates to the various Committees, Commissions and Boards RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Set date of interviews BRIEF SUMMARY: Vacancies have been posted since January 2000 at City Hall, Library, on Cable, at the Chamber of Commerce, Joslyn and Clubhouse and advertised in the El Segundo Herald and Inside El Segundo # of O enures Terms Expire Economic Development Advisory Council 4 Unlinuted Investment Advisory Comrmttee 1 8/30/01 Recreation & Parks Commission 1 5/30100 Planning Commission 2 6/30/00 Senior Citizen Housing Corporation Board 2 6130/00 Library Board of Trustees 2 6/30100 & `01 Community Cable Advisory Committee 2 10/31/00 & `03 Capital Improvement Program Advisory Commission 1 11/30/00 LAXMAC 1 12/31/00 ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: FISCAL IMPACT: N/A ORIGINATED. Julia Abreu- Mason, Council Assistant Date: June 9, 2000 REVIEWED BY: Mary Strenn, City Manager Date: June 9, 2000 /a TAKEN: lam wkOb OWft6 Wagrn RN.0 m,n uneme.s 2 129 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Report of Committees, Boards, and Commissions AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Council Sub - Committee for the Senior Housing Board — Report on proposed rent increase for Park Vista RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Review Sub - Committee Report BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The Council assigned Council members Wernick and McDowell to a sub- committee of the Senior Housing Board to review the Board's recommendation in December 1999 to increase the rent for Park Vista residents. The sub - committee met on June 14`h to discuss the Senior Housing Board's recommendation and to consider a suggestion to only increase rents for new tenants. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: ORIGINATED: ag Johnson, Recreation and Parks Director REVIEWE Y: Mary trenn, City Manager DATE: June 13, 2000 DATE: June 13, 2000 ; Up 130 3 A EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Commissions and Boards AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Proposal of 3% rent Increase at Park Vista for 17 months beginning August 1, 2000 though December 31, 2001 An additional annual 1.5-% increase is also proposed from January 1, 2002 through December 2005 (This 3% proposed breakdown amounts to a monthly $9 Increase for 33 bachelor apartments, a $11 monthly increase for 31 small bedroom apartments and a $13 increase for 32 large bedroom apartments Providing approximately $17,918 of new revenue toward current maintenance projects per year). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Senior Housing Boards recommendation for proposed rental Increase plan BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The last rental increase was in 1996 During the past four years many of the costs in the operation have increased In addition to the increase of costs for ongoing services, the building systems have been to requiring additional maintenance and replacement, i e, balconies, decks and drainage systems and, an emergency power supply system In addition, the Board budgets 9 apartment "turn - avers" per year and this year alone there have been 23 "turn- overs" in apartment rentals The facility is now going into its twelfth year of operation and the Board foresees many more maintenance and replacement needs coming up in the near future The Senior Housing Board has been accessing the Park Vista reserve account to provide for these repairs and maintenance issues It is the desire of the Board that the reserves stay in the reserve account and repairs and maintenance projects are maintained through current revenues /rentals ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: NA Amount Requested: 3% rental increase —17 months. Annual 1.5% thereafter until 2006 Account Number: Park Vista Project Phase: NA Appropriation required: Approval of recommendation ORIGINATED: DATE: Peter Freeman, President of Senior Housing Board 131 we i 8= LL z 0 u� N r y0 O= r Q U� 3 a 7 o, m$ou$n'm$ °r m mrv� $m ^m 7r e Q W Y LL W �� LL QuU Yu jQ F ti J� m C Y 2 L yNj � � W i � W N still! Wgg tg W #y EW'' ��1tl����3�� 4Y�O r 5 U c Z 1 s f Y w € NU r s W 0 q Y u i E n I fE j��i fi Us �a R LL s (i n� E LL � m i' i D =s W O 13- 4 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER 5/27/2000 THROUGH 610912000 Date Payee Amount Description 5/30/00 Wells Fargo 30,000 00 TPT The Lakes Golf Payroll Transfer 5/31/00 Health Comp 977.70 Weekly eligible claims 5/26 618100 IRS 164,584.61 Federal Taxes PR25 6/8/00 Employment Development 31,194 87 State Taxes PR25 618100 Health Comp 2,206.67 Weekly eligible claims 6/2 6/8/00 ACH- Federal Reserve 250.00 Savings Bonds PR24 619100 Wells Fargo 25,000 00 Worker Comp 254,213 85 DATE OF RATIFICATION: 6120100 TOTAL PAYMENTS BY WIRE: Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by Deputy Treasurer (� 2 /Cc) Date Finance Director Date City Manager Dat� 254,213.85 Information on actual expenditures is available in the City Treasurer's Office of the City of El Segundo 133 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, June 6, 2000 - 5 :00 P.M. 5:00 PM Session CALL TO ORDER - Mayor ProTem Jacobs at 5:00 p m ROLL CALL Mayor Gordon Mayor Pro Tem Jacobs Council Member Gaines Council Member McDowell Council Member Wernick CLOSED SESSION: - Present - Present - Present - Present - Present The City Council moved into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code §54950, et sea.) 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 matters covered under Gov't Code §54957 (Personnel); and /or conferring with the City's Labor Negotiators as follows: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov't Code §54956.9(a)) 1 City of El Segundo v. Bd. of Airport Commissioners, et al., LASC Case No. BC 220609 2 Ralston v. El Segundo, LASC Case No. YC 036223 3 Hill v El Segundo, USDC No. CV 98- 1463- LGB(SHX) 4 Valone Williams v. Brian D. Evanski, et al., LASC Case No. 99CO2571 5. Venegas v El Segundo, LASC Case No. BC207136 6 In re Randall's Island Family Golf Centers, Inc., U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 00- 41065. 7 City of El Segundo v Stardust, LASC Case No YC031364 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Gov't Code §54956 9(b): -1- potential case (no further public statement is required at this time); Initiation of litigation pursuant to Gov't Code §54956.9(c)- -3- matters. DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS (Gov't Code §54957) — None. CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR - (Gov't Code §54957.6) — City Representative: Mary Strenn and Richard Kopenhefer Employee Organizations: City Employees' Association, Supervisory & Professional Employees' Association, El Segundo Firefighters' Association, El Segundo Police Officers' Association, and all unrepresented employees. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) — NONE MINUTES OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL J 134 5 PAGE NO 1 Council recessed at 6:55 p.m Council reconvened at 7:00 p.m REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 6, 2000 -7:00 P.M. 7:00 PM Session CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Gordon at 7:00 p m. INVOCATION - Clerk Mortesen PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Mayor Pro Tern Sandra Jacobs PRESENTATIONS Council Member McDowell presented a Proclamation to Carl Jacobson declaring June 17, 2000 as VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION DAY in the City of El Segundo, recognizing the contributions of those who volunteer services on behalf of the City, and inviting the City's volunteers to a celebration in their honor on Saturday, June 17, 2000 from 11:00 a m to 2 00 p m at Chevron Park Council Member Gaines presented a Proclamation to Gordon Laudent, and Reginia Rose declaring June 6, 2000 as The Aerospace Corporation Day in El Segundo, to commemorate the company's 40th anniversary and commending the skilled employees of The Aerospace Corporation for their role in our nation's defense - related space systems and other vital government programs. Mayor ProTem Jacobs introduced Francisco Valdez, from our Sister City. Francisco is visiting the City in support of the cultural exchange program we enjoy with Guyamas. An art exhibition of his work is currently on display in the Library ROLL CALL Mayor Gordon - Present Mayor Pro Tern Jacobs - Present Council Member Gaines - Present Council Member McDowell - Present Council Member Wernick - Present 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 behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves pnor to addressing the City Council Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250 While all comments are welcome, the Brown Act does not allow Council to take action on any item not on the agenda The Council will respond to comments after Public Communications is closed MINUTES OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL JUNE 6, 2000 PAGE NO 2 135 Sandra Mason, resident; spoke regarding the skate boards and bicycles on Main Street Ken Velten spoke for Habitat for Humanity, South Bay -Long Beach, informed Council and the public about a meeting to be held on June 13 at 6:30 p.m. at the El Segundo United Methodist Church and to recruit volunteers for assistance in a project to build homes in the Wilmington area Request on behalf of the U.S Department of the Air Force for a mechanism to facilitate arrangements with private parties to obtain new, seismically secure buildings on the Los Angeles Air Force Base and options to capture a tax increment to close the gap between the value of the land and the cost of replacement facilities. MOVED by Council Member Gaines, SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Jacobs to direct staff to prepare a report detailing the mechanism for working with the Air Force on this project listed in the correspondence from the Air Force including the capturing of a tax increment by the Air Force as mechanism to facilitate arrangements with private parties to obtain new, seismically secure buildings on the Los Angeles Air Force Base to close the gap between the value of the land and the cost of replacement facilities. MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE; AYES: MAYOR GORDON, MAYOR PROTEM JACOBS; NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS MCDOWELL AND WERNICK. 312 Mayor Gordon, Mayor ProTem Jacobs, and Council Member Gaines support investigating all aspects of the Air Force request. Council Member McDowell and Wernick do not favor the formation of a Redevelopment Agency A. PROCEDURAL MOTIONS Consideration of a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions on this Agenda by title only MOVED by Mayor ProTem Jacobs, SECONDED by Council Member McDowell to read all ordinances and resolutions on this Agenda by title only. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE. 510 B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS - Discussion and Introduction of an Ordinance. amending certain Sections of Chapter 3 06 of the El Segundo Municipal Code, entitled Business Attraction Program Mayor Gordon appointed a task force with Council Member McDowell and Wemick to discuss the approval mechanism with the public and business community and compile all comments. To report back to Council at the second meeting in August Council Member McDowell requested that no incentives be considered between now and the time the task force reports back to Council. The City Manager clarified that Incentives could be brought to Council if opportunities arose before then. MINUTES OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL JUNE 6, 2000 PAGE NO 3 % 136 4 Dog Park Rules Ordinance No 1318 Director of Recreation and Parks, Greg Johnson, gave a brief report. City Attorney Mark Hensley read by title only: ORDINANCE NO. 1318 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 8.12 OF THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING SECTION 8.12.160 RELATING TO DOG PARK RULES Council Member Gaines introduced Ordinance No. 1318 C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - NONE D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 5 Review of Golf Course issues. Mary Strenn, City Manager, gave a report Consensus of the sub - committee was to continue the management of the golf course on a month to month basis. A request for proposal to be prepared (in approximately one year) after the completion of the widening of Sepulveda, and the water reclamation project is further along The payoff of the bonds will be investigated in 2002. Council directed staff to put together a report on a contingency plan to be circulated to Council, in the event Family Golf is no longer allowed to manage the Course. 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. 6 Approve Warrant Numbers 2510178 - 2510560 on Register No. 16 in total amount of $1,402,762.15, and Wire Transfers in the amount of $1,244,729 40 7 Aprove City Council meeting minutes of May 6 -9, 2000, May 15, 2000 and May 16, 2000. 8 Approval of Contract No. 2796 for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) management services with Tina Gall and Associates for approximately $16,000 for CDBG fiscal year 2000/2001 and a maximum of 10% of each year's allocation for the subsequent two years; and Contract No. 2795 with LDM Associates for MINUTES OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL JUNE 6, 2000 PAGE NO 4 137 approximately $35,400 for CDBG fiscal year 2000/2001 and a maximum of 20% of each year's allocation for the subsequent two years for the Minor Home Repair Project ($8,400) and the Residential Sound Insulation Project ($27,000). Contract period. July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2003. 9 Approval of Contract No. 2794 with Willdan Associates for providing a temporary License Permit Specialist total cost not to exceed $39,600 10 PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBER WERNICK 11 PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY MAYOR PRO TEM JACOBS 12 PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCDOWELL 13 Rejection of bids received for the rehabilitation of Sanitary Sewer Pump Station No 13 (Project No PW 00 -1) and authorization for staff to re- advertise the project 14 PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY MAYOR GORDON 15 Approve three Professional Service Agreements to implement federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) public service activities between the City of El Segundo and the South Bay Youth Project (Juvenile Diversion) Contract No. 2797, Daniel Freeman Manna Hospital (Home Delivered Meals) Contract No 2799, and, Just Right Help, Inc, (Senior In -Home Services) Contract No. 2798, respectively and authorize the Mayor to execute said agreements. Authorize an appropriation of $16,000 for South Bay Youth Project; $9,500 for Daniel Freeman Marina Hospital; and $19,500 for Just Right Help, Inc from the 2000 -2001 annual CDBG Public Service allocation (a maximum limit of 15% or $16,743), and City General Funds from the 2000 -2001 Fiscal Year budget (in an amount not to exceed $28,257), and the same amounts for each agency for the subsequent two contract years (2001- 2003). 16 Authorize the Director of Finance to serve as Treasurer /Auditor of the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG). MOVED by Council Member McDowell, SECONDED by Council Member Wemick to approve consent agenda items 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19. MOTION PASSED BY UNANAIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 510 CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA 10 Amendment to a professional service Contract No. 2762 with Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates (RBF) for additional environmental services to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the proposed El Segundo Media Center project on the 46 -acre former Rockwell International property bounded by Mariposa Avenue, Nash Street, Atwood Way, and Douglas Street. The MINUTES OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL JUNE 6, 2000 PAGE NO 5 13 r, amount to be paid to the Consultant under this amendment is $16,700.00 The applicant of the - project is responsible for the full amount. Mayor Gordon and Council Member Wernick not participating on this item due to a possible conflict of interest. MOVED by Mayor ProTem Jacobs, SECONDED by Council Member McDowell to approve the amendment to Contract No 2762 with Robert Bein, William Frost & Associations for additional environmental services to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the proposed El Segundo Media Center project on the 46 -acre former Rockwell International property bounded by Mariposa Avenue, Nash Street, Atwood Way, and Douglas Street The amount to be paid to the Consultant under this amendment is $16,700.00. The applicant of the - project is responsible for the full amount. MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE. AYES: MAYOR PROTEM JACOBS, COUNCIL MEMBERS, GAINES and MCDOWELL. NOES: NONE. NOT. PARTICIPATING: MAYOR GORDON and COUNCIL MEMBER WERNICK. 3/012 11 Adoption of plans and specifications for the Grand Avenue rehabilitation protect between Main and Maryland Streets — Project No. PW 99 -6 (estimated cost = $170,000) Mayor ProTem Jacobs and Council Member McDowell not participating due to a possible conflict of interest. MOVED by Council Member Gaines, SECONDED by Council Member Wernick to approve of the Adoption of plans and specifications for the Grand Avenue rehabilitation project between Main and Maryland Streets — Project No PW 99 -6 (estimated cost = $170,000). MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE. AYES: MAYOR GORDON, COUNCIL MEMBERS, GAINES, AND WERNCIK. NOES: NONE. NOT - PARTICIPATING: COUNCIL MEMBER MCDOWELL, AND MAYOR PROTEM JACOBS. 31012 12 Approve extension to street sweeping Contract No. 2347 with Nationwide Environmental Services for an additional three (3) years at the same rate. Annual fiscal impact = $94,560. MOVED by Council Member McDowell SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Jacobs to Approve extension to street sweeping Contract No. 2762 with Nationwide Environmental Services for an additional three (3) years at the same rate. Annual fiscal impact = $94,560. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 510 14 Adopt Resolution No 4164 from the South Bay Task Force requesting the City of El Segundo to support the Task Force's efforts to mitigate noise impacts resulting from LAX by promoting the development of other airport sites, supporting legislative efforts and addressing environmental justice issues MOVED by Mayor Gordon, SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Jacobs to adopt Resolution No 4164 from the South Bay Task Force requesting the City of El Segundo to support the Task Force's efforts to mitigate noise impacts resulting from LAX by promoting the development of other airport sites, MINUTES OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL JUNE 6, 2000 PAGE NO 6 13 ° supporting legislative efforts and addressing environmental justice issues MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 F. NEW BUSINESS — 17 Adoption of Resolution No. 4165 naming the beach between Grand Avenue south to the El Porto Jetty, E/ Segundo Beach. Recreation and Parks Director Greg Johnson gave a brief report MOVED by Mayor ProTem Jacobs, SECONDED by Council Member Gaines to adopt Resolution No 4165 naming the beach between Grand Avenue south to the El Porto Jetty, El Segundo Beach MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 18. Purchase a portable sink for the Farmers Market and other city special events per Health Department guidelines and requirements MOVED by Council Member Gaines, SECONDED by Council Member McDowell to purchase a portable sink for the Farmers Market and other city special events per Health Department guidelines and requirements and authorize appropriation from the Associated Recreation Fund account. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 510 19. Authorize staff to solicit proposals for professional engineering services for the reconstruction of Storm Water Pump Station No 16, located at the intersection of Eucalyptus Drive and Holly Avenue (estimated cost of services in fiscal year 1999- 2000 = $20,000) MOVED by Council Member Wernick, SECONDED Council Member McDowell to authorize staff to solicit proposals for professional engineering services for the reconstruction of Storm Water Pump Station No 16, located at the intersection of Eucalyptus Drive and Holly Avenue (estimated cost of services in fiscal year 1999 -2000 = $20,000). MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 510 G. REPORTS - CITY MANAGER - NONE H. REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY - NONE REPORTS - CITY CLERK - NONE J. REPORTS - CITY TREASURER - NONE K. REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member McDowell - MINUTES OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL JUNE 6, 2000 PAGE NO 7 140 20. Request Council consensus to cancel July 5, 2000 Council meeting MOVED by Council Member Wernick, SECONDED by Council Member Gaines to cancel July 5, 2000 City Council meeting. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 Council Member Gaines - Spoke regarding a meeting Senator Kuykendall regarding airport issues Council Member Wernick — Spoke regarding mosquito abatement and AQMD meetings. Mayor Pro Tem Jacobs — Spoke regarding Hyperion mosquito abatement, and Transportation and Communication Committee, (SCAG), Airport issues Mayor Gordon — Noted an item of importance that needed to be added to the Agenda MOVED by Council Member Wernick, SECONDED by Council Member McDowell to address expanding the scope of service of Cassidy and Associates for lobbying services, an item of importance that arose after the posting of the Agenda. MOTION PASSED BY UNANAIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 MOVED by Mayor Gordon, SECONDED by Council Member McDowell to oppose the merger of United Airlines and US Air; send a letter from the City of El Segundo to the House Judiciary Committee stating the City's opposition and encouraging the Committee not approve the merger and send letters to our Coalition partners urging them to also send opposition letters, inform local press of our opposition to the proposed merger; approve increased funding for our lobbyist, Cassidy and Associates (or suitable replacement), for the opposition of the merger and their testifying at the House Judiciary Committee Hearings on June 14, 2000. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 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 behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves pnor to addressing the City Council Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250 While all comments are welcome, the Brown Act does not allow Council to take action on any item not on the agenda The Council will respond to comments after Public Communications is closed MEMORIALS - Adjournment in memory of Marjorie Demmer, mother of Susan Gaines and Florence Louise Haig CLOSED SESSION - NONE MINUTES OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL JUNE 6, 2000 PAGE NO 8 141 ADJOURNMENT at 8.47 p.m. Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk MINUTES OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL JUNE 6, 2000 PAGE NO 9 142 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA DESCRIPTION: MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA HEADING: Consent An Ordinance of the City of El Segundo, California, amending chapter 8.12 of the El Segundo Municipal Code by adding Section 8.12.160 relating to dog park rules (Second Reading) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Adopt Ordinance BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: This item was brought to Ccuncil at the June 6th meeting This is the second reading of the Ordinance before adoption ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number. Project Phase: Appropriation Required: ORIGINATED: Greg Johnson, Recreation and Parks Director DATE: June 13, R EWE BY: DATE: June 13, 2000 Ma trenn, City Manager ;'0a o 0 143 ORDINANCE 1318 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 8.12 OF THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING SECTION 8.12.160 RELATING TO DOG PARK RULES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 Chapter 8.12 of the El Segundo Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding thereto Section 8 12.160 which Section shall read as follows 8 12.160 EL SEGUNDO DOG PARK RULES Owners and /or handlers shall be in attendance with dogs during the use of the Dog Park The Dog Park shall be open from dawn to dusk, seven days a week The folluwing rules shall be in force: (1) Aggressive dogs are not allowed in the park; (2) No food in the park/don't feed dogs in the park, (3) Owners must supervise and clean up after dogs, (4) Children under 12 years of age must be supervised by an adult; (5) Dogs must be at least 4 months old and vaccinated, (6) Dogs in heat are not permitted; (7) No spiked collars, (8) No bikes, roller blades, roller skates, strollers or similar items allowed in the park, (9) Owners must have a leash available at all times; (10) Parking regulations must be obeyed; (11) Dog owners are liable for any injuries or damage caused by their dog(s), (12) All dogs must be currently licensed; (13) Professional dog trainers are not allowed to conduct training on site (14) No person may bring more than 3 dogs to the park at one time. The following behaviors must be stopped immediately. (1) Prolonged growling, (2) Mounting or pinning of other dogs In the case of an emergency 911 shall be called. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall become effective at midnight on the thirtieth (30) day from and after the final passage and adoption hereof. ORDINANCE NO 1318 ESMC SECTION 8 12160, DOG PARK RULES A PAGE NO 1 9 3 SECTION 3 The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance, shall cause the same to be entered in the book of original ordinances of said City; shall make a not of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted; and shall within 15 days after the passage or adoption thereof cause the same top be published or posted in accordance with the law PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of 2000 Mike Gordon, Mayor ATTEST STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing Ordinance No. was duly introduced by said City Council at a regular meeting held on the day of 2000, and 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 day of 2000, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mark D. Hensley, City Attome ORDINANCE NO 1318 ESMC SECTION B 12.160, DOG PARK RULES 4 ` PACE NO 2 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRI Accept the work as complete for the 1998 -99 Replacement of Water Mains — Project No. PW 98 -10 (final contract amount = $325,474.00). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1 Accept the work as complete 2 Authorize the City Clerk to file the City Engineer's Notice of Completion in the County Recorder's office. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: On August 17, 1999, the City Council awarded a contract to B.R Day Construction, Inc., in the amount of $322,704.00 for the replacement of water mains in the following streets 1 Douglas Street, between Imperial Highway and 950' southerly. 2. Virginia Street, between Imperial Avenue and Maple Avenue 3. Penn Street, between Mariposa Avenue and Palm Avenue. The total contract amount, based on measured quantities, is $325,474.00. Ail work has been completed to the satisfaction of staff. Staff recommends City Council acceptance of the completed work. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Notice of Completion. FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: No Amount Requested: $325,474.00 Account Number: 501 -400- 7103 -8207 Project Phase: Acceptance of work Appropriation Required: No ORIGINATED BY- a e • Date: JUN 82000 REVIEWED BY: Aan Date:�/ � Mary Strenn. Citv er % 0 7 N \COUNCILUUNE28 -01 (Tuesday 8/8/00 6 00 P M) 146 Recording Requested by and When Recorded Mail To: City Clerk, City Hall 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECT Project Name 1998 -99 Replacement of Water Mains Project No PW 98 -10 Notice is hereby given pursuant to State of California Civil Code Section 3093 at seq that 1 The undersigned is an officer of the owner of the interest stated below in the property hereinafter described 2 The full name of the owner is City of El Segundo 3 The full address of the owner is City Hall, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, CA, 90245 4 The nature of the interest of the owner is Public street right -of -way 5 A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was field reviewed by the City Engineer on May 24, 2000 The work done was Replacement and installation of water mains 6 On June 20, 2000, the City Council of the City of El Segundo accepted the work of this contract as being complete and directed the recording of this Notice of Completion in the Office of the County Recorder 7 The name of the Contractor for such work of improvement was B R. Day Construction, Inc 8 The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of El Segundo, County of Los Angeles, State of California, and is described as follows - 9 The street address of said property is N/A Dated Bellur K Devara) City Engineer VERIFICATION 1, the undersigned, say I am the City Engineer of the City El Segundo, the declarant of the foregoing Notice of Completion, I have read said Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof, the same is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing is true and correct Executed on 2000 at El Segundo, California Bellur K Devarat City Engineer N \NOTICE'S \PW98 -10 NOC (6!7100) 147 JI EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Renewal of Library's annual periodical subscription list with EBSCO Subscription Services for the period September 1, 2000 - August 31, 2001. Fiscal Impact- $13,564. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Approve renewal of services with EBSCO Subscription Services. BACKGROUND& DISCUSSION. EBSCO Subscription Services supplies over 90% of the Library's popular magazines and business journals at a substantial savings. This collection comprises over 300 titles that are used for informational resources, student projects, and CD ROM access to over 100 additional titles not in our collection. EBSCO has had an excellent track record in delivering periodicals in a timely manner without a disruption of monthly issues to our patrons. Staff is recommending approval of renewing the EBSCO Subscription Services for $13,564 ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1) EBSCO Subscription Services Annual Renewal List cover letter 21 Invoice FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget or CIP: Amount Requested: $13,564 Account Number: 001 -400- 6104 -5501 Project Phase: Appropriation Required: No ACTION TAKEN: AGAFORM 148 r ANNUAL RENEWAL LIST P O BOX 92901 LOS ANGELES, CA 90009 EL SEGUNDO PUBLIC LIBRARY ERICA CONDON 111 W MARIPOSA AVE EL SEGUNDO CA 90245 -2201 June 1, 2000 DAVID S. KERIN VICE PRESIDENT, GENERAL MANAG FAXO(310) 322 - 25800) 683 -27 58 ACCOUNT NO LA- 21455 -00 Enclosed is the annual renewal list for your subscriptions through EBSCO. Note pages are printed front and back. Please check the following information on your renewal list and make corrections directly on the list where applicable. *Bill—to address .Quantity •Send —to address • Departmental /Fund codes ADDING TITLES: Attach a list of titles you wish to add to your renewal list and indicate the following: 1) New or Renewal 2) Desired Start Date 3) Quantity DELETING TITLES: Draw a line through the title(s) you do not wish to renew CLAIMS- Forward all claims under separate cover to your customer service representative Please do not communu ate claims by writing on the renewal list. PURCHASE ORDER: Many organizations require a purchase order (PO) or voucher. Please check one of the following: The PO is attached The PO number is No PO is required. _ The PO will follow on PRICES: The prices shown on this list are current, but are subject to change by the publisher. A 9 to 1 I percent allowance for price increases is suggested for budgeting purposes. (date). INVOICE: This is not an invoice. A definitive invoice will be sent to you when your order is processed. If special invoicing or payment arrangements are required contact our Accounts Receivable Department. PAYMENT: Please check one of the following —Prepayment has been made. -Payment is enclosed. Renewal list to follow on (date). _Payment will be made when invoiced. DEADLINE: Most publishers require 60 to 90 days to process orders. Please return your renewal to EBSCO no later than September 1, 2000 to ensure continuous subscription services. SIGNATURE REQUIRED: To authorize renewal of your subscription, please check one of the choices below, sign your name, print the other information, and return this form with a copy of your renewal list. — Renew AS IS (no changes). _ Renew with the changes indicated on my list. Authoiized Signature_ ��.4I11 Print Name: Title:_ Phone. Fax: Date: CONTACT YOUR RENEWAL COORDINATOR AT 1 800 683 -2726 FOR ASSISTANCE. I T STEPHENS, PRESIDENT - 9IRMINGHAM,ALABAMA 33201 -1943 203) 9916600 � }4� s�. INVOICE PUB/SN RS 60 TTOM90 TDAYS FROM DATE OF INVOICE TO P 0 BOX 92901 FAX (310)322 -2558 1-800-683- 27245GIN SERVICE LOS ANGELES CA 90009 -2901 (310)322 -5000 BILL TO su6swBEn SEND MAGAZINES TO CODE IS EL SEGUNDO PUBLIC LIBRARY ERICA CONDON 111 W MARIPOSA EL SEGUNDO CA 90245 su. aIAMINY] BFN11TTSNN`F A. Mu.. IArYSBmNlO 1 111 THK HWOMF. I LELCF RE-0ER TO BOTH THE INVOICE NIU&I AND M lK1ImT N1 m YOUR PURCHASE ORDER NO AODOOMT NO DATE REF CODE NWOO NO PAGE LA —S- 21455 -00 06/0112000 EP 9746 1 TITLE NUMBER OTY NAME OF PUBLICATION FpLA•WM•N +o x.YnV• T••PP . ( ••acs sxsioi Ili i SUBSCRIPTION RENEWALS AT C RRENT RATES SS<u P 1154 ESTIMATED PUBLISHER PFIC E INCREASES AMOUNT DUE G/0 �7/ 129 -9 t / 0 ;/ / yp -oo / p/ / r 74 1 �c. G3S� .1 •r ma wu al hd par 30 01.S ., um..•r uml d Pavm•m eu• en nuipr el nnvei.1 Inveins M 1% en ma 0sn aar incur • 1 c P•Y P•r tArs .n oip in lull Tb,s �nuo • u aubmin•d to yp. br EBSCO .n ns upae II„III NT EC81 5 O 60UTR li m TO z Yom e9•n1 EBSCO gua anlu:po•Y'••nt zo •II pubinM1ar EE „III�,III AL 3u .VA 062000000 EBSCO S FEDERAL 10 ND 63- 6011166 • 0 0 7 L A s AOI;TO 70 001057. EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent AGENDA DESCRIPTION. Annual destruction of identified records in accordance with the provisions of Section 34090 of the Government Code of the State of California The City Attorney has consented to the plan for records destruction. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Resolution authorizing the destruction of certain records. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: Each year various Departments need to transition older documents to storage or destruction and make space for the new year's records By reviewing the older records and inventorying the current ones, we are able to use the available storage space more efficiently. To accomplish this goal, older records, which are no longer needed, should be destroyed annually. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. Resolution with attachments. FISCAL IMPACT: Not to exceed $500.00. Operating Budget- Amount Requested: Account Number: 001 -400- 1301 -5204 Protect Phase: Appropriation Required: ORIGINATED: DATE. %�) , ( Cindy Morteser' Mary tre CIt� M Hager �iop 15 9 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS WHEREAS, there is presented to the City Council for approval and forwarding to the City Council, the attached correspondence, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the records herem referred to are of no further value to the City of El Segundo, and that they occupy badly needed storage space, and WHEREAS, the City Attorney has, in accordance with the provisions of Section 34090 of the Government Code of the State of California, consented to the destruction of said records and documents NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS SECTION 1 The City Clerk is hereby authorized and granted authority to dispose of the records identified in Exhibn "A ", and shall cause these records to be destroyed in a lawful manner SECTION 2 upon destruction of the foregoing records, the City Clerk shall make a certificate of complete destruction of said records and file the original of the same in the Office of the City Clerk and file a copy of said certificate together with a certified copy of this resolution in the City Clerk's Department SECTION 3 The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution, shall enter the same in the book of original resolutions of said city, and shall snake a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said city, to the nunutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20' day of June, 2000 Mike Gordon, Mayor ATTEST STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO 1 1, 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 the City is five, that the foregoing Resolution No was duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor of said City, and attested to by the City Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 20" day of June, 2000, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following roll call vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM /111ark D Hensl i orney "(/ DOCUMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION - 6/2000 BOX 1 Agenda Packets -1992 July July 6 July 7 July 14 July 17 July 20 July 21 August 3 August 4 August 5 August 10 August 11 August 18 August 20 August 24 August 25 September 1 September 9 September 15 EXHIBIT "A" APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION Emu WE 15? 15? DOCUMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION - 6/2000 BOX 2 Agenda Packets -1992 September 30 October 6 October 20 November 3 November 10 November 17 December 1 December 12 December 15 December 21 EXHIBIT "A" APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION. r •' - 154 DOCUMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION - 6/2000 BOX 3 Agenda Packets -1993 January 5 January 18 January 19 January 28 February 2 February 3 February 4 February 5 February 15 February 16 Februan,18 March 2 March 3 March 9 EXHIBIT "A" APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION- 155 I DOCUMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION - 6/2000 BOX 4 Agenda Packets -1993 March 13 March 16 March 24 April 6 April 13 April 20 May 4 May 17 May 18 June 9 June 15 June 21 June')') June 26 EXHIBIT "A" APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION. M/ 15 6 DOCUMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION - 6/2000 BOX 721 FPPC FY1994/95 (COPIES) Carl Jacobson Sean M. Mahon Liam B Weston Gordon Leon Michael D Robbins Robert Yeagley Jane Fnedkin (+ 730 - ICRMA) James W. Morrison Richard J Switz Susan C Schofield Leland C Dolley Brian Scott Crowley M Stacev Palmer Loran M. Hammond 730 FPPC FY1991/92 (ORIGINALS) Sara Z Rostanuan Naima Greffon William S. McCoy Donald E Bott Shannon C Leonard Sandra Carol Jacobs Kendra S Moores Nancy M Hutar Terry Lee Cerretto Laurie B jester Paul Garry Hyrum B. Fedle Ron Darville Loran M. Hammond Ray Herbert Miller Janue Tavlor David Skillicorn Louis H. Ervin, Jr Patrick D Miner Linda L Robinson Richard S. Feam Gene H Bell Kenneth R. Putnam Ronald Lamar Hart Bellur K Devaral John W Hilton Lora E. Freeman William H Cameron William Martin Cindy Mortesen Dushan Skanch Lawrence D Vivian Colleen Frances Mulvany Barbara J Pearson Debra F. Brighton Margie A. Randall Caroline E Rowan Erika Condon Kimberley McIntosh Jaime Roger Kelly Rollie Wright Richard A. Croxall James K Fauk Richard Williams Ara Avak John J Trujillo Steven G. Klotzsche Peter C. Freeman Jacquelvn D Abraham Joan M Garcia Louise Eckersley Steve Jones Gwen Eng Kirk Jon Walske Eunice Kramer Carl S Evans AJ Paz Tunothv J Grimmond Frank V Meehan C Blake Mitchell John O Wayt Ronald R Green Richard D. Garland David W Sloan Donald L. Johnson Sylvia V. Ruiz Eric Moore Steve H. Tsumura Casey Ure Gary A Chandler John W. Gilbert Carl M. Nessel FPPC Correspondence EXHIBIT "A" APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: CITY ORNEY 5 157 DOCUMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION - 6/2000 BOX 5 (Cont'd) BID NOS 9201 2 -21 -92 3 Micro Computer Systems 9202 3 -16-92 Lease Water Pumping Rights - West Basin 9203 3 -16-92 AMT Protection Systems 9204 4-2 -92 4 sedans 9205 4-8-92 Emission Analyzer 9206 5 -27 -92 Centrifugal Trash Pump 9207 5 -27 -92 Copiers 9208 6-1 -92 2 Wheelchair Lift Buses 9209 6-2 -92 Extended Cargo Area MuuWagon PW 92 -1 7 -7 -92 NOC92- 2290033 Clean & CCTV Inspect sewer lines PW 92 -3 5 -26-92 NOC92- 1759533 1991 -92 Slurry Seal 9123 1 -31 -92 Two 1500 GPM Triple combination Pumpers 9301 7 -15 -92 Service to dump City Debris 9303 7 -15-92 Asphalt Pavmg Material & DMIIiSSI Oil 9304 9 -15 -92 Library OCLC Magnetic Tapes Conversion 9305 9 -10 -92 PaTatransit Bus with Wheelchair Lift 9306 11 -19 -92 Automated Library System 9307 11 -12 -92 Towing & Storage of velvcles EXHIBIT "A" APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION- Y ;CTfY Y 6. 158 DOCUMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION - 6/2000 BOX 8-89 to 4-90 Pla rang General Chronology Files - misc. mtemal and external correspondence (letters and menos) Citv Treasurer Cancelled checks to be destroyed 1. Payroll Cancelled checks July 1990 - Sep. 1992 7 Boxes 2 Payable checks Jan 1990 - Sep 1992 5 Boxes 3. Void checks 1985 -1988 1 Box 4 Warrant Registers August 1990 -November 1992 1 Box 5. Strategic Plan Study (GRIP) by Municipal Resource Consultants November Appendix I, II, III 3 Boxes 6 Bank Statement and Cancelled Checks 1983 -1992 2 Boxes 7. Annual Report (Financial Institute city has business with) See detail attached 1 Box 8 - Register of Disbursements June - Dec 197 Balance Report Security Pacific Bank 1990 -1991 Void Check Payroll special pickup list 1992 -1993 NOTE 1 - 8 SENT DOWN TO CITY CLERK STORAGE ON 2/15/00 9. Bail Deposit slips 1985 -1991 1 Box 10. Bail Check Stubs 1984 -1991 1 Box 11. Payroll Check Register 1989 -1997 (Duplicated Copy) Boxes 12. - Payroll Cancelled Check 8/1991 and 9/92 - Trust Worker Comp. Cancelled Check 1988 -1989 - Bail Fund Cancelled Check 1/89 -12/92 - Westnet Cancelled Check 1/90 -12/92 EXHIBIT "A" APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: C Y 7 Z 15° - Security Pacific Bank Check Stub 1975 -1989 - Coast Saving Check Stub 1990 -1991 - Federal Tax Deposit Coupon 1989 -1990 13. Payroll Canceled Check 10/92 -1/93 1 Box 14. Account Payable Cancelled check 9/92 -3/93 1 Box NOTE 9 - 14 SENT DOWN TO CITY CLERK STORAGE ON 3/11/00 EXHIBIT "A" APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION. c l 1 8 16 C PUBLIC WORKS All Westinghouse Hydro-electric files The Hydro facility has been decommissioned and removed 1993 -1996 Weed Abatement Files. Fire Department has accomplished weed abatement with no outstanding properties to be abated Former Public Works Department employee personnel files DUPLICATE ORIGINALS are kept in the Human Resources Department 1989 -1998 Review comments from Public Works engineering to Planning Division regarding planned projects for City DUPLICATE ORIGINALS of this information are kept in Planning Division 1985- Present DUPLICATE original legal clamps relative to Public Works Files are cases that have been settled from 1985 to present. Information relative to cases has been transmitted to Burke, Williams & Sorensen. Burke, Williams & Sorensen maintain original files I -105 Freeway construction information, including projects surrounding the 1 -105 Freeway Project completed six years ago and Caltrans is now the lead agency EXHIBIT "A" APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION, ,ice 161 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION Renewal of General Services Agreement (GSA) between the City and the County of Los Angeles for another five (5) years commencing on July 1, 2000 for services performed by the County on behalf of the City. COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Contract and authorize the Mayor to execute BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The current GSA will expire on June 30, 2000. The County of Los Angeles has sent a new GSA (Renewal) to cover the period from July 1, 2000 through June 30, 2005. The Renewal references the Assumption of Liability Agreement between the City of El Segundo and the County of Los Angeles dated as of November 14, 1977 The County currently provides the City with services such as maintenance of traffic signals and highway signs, district attorney representation, health programs, training and the like. The Renewal GSA may provide additional services in the future, which are not currently available to the City The City Attorney has approved the GSA as to form. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft contract. IMPACT: Operating Budget: Amount Requested: $100,000 00 per year Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation required: ORIGINATED BY: a��y DATE: Andres Santamaria, Director of Public Works JUN 12 2000 Mary Strenn, CitgMana i�0 a N 1000NCUJUNE20 03 (Monday 8(12!001000 AM) :F 10 GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, dated for purposes of reference only, 2000, is made by and between the County of Los Angeles, hereinafter referred to as the "County ", and the City of El Segundo, hereinafter referred to as the "City." RECITALS: (a) The City is desirous of contracting with the County for the performance by its appropriate officers and employees of City functions. (b) The County is agreeable to performing such services on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. (c) Such contracts are authorized and provided for by the provisions of Section 56'/2 of the Charter of the County of Los Angeles and Section 51300, et seq., of the Government Code. THEREFORE, THE PARTIES MUTUALLY AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1 The County agrees, through its officers and employees. to perform those City functions which are hereinafter provided for 2 The City shall pay for such services as are provided under this agreement at rates to be determined by the County Auditor - Controller in accordance with the policies and procedures established by the Board of Supervisors These rates shall be redofusted by the County Auditor - Controller annually effective the first day of July of each year to reflect the cost of such service in accordance with the policies and procedures for the determination of such rates as aoopted by the Board of Supervisors of County. 'iof6 1 16- 3. No County officer or department shall perform for said City any function not coming within the scope of the duties of such officer or department in performing services for the County. 4 No service shall be performed hereunder unless the City shall have available funds previously appropriated to cover the cost thereof. 5. No function or service shall be performed hereunder by any County officer or department unless such function or service shall have been requested in writing by the City on order of the City Council thereof or such officer as it may designate and approved by the Board of Supervisors of the County, or such officer as it may designate, and each such service or function shall be performed at the times and under circumstances which do not interfere with the performance of regular County operations 6 Whenever the County and City mutually agree as to the necessity for any such County officer or department to maintain administrative headquarters in the City, the City shall furnish at its own cost and expense all necessary office space, furniture, and furnishings, office supplies, janitorial service, telephone, light, water, and other utilities. in all instances where special supplies, stationery, notices, forms and the like must be issued in the name of the City, the same shall be supplied by the City at its expense It is expressly understood that in the event a local administrative office is maintained in the City for any such County officer or department, such quarters may be used by the County officer or department in connection with the performance of its duties in territory outside the City and adjacent thereto provided, however, that the performance of such outside duties shall not be at any additional cost to the City. 2of6 164 7 All persons employed in the performance of such services and functions for the City shall be County employees, and no City employee as such shall be taken over by the County, and no person employed hereunder shall have any City pension, civil service, or other status or right. For the purpose of performing such services and functions, and for the purpose of giving official status to the performance hereof, every County officer and employee engaged in performing any such service or function shall be deemed to be an officer or employee of said City while performing service for the City within the scope of this agreement 8 The City shall not be called upon to assume any liability for the direct payment of any salary, wages or other compensation to any County personnel performing services hereunder for the City, or any liability other than that provided for in this agreement Except as herein otherwise specified, the City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnity to any County employee for injury or sickness arising out of his employment. 9. The parties hereto have executed an Assumption of Liability Agreement approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 27, 1977 and /or a Joint Indemnity Agreement approved by the Board of Supervisors on October 8, 1991. Whichever of these documents the City has signed later in time is currently in effect and hereby made a part of and incorporated into this agreement as of set out in full herein. In the event that the Board of Supervisors later approves a revised Joint Indemnity Agreement and the City executes the revised agreement, the subsequent agreement as of its effective date shall supersede the agreement previously in effect between the parties hereto. 3 of 6 16` 10 Each County officer or department performing any service for the City provided for herein shall keep reasonably itemized and in detail work or fob records covering the cost of all services performed, including salary, wages and other compensation for labor; supervision and planning, plus overhead, the reasonable rental value of all County-owned machinery and equipment, rental paid for all rented machinery or equipment, together with the cost of an operator thereof when furnished with said machinery or equipment, the cost of all machinery and supplies furnished by the County, reasonable handling charges, and all additional items of expense incidental to the performance of such function or service. 11 All work done hereunder is subject to the limitations of the provisions of Section 23008 of the Government Code, and in accordance therewith, before any work is done or services rendered pursuant hereto, an amount equal to the cost or an amount 10% in excess of the estimated cost must be reserved by the City from its funds to insure payment for work, services or materials provided hereunder 12 The County shall render to the City at the close of each calendar month an itemized invoice which covers all services performed during said month, and the City shall pay County therefore within thirty (30) days after date of said invoice. If such payment is not delivered to the County office which is described on said invoice within thirty (30) days after the date of the invoice, the County is entitled to recover interest thereon. Said interest shall be at the rate of seven (7) percent per annum or any portion thereof calculated from the last day of the month in which the services were performed. 13 Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code Section 907, if such payment is not delivered to the County office which is described on said invoice within thirty (30) days after the date of the invoice, the County may satisfy such indebtedness, including interest thereon, from any funds of any such City on deposit with the County 4of6 16 F without giving further notice to said City of County's intention to do so 14 This contract shall become effective on the date herein -above first mentioned and shall run for a period ending June 30, 2005, and at the option of the City Council of the City, with the consent of the Board of Supervisors of County, shall be renewable thereafter for an additional period of not to exceed five (5) years. 15 In event the City desires to renew this agreement for said five -year period, the City Council shall not later than the last day of May 2005, notify the Board of Supervisors of County that it wishes to renew the same, whereupon the Board of Supervisors, not later than the last day of June 2005, shall notify the City Council in writing of its willingness to accept such renewal. Otherwise such agreement shall finally terminate at the end of the aforedescribed period. Notwithstanding the provisions of this paragraph hereinabove set forth, the County may terminate this agreement at any time by giving thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the City The City may terminate this agreement as of the first day of July of any year upon thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the County. 16. This agreement is designed to cover miscellaneous and sundry services which may be supplied by the County of Los Angeles and the various departments thereof In event there now exists or there is hereafter adopted a specific contract between the City and the County with respect to specific services, such contract with respect to specific services shall be controlling as to the duties and obligations of the parties anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, unless such special contract adopts the provisions hereof by reference 5 of6 167 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers Executed '.his ATTEST. City Clerk By Deputy ATTEST. VIOLET VARONA - LUKENS Executive Officer /Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: LLOYD W. PELLMAN County Counsel day of 2000 By F�21.- S�IX�t Deputy gsag5 -frm THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO By Mayor THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES By Chairman, Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO FORM: ty Att ey 6of6 1 6^ EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Award of contract to National Plant Services, Inc., for the cleaning and Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) inspection of sewer lines — Project No.: PW 00 -6 (contract amount $212,887 72). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, National Plant Services, Inc , in the amount of $212,887.72. 2 Authorize the Mayor to sign the Standard Public Works Construction Agreement after approval as to form by the City Attorney BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: The City Council on April 18, 2000, adopted plans and specifications for the cleaning and CCTV inspection of approximately forty (40) miles of sewer lines in the area west of Sepulveda Boulevard, and authorized staff to advertise the project for the receipt of construction bids. Three (3) companies had received bid packages (Discussion continues on the next page.........) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: Yes Amount Requested: $212,887.72 Account Number: 301 -400- 8204 -8317 Project Phase: Award of contract Appropriation Required: No 67 p_ Date: �1 JUN s zoos Page 1 11 N \COUNCILUUNE20 -02 (Wednesday fif?=1 00 P M ) l6° DISCUSSION: (continued) On June 6, 2000, the City Clerk received and opened the following bid: National Plant Services, Inc. $212,887.12 The other two (2) plan holders, Empire Pipe Cleaning and Equipment, Inc., and Security Zone, declined to submit bids. It is generally recommended that the sewer mains be video inspected every five (5) to seven (7) years in order to evaluate the condition of sewer mains and to identify critical areas for repair and rehabilitation. An additional benefit is derived by the cleaning of all sewer mains prior to television inspection, which is included in the scope of the inspection contract National Plant Services, Inc , did the last video inspection of the sewer mains in 1991. The CCTV inspection of the sewer lines is specialty work in the construction industry and few companies have the equipment and expertise to perform the work. Staff contacted the two (2) companies that declined to bid. Empire Pipe Cleaning and Equipment, Inc., indicated to staff that they had commitments to other contracts and were not able to submit a bid at this time. Security Zone indicated that after reviewing the bid package, they do not perform CCTV inspections as required by the City. Staff has verified the low bidder's reference and received favorable responses. National Plant Services, Inc., had completed the last video inspection of the sewer lines for the City to the satisfaction of staff Staff is of the opinion that the City may not receive more favorable bids, if the project is re- advertised. Staff recommends award of contract to National Plant Services, Inc., in the amount of $212,887.72. Page 2 N \COUNCILUUNE20-02 (Wednesday W7100 100 P M ) 170 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION Resolution of the City Council rescinding Resolution Number 4147, and adopting a new resolution approving a new Conflict of Interest Code RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION. Adopt Resolution approving a new Conflict of Interest Code. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION- Pursuant to Government Code 87306.5, no later that July 1, of each even numbered year, the code reviewing body (City Council) shall direct the City Clerk to review the Conflict of Interest Code The City Clerk has reviewed the Resolution and is recommending the following additions: COUNCIL, COMMISSIONS, COMMITTEES, & BOARDS Members of the Community Cable Advisory Committee FINANCE DEPARTMENT Information Systems Manager ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft Resolution FISCAL IMPACT: NONE IATEL� "g"\ �1 DATE: Mort , Cit Clerk June 5, 2000 REVIEWED DATE: Mary Strenn, y Manager 171 12 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 4147 AND ADOPTING A NEW CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Resolution No 4147 which establishes a Conflict of Interest Code for various City elected officials, and employees is hereby repealed SECTION 2 The City of El Segundo does hereby adopt the following Conflict of Interest Code CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO A Incorporation of Standard Code The Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 81000 et seq., requires state and local government agencies to adopt and promulgate a conflict of interest code The Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted a regulation, 2 Cal Code of Regulations, Section 18730, which contains the terms of a standard conflict of interest code, which can be incorporated by reference, and which may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission to conform to amendments in the Political Reform Act after public notice and hearings Therefore, the terms of 2 Cal Code of Regulations, Section 18730, and any amendments to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission are hereby incorporated by reference and along with the designation of officials and employees and the disclosure categories set forth herem, constitutes the Conflict of Interest Code of the City of El Segundo (the "Conflict of Interest Code ") B Filing of Statements Pursuant to Section 4 of the standard code, designated officials, officers and employees shall file Statements of Economic Interest with the City Clerk or Deputy City Clerk Upon receipt of the Statements of Economic Interests of members of the City Council, City Treasurer, Members of the Planning Commission, City Attorney, and City Manager, the City Clerk, or Deputy City Clerk, shall make and retain a copy and forward the original of these Statements to the Political Practices Commission Pursuant to Government Code Section 82011 (c), the City Council is the code reviewing body with respect to the Conflict of Interest Code RESOLUTION NO REPEALING RESO NO 4147 ADOPTING NEW CONFLICT OF INTEREST 7_ 172 C Review Procedure Pursuant to Government Code 87306.5, no later that July 1, of each even numbered year, the code reviewing body (City Council) shall direct the City Clerk, or Deputy City Clerk, to review the Conflict of Interest Code. The City Clerk or Deputy City Clerk shall submit an amended Conflict of Interest Code to the code reviewmg body (City Council) if a change in the Conflict of Interest Code is necessitated by changed circumstance. If no change in the Conflict of Interest Code is required, the City Clerk, or Deputy City Clerk, shall submit a written statement to that effect to the code reviewing body (City Council) no later than October 1 of the same year D Designated Positions The following positions entail the making or participation in the making of decisions which may foreseeably have a material effect on their financial interests COUNCIL, COMMISSIONS, COMMITTEES, & BOARDS Members of the City Council Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Recreation & Parks Commission Members of the Senior Housing Board Members of the Library Board of Trustees Members of the Investment Advisory Committee Members of the Capital Improvement Program Advisory Members of the Economic Development Advisory Council Members of the Community Cable Advisory Committee OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER City Manager Assistant City Manager OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY- City Attorney OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK City Clerk Deputy City Clerk RESOLUTION NO REPEALING RESO NO 4147 ADOPTING NEW CONFLICT OF INTEREST -2- 173 OFFICE OF THE CITY TREASURER. City Treasurer Deputy City Treasurer PLANNING AND BUILDING SAFETY- Director of Community, Econorruc & Development Services Planning Manager Building Manager Econorruc Development Manager Senior Planner Associate Planner Assistant Planner (s) Planning Technician Semor Plans Examiner Senior Building Inspector Building Inspector(s) Airports Projects PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Director of Public Works City Engineer General Services Manager Water Supervisor Wastewater Supervisor FINANCE DEPARTMENT Director of Finance Assistant Director of Finance Accounting Manager Purchasing Agent Business Services Manager Information Systems Manager RESOLUTION NO REPEALING RESO NO 4147 ADORING NEW CONFLICT OF INTEREST 3 74 LIBRARY DEPARTMENT Director of Library Services Senior Librarian (s) POLICE DEPARTMENT Police Chief Police Captam(s) FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Chief Battalion Chief(s) RECREATION AND PARKS DEPARTMENT Director of Recreation and Parks Recreation Superintendent Listed in the code for information purposes only These positions file under Government Code Section 87200 with the Fair Political Practices Commission CONSULTANTS All consultants except those included by the City Manager in accordance with the following procedure The City Manager may deternune in writing that a particular consultant, although a "designated position," is lured to perform a range of duties that requires the consultant to fully comply with the disclosure requirements described in this section Such written determination shall include a description of the consultant's duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. The City Manager determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this conflict of interest code E Disclosure Requirements SECTION 1 Designated employees shall disclose all interests as required by the Political Reform Act. RESOLUTION NO REPEALING RESO NO 4147 ADOPTING NEW CONFLICT OF INTEREST 4 75 SECTION 2 When a new positron classification is finalized by the Human Resources /Risk Management Department for approval by the City Council, included in the presentation will be a directive to the City Council to decide whether that new position will be required to file a Statement of Economic Interest, and be included as a designated position in the Conflict of Interest Code SECTION 3 When the City Council establishes a Commission, Committee, or Board, included in the agenda item will be a directive to the City Council to decide whether the members of the Commission, Committee or Boards will be included as a designated position in the Conflict of Interest Code and the members of the Commission, Committee or Board so designated by the City Council, will be required to file a Statement of Economic Interest. SECTION 4 The City Clerk is directed to forward a certified copy of this Resolution to the Legal Department of the Fair Political Practices Commussion SECTION 5 The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution, shall enter the same in the book of original resolutions of the City, and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of the City, in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 20th day of June, 2000. Mike Gordon, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ark H ey, ity A mey RESOLUTION NO REPEALING RESO NO 4147 ADOPTING NEW CONFLICT OF INTEREST -9. 176 ATTEST STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, Califorrua, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing Resolution No was duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor of said City, and attested to by the City Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 20th day of June, 2000, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO REPEALING RESO NO 4147 ADOPTING NEW CONFLICT OF INTEREST 6 177 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Acceptance of the installation of chain link fencing for Storm Water Pump Station No 17 and Dog Park — Project No. PW 99 -7 (final contract amount $71,484.00). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1 Accept the work as complete. 2 Authorize the City Clerk to file the City Engineer's Notice of Completion in the County Recorder's Office BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: The City Council on February 1, 2000, awarded a contract for $70,309.00 to Green Giant Landscape, Inc , for the installation of chain link fencing for the Dog Park and Storm Water Retention Basin No. 17 at Center Street and Imperial Avenue. The work has now been satisfactorily completed. The final contract amount, based on actual measured quantities, is $71,484.00 There are sufficient funds budgeted in the project to cover the final contract amount and no additional appropriation is required. Staff recommends City Council acceptance of the work. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Notice of Completion FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: No Amount Requested: $71,484.00 Account Number: 301 -400- 8204 -8460 and 301 -400- 8202 -8466 Project Phase: Accept the work as complete Appropriation Required: No ORIGINATED BY: ?? �� Date: / Lru>%oa ��'�"'v' e�"`t""" to /ZIOO N 1COUNCILUUNE2"4 (Monday 8/17/00 3 00 P M) 13 Recording Requested by and When Recorded Mail To: City Clerk, City Hall 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECT Project Name Installation of Chain Link Fencing for Storm Drain Pump Station No 17 and Dog Park Project No PW 99 -7 Notice is hereby given pursuant to State of California Civil Code Section 3093 at seq that 1 The undersigned is an officer of the owner of the interest stated below in the property hereinafter described 2 The full name of the owner is City of El Segundo 3 The full address of the owner is City Hall, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, CA, 90245 4 The nature of the interest of the owner is City park and storm drain pump station 5 A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was field reviewed by the City Engineer on May 12, 2000 The work done was Installation of chain link fencing 6 On June 20, 2000, the City Council of the City of El Segundo accepted the work of this contract as being complete and directed the recording of this Notice of Completion in the Office of the County Recorder 7 The name of the Contractor for such work of improvement was Green Giant Landscape, Inc 8 The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of El Segundo, County of Los Angeles, State of California, and is described as follows City park and storm drain pump station 9 The street address of said property is 1015 East Imperial Avenue Dated Bellur K Devaraj City Engineer VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, say I am the City Engineer of the City El Segundo, the declarant of the foregoing Notice of Completion, I have read said Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof, the same is true of my own knowledge I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing is true and correct Executed on , 2000 at El Segundo, California Bellur K. Devaraj City Engineer N WOTICE'S\PW99 -7 NOC (6/12100) r jg EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE- June 12,20W AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Examination plans for the Personnel Merit System Job classification of License/Permit Specialist I/II RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Approve the Examination Plans INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: Chapter 2 28 080 of the El Segundo Municipal Code, entitled "Administration and Personnel ", provides that the Personnel Officer shall review and recommend to the City Manager, who in turn shall recommend to the City Council, an appropriate examination plan and weights for each portion of the examination for Personnel Merit System fob classifications DISCUSSION: ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: FISCAL IMPACT: (Check one) Operating Budget: Capital Improv. Budget: Amount Requested: Project/Account Budget: Project/Account Balance: Date: Account Number Project Phase: Appropriation Required - Yes_ No_ City ,e & me U 14- The Human Resources Department has initiated the recruitment, testing and selection process for the ,lob classification of License/Pemnt Specialist I/II and has posted the notices of the examinations in accordance with the City's Municipal Code and the City's Personnel Rules and Regulations It is recommended that the City Council approve the examination plans that contain the following examination techniques and weights for each portion of the examinations License/Permit Specialist I/II (Open - Competitive) Career Preparation Interview & Structured Technical Interview Weighted 100% 181 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2000 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: New Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Take action necessary to give notice of a special election regarding the implementation of a special tax on parking lot businesses RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Adopt the four resolutions attached BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: On July 6,1999 City Council directed staff to prepare documents for the implementation of a 10% tax on all paid parking in the City of El Segundo. Revenues generated by the tax would be used for police and fire services and public road improvements. Employees of companies that use a parking structure will be exempt from the tax (continued on next page) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: r Resolution Giving Notice of a Special Municipal Election to be held November, 7 2000 to Provide Revenues for the City's Police and Fire Departments _and Public Road Improvements and "Exhibit A" attached Resolution Requesting the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to Consolidate a Special Municipal Election to be held November 7, 2000 with the General Election Resolution Setting Priorities for Filing Written Arguments Regarding City Measures and Directing City Attorney to Prepare an Impartial Analysis of the Measure Resolution Providing for the Filing of Rebuttal Arguments for City Measures Submitted at Municipal Elections FISCAL IMPACT: Potential Revenue Source of $350,000 to $450,000 annually; One -time costs for Special Election of $20,000 FY 2000 -2001 Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: 7 Bret �/PPllumlee, Director of Finance Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk REVIEWED BY: Mar}f Str WE�eii / i Manager $0 $20,000 001. 400 - 1302 -6214 Special Municipal Election Yes DATE: 6 %9 12-06t; G�GG 15 182 BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION CONTINUED: The current Municipal Code section 5.08.527 requires parking lot operators to pay a business license tax of $9 per parking stall per year This generates approximately $15,000 annually The attached ordinance would amend this section to require parking lot operators to pay a business license tax of 10% of annual gross receipts generated from the operation of the parking lot This tax will not apply to receipts attributable to employee parking on these lots Fiscal Impact Finance staff has done a preliminary analysis of existing paid parking lots in the City, which Indicates that there are approximately 3,700 paid parking spaces that generate approximately $3,500,000 to $4,500,000 in gross receipts, net of employee parking, to the parking lot operators /owners This would bring in approximately $350,000 to $450,000 annually to the City. The estimated cost of the election is $20,000, which will be included In the FY 2000 -2001 Proposed Budget Special Tax The parking lot tax is being proposed as a special tax, which means that the revenues generated by the tax must be pledged for specific purposes In this case the purposes are fire and police services and public road improvements Proposition 218, a constitutional amendment adopted by the voters on November 5, 1996, places restrictions on the adoption of taxes, Including special taxes Article XIII C, Section 2 (d) of the California Constitution provides that- "No local government may impose, extend or Increase any special tax unless and until such tax is submitted to the electorate and approved by a two- thirds vote. A special tax shall not be deemed to have been Increased if It is imposed at a rate not higher than the maximum rate so approved " Thus, a special tax must be placed on the ballot and be approved by at least two - thirds of the vote. The proceeds from a special tax must be used exclusively for the purposes for which it Is levied. Election Procedures /Resolutions The procedures for the City Council to place a tax measure on the ballot are relatively simple and straightforward Once the proposed ordinance imposing the tax is drafted, the City Council adopts a Resolution calling and giving notice of the special municipal election. This action is the only necessary action by the 183 BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION CONTINUED: City Council with respect to placing a tax measure on the ballot The actions described below may be desirable but they are not mandatory The City Council may, in its discretion, adopt a resolution authorizing any or all of the Council Members to prepare and submit a written argument regarding the proposed tax measure The legislative body, or any member or members of the legislative body authorized by that body, or any individual voter who is eligible to vote on the measure, or bona fide association of citizens, or any combination of voters and associations, are all authorized, pursuant to Section 9282 of the Elections Code to file a written argument for or against any city measure If the City Clerk, in her capacity as the city elections official, receives more than one argument, she must select one of the arguments to be printed and distributed to the voters Section 9287 of the Elections Code sets out the preference and priority that the city elections official must comply with as follows 1 The legislative body, or member or members of the legislative body authorized by that body 2 The individual voter, or bona fide association of citizens, or combination of voters and associations, who are the bona fide sponsors or proponents of the measure 3 Bona fide associations of citizens 4 Individual voters who are eligible to vote on the measure Thus, if the City Council chooses not to authorize one or more of its Members to prepare an argument, individual voters or bona fide associations of citizens will have the opportunity to have their arguments, if any, printed and distributed to the voters In addition, pursuant to Section 9280 of the Elections Code, the City Council may, in its discretion, authorize and direct the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure showing the effect of the measure on the existing law and the operation of the measure Notice that a special election will be held in November must be submitted to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors by August 6, 1999 It is important to point out that because of the critical timing of this notice, the analysis included with the report is preliminary only, and staff will continue to research and fine - tune the fiscal impact until the November 2, 1999 election 184 RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF HOLDING A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2000, FOR THE SUBMISSION TO THE VOTERS OF A SPECIAL TAX ON PARKING LOT BUSINESSES TO PROVIDE REVENUES FOR THE CITY'S POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS AND FOR PUBLIC ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Whereas, Article XIII C requires that special taxes be approved by a two - thirds vote of the people, and Whereas, the People of the City of El Segundo ( "City ") desire to impose a tax for purposes of providing revenue for the operation of the City's Police and Fire Departments and for public road improvements to maintain the fiscal mtegnty of the City and to ensure that the City continues to meet its obligations to the community in the provision of these vital public services, and Whereas, the City Council desires to maintain a fair system of taxation that equitably applies the business license tax to the businesses in the City, and Whereas, the City already taxes businesses based on the number of employees employed within the City; and Whereas, an exemption from the proposed tax is provided for employee parking to maintain the desired fairness and equity in the City's taxation system, and Whereas, under the provisions of the laws of the State of California, a Special Municipal Election shall be held on November 7, 2000 to submit to the voters at the election a question relating to the adoption of a business license tax on parking lot businesses. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section I That to provide revenues for the operation of the City's Police and Fire Departments and for public road improvements the City is placing on the ballot an amendment of the parking lot tax. Section 2 That pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of Califoriria, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of El Segundo, California, on Tuesday, November 7, 2000, a Special Municipal Election RESOLUTION NO PARKING LOT TAX PAGE NO 1 Section 3 That the City Council, pursuant to Its right and authority, does order submitted to the voters at the Special Municipal Election the following question "Shall an Ordinance be adopted that replaces the current YES business license fee of $10 per year on shuttle service parking stalls with a special 10% tax on gross receipts on all parking, except employee parking, for purposes of providing revenues for police and fire services and public road NO improvements " Section 4 That the proposed measure to be submitted to the voters is attached hereto as Exhibit A Section 5 That the ballots to be used at the election shall be in form and content as required by law. Section 6 That the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to procure and furnish any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter and all supplies, equipment and paraphernalia that may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election Section 7 That the polls for the election shall be open at seven o'clock a in of the day of the election and shall remain open continuously from that time until eight o'clock p m. of the same day when the polls shall be closed, except as provided In Section 14401 of the Elections Code of the State of California Section 8. That in all particulars not recited in this resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections. Section 9. That notice of the time and place of holding the election is given and the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of the election, in time, form and manner as required by law. Section 10 That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions. RESOLUTION NO PARKING LOT TAX PAGE NO 2 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this 20ih day of June, 2000 Mike Gordon Mayor ATTEST STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five, that the foregoing Resolution No 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 201h day of June, 2000, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote. AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN- Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: WA 10 ` . Wit i* RESOLUTION NO PARKING LOT TAX PAGE NO 3 EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 5.08 527, ENTITLED "PARKING LOTS," OF CHAPTER 5.08, ENTITLED `BUSINESS LICENSE SCHEDULE," OF TITLE 5, ENTITLED `BUSINESS REGULATIONS AND LICENSING," OF THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE BY IMPOSING A GROSS RECEIPTS TAX ON PARKING LOT BUSINESSES AND ELIMINATING THE PER PARKING SPACE TAX THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section I Section 5.08.527, entitled "PARKING LOTS," of Chapter 5 08, entitled `BUSINESS LICENSE SCHEDULE," of Title 5, entitled "BUSINESS REGULATIONS AND LICENSING," of the El Segundo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows "5 08.527 PARKING LOTS. Every person engaged in the business of operating a parking lot for vehicles shall pay a business license tax of ten percent (10 %) of annual gross receipts generated from the operation of the parking lot For purposes of this section, the term "gross receipts" shall mean gross income, as defined In the Internal Revenue Code. The business license tax imposed by this section shall not apply to receipts attributable to employee parking for a budding located in the City which is serviced by the parking lot." Section 2. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance or any part thereof Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and enter It into the book of ongmal Ordinances. Section 4. The City Clerk shall publish or post the ordinance according to law ORDINANCE NO PARKING LOT TAX PAGE NO I RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, SETTING PRIORITIES FOR FILING WRITTEN ARGUMENTS REGARDING CITY MEASURES AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF THE MEASURE Whereas, a Special Municipal Election is to be held in the City of El Segundo, California, on November 7, 2000, at which there will be submitted to the voters the following measure "Shall an Ordinance be adopted that replaces the current business license fee of $10 per year on shuttle service parking stalls with a special 10% tax on gross receipts on all parking, except employee parking, for purposes of providing revenues for police and fire services and public road improvements " NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City Council authorizes [Mayor][Councit Member] to file, on behalf of the City Council, a written argument regarding the proposed City measure set forth above, in accordance with the Elections Code of the State of California, Division 9, Chapter 3, Article 4, commencing with Section 9280, which argument shall include the signatures of the each Council Member who wishes his or her signature to appear The City Council further authorizes the inclusion of the signatures of other persons or organizations as the Council Member(s) wish, not to exceed five (5) signatures on each argument, and to change the argument until and including the date fixed by the City Clerk after which no arguments for or against the City measure may be submitted to the City Clerk. Section 2. That the City Council directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the measure to the City Attorney. The City Attorney shall prepare an impartial analysis of the measure showing the effect of the measure on the existing law and the operation of the measures The impartial analysis shall be filed by the date set by the City Clerk for the filing of primary arguments. Section 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions. RESOLUTION NO CITY ATTORNEY IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEASURE PAGE NO 1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this 20th day of June, 2000. Mike Gordon Mayor ATTEST- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five, that the foregoing Resolution No 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 20h day of June, 2000, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote. AYES. NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM- ark D H ey, ity At mey RESOLUTION NO CITY ATTORNEY IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF MEASURE PAGE NO 2 RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS FOR CITY MEASURES SUBMITTED AT MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS Whereas, Sections 9220 and 9285 of the Elections Code of the State of California authorizes the City Council, by majority vote, to adopt provisions to provide for the filing of rebuttal arguments for city measures submitted at municipal elections; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That pursuant to Sections 9220 and 9285 of the Elections Code of the State of California, when the clerk has selected the arguments for and against the measure which will be printed and distributed to voters, the clerk shall send copies of the argument in favor of the measure to the authors of the argument against, and copies of the argument against to the authors of the argument in favor. The authors may prepare and submit rebuttal arguments not exceeding 250 words The rebuttal arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk not more than 10 days after the final date for filing direct arguments. Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the same manner as the direct arguments Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the direct argument which it seeks to rebut Section 2 That all previous resolutions providing for the filing of rebuttal arguments for city measures are repealed and superseded Section 3 That the provisions of Section 1 shall only apply to the special municipal election to be held on November 7, 2000, and shall then be repealed. Section 4 That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions RESOLUTION NO FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS FOR CITY MEASURE PAGE NO I PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this 20th day of June, 2000. Mike Gordon Mayor ATTEST. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five, that the foregoing Resolution No. 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 20th day of June, 2000, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote* AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Orty Atto RESOLUTION NO FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS FOR CITY MEASURE PAGE NO 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO CONSOLIDATE A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 7, 2000, WITH THE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THAT DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE Whereas, the City Council (`City Council ") of the City of El Segundo ( "City ") adopted its Resolution No. on June 20, 2000 calling a Special Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 7, 2000, for the purpose of submitting to the voters the question relating to the adoption of a special business license tax on parking lots, and Whereas, it is desirable that the Special Municipal Election with respect to the question relating to the adoption of a business license tax on parking lots be consolidated with the school election to be held on November 7, 2000, and that within the city the precincts, polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the county election department of the County of Los Angeles canvass the returns of the Special Municipal Election and the election be held in all respects as if there were one election, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That pursuant to the requirements of Section 10403 of the Elections Code, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles is hereby requested to consent and agree to the consolidate a Special Municipal Election with the School election on Tuesday, November 7, 2000, for the purpose of placing an initiative measure on the ballot Section 2. That a measure is to appear on the ballot as follows: "Shall an Ordinance be adopted that replaces the current YES business license fee of $10 per year on shuttle service parking stalls with a special 10% tax on gross receipts on all parking, except employee parking, for purposes of providing revenues for police and fire services and public road NO improvements." ViS,J�, I ION N, REQUEST COUNTY TO CONSOLIDATE A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION, NOV 7, 2000 PAGE NO I Section 3. That the county election department is authorized to canvass the returns of the Special Municipal Election. The election shall be held in all respects as if there were only one election, and only one form of ballot shall be used. Section 4 That the Board of Supervisors is requested to issue instructions to the county election department to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of the consolidated election. Section 5 That the City of El Segundo recognizes that costs will be Incurred by the County by reason of this consolidation and agrees to reimburse the County for all costs related thereto. Section 6 That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Board of Supervisors and the county election department of the County of Los Angeles Section 7 That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this 20th day of June, 2000 Mike Gordon Mayor ATTEST STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five, that the foregoing Resolution No 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 2e day of June, 2000, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN. Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APP ED AS TO FORM ark D. Herikfey, City Afidmey RESOLUTION NO REQUEST COUNTY TO CONSOLIDATE A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION, NOV 7, 2000 PAGE NO 2 06-20 -BG 03.54 M Frm- GREENSERG.GIUSNER 310- 553 -0667 T -863 P 02!03 F -070 STEPHEN CL-AMAN CENTuNv CIT• tQOO wVENUE 01 THE ST."s LOS wNCr4Zs C- 11FORMw sOOC7 (310YZOi -7474 June 20, 2000 Ms. Laurie .jester Director of Planning City of E1 Segundo 350 Main Street E1 Segundo, CA 90245 -0989 Re. DOwntown E1 Seguggio $Oecific Plan 121 West Grand El Segnmdo California Dear Ms. Jester: I am writing to you in connection with the hearing to be held on June 20, 2000 concerning the Specific Plan for Downtown El Segundo. My co- owner, David Levy, and I appreciate the great amount of effort and thoughtfulnasA tbA4oAW. gone inzp., rlua n + draft of the specific plan. We appreciate the efforts of the community, as well as the staff in considering the future of downtown El Segundo. With regard to our property, the former Ralphs Market, we would like to have the flexibility to develop offices in the existing market structure. So far, despite Ralph's marketing efforts, no viable prospects have surfaced. David and I have had recent discussions with Internet incubators developers who are interested in creating a office building incubator facility, for technology start up companies. We would like to have the flexibility to carry on such a use zz our property and we are concerned that as now drafted, the specific plan would not permit that. Such as use, I think, would be attractive to the City. 988101 W 00.1139m i ... 0 .. .., w . 0043" '^ 06 -20-00 03 55pn FrorGREENBERG AUSNER 310- 553 -OBST T -663 P 03/03 F-OTO we are also concerned about the requirement of the draft Specific Plan that "retail" be placed on our frontage along Grand. We have studied the potential further development of our property and believe that a retail facility at the corner would be economically feasible, but do not believe that retail along the entire frontage would be. Finally, I note that the phrase "non - retail preferred vacancy" was deleted from the final draft. We request that this phrase be re- inserted. we would appreciate it if you would consider flexibility in the Specific Plan allowing us to not have retail along the entire frontage on Grand, and to use the existing market facility for office use. Your consideration .of•.Qbx rs appreciated. Sincerely, Step en Claman SC/ac CC: David Levy M91O1M00- 1139M9-1 Replaces missire. Age, 1u0 EXHIBIT 6 SUMMARY OF PARKING MANAGEMENT OPTIONS City of El Segundo 126 Draft June 20, 2000 Downtown Specific Plan Relative Cost to Implement OPTIONS DESIRED EFFECTS /ISSUES H, M, L (1) Short -Term Parking Management Options 3 increase awareness of parking opportunities Low 3 more effective use of available parking Create Visitor Parking 3 need support of business community to (approximately $5,000 to Information Guide /Map circulate guide /map $10,000) 3 better utilize available private spaces Low Implement a Shared Use 3 would require additional detailed analysis and Parking Program coordination with private property owners (staffladministration costs) 3 identify current parking surplus Moderate 3 monitor development as it occurs and its Establish Baseline Parking impact on overall parking operations (staffladministration costs Ratios for the Downtown as a 3 add new parking or take other actions when equivalent to several hours Whole and Monitor Over Time supply reaches approximately 85% of per week, after initial labor demand, prior to reaching a critical point intensive inventory) 3 provide more clear and consistent signage Enhance Directional Signage 3 better utilize alley- access parking Moderate 3 enhance aesthetics Mid -Term Parking Management Options 3 provide convenient customer parking Low to Moderate Implement Trial Period Shared 3 assist parking impacted business Valet Parking Program During 3 need to analyze potential sites and select ($5,000 to $15,000 per Peak Season Contractor season for City support) 3 provide more spaced via use of angle rather Moderate dd On- street Angle Parking than parallel curb parking 3 slows traffic, promotes pedestrian use (costs for signing and striping) City of El Segundo 126 Draft June 20, 2000 Downtown Specific Plan a c EL SEGUNDO CHAMBER OF COMMER-C 2611 UN 19 PM 3.6 J Date June 14, 2000 To Mayor Mike Gordon From Bill Crrgger, Chairman Downtown El Segundo Committee (DESI) El Segundo Chamber of Commerce Re Downtown Specific Plan cc James Hansen, City of El Segundo DESI Committee Members Elyse Rothstein, Chamber President Dear Mayor Gordon JUN 19 2000 On your agenda for the Council meeting on June 20 is the proposed Downtown Specific Plan as approved by the Planning Commission at their recent hearing While the final draft of the Plan is not yet available for public review, we met today with City staff to discuss issues of importance to our group, issues which we raised with the Planning Commission during their public hearing process, as well as with staff during the initial drafting of the Plan It is our understanding that some of the features of the Plan to which we object have not been revised and will appear in the final draft that will come before you on the 20th While we are very supportive of the City's revitalization efforts for downtown, we urge you to require the following changes to the Plan before giving it your approval Delete the prohibition on office uses in the 300 and 400 block of Main Street. Landlords on Main Street have repeatedly made efforts to attract retail tenants, often advertising for months without receiving a single response Office and quasi- office users however, have found the street to be attractive and have made major investments in the buildings there, as evidenced by many of the new, attractive storefronts we've seen of late We all share the objective of bringing more retailers to downtown however, simply zoning away all other uses will not make it happen A much more creative program of business attraction and retail incentives is required if we are to meet our objective The proposed legislation will only result in stifled investment and greater vacancy, both of which will further frustrate efforts to attract quality businesses, not to mention cause great and unfair financial hardship to property owners on the street The zoning and development standards for the former Ralphs site must be more flexible to permit yet unknown, but potentially desirable uses. Page I of 1 427 Main Street, El Segundo, CA 90245 • (310) 322 -1220 • Fax (310) 322 -6880 E -mail elsegundochamber @aol corn The "Village" concept for the former Ralphs property sets forth very specific design standards for redevelopment of the site, including a requirement that new buildings must line the streets with parking located in the rear The only circumstance under which such standards would apply would be after Ralphs has lost control of the property At that time, it may be possible to attract a new grocer or other "anchor" retailer The proposed "village" design standards would effectively preclude such a large user If enacted, we may never know what businesses "pass" on the site after learning of the "village" requirements. Specific standards and implementation hurdles for private parking, shared parking, and public parking facilities must be addressed. There is a lack of continuity between the various parking provisions, On the one hand, all uses on private property must provide the standard code required parking on their property On the other, there is talk of shared parking and new public parking structures Will public parking be in lieu of parking on private property? When, and according to what criteria, will public parking be built? Will private property owners be expected to enter into shared parking agreements to meet new parking demands? A more linear and logical evaluation of parking needs to be addressed, including an evaluation of the ultimate parking demand at ultimate build - out, and the key demand levels at which public structures will be needed A direct 'Cause and effect" relationship between the parking demands and parking requirements must be stated to clearly establish what this legislation intends and requires Delete discussion of the "Pursell Plaza ". A detailed description of a plaza accessible to the public is set forth for property currently used as a private parking lot at the Pursell Building at Main and Grand It states that "the impetus for this plaza is the redevelopment of the Pursell Building into a mixed -use center with a mayor anchor tenant" What is the effect of this legislation? If enacted, will the property be zoned "mixed use "? Will the requirement for on -site parking, now located in the proposed "plaza ", be waived? What if the property owner wants to modify the existing improvements or build something else on the property, must any re- investment include such a plaza? This element appears as a discussion without any clear legal intent or connection to the zoning standards, it should be deleted Make the first implementation priority streetscape improvements. One of the most effective means of attracting desirable new businesses to Main Street will be the implementation of the sidewalk and streetscape improvements The Plan should state that this will have the highest implementation priority Consider relevant input from the KMG study commissioned by the City and Chamber of Commerce. The KMG study of 1998 indicated that the downtown area contained nearly twice the retail building area that a city of our size could be expected to support Was this, as well as the other information in the study, considered by staff during the preparation of the Plan? If so, how was the question of oversupply addressed? Continue the matter beyond the June 20 bearing to allow more time for interested parties to review the final draft when available. Again, DESI wishes to express its support for the Downtown Specific Plan with the qualifications noted above We want to commend the staff, Council, and you for your leadership in undertaking this important effort for the betterment of Downtown Ei Segundo Page 2 of 2 Subject: Downtown zone change Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 13:17:44 -0700 From: Alan West <a.f.west @worldnet.att.net> To: jgains @elsegundo.org JUN CC: kmcdowell @elsegundo.org 9 PM 3.38 Hi, as you know I have never bothered you council members before as you have proven to be doing a better lob than I thought possible. On this issue I feel compelled to give you some history, I believed we did this very same zone change several years ago. After it was implemented by planning I urged our baker to apply as he had no kids living at home and it fit his work to live over the bakery. He used a designer/ engineer (at my suggestion) that designed most of all the Grainger properties 20 -50 different units here in town. The designer worked closely with planning in preplanning to ensure that the owners ideas could be implemented. To cut to the chase a year & $10,000 later he was turned down because of I parking space. When we passed the new CRS zoning it was well known by everyone (planning included) that most of the property owners in the zone did not have adequate parking but in council /planning discussion it was decided the advantage of upgrading downtown outweighed the parking issue. Let me illustrate the bakery parking issue, Art parks his car at the shop while working during the day then drives home at night when the shop is not open. If he lived upstairs his car would be parked there also. (net change in parking usage 0) In my opinion planning department past our zoning request on the front page but in application they took it away on the back pages with all the requirements. Since Arts designer did extensive preplanning with planning there is no excuse for the above. Now to my goal, We own the property South of the Chamber "Little Palette art Studio" It's paid for and we would like very much to install an elevator and build a nice retirement house above our studio, Allene could go downstairs to work. (I dial this for over 30 years at 303 Virginia and have no regrets) In this day and age home offices are more & popular. I work with over 20 different cities and have found that upstairs residential is gaining over upstairs offices. Look at the $ facts it will cost us about $200,000 to remodel and build an upstairs office or home. To make the office pay the new mortgage we would need about $2,000 per month, I don't believe that is possible upstairs. On the other side of the coin where in El Segundo where can we build a new home for $200,000. All of us would like to see Main Street upgraded at street level, if we could make it work as noted above the cost of the street look could be absorbed. At this time knowing the rents on main street upstairs I would never build on speculation for new offices up there. Bottom line: Let us the owners make the decision build offices! Or Build our house! By the way offices would make more parking congestion than my house. Alan West a.f.west @att.net PH 322 -5900 of 1 6/19/00 9.24 AM Subject: Downtown Plan and Zone Change Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 12:25:15 -0700 (PDT) From: pursell @webtv.net (Donna and Jack Pursed) To: elsegmayor @aol.com, sjacobs @elsegundo.org, jgaines(NseVnb8.c%, 3. 58 nwernick @elsegundo.org, kmcdoweli @elsegundo.org I am John Pursell, representing the Alice Pursell Trust, owner of 301 -315 Main St and 105 -113 W. Grand Ave. I have been a member of the Downtown Task Force and attented all but one of the Task Force meetings. However after all of the consultants input and staff member opinions have been considered I have several major objections to the Plan and Zone Change The closure of Ralph's at Richmond and Grand has caused most of the problem and this lack of a mayor "Anchor" is prolonging the problem. No Downtown property owner caused Ralph's to leave; but most retail operators are loosing business. Our number 1 goal is the re- gaining of the use of the Ralph's site. The best use of the site is again as a supermarket, to focus shopping by the 16,000 full -time residents of E1 Segundo, back Downtown. All of the women who dttented the Task Force meetings want a full service market in Downtown El Segundo' The Plan and Zone Change would restrict the use of ground floor space and would only serve to excerbate an already frustrating situation. Until there is a determination of the empty Ralph's site owners should not be restricted on tenant type.Many owners, including myself, have actually reduced rents to retain retail tenants who are suffering from the great loss of foot traffic. A seperate study by ZMG says that there is already a surplus of retail space in the city. If property owners are forced to limit tenant base there will be more vacancies Downtown. Empty buildings may get less maintenance and lead to a poorer look to the area - defeating the purpose of the Plan -to upgrade Downtown E1 Segundo! Empty buildings lead to foreclosures and bankruptcies, further depressing the area. Repeated advertsing in the Herald and the Daily Breeze by myself and other owners has failed to attract new retail, partly because of the unknown use of the Ralph's site. In addition this proposal would not allow the former Security Bank building across from City Hall to be used as a bank again. If the proposed Village were built on the Ralph's site there would be an even greater surplus of retail space. The key is to attract a super market somewhere in Downtown E1 Segundo to act as a nucleus for a vibrant Downtown E1 Segundo and then persue a plan for expanding new retail, restaurant and service businesses. There are several owners of property Downtown who rely on the rent as their sole source of income. So the best plan for today is not to change any current permitted use until we can resolve the Ralph's dilemma. Besides the city has had this mix since 1917 and it is a part of the charm and character of E1 Segundo. On a personal note: I object to Pursell Alley and Pursell Plaza, which is now parking, because there is no replacement parking available nearby. This parking was required by the City Council when the building was built and is is much needed. I would see this as a taking by the City. 'f 2 6/19/00 9:24 AM Very 3increly, John "Jack" Pursell http: / /community.webty. net /pursell /JackandDonnaPursell `2 6/19/00 9:24 AM U op y f9 (.D v✓i&i ! WRITER S DIRECT DIAL 213 236 2705 bwoh/enberp @bwslaw com Kristy Hennessey, Vice President Government and Public Affairs Time Warner Communications 303 West Palm Avenue Orange, California 92866 RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICE OUR FILE NO 3403 TENTH STREET, SUITE 300 00111 -0002 RIVERSIDE CALIFORNIA 92501 -3629 Tel (909) 788 -0100 Fax (909) 788 5785 June 7, 2000 Re El Segundo Cable Franchise Change of Control Dear Ms Hennessey I write to address two issues that have arisen in the City of El Segundo's review of the Form 394 regarding the change of control that would occur as part of the proposed AOL -Time Warner merger First, we noted that your letter of May 19, 2000 (confirming the City's request for a 38 -day extension of time) contains a reference to the City of Los Alamitos in the third paragraph We believe this is simply a typographical error, and it does not substantively affect the agreement between the City of El Segundo and Time Warner, Inc to extend the Form 394 review period to July 18 Would you please confirm this error is merely typographical and not substantive9 Second, and we believe of much greater concern, is an issue about Time Warner's acquisition of the El Segundo cable franchise from Paragon Cable It is our understanding that the franchise was supposed to be transferred, or control of the franchise changed, as part of Time Warner Inc 's 1995 acquisition of Kbicom, Inc from Houston Industries However, a search of the City's files, as well as our offices' files, has not revealed any appropriate documentation regarding a transfer or change of control from Houston/Paragon to Time Warner Instead of a Form 394, we found only a letter dated March 24, 1997 from you (as Director of Customer Operations, Government & Public Affairs of Paragon) to then -Mayor Sandra Jacobs That letter merely informed the City that Paragon Cable was changing its D B A name to Time Warner Communications In light of the requirements of federal law, the El Segundo Municipal Code, and the franchise, this appears to be a transfer of the franchise or change of its control without the consent of the City Obviously, this could have a fundamental effect on the franchise and the City's review of the proposed change of control to AOL /Time Warner So that we may fully evaluate the status of the LA #48165 vl LAW OFFICES BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE 611 WEST SIXTH STREET SUITE 2500 VENTURA COUNTY OFFICE 18301 VON KARMAN AVENUE SUITE 1050 LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90017 3102 2310 EAST PONDEROSA DRIVE SUITE 25 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 1009 TO (213) 236 -0600 CAMARILLO CALIFORNIA MI 0.4747 Tal 19491 863 -3363 Fax (213) 236 -2700 Tel (805) 987 3468 Fax (9491 863 3350 hrfp Ilwwwbwslawcom Fax 18051 482 9834 WRITER S DIRECT DIAL 213 236 2705 bwoh/enberp @bwslaw com Kristy Hennessey, Vice President Government and Public Affairs Time Warner Communications 303 West Palm Avenue Orange, California 92866 RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICE OUR FILE NO 3403 TENTH STREET, SUITE 300 00111 -0002 RIVERSIDE CALIFORNIA 92501 -3629 Tel (909) 788 -0100 Fax (909) 788 5785 June 7, 2000 Re El Segundo Cable Franchise Change of Control Dear Ms Hennessey I write to address two issues that have arisen in the City of El Segundo's review of the Form 394 regarding the change of control that would occur as part of the proposed AOL -Time Warner merger First, we noted that your letter of May 19, 2000 (confirming the City's request for a 38 -day extension of time) contains a reference to the City of Los Alamitos in the third paragraph We believe this is simply a typographical error, and it does not substantively affect the agreement between the City of El Segundo and Time Warner, Inc to extend the Form 394 review period to July 18 Would you please confirm this error is merely typographical and not substantive9 Second, and we believe of much greater concern, is an issue about Time Warner's acquisition of the El Segundo cable franchise from Paragon Cable It is our understanding that the franchise was supposed to be transferred, or control of the franchise changed, as part of Time Warner Inc 's 1995 acquisition of Kbicom, Inc from Houston Industries However, a search of the City's files, as well as our offices' files, has not revealed any appropriate documentation regarding a transfer or change of control from Houston/Paragon to Time Warner Instead of a Form 394, we found only a letter dated March 24, 1997 from you (as Director of Customer Operations, Government & Public Affairs of Paragon) to then -Mayor Sandra Jacobs That letter merely informed the City that Paragon Cable was changing its D B A name to Time Warner Communications In light of the requirements of federal law, the El Segundo Municipal Code, and the franchise, this appears to be a transfer of the franchise or change of its control without the consent of the City Obviously, this could have a fundamental effect on the franchise and the City's review of the proposed change of control to AOL /Time Warner So that we may fully evaluate the status of the LA #48165 vl Kristy Hennessey, Vice President June 7, 2000 Page 2 franchise, please explain the nature of the Paragon/Time Warner franchise transfer, and provide our office with copies of any relevant documentation or information you may have If you have any other questions or comments regarding these matters, please contact our office at your convenience Very truly yours, :01"F� MR303% - � WP Bradley E Wohlenberg for BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP cc Mary Strenn, City Manager Greg Johnson, Cable Manager Mark D Hensley, City Attorney NOTICE OF CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the following public hearing: On the Downtown Specific Plan The Plan area generally encompasses the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street, and abutting properties on Grand Avenue [Environmental Assessment No EA -474 (Mitigated Negative Declaration), General Plan Amendment No 99 -2, Zone Change No 99 -2 and Zone Text Amendment No 99 -51 Applicant City of El Segundo, Property owners Various is continued to July 18, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. POSTE"2Q .� POSTED T E: a20 QT- POSTED DATE: !O ;�'?d ` ® d (( I [ )) CONTINENTAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ZED JUN 20 PH U. 315 June 20, 2000 Honorable Mike Gordon, Mayor Members of City Council City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 Re Proposed amendment of section 5.08.527, entitled "Parking Lots" imposing a gross receipts tax on Parking Lot Businesses and eliminating the per parking stall tax Dear Mayor Gordon and Council Members In connection with the captioned matter, Continental Development Corporation is opposed to the proposed parking ordinance as drafted We do not believe a broad parking tax increase is warranted The parking tax as proposed would place undue additional financial burden on business In addition to the payment of a 100/0 gross receipts tax, business and building owners will have the additional burden and cost of accounting and reporting to the City Ultimately, this burden will increase the rental rates making rental space in the City less competitive in the market area If a limited parking tax increase 1s warranted on a particular type of parking, we suggest that the following revision in the shaded area be made to the proposed ordinance 115 08 527 Parking Lots Every person engaged in the business of operating a parking lot for vehicles shall pay a business license tax of ten percent (10 %) of annual gross receipts generated from the operation of the parking lot For purposes of this section, the term "gross receipts" shall mean gross income, as defined in the Internal Revenue Code The business license tax imposed by this section shall not apply to receipts attributable to employee 4 "Jo t,"fll, (fil l dill +IS F�1Sx:gta 54 " parking for a building to y a1i��I�t��� p g g Gated in the City which is serviced by the parking lot." K4yfft8JTf Lrds�Wapar�/aa,6nmlvtiWMnf OAftl bt 2041 ROSECRANS AVENUE, PQ BOX 916, EL SEGUNDQ CAUFORNW 90245-0916 PHONE (310) 640.1520 • FAX (310) 414 -9279 SCRIPT FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM #1 FOR JUNE 20, 2000 MAYOR: THIS IS THE TIME AND PLACE HERETO FIXED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing on the Downtown Specific Plan, The Plan area generally encompasses the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street, and abutting properties on Grand Avenue [Environmental Assessment No. EA-474 (Mitigated Negative Declaration), General Plan Amendment No. 99 -2, Zone Change No. 99 -2 and Zone Text Amendment No. 99 -5] Applicant, City of El Segundo, Property owners Various MAYOR: CITY CLERK WAS PROPER NOTICE OF THE HEARING GIVEN IN A TIMELY MANNER? CLERK: Proper notice of the public hearing was done. MAYOR: CITY CLERK HAS ANY WRITTEN COMMUNICATION BEEN RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PUBLIC HEARING? CLERK: No written communications were received by the City Clerk's Office regarding this public hearing AAYOR: THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN MS STRENN WHO WILL MAKE THE PRESENTATION? After the oresentation. MAYOR: THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN FOR PUBLIC INPUT: After public Council discussion. and then MAYOR: MAY I PLEASE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. MAYOR: CITY ATTORNEY WILL READ BY TITLE ONLY. MAYOR: WHO WILL INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE? KI"� CONTINENTAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Honorable Mike Gordon, Mayor June 20, 2000 Page 2 The intent of the above suggested revision is to exclude from the parking tax ordinance the following additional types of parking • Tenant parking (including their employees, visitors, guests, and patrons), • Valet parking, • All retail customer parking, • All theater parking, • All restaurant parking, and • Validated parking We urge the City Council to make the above revision to the proposed ordinance Sjtrccerely, Saunders KUnpNJU a" uWmVrtpoMMisNi4l Nta4m 3 N 327 A