The URL can be used to link to this page

2004 SEP 07 CC PACKET - AAGENDA 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. During the first Public Communications portion of the Agenda, comments are limited to those items appearing on the Agenda. During the second Public Communications portion of the Agenda, comments may be made regarding any matter within the jurisdiction of the City Council. 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 second Public Communications portion of the Agenda by submitting a Written Request to the City Clerk or City Managers Office at least six days prior to the City Council Meeting (by 2:00 p.m. the prior Tuesday). Other members of the public may comment on these items only during this second Public Communications portion of the Agenda. 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 lenath. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact City Clerk, 524 -2305. 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, SEPTEMBER 7, 2004 — 5:00 P.M. Next Resolution # 4386 Next Ordinance # 1378 5:00 P.M. SESSION CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATION — (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. CLOSED SESSION: The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54960, et se q.) 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 Government Code Section §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)) — 8 matters 1. Flynn v. City of El Segundo, LASC No. YC046253 2. Bressi v. City of El Segundo, LASC Nos. BC288292 and 288293 3. Emazeki v. City of El Segundo, LASC No. YCO47980 4. Hafley v. City of El Segundo, LASC No. YC045092 5. Chen v. City of El Segundo, LASC No. YC049424 6. Pulido v. City of El Segundo, USDC No. USDC No. 03CV9563 7. In the Matter of the Noise Varian Proceeding for Los Angeles International Airport — California Department of Transportation Case No. L2004060244 8. City of El Segundo v. Stardust West Apartments, LASC No. YC031364 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(b): -0• potential case (no further public statement is required at this time); Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(c): -1- matter. DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS (Gov't Code §54957) — 0 matter CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54957.6) — 2 matters 1. Represented Group: City Employees Association Labor Negotiators: Mary Strenn & Bruce Barsook 2. Represented Group: Police Support Services Labor Negotiators: Mary Strenn & Bruce Barsook CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8) — 0 matter SPECIAL MATTERS — 0 matter 002 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. During the first Public Communications portion of the Agenda, comments are limited to those items appearing on the Agenda. During the second Public Communications portion of the Agenda, comments may be made regarding any matter within the jurisdiction of the City Council. 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 second Public Communications portion of 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.m. the prior Tuesday). Other members of the public may comment on these items only during this second Public Communications portion of the Agenda. 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 lenath. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact City Clerk, 524 -2305. 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, SEPTEMBER 7, 2004 — 7:00 P.M. Next Resolution # 4386 Next Ordinance # 1378 7:00 P.M. SESSION CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION — Reverend SeHee Han of United Methodist Church of El Segundo PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Council Member Carl Jacobson 00J PRESENTATIONS - (a) Proclamation in commemoration of the events of September 11, 2001. (b) Commendation to Janet Miller Sheehan, Planning Commissioner, for her valued services rendered in the public interest as a Member of the Planning Commission. ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Only - 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on 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 not 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 the Agenda by title Recommendation - Approval. B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS Consideration and possible action to open a public hearing and receive testimony regarding a certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report (including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations) and adoption of an update to the Circulation Element of the El Segundo General Plan. Recommendation - (1) Open Public Hearing; (2) Receive public testimony and other evidence; (3) Discussion; (4) Reading of Resolution approving Environmental Assessment No. 579 and General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1 by title only; (5) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. Consideration and possible action (Public Hearing) regarding the FY 2004 -2005 Preliminary Budget and Five -Year Capital Improvements Plan including discussion and possible direction regarding all City revenues and expenditures. Recommendation - (1) Open Public Hearing; (2) Discussion; (3) Close or Continue the Public Hearing to September 21, 2004; (4) Schedule the budget adoption for the September 21, 2004 meeting; (5) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 004 C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 3. Consideration and possible action regarding a report to Council on requested additional information: costs, impacts, and workload for alternative "run short" scenarios (to "run short" means that on a given day and temporary basis, not filling a vacant position with overtime personnel). These scenarios were developed as a result of the Fire Department's budget reduction proposal (running short in fire suppression staffing up to one person per rank /assignment as vacancies occur). Recommendation — (1) Receive and review information; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 4. Consideration and possible action regarding remodeling the existing clubhouse, located at 300 E. Pine Avenue and authorize an increase in amount paid to the architect for services relating to the preparation of the remodeling assessment report. Fiscal Impact $45,000. Recommendation — (1) Receive assessment report regarding remodeling the clubhouse; (2) Discuss alternatives regarding remodeling the clubhouse; (3) Defer the Community Center project for two years; (4) Authorize expenditures of approximately $275,000 for maintenance work at the clubhouse and city hall and preserve the balance ($5,772,000) for future use; (5) Authorize staff to develop specifications to abate any hazardous materials and paint the interior and exterior of the clubhouse; (6) Approve change order no. 5 of $45,000 to the original purchase order for architect LPA Inc., (7) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 5. Consideration and possible action regarding setting a date for interviewing candidates for one position each on the Planning Commission, Community Cable Advisory Committee and Economic Development Advisory Council. Recommendation — (1) Set date for interviews of candidates for Tuesday, October 5, 2004; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 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. 5 005 6. Warrant Numbers 2542521 to 254914 on Register No. 22 in the total amount of $2,193,625.29 and Wire Transfers from 816/2004 through 8/26/2004 in the total amount of $1,182,855.71. Recommendation — Approve Warrant Demand Register and authorize staff to release. Ratify: Payroll and Employee Benefit checks; checks released early due to contracts or agreement; emergency disbursements and /or adjustments; and wire transfers. 7. City Council Special and Regular Meeting Minutes of August 17, 2004. Recommendation — Approval. 8. Consideration and possible action regarding a status report on legislative bill number AB2702 seeking to amend state law to allow the development of second dwelling units in residential neighborhoods. Recommendation — (1) Receive and file; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 9. Consideration and possible action to adopt a Resolution in support of statewide ballot measure, Proposition 1A, which would restrict the ability of the Legislature to utilize funds allocated to local governments. Recommendation — (1) Adopt Resolution supporting statewide ballot measure Proposition 1A; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 10. Consideration and possible action to adopt a Resolution establishing City policy regarding the display of the United States flag at City facilities and public rights of Recommendation — (1) Adopt resolution establishing policies and procedures related to the public display of flags; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 11. Consideration and possible action regarding a letter to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission supporting the proposed Pacific Concourse Project that includes 450 residential units in two buildings in the Del Aire Business Park along La Cienega Blvd. Recommendation — (1) Approve the letter to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 006 12. Consideration and possible action regarding a proposal by the Community, Economic and Development Services Department (CEDS) to establish a new job classification of Plans Examiner. Fiscal Impact: $38,000 savings. Recommendation — (1) Approve the Plans Examiner Class Specification; (2) Adopt the Resolution establishing the month salary range; (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 13. Consideration and possible action regarding the award of a purchase order to Knoll, Inc. for furniture and a delivery/installation contract to Associates Purchasing, for Library Meeting Rooms and Interior Modifications Project - Approved Capital Improvement Program. Fiscal Impact: $56,000. Recommendation — (1) Recommend that City Council waive the formal bidding process per the Municipal Code and approve the City's use of competitively solicited federal General Services Agreement (GSA) Contract #GS- 28F- 8029H; (2) Authorize the issuance of a purchase order for meeting rooms and office furniture with Knoll (manufacturer), in the amount of $39,150; (3) Award of a contract to the authorized distributor and installers, Associates Purchasing, in the amount of $16,850; (4) Authorize the City Manager to execute a standard City Professional Services Agreement, as approved to form by the City Attorney on behalf of the City; (5) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 14. Consideration and possible action regarding Recreation and Parks Drama Program for Fiscal Year 2004 -2005. Recommendation — (1) Receive and file information regarding the Fall drama program; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 15. Consideration and possible action regarding the waiver of fees for City services associated with the Tree Musketeers' first annual "Rock the Earth" event at Chevron Park located at El Segundo Blvd and Illinois Street. Fiscal Impact: Recommendation — (1) Waive fees for City services associated with the Tree Musketeers' first annual "Rock the Earth" event; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 16. Consideration and possible action regarding the waiver of fees for City services associated with the Fire and Police Associations' 4th Annual Pancake Breakfast. Fiscal Impact: $760. Recommendation — (1) Approve fees associated with Fire and Police Associations' 4th Annual Pancake Breakfast; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 007 17. Consideration and possible action to waive second reading and adopt the Ordinances increasing the water and wastewater rates on a city -wide basis. Recommendation — (1) Waive second reading and adopt the Ordinances; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 18. Consideration and possible action authorizing the City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Agreement with the City of Redondo Beach for retention of a consultant to perform a bacteria Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) implementation plan study. Fiscal Impact: $502. Recommendation — (1) Authorize City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Agreement with the City of Redondo Beach to perform a bacteria TMDL implementation plan study; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 19. Consideration and possible action regarding approval of a three -month contract extension for the City's custodial contract with K & P Janitorial and Maintenance through December 31, 2004. No Fiscal Impact. Recommendation — (1) Authorize the City Manager to execute an extension of K & P Janitorial and Maintenance contract through December 31, 2004 in a form approved by the City Attorney; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 20. Consideration and possible action to replace a marked police vehicle that was totaled when struck by a negligent driver. Fiscal Impact $33,200 — City seeking recovery from second party insurance. Recommendation — (1) Approve purchase of replacement unit; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 21. Consideration and possible action to approve contract with UCLA Center for Pre - Hospital Care, for continuing education, as well as program oversight of Citywide AED (Automatic External Defibrillator) Program. Fiscal Impact: there is no change in cost for current services being provided ($24,200 for Fire and $4,400 for Police). Recommendation — (1) Approve contract as presented; (2) Authorize City Manager to sign agreement; (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA F. NEW BUSINESS 22. Consideration and possible action regarding the Annual Halloween Frolic event location moving from Recreation Park to Main Street and request for increased funding for the event. Fiscal Impact: $9,210. Recommendation — (1) Determine location of the Annual Halloween Frolic event; (2) Approve increased funding request for Main Street location; (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. G. REPORTS —CITY MANAGER— NONE H. REPORTS —CITY ATTORNEY —NONE REPORTS —CITY CLERK — NONE REPORTS — CITY TREASURER — NONE K. REPORTS — CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Boulgarides — Council Member Busch — Council Member Jacobson — Mayor Pro Tem Gaines — Mayor McDowell — 23. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of a resolution expressing the City of El Segundo's support of efforts by the California Air Resources Board to implement measures aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Recommendation: (1) Adopt resolution supporting California Air Resources Board efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this matter. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS — (Related to City Business Only — 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total) Individuals who have receive 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 not on the agenda. The Council will respond to comments after Public Communications is closed. 009 MEMORIALS — CLOSED SESSION The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54960, It 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 Government Code Section §54957 (Personnel); and /or conferring with the City's Labor Negotiators. REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION (if required) ADJOURNMENT POSTED: DATE: �l f t7 ,n TIME: d • 55� ° "l NAME: o 10 n10 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 7, 2004 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Special Orders of Business - Public Hearing AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to open a public hearing and receive testimony regarding certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report (including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations) and adoption of an update to the Circulation Element of the El Segundo General Plan. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1. Open Public Hearing; 2. Receive public testimony and other evidence; 3. Discussion; 4. Reading of Resolution approving Environmental Assessment No. 579 and General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1 by title only; and /or, 5. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: On August 12 and 26, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed update to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. After receiving testimony and documentary information, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 2572, recommending City Council certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report with a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Environmental Assessment No. 579) and approval of the Circulation Element update (General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1). The staff report prepared for the August 12 and 26, 2004 Planning Commission hearings (Exhibit B) contains a full project description. The draft minutes from the Planning Commission are also included (Exhibit C). (Continued on next page... ) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: A. Draft Resolution with attached Circulation Element B. Planning Commission Staff Reports, dated August 12 and 26, 2004 C. Draft Planning Commission Minutes, dated August 12 and 26, 2004 D. Final Environmental Impact Report (To be distributed separately) FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: $244,530 Amount Requested: None Account Number: 001 -400- 2402 -6214 Project Phase: N/A Appropriation Required: Yes X No Hansen, Director of Commun Economic and GJl //d Services Vv v,"' Oil 1 STAFF REPORT: September 7, 2004 Background Project History Page 2 In May 2002, the Council authorized staff to begin revising the Circulation Element afterthe Council reached a consensus in 2001 to stop working on a previous Circulation Element update from 1998. After Council direction in May 2002, staff held several scoping meetings with community stakeholders on the issues to address in the Circulation Element update. The Council then directed staff to issue a Request for Proposals for consultants to prepare the Circulation Element update and Environmental Impact Report (EIR). On November 19, 2002, the Council selected the team of Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. and Christopher A. Joseph and Associates to prepare the Circulation Element update and EIR, respectively. Staff and the consultants held several workshops with the Council to define the methodology and assumptions for data sources, traffic model, various land use build out scenarios, and conclusions of the traffic forecasts. On October 5, 2003, the Council defined the "project" for environmental review after determining that the land use assumptions in the updated Circulation Element would not change from the 1992 version of the Circulation Element. Based upon the project description crafted by the City Council, staff began environmental review. As a result, a Draft EIR was circulated for public review from June 25, 2004 to August 9, 2004. The Planning Commission held public hearings on the EIR and Circulation Element update on August 12, 2004 and August 26, 2004. Context It is important to note the City of El Segundo is located in Los Angeles County, home to over 9,500,000 people. Like so many communities in this region, thousands of people on their way to and from work drive through this city. Sepulveda and Aviation Boulevards are especially impacted by this phenomenon that creates traffic congestion above and beyond levels generated by our businesses and residents. Because this is beyond the direct control of the City, it adds to the challenge of both planning and funding transportation improvements. Project Description The purpose of the Circulation Element is to establish the City's goals, objectives and policies for the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, any military airports and ports, and other public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The Circulation Element is intended to provide an assessment of the levels at which the existing circulation infrastructure operates, and forecast future infrastructure needs based upon anticipated future land use development in accordance with the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan. The goal of the Circulation Element is to spell out the means by which the City will identify a system capable of responding to the growth that is occurring and that will occur during the life of the plan (2025) consistent with the Land Use Plan presented in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. STAFF REPORT: September 7, 2004 Page 3 The Draft Circulation Element summarizes the key findings of the traffic analysis completed for the project. By nature, a Circulation Element is more general than the traffic report. Its purpose is not to provide detailed solutions to every specific traffic problem in the City, but to establish the framework for future infrastructure planning. The following are the proposed changes to the existing Circulation Element: Changes in Roadway Designations • Deleting the previously planned portion of Mariposa Street between Douglas Street and Aviation Boulevard. • Deleting the previously planned portion of Grand Avenue between Douglas Street and Aviation Boulevard. • Deleting the east -west secondary arterial between Hughes Way and Douglas Street. • Deleting Nash Street as a secondary arterial between El Segundo Boulevard and Park Place. This action would also result in deleting the truck route along this segment. • Converting Nash Street from a one -way southbound street to a two -way secondary arterial between Imperial Highway and El Segundo Boulevard. • Converting Douglas Street from a one -way northbound street to a two -way secondary arterial between Imperial Highway and El Segundo Boulevard. • Retention of the Grand Avenue truck route between Main Street and Sepulveda Boulevard in the Recommended Truck Route Plan. • Re- designation of Park Place between Nash Street and Douglas Street from a street classification as a local commercial street to a collector street. Physical Changes in Roadway Confiqurations • Developing a street system within the site located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue (the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site) consistent with the development concept of that site. It is expected that there will be a north - south, two -lane, albeit circuitous, roadway connection between El Segundo Boulevard and Park Place in lieu of the Nash Street secondary arterial (to be deleted). This connection may not be a linear route and may entail several turns. A two -lane, east -west collector street connection between Sepulveda Boulevard and Nash Street along a new alignment would be provided through the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site. • Converting Nash Street from a one -way southbound street to a two -way secondary arterial between Imperial Highway and El Segundo Boulevard. • Converting Douglas Street from a one -way northbound street to a two -way secondary arterial between Imperial Highway and El Segundo Boulevard. • Intersection modifications along Nash and Douglas Streets associated with the change from one -way to two -way operation. • Incorporation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) improvements onto the roadway network. STAFF REPORT: September 7, 2004 Page 4 Intersection Improvements and Revisions to Circulation Element Policies The proposed Circulation Element Update includes planned intersection improvements designed to achieve LOS D or better. The proposed project includes modifications to Circulation Element policies that would limit potential intersection improvements to those that can be feasibly implemented, by limiting lane additions beyond the existing right -of -way to those that would not affect buildings, freeway supports or railroad rights -of -way. Creation of a significance threshold policy for development project review. There is a discussion of each of these topics in the draft Circulation Element. Additionally, staff has reviewed the goals, objectives and policies in the Circulation Element and has proposed a number of changes to consolidate and clarify several policies. Most importantly, staff is proposing Policy C3 -1.2 which would formally establish the significance threshold for use in evaluating the impacts of development on the roadway network. The proposed threshold would consider a proiect to create a significance impact if it causes a Level of Service (LOS) to deteriorate from LOS D or better to LOS E or F. If an intersection is already operating at a deficient level of LOS E or F, a two percent increase in traffic would be considered a significant impact. Another policy change of note would be in C4 -3.2. If adopted, this policy would direct the City to update its Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee Program. Since the proposed Circulation Element contains an updated list of intersection improvement projects, which will require funding, an update of the fee program study could create a mechanism to raise funds from developers to pay for a portion of these improvements. Methodology, Assumptions, and Analysis Staff and the consultants began work on the Circulation Element by preparing methodology and a set of data assumptions that would be used in preparing the traffic model to study the traffic that would be forecast for the year 2025. This review included determining the list of intersections to study, identifying major projects to incorporate into the background growth (i.e., LAX expansion, Playa Vista, Campus El Segundo, LAAFB expansion, etc.), reviewing the use of data from the Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) regional transportation model for regional through traffic inputs, reviewing inventories of vacant and recyclable land in the City to assess future buildout, and reviewing previous assumptions regarding planned roadway extensions and the conversion of the Nash - Douglas one -way couplet to two -way operations. The City Council reviewed the methodology and assumptions at its February 4, 2003 meeting and approved a working set of assumptions for the traffic modeling to begin. Traffic Model The next step in the update process was for Kimley -Horn and Associates to prepare the traffic model and present the results of the validation process to the City Council. The validation process is intended to make sure the traffic model will accurately predict future traffic growth by comparing the results of the model inputs versus the current traffic levels which were measured by new counts of all signalized intersections in the City. The model was also run against the projected buildout in the existing General Plan. This analysis provided a point of comparison for the projected future traffic that would be expected from 014 STAFF REPORT: September 7, 2004 Page 5 the new Circulation Element assumptions. accurate forecasts as well. On August 5, 2003, the Council reviewed the results of the validation effort and directed staff to begin the traffic modeling for three land use scenarios that it wanted studied as part of the update process. Development Densitv Scenarios In an effort to address the density concerns of many stakeholders that were raised in the aborted Circulation Element update process initiated in 1998, the Council directed staff to study three different land use buildout scenarios in the Mixed -Use North (MU -N) and Corporate Office (CO) Zones. The three Floor Area Ratio (FAR) scenarios (0.8, 1.0, and 1.3) would help the decision makers understand if lowering or raising the density limitations in these two zones would significantly affect the future traffic volumes in the City. Floor area ratio is the ratio between building size and lot size. The larger the permitted FAR the larger the development may be on a given size property. Staff returned to the City Council with the results of the traffic modeling on October 8, 2003. At that time staff presented a comparison of the three land use alternative scenarios, which also included a comparison with a "No Land Use Change" scenario. The results from the traffic model concluded that traffic would increase approximately 20 -50 percent (depending on the intersection) between now and 2025. The difference in traffic volume between the three land use scenarios was approximately 2 -11 % depending on the location within the City. After reviewing the comparative impacts of each land use scenario, the consensus of the City Council was to select the "No Land Use Change" scenario as the proposed project that would be studied in the Environmental Impact Report. The Council concluded that the there were not sufficiently significant traffic improvements that would be derived from reducing the density in the MU -N and CO Zone versus leaving the current land use densities in place. Level of Service (LOS) The draft Circulation Element summarizes the existing traffic conditions in the City using Level of Service (LOS) criteria; defines the type of street network that would be appropriate to serve the community though the proposed Master Plan of Streets; and analyzes howthe proposed network will perform in handling the traffic that could be generated though the buildout of the City as permitted in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Level of Service (LOS) measures the volume of traffic compared to the capacity of the roadway. Roadways with LOS A, B, C, and D are generally considered to be acceptable levels with little or no delays. Roadways with LOS E are considered deficient and LOS F means the volume exceeds the design capacity of the roadway. This criterion should always be movement at an otherwise well functioning intersection can lower the LOS. Exhibit C -3, C- 4, and C -5 in the draft Circulation Element provide a more detailed discussion of LOS criteria. Environmental Review The Draft EIR discusses the environmental impacts associated with each of the proposed project elements (i.e., conversion of Nash - Douglas one -way coupletto two -way operations, 114N STAFF REPORT: September 7, 2004 Page 6 mitigation measures where appropriate if a significant impact is likely to be caused by the project. The EIR only analyzes the impacts of proposed updates to the 1992 Circulation Element. Impacts from components that remain unchanged in the Circulation Element, such as the Master Bicycle Plan and public transportation facilities, were addressed in 1992 and are not part of the new EIR. As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Draft EIR also examines alternatives to the proposed project. There are four alternatives, including a "no project" alternative, and buildout of the General Plan using the 0.8, 1.0 and 1.3 FAR scenarios. The Draft EIR concluded that there would be significant and unavoidable traffic and circulation impacts at six of the 55 studied intersections in the City. No feasible mitigation measures could be identified which would reduce the traffic impacts at these intersections to a level of insignificance (see discussion on page IV.B -17 of the DEIR). However, feasible traffic improvements for five of the six intersections are proposed to help improve traffic conditions from what they would otherwise be without the proposed Circulation Element. The sixth intersection (Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue) was recently improved as part of the Sepulveda Boulevard widening project. Additional improvements would require significant interagency coordination (i.e., Caltrans and City of Manhattan Beach) and dedications of land from properties abutting the intersection. The Draft EIR also identified potentially significant and unavoidable air quality impacts for Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) due to temporary construction activities required for improving intersections listed in the proposed updates. Similarly, significant and unavoidable temporary construction noise impacts were also identified for those intersections. Absent a Statement of Overriding Considerations ( "SOC "), a project forwhich an EIR was prepared cannot be approved by the City with significant and unavoidable impacts. Here, a SOC must be adopted relating to the unavoidable significant traffic impacts at six intersections, construction related NOx impacts, and construction related noise impacts at five intersections in order to certify the FEIR. An SOC acknowledges that a project has significant environmental impacts, but finds that other aspects of the project, such as economic benefits, outweigh the unavoidable environmental impacts of the project. The proposed Circulation Element identifies infrastructure improvements that will help alleviate traffic impacts caused by growth within the City and caused by regional pass - through traffic that will occur during the life of the Circulation Element (through 2025). The proposed Circulation Element anticipates that such improvements, along with the other modifications, will improve overall traffic conditions in the City when compared to the City's current Circulation Element. The proposed SOC contains findings that benefits of these improvements for traffic flow and economic development outweigh the temporary significant construction related air quality and noise impacts. While there will be unavoidable temporary construction related air quality and noise impacts due to the improvements incorporated into the proposed Circulation Element, the long -term traffic benefits from the improvements identified in the DEIR, as stated in the SOC, outweigh the temporary impacts. Improved traffic flow will help reduce air quality impacts over time. Additionally, none of the construction related noise impacts would be adjacent to residential uses in El Segundo. Ten letters commenting on the Draft EIR were submitted during the public review period 015 STAFF REPORT: September 7, 2004 Page 7 Responses to these comments are included in the Final EIR, which was available for public review on August 27, 2004. Plannina Commission Hearin The Planning Commission held its public hearing on the Circulation Element update on August 12, 2204 and August 26, 2004. At these hearings the Commission took public testimony, reviewed the Draft EIR, and considered the proposed changes to the Circulation Element. The Commission's discussion focused on issues related to the conversion of the Nash - Douglas one -way couplet, efforts the City could take to pursue regional solutions to the City's traffic issues, "related projects," and residential traffic control. At least one speaker during the Planning Commission public hearings noted the City's previous efforts to update the Circulation Element which began in 1998. As mentioned earlier, the City Council ended that process in 2001. While the assumptions and information generated during the previous process are not relevant for the current environmental review process, it is important to note that the 1998 draft Circulation Element update included several projects not considered by the current proposed project. Those projects included revisions to Main Street and Smoky Hollow density that are not part of the current proposed Circulation Element update. Since the 1998 project contained different data and assumptions than the current proposed project, the environmental review and methodology was also different. Direct comparisons between the 1998 project and the current Circulation Element update are therefore inapplicable to the City's current environmental analysis. Several commentators raised the issue of how "related" projects are incorporated into the Circulation Element analysis. The Draft EIR includes Appendix C that listed all of the approved and reasonably foreseeable projects within the City boundaries that were incorporated into the traffic forecasts for the year 2025. This included the Campus El Segundo project, the Los Angeles Air Force Base project, and development on the Honeywell properties at Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue. This list is also incorporated into the Final EIR. Since it is virtually impossible to accurately include every potential project outside the City limits that might contribute pass- through traffic, early on in the process, the City Council in 2003 directed staff as part of the Circulation Element update to use the SCAG regional traffic model as the source of traffic generation to represent regional through traffic. The SCAG model factors in traffic growth throughout the region based on the actual General Plan of each community. The SCAG model is used in place of a detailed list of specific projects outside the city (an approach assessing cumulative impacts per Section 15130 of CEQA). However, due to the size of the LAX Master Plan and Playa Vista project, and their proximity to the City, the specific traffic impacts expected from those two projects were also factored into the growth projections. While other individual projects outside the City are not specifically analyzed, their effects on traffic in the City are accounted for in the SCAG model, to the extent that these projects are built in conformance with the approved General Plans that are the basis of the SCAG model. Based on testimony given at the Planning Commission hearing, staff added text to the draft Circulation Element to describe the summer beach shuttle (page 4 -32) and to acknowledge that private companies operate several employee shuttles between their facilities in town which helps reduce traffic (page 4 -39). Staff also revised Exhibit C -9 and the text on page 01.6 STAFF REPORT: September 7, 2004 Page 8 4 -18 to depict the additional intersection improvements that are proposed to supplement the planned improvements already identified in the existing Circulation Element (as studied in the traffic analysis and the EIR). Conclusion Staff recommends that the Council adopt the draft Resolution approving Environmental Assessment No. 579 with a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopt General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1. P:\Planning & Building Safety\Projects\576- 599 \Ea - 579 \9- 7- 04.ais.final.doc 017 Exhibit A with 3 attachments RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING A PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 579 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 02 -1, ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND AMENDING THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE EL SEGUNDO GENERAL PLAN. The City Council of the City of El Segundo does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares that: A. On December 1, 1992, the City of El Segundo Adopted a General Plan for the years 1992 -2010; B. On December 1, 1992, the City of El Segundo certified a Final Environmental Impact Report and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the El Segundo General Plan pursuant to Ordinance No. 1189; C. The Circulation Element is a required element of the City's General Plan. Government Code § 65302(b) requires that a Circulation Element consist of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, any military airports and ports, and other local public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the General Plan's Land Use Element. To fulfill this goal, the Circulation Element creates a plan for constructing arterial, residential, and collector roads; intersections; traffic volume; and other, similar, matters which, together, create a system capable of responding to urban growth within the City's jurisdiction; D. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15378(a)(1), the City Council began environmental review in 1998 for updating the City's Circulation Element. While the City determined that updating the Circulation Element of the General Plan was desirable, California law does not impose a particular time period for such updates; E. These efforts continued in 2002 in order to provide a Circulation Element reflecting the existing traffic conditions and making reasonable forecasts of anticipated future traffic conditions in the City; F. The proposed Circulation Element contains descriptions of the general location and extent of proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, military facilities, airports and other local public utilities. 1 013 All of these facilities are correlated with the Land Use Element of the General Plan as required by Government Code § 65302(b); G. The proposed Circulation Element includes modifications to the roadway designations, physical changes to roadway configurations, identification of specific intersection improvements, and revisions to the City's goals, objectives and policies; K The City reviewed the project's environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA"), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regulations § §15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines "), and the City's Environmental Guidelines (City Council Resolution No. 3805, adopted March 16, 1993); I. During the preparation of the Circulation Element update, the public, civic organizations, public agencies and other community groups were provided the opportunity to participate in the preparation of the Circulation Element update at scoping meetings held on June 5, 2002 and June 25, 2002; and at City Council meetings held on September 17, 2002, November 19, 2002, February 4, 2003, August 5, 2003, and October 8, 2003 as required by Government Code § 65351; J. A duly noticed public hearing was scheduled before the Planning Commission for August 12, 2004 to receive public comment regarding the DEIR and Circulation Element update; K. On August 12, 2004 the Commission opened a public hearing to receive public testimony and other evidence regarding the application including, without limitation, information provided to the Commission by City staff. There were no public speakers at that time and the Planning Commission continued the public hearing to August 26, 2004; L. At the continued public hearing on August 26, 2004, the Commission considered the evidence submitted to the record including, without limitation, testimony from the public, the City's third -party consultant, and City staff. The Commission adopted Resolution No. 2572 recommending approval of the proposed project based upon the evidence presented to the Commission at its August 12, 2004 and August 26, 2004 hearings including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Community, Economic and Development Services Department; M. On September 7, 2004 the City Council conducted a public hearing to receive public testimony and other evidence regarding the application including, without limitation, information provided to the Commission by City staff; and, z 0.19 N. At the public hearing, the City Council considered the evidence submitted to the record including, without limitation, testimony from the public, the City's third -party consultant, and City staff. This Resolution is made based upon the evidence presented to the City Council at its September 7, 2004 public hearing including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Community, Economic and Development Services Department. SECTION 2: Environmental Assessment. The City Council makes the following environmental findings: A. The purpose for amending the Circulation Element (the "Project ") is to refine and make appropriate adjustments to the programs, future traffic forecasts, goals, policies, and objectives in order to address concerns raised by the community about future traffic growth in the City; B. CEQA Guidelines § 15378(a)(1) requires environmental review for amendments to the City's General Plan; C. An Initial Study and Notice of Preparation were prepared pursuant to the requirements of CEQA. The Notice of Preparation of the DEIR was circulated for public review between December 30, 2003 and January 29, 2004. A revised Notice of Preparation was prepared and circulated for public review from May 7, 2004 to June 7, 2004. The Initial Study found that the project could cause significant environmental impacts; D. Accordingly, a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report ( "DEIR ") was prepared by Christopher A. Joseph and Associates under contract to the City and under the supervision of the City Community, Economic and Development Services Department and circulated for public review and comment between June 25, 2004 and August 9, 2004. A Notice of Completion was filed with the State Clearinghouse on June 25, 2004; E. The City received ten comments on the DEIR from public agencies, groups and individuals; F. A Final Environmental Impact Report ( "FEIR ") was prepared, which includes the DEIR, comments regarding the DEIR and written responses to such comments, a summary of changes to the DEIR, and all technical appendices; G. The FEIR for the proposed Project, entitled "El Segundo Circulation Element Project Update Final Environmental Impact Report", prepared by Christopher A. Joseph and Associates under contract to the City and under the supervision of the City Community, Economic and Development Services Department on June 25, 2004 (State Clearinghouse No. 020 2004011012), is incorporated by reference; H. The City, acting as lead agency, has reviewed and edited as necessary the Draft EIR and the Final El to reflect its own independent judgment to the extent of its ability, including reliance on City technical personnel from other departments as well as professional consultants retained by the City in order to provide technical advice an assistance in evaluating environmental impacts associated with the Project. I. Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21082.1(c)(3), the City Council independently reviewed and analyzed the FEIR. Based upon that review and analysis, and recommendations made by the City's Planning Agency as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2572, the City Council finds the FEIR is an accurate and complete statement of the potential environmental impacts resulting from the Project. The FEIR reflects the City's independent judgment as lead agency; J. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15091, any changes or alterations required for the Project, or incorporated into the Project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect are identified for the FEIR. Any potential changes or alterations that may be made to the proposed mitigation measures are addressed and analyzed in the FEIR; K. The DEIR and FEIR were made available for public review and comment in the time and manner prescribed by CEQA; L. The FEIR generally concluded that, with mitigation, the Project would not have a significant, adverse effect on the environment. Those mitigation measures are desirable and feasible; M. The FEIR also identified three environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated: 1. Traffic impacts at six City intersections; 2. Temporary construction related Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions; and 3. Temporary construction related noise impacts. The temporary construction impacts would arise from the construction of planned roadway and intersection improvements proposed in the Circulation Element; N. Based upon a review of all relevant matters in the record, the City Council finds that the proposed construction of planned roadway and intersection improvements will improve the overall circulation system of the City and 4 021 reduce long -term air quality impacts. Therefore, the temporary construction impacts are offset by the long -term benefits; O. In accordance with § 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, the record on which the City Council's findings are based is located at the Community, Economic and Development Services Department, City of El Segundo, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California 90245. The custodian of records is the Director of Community, Economic and Development Services; P. There is no evidence that the project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends, because the project is in a built -out urban environment; Q. The City reviewed the FEIR for the project and considered the public record on the project, including, without limitation, the following: 1. Staff reports prepared by the Community, Economic and Development Services Department and the DEIR and FEIR prepared by Christopher A. Joseph & Associates for the City; 2. Staff presentations at public hearings and meetings; 3. All applicable regulations and codes; 4. Public comments, both written and oral, received and /or submitted at or prior to the public hearings and meetings, supporting or opposing the proposed project; and, 5. All related documents received and /or submitted at or before the public hearings; R. Because of the facts identified in this Resolution, specifically the creation of significant unavoidable environmental impacts as described above, the FEIR found that a Statement of Overriding Considerations would be required in order for the project to be approved. SECTION 3: General Plan. The proposed project conforms with the City's General Plan as follows: A. The proposed Circulation Element General Plan Amendment is consistent with the 1992 General Plan, as amended, since it provides a set of goals, objectives and policies to implement a traffic circulation system in the City capable of supporting the urban development anticipated in the Land Use Element of the General Plan; B. The proposed Circulation Element would not create an internal 5 022 inconsistency within the General Plan; and, C. The proposed Circulation Element, in conjunction with the existing General Plan, comprises an integrated and compatible statement of policies. SECTION 4: Approvals. A. The City Council adopts Findings of Facts and a Statement of Overriding Considerations as set forth in attached Exhibit 'A," which are incorporated into this Resolution by reference; B. In accordance with the requirements of Public Resources Code §§ 21081(a) and 21081.6, the City Council adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) as set forth in attached Exhibit "B," which is incorporated into this Resolution by reference. The City Council adopts each of the mitigation measures expressly set forth in the MMRP as conditions of approval of the proposed project; C. The City Council certifies that FEIR SCH No. 2004011012, dated June 2004 for Environmental Assessment No. 579 and General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1 is adequate and was completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq.; and, D. The City Council amends Chapter 4 of the El Segundo General Plan, entitled "Circulation Element," in its entirety as set forth in attached "Exhibit C," which is incorporated by reference. SECTION 5: Reliance on Record. Each and all of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. SECTION 6: Limitations. The City Council's analysis and evaluation of the project is based on the best information currently available. It is inevitable that in evaluating a project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the project will not exist. One of the major limitations on analysis of the project is the City Council's lack of knowledge of future events. In all instances, best efforts have been made to form accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are the limitations on the City's ability to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national problems and issues. The City must work within the political framework within which it exists and with the limitations inherent in that framework. 023 SECTION 7: Summaries of Information. All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact. SECTION 8: This Resolution will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent resolution. SECTION 9: According to the El Segundo Municipal Code, a copy of this Resolution will be mailed to any person requesting a copy. SECTION 10: This Resolution is the City Council's final decision and becomes effective thirty (30) days from its adoption. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of September 2004. Kelly McDowell, 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 7th day of September, 2004, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: /_T:T. -1L1NTa Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk PAPlanning & Building Safety\Projects\576- 599 \Ea -579) 024 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. Exhibit A After receiving, reviewing, and considering all the information in the administrative record for this matter, including, without limitation, the factual information and conclusions set forth in this Resolution and its attachment, the City Council finds, determines, and declares as follows: I. FINDINGS REQUIRED BY CEQA. Public Resources Code § 21081 and CEQA Guidelines § 15091 require the City, before approving a project, to identify significant impacts of the project and, if significant impacts are identified, make one or more of three allowable findings based upon substantial evidence in the record for each significant impact: A. The first allowable finding is that 'changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR" (CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1)). B. The second allowable finding is that "such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency" (CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(2)). C. The third allowable finding is that "specific economic, social, or other considerations make unfeasible the mitigation measures or Project alternatives identified in the Final EIR" (CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3)). II. FINDINGS REGARDING THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT. A. Potential Impacts Found to be Insignificant by the Initial Study. The Initial Study identified the following environmental effects as not potentially significant. Accordingly, the City Council finds that the Initial Study, the FEIR, and the record of proceedings in this matter do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to the areas listed below. 1. Agricultural Resources 2. Mineral Resources. 3. Public Services 4. Recreation 1 025 Q Although the Initial Study identified the following environmental effects as potentially significant, the City Council finds that the Initial Study, the FEIR, and the record of proceedings in this matter do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to the areas listed below. 1. Aesthetics. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The City of El Segundo is an urban environment. Most of the City is built out with urban uses, with a small portion of the developed area in parkland, recreational uses, and open space, much of which is located along public utility and railroad right -of -ways. (2) The City does not contain any notable landforms or natural areas that would be considered scenic resources or would comprise scenic vistas. (3) The Pacific Ocean is located along the western boundary of the City. The Pacific Ocean touches the City boundary at the site of the Chevron Oil Refinery. North of the refinery, along the coast but not within the El Segundo City limits, are the City of Los Angeles Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Department of Water and Power Scattergood Generating Station. These facilities generally work to obscure any type of scenic view of the Pacific Ocean available from the City. (4) No designated state scenic highways are located in the City of El Segundo. No notable scenic resources are present in the City. (5) The conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation, the addition of roadways or improvement of intersections would not substantially change the visual character of areas within the City. The proposed modifications to roadways resulting from implementation of the Circulation Element roadway designations do not include massive structures such as bridges, fly -over ramps or large under- or overpasses that could potentially result in substantial changes in the visual environment. While development of an underpass may be required for the Park Place extension, it would be located underground and would not change the existing visual landscape. Impacts are anticipated to be limited to additional traffic signals, roadway markings or additional street lanes that would be consistent with the visual character of existing roadways. 2 0 26 b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Aesthetics. 2. Air Quality. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Implementation of the proposed project would not have the potential to create odors. The proposed project consists of reconfiguration of existing roadways and intersection improvements in certain locations throughout the City. The project would not generate additional traffic on existing roadways. Only one new road would be created. Specific air quality impacts associated with the construction of this road would be addressed under the EIR being prepared for the Plaza El Segundo development. The proposed project does not include substantial odor generating uses, such as industrial processes, landfills or wastewater treatment plants. b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Air Quality. 3. Biological Resources. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The City is a highly urbanized area with only a small portion of the City undeveloped. There are no known locally designated natural communities or conservation plans in the City. The proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans. b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Biological Resources. 3 0 2 i, 4. Cultural Resources. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Development of the proposed project will not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Cultural Resources — Human Remains. 5. Geology and Soil. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The City is located within the seismically active Southern California region and is subject to similar risks from seismic activity as other communities in the region. According to the City's General Plan, no known active or potentially active faults are located within the City. The proposed project includes the construction of a structure, specifically the underpass for Park Place associated with its extension to Sepulveda Boulevard. The only seismic effect that could be associated with the proposed project would be as a result of ground rupture and seismic shaking. (2) The City is located in the vicinity of the San Andreas Fault Zone, the Newport- Inglewood Fault Zone, the Cucamonga Fault Zone, the Whittier - Elsinore Fault Zone, and the San Jacinto Fault Zone. (3) Roadways and intersection improvements associated with the proposed project could be affected by ground shaking as a result from seismic activity on these, as well as other fault systems located in Southern California. (4) The only structure associated with the proposed project is the construction of the Park Place underpass. Construction of this structure would not expose people or structures to the adverse effects of seismic groundshaking greater than those typically encountered in the Southern California region. In addition, construction of this structure would be accomplished in accordance with all applicable building regulations. (5) The proposed project would not involve use of wastewater disposal systems. No impact is anticipated. a 02� b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Geology and Soils. 6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The proposed project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. (2) The proposed project will not result in a release of hazardous materials into the environment because it would not involve the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Only one new road would be constructed under this project. The road would connect Park Place to Sepulveda Boulevard through the property located at the northeast corner of Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue. This road is not anticipated to be used for the transport of hazardous materials. (3) The proposed project would not involve the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and would therefore not emit hazardous or acutely hazardous materials within a quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The only new road proposed under this project would be constructed on the property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue. No schools are located within a quarter mile of this site. (4) The City of El Segundo is located directly south of LAX. The proposed project does not include the construction of structures that would have the potential to conflict with the existing airport land use. Any new streets lights added to the City street system would be shielded and would be aimed towards the ground. They would not interfere with the operation of LAX. Compliance with the City of El Segundo General Plan and any FAA requirements would result in less than significant impacts from safety hazards for people utilizing the roadways or intersections included under the proposed project. (5) There are no private airstrips located within the City of El Segundo. (6) The proposed project would be required to conform to all applicable City of El Segundo emergency response 5 020 and /or emergency evacuation plans. The proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable Fire Department and Public Works Department regulations pertaining to emergency access and evacuation during construction. (7) The City is an urbanized area and is not situated near wildlands. b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Hazards and Hazardous Materials. 7. Hydrology and Water Quality. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The proposed project does not propose any groundwater wells or pumping activities. All water supplied to any site requiring irrigation will be derived from the City's existing water supply and infrastructure. Though the proposed project may result in a slight increase in the amount of impervious surface in the City through construction of additional paved roadway and intersection areas, it would not be substantial enough to interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. (2) The proposed project would not include any other potential sources of runoff pollution that could substantially degrade water quality, other than those discussed in the preceding sections. No impact would result. (3) The proposed project does not involve the construction of any housing. According to the General Plan, apart from coastal storm surges, the City is not prone to flooding during 100 -year storm events. (4) The City is not located within a 100 -year flood zone. The facilities that would be built as part of the proposed project do not include structures that would impede or redirect flood flows that could occur as part of coastal storm surges. s 030 (5) There are no major dams located within the City or upstream of the City that would expose people or structures to risk of loss, injury or death as a result of flooding. b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Hydrology and Water Quality. 8. Land Use. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The proposed project would result in construction of roadways in an existing street system and modification of existing streets and intersections. New roadways would not divide an established community. (2) The City is a highly urbanized area with only a small portion of the City undeveloped. There are no known locally designated natural communities on the site or in the project vicinity and there are no habitat or natural communities conservation plans in effect in the City. b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to land use. 9. Noise. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The City of El Segundo is located directly south of LAX. However, the proposed project would not include residences or employment locations that would result in exposure of people to excessive noise levels from airport operations. (2) There are no private airstrips located in the City of El Segundo. Additionally, the proposed project would not provide places of employment or residence. Therefore, the project would not expose persons to excessive noise levels associated with a private airstrip. ' 031 HO 11 b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to noise. Population, Housing, and Employment. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The proposed project would not require the acquisition of property containing housing. Therefore no displacement of housing would occur and the construction of replacement housing elsewhere would not be required. (2) The proposed project would not require the acquisition of property containing housing. Therefore no displacement of people would occur and the construction of replacement housing elsewhere would not be required. b) Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. c) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to population and housing. Transportation and Circulation. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Because the proposed project only includes roadway and intersection improvements, implementation of the project would not have the potential to result in a change in air traffic patterns at the Los Angeles International Airport or any other airport in the area. (2) The proposed project would modify the street system. The proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause an increase in hazards to a design feature, but would instead change the street system to accommodate projected traffic growth and minimize dangerous street conditions. (3) The proposed project includes modification of the street system. Design of roadway and intersection modifications will be undertaken by the City's Public Works Department and must comply with all Fire Department requirements regarding emergency access. 034' (4) The proposed project includes the modification of the street system. The proposed project would not result in the need for parking. (5) The proposed project would not conflict with adopted goals and policies supporting alternative transportation. The Bicycle Master Plan would not be affected by the proposed project. Any development of the proposed project would be required to adhere to applicable policies or programs supporting alternative transportation. b) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to transportation and circulation. 12. Utilities and Service Systems. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The proposed project would not involve the development of any facilities that would generate wastewater. Therefore, the project would not impact any wastewater treatment requirements of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. (2) Wastewater conveyance and treatment in the project area is under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts. The proposed project would not involve the development of any facilities that would generate wastewater and would not require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. (3) The City of El Segundo provides water service to the entire City and projects that it has sufficient supplies available to serve the City in the future. Implementation of the proposed project could result in the need for water only to irrigate landscaping. This additional demand would be minimal. (4) The proposed project would not involve developing any facilities that would generate wastewater. Therefore, the proposed project would not affect the capacity of any waste water treatment provider. (5) Solid waste generated in the City of El Segundo is disposed in several landfills in Los Angeles County. The proposed project would not result in a consistent and s 0 33 substantial generation of solid waste. Construction debris and a potential increase in littering might result from modifications proposed by the project. (6) Except for the disposal of construction debris that might result from modifications to existing roadways and potential littering, the proposed project would not involve solid waste disposal Any disposal would comply with federal, state and local statues and regulations. No impact would occur. b) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance. C) Finding: The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to utilities and service systems. C. The City Council finds that although the following environmental effects were identified as potentially significant in the FEIR, changes or alterations within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and not the City have been adopted by such other agencies or can and should be adopted by such other agency to avoid or lessen the potential significant environmental effects listed below to a level of insignificance. 1. Aesthetics. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The proposed changes in roadway designations and the construction of the new roadway system identified as part of the El Segundo Circulation Element Update would not produce a significant lighting impact. (2) Under the proposed Circulation Element Update, modifications to 14 intersections are identified to accommodate growth in future traffic levels in the City. Implementation of these intersection improvements would have the potential to, generate increased lighting levels that could impact light sensitive receptors. These impacts could occur at up to four intersections that are located near residential areas by increasing the amount of street lights and traffic signals in the immediate area. These intersections include: • Intersection #12 — Aviation Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard (Hollyglen) 10 034 • Intersection #13 — Aviation Boulevard /Utah Avenue (Hollyglen) Intersection #25 — Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue (Manhattan Beach) Intersection #50 — El Segundo Boulevard /Isis Avenue (Del Aire and Hollyglen) (3) The Bright Horizons Day Care would not be impacted by increased night lighting as it is a daytime use. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any intersection improvement project proposed at any of the following four intersections: Aviation Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard; Aviation Boulevard /Utah Avenue; Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue; El Segundo Boulevard /Isis Avenue; to identify potential impacts on sensitive receptors that could result from additional lighting. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: Before constructing specific intersection improvements, impacts associated with increased night lighting in the area must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. This examination must address the potential of the subsequent activity to increase ambient lighting levels beyond the threshold identified in the Program EIR. The analysis must incorporate the mitigation measures identified below as appropriate. C) Mitigation: (1) Street lights must be designed and located to minimize spill over of light into residential areas (C -1). (2) New lighting sources must be shielded to direct light downward and not toward the sky to minimize atmospheric light pollution (C -2). d) Finding: (1) Impacts of the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operations and intersection improvements, with the exception of the four listed above, would be less than significant. 11 03 (2) Impacts of the improvements at the four intersections identified above would be determined by the subsequent environmental documentation. (3) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Aesthetics. 2. Air Quality. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Minimal or no construction emissions would be expected to result from the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way, as this activity would occur within the existing right -of -way and would involve only restriping of the existing roadway and possible installation of new street lighting or traffic signal poles (i.e., no major grading or construction activity required), or from the deletion of roadways from the Circulation Element network. Impacts from construction emissions associated with these components of the proposed Circulation Element Update would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds and would be less than significant. (2) The proposed Circulation Element Update would not result in any increase in traffic utilizing the City's Circulation Element roadway network. Therefore, no additional regional emissions would occur as a result of the proposed Circulation Element Update and no impacts related to regional air emissions would occur. (3) One -hour CO concentrations would range from approximately 6.4 ppm to 10.3 ppm at worst -case sidewalk receptors. Eight -hour CO concentrations are anticipated to range from approximately 4.4 ppm to 7.1 ppm. The State one- and eight -hour standards of 20.0 ppm and 9.0 ppm, respectively, would not be exceeded at worst -case sidewalk receptor locations at the study intersections. Thus, a less than significant impact is anticipated at the study intersections. In addition, because the intersections with the highest levels of traffic and congestion (Imperial /Sepulveda and Aviation /Rosecrans) would not exceed the State standard, other intersections in the City would also not exceed the standard. Impacts related to CO concentrations would be less than significant. (4) The proposed Circulation Element Update would accommodate future traffic levels without resulting in 12 036 violations of state standards for CO. Therefore the proposed Circulation Element Update would be consistent with the 2003 AQMP. (5) Impacts of the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to regional emissions and localized CO concentrations would be less than significant. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: • No subsequent environmental documentation is required for conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one - way to two -way operation. C) Mitigation: (1) Because of the limited construction activity that would be associated with the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation, no mitigation measures are required for this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update d) Finding: (1) Construction impacts associated with the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation would be less than significant. (2) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Air Quality. 3. Biological Resources. a) Facts /Effects. (1) No impacts to biological resources would occur with the changes in roadway designations as they would not result in a physical change to the existing environment. (2) The changes to and along Nash Street and Douglas Street would not impact biological resources. The entire area adjacent to these streets is completely developed and does not contain any sensitive biological resources. No sensitive or endangered plant or animal species, including the El Segundo Blue Butterfly, exist in this area, no riparian /wetland habitat is present, and the area is not known to be a wildlife corridor. Therefore, no biological resource impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of the roadway changes and modifications along Nash Street and Douglas Street. 13 037 (3) The development of a roadway network on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site has the potential to significantly impact biological resources. This area may contain wetlands /riparian habitat or vernal pools that could potentially be affected by construction of new roadways. In addition, this site may include other species in areas that have not been disturbed. (4) Most of the intersections where the identified intersection improvements would be implemented are located in areas that are completely developed and contain no biological resources. However, intersection #25 (Sepulveda/ Rosecrans) is located in an area that has or may have biological resources. Any modifications to this intersection would have a potentially significant impact. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed construction of a new roadway system on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and any proposed improvements to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection to identify potential biological resources impacts. Before constructing new roadways on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and any proposed improvements to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection, impacts associated with biological resources must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: • A general biological assessment must be conducted to determine the presence /absence of sensitive biological resources and wetlands. If sensitive biological resources are identified, measures must be identified to reduce impacts to these resources to less than significant levels. c) Mitigation: (a) Impacts of the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operations and the other components of the Circulation Element Update, except as identified above, would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. d) Finding: (a) Impacts of the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operations and the other 14 038 components of the Circulation Element Update, except as identified above, would be less than significant. (b) Impacts of the improvements at the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection and the roadway network on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site would be determined by the subsequent environmental documentation. (c) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Biological Resources. 4. Cultural Resources. a) Facts /Effects. (1) No impacts to historic, archaeological, or paleontological resources are anticipated as a result of converting Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two - way operation as this activity would take place within the existing right -of -way. (2) The development of a roadway network on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site could impact subsurface archaeological resources as the site is relatively undeveloped. Archaeological resource 19- 186856 is located on the northeastern portion of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and could be affected by the new roadway network. In addition, it is unknown whether paleontological resources exist on this site. Construction of the remainder of the north - south connection between Hughes Way and El Segundo Boulevard could also affect archaeological and /or paleontological resources. This would be a potentially significant impact. (3) No historic resources have been identified and therefore, no impacts to historic resources are anticipated. (4) Implementation of the identified intersection improvements at the 14 identified intersections could potentially impact archaeological resources located near these intersections. At all of the intersections requiring the implementation of traffic mitigation measures, the potential exists to encounter and disturb previously unknown, subsurface cultural resources. These impacts would be potentially significant. (5) At all of the intersections requiring the implementation of intersection improvements, the potential exists to 15 03`) b) C) encounter and disturb previously unknown, subsurface paleontological resources. These impacts would be potentially significant. (6) No historic resources have been identified and therefore, no impacts to historic resources are anticipated. Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed project on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site to identify potential impacts to cultural resources (archaeological, paleontological or historic). Impacts to cultural resources must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading either to an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following and must incorporate mitigation measures identified below as appropriate: • A records search and /or Phase I Archaeological Survey must be conducted by a qualified archaeologist before the implementation of physical changes to the existing roadway network, involving the construction of new roadways. If the survey identifies resources within the construction area of the roadway, follow on studies must be conducted in accordance with the recommendations of the records search before commencement of construction. Mitigation: (a) In the event that archaeological or paleontological resources are encountered during the course of grading or construction, all development must temporarily cease in these areas until the resources are properly assessed and subsequent recommendations are determined by a qualified archaeologist (F -1). d) Finding: (a) Impacts of the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operations would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. (b) With implementation of the listed mitigation measure, impacts to cultural resources from intersection improvements would be less than significant. 16 04u (c) Impacts from the construction of the new roadway on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site would be determined by the subsequent environmental documentation. (d) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to cultural resources. 5. Geology and Soil. a) Facts /Effects. (1) The conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation would occur within the existing right -of -way. No removal and compaction of fill material or grading would occur with the implementation of this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update. (2) Removal of existing asphalt, removal and compaction of fill material, grading of areas for new roadway surfaces, etc. would expose soils to localized erosion during periods of high winds and heavy precipitation. Control of waterborne soil erosion during construction is governed by existing regulations. Windborne erosion during construction would constitute a significant impact. (3) None of the proposed roadway network, including the conversion of Nash Street and Douglas Street, and the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site, is located in the high risk area for liquefaction. In addition, none of the intersections requiring the implementation of traffic mitigation measures are located in this high risk area. (4) The roadway network that would be modified and the 14 intersections where improvements have been identified are not at risk from landslides. (5) Both Nash Street and Douglas Street as well as 9 of the 14 intersections where improvements have been identified are located within soil types that have a high shrink/swell potential. However, because the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation would consist of restriping and minor construction activities within the existing right -of -way, this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update would have less than significant impacts with respect to expansive soils. (6) Depending upon the configuration and specific location of the new roads proposed for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site, and the location of specific 17 0141 intersection proposed for modification, they may be located on expansive soils. Roads and intersections could be damaged by the shrinking and swelling of soils if constructed on expansive soils, which would be a significant impact. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any new roadway construction or intersection improvement project located within areas with expansive soil hazards, as listed above. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: • Before constructing new roadways or specific intersection improvements, impacts associated with expansive soil hazards must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The analysis must include a comprehensive geotechnical investigation which must be submitted as part of the design process for individual portions of the proposed Circulation Element Update and must also incorporate the mitigation measures identified below, as appropriate. C) Mitigation: (1) The following mitigation measures must be incorporated as appropriate for intersections and roadways located within areas with expansive soil hazards, as listed above. Mitigation measure G -3 must apply to all construction activities associated with the proposed Circulation Element Update to address wind -borne erosion impacts. Regulatory requirements to address water - related erosion impacts are contained in Section IV.H, Hydrology and Water Quality. • Specific design recommendations presented in a comprehensive geotechnical report, discussed above under Subsequent Environmental Documentation, must be incorporated into the final design and approved by the City Engineer and City Council prior to construction (G- 1). • Specifications for site grading must be subject to approval by the City Engineer (G -2). • Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per hour (mph) (G -3). 18 042 d) Finding: (1) Impacts associated with the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. (2) Impacts at the nine identified intersections and the new roadway system on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site with respect to expansive soil would be determined by the subsequent environmental documentation. (3) With implementation of Mitigation Measure G -3, impacts related to wind -borne erosion would be less than significant. (4) Impacts from landslides, and liquefaction at the intersections with identified improvements and the new roadway system on the Sepulveda/ Rosecrans site would be less than significant. (5) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to geology and soils. 6. Hydrology and Water Quality. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one - way to two -way operation would take place within the existing right of way and would not involve major construction activity. Impacts related to water quality during construction for this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update would be less than significant. (2) Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would likely involve clearing and grading of one or more acres (not including the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operations), a General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit must be obtained from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) prior to the start of construction. The NPDES requires that a notice of Intent (NOI) be filed with the SWRCB. By filing an NOI, the applicant agrees to the conditions outlined in the General Permit. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) identifies which best management practices (BMPs) will be implemented such as sandbag barriers, dust controls, employee training, and general good housekeeping 19 043 practices. With the implementation of the BMPs, as required under existing regulations, short-term water quality impacts would be less than significant. (3) If not properly designed and constructed, the proposed Circulation Element Update could increase the rate of urban pollutant introduction into storm water runoff. In order to prevent these potential impacts, the project will be required to be designed in compliance with 1) Section 402 (p) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, or Clean Water Act (CWA); 2) Order No. 01 -182 of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region, which regulates the issuance of waste discharge requirements to Los Angeles County and Cities tributary to the County under NPDES Permit No. CA0061654; and 3) the County of Los Angeles Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSWMP). (4) In compliance with the SUSWMP requirements, modifications to intersections and roadways associated with the implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would be required to provide for the treatment/filtration of on -site storm water runoff, before it enters the public storm water conveyance system, in order to minimize the introduction of pollutants of concern. In meeting this specific requirement (i.e., minimization of the pollutants of concern), implementation activities under the proposed Circulation Element Update will incorporate a BMP or combination of BMPs best suited to maximize the reduction of pollutant loadings. Applicable BMPs will be selected from those approved sources identified in the County of Los Angeles Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSWMP). As required by the SUSWMP, the implemented system must remove 85 percent of such "first flush" storm water pollutants as hydrocarbon compounds (i.e., automotive oils, lubricants and other fluids) deposited, as a matter of course, along the proposed streets. With compliance with the existing regulatory SUSWMP requirements, the proposed Circulation Element Update's operational impacts on storm water quality would be less than significant. (5) New roads would be constructed and some existing intersections could be modified in order to accommodate future traffic growth. This would increase the amount of impermeable surfaces within the City and thereby increase the amount of storm water entering the drainage system. If the existing or future /planned storm drains cannot accommodate the increase in storm water flow, flooding 20 044 would occur on roadway segments and in intersections. Additionally, during the widening of existing roadways, storm drains currently in place may be impacted by construction activities or need to be relocated in order to accommodate the roadway modifications. The proposed conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operations would take place within the existing right -of -way and would not increase storm water runoff. (6) The areas of the City where physical roadway changes are proposed and intersections improvements have been identified are not at risk of impact from tsunamis due to their distance from the Pacific Ocean and any large bodies of water. Therefore, no impacts from tsunamis on the new roadway network and intersection improvements would occur. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed roadway construction or intersection improvement project at any of the 14 intersections listed below to identify potential impacts on the storm drain system. Before construction of specific roadway or intersection improvements, impacts to the storm drain system must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration: • The City must prepare a master drainage plan for any area of the City affected by implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update. This plan must include detailed hydrology /hydraulic calculations and drainage improvements, showing quantitatively how the project that implements the proposed Circulation Element Update would eliminate the potential for downstream flooding due to increased storm water runoff. • The City must design a conveyance and detainment system to meet the LACDPW limits on storm drains that would convey the discharge from the new and modified roadways and intersections. C) Mitigation: (a) No specific mitigation measures related to drainage systems have been identified at this time. The subsequent environmental documentation described above may identify 21 0 4a mitigation measures pertinent to a specific roadway or intersection improvement project. d) Finding: (a) Impacts associated with conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. (b) Impacts to storm water drainage from the construction of the roadway system on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and identified intersection improvements would be determined by the subsequent environmental documentation. (c) The City Council finds that the FOR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to hydrology and water quality. 7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. a) Facts /Effects. (1) There are several contaminated sites located within the boundaries of the City of El Segundo. These sites tend to be concentrated in the industrial and commercial areas of the City due to the nature of the contamination. These lists continually change as some sites are cleaned up and others are identified and it is possible that they could be identified within residential areas. All of the proposed physical changes in the roadway network would be located on or near properties with known contaminated sites. Depending upon the nature of the individual sites and the extent of roadwork required, workers could be exposed to these hazardous substances. This would be a potentially significant impact. (2) Intersections where traffic improvements have been identified may also be located on or adjacent to contaminated sites. Implementation of the traffic mitigation measures may also expose construction workers and adjacent bystanders to the site contamination. This would be a potentially significant impact. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed intersection improvements or construction of new roadways to identify potential impacts that could result from exposure to contaminated sites. Impacts associated with contaminated sites must be 22 0 4 6 examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: A Phase One Environmental Site Assessment must be conducted for any of the proposed roadway and intersection modifications to identify potentially contaminated sites. If contaminated sites are identified within the boundaries of the project site, appropriate measures must be taken to protect the well -being of the construction workers and the surrounding population. Investigative and remedial activities undertaken in accordance with this requirement must be undertaken under the oversight and to the satisfaction of the cognizant regulatory agency(ies) including but not be limited to: Department of Toxic Substances Control, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region and /or South Coast Air Quality Management District. C) Mitigation: (1) No specific mitigation measures have been identified at this time. The subsequent environmental documentation described above would identify the measures required to address any conditions related to contamination or hazardous materials that may be encountered by future roadway or intersection improvements. d) Finding: (1) Impacts associated with the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. (2) Impacts from the implementation of the intersection improvements and the new roadway construction would be determined by the subsequent environmental documentation. (3) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to hazards and hazardous materials. 23 04! 8. Land Use. a) Facts /Effects. (1) With the Circulation Element Update, there would be no change in the existing land uses throughout the City of El Segundo. The Circulation Element Update would be implemented in order to accommodate the existing /future land uses and anticipated traffic levels. No impact to land use compatibility would occur. (2) The proposed Circulation Element Update would not conflict with any of the applicable policies of the El Segundo General Plan (Economic Development Element, Circulation Element, Air Quality Element, Noise Element, and the Public Safety Element) or Southern California Association of Government's Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. Therefore, no impacts with plan consistency are anticipated as a result of the proposed Circulation Element Update. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. c) Mitigation: (1) Because no significant impacts related to land use have been identified, no mitigation measures are required. d) Finding: (1) Land use compatibility impacts associated with the proposed Circulation Element Update would be less than significant. The proposed Circulation Element Update would be consistent with adopted plans and policies set forth in the El Segundo General Plan and Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. (2) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to land use. 9. Noise. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Deletion of roadways from the Circulation Element roadway network would have no construction noise impacts as no construction activity would be associated with this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update. 24 048 (2) Conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one - way to two -way operation would involve restriping and reconfiguration within the existing right -of -way to provide for the movement of two -way traffic at existing intersections on these streets and would involve minimal construction activity. Construction noise impacts of this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update would be less than significant. (3) The increase in projected traffic noise levels on the proposed Circulation Element Update roadway system would be less than audible (i.e., less than 3 dBA) on six of the seven roadway segments. The largest increase, 3.5 dBA, would occur on the segment of Aviation Boulevard located south of Imperial Highway. However, this increase would be less than the significance threshold of 5 dBA. Impacts related to vehicular noise sources resulting from implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would be less than significant with mitigation. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required for conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation. C) Mitigation: (1) Construction contracts must specify that all construction equipment must be equipped with properly working mufflers and other applicable noise attenuation devices (K -1). (2) All property owners located within 400 feet of the construction site must be sent a notice regarding the construction schedule of the proposed project. All notices must indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints (K -2). (3) A "noise disturbance coordinator" position must be established for the project. The disturbance coordinator is responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad mufflers, etc.) and would be required to implement reasonable measures such that the complaint is resolved. All notices that are sent to the property owners within 400 25 049 feet of the construction site must list the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator (K -3). (4) As stated in the El Segundo Municipal Code, construction is restricted to the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at anytime on Sunday or a Federal holiday (K -4). d) Finding: (1) Construction noise impacts from conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation would be less than significant. (2) Operational traffic noise impacts would be less than significant. (3) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to noise. 10. Population, Housing, and Employment. a) Facts /Effects. (1) No housing would be constructed as part of this project and no permanent employment opportunities would be created. (2) Implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would result in increased temporary employment opportunities in the construction field during the modifications of the existing roadways and intersections and construction of a new roadway network on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site. Employment patterns of construction workers in Southern California are such that it is not likely that they would relocate their households as a consequence of the construction employment associated with the proposed Circulation Element Update. Therefore, impacts to employment in the region would be less than significant. (3) There would be no permanent employment associated with the proposed Circulation Element Update. As no permanent employment opportunities are associated with the implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update, no demand for housing or increase in permanent population is expected. Therefore, no impacts to housing or population growth would be anticipated. 26 050 b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation: (1) As no significant impacts on population, housing, and employment have been identified, no mitigation measures are required. d) Finding: (1) No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures were required. No impact is anticipated to employment or population growth as a result of implementing the proposed Circulation Element Update. (2) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to population, housing, and employment. A The City Council finds that in response to each adverse impact identified below, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated in the Project, which lessen the significant adverse environmental impact. However, these impacts cannot be totally avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance if the Project is implemented. Air Quality. a) Facts /Effects. (1) A prototypical construction scenario for intersection improvements to implement the proposed Circulation Element Update would involve the construction of up to three intersection improvements at any given time. Estimated daily construction emissions for this scenario would exceed the SCAQMD threshold for NOx emissions. Accordingly, NOx emissions would have a significant environmental impact. Emissions of other pollutants would be below the SCAQMD thresholds and less than significant impacts would occur. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any roadway or intersection improvement project identified in the proposed Circulation Element Update 27 0 5 1 to identify emissions associated with construction of that specific roadway or intersection improvement. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: Before constructing specific roadway or intersection improvements, impacts associated with temporary construction related emissions must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. This examination must provide quantified estimates of construction related emissions based upon the specific site, schedule and construction equipment utilization characteristics of the proposed roadway or intersection improvement and compare the estimated emissions to the SCAQMD thresholds for construction emissions. The analysis must incorporate the mitigation measures identified below as appropriate, along with any other mitigation measures identified by the project - specific analysis. C) Mitigation: (1) The following is a list of feasible control measures that the SCAQMD recommends for construction emissions of PM10. These mitigation measures apply to all construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update, including construction of new roadways on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and construction of identified intersection improvements at 14 intersections. Fugitive Dust, PMIO (a) Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, including, but not limited to, the following: • The construction area and vicinity (500 -foot radius) must be swept (preferably with water sweepers) and watered at least twice daily. Site wetting must occur often enough to maintain a 10 percent surface soil moisture content throughout all earth - moving activities (D -1). • All unpaved roads, parking and staging areas must be watered at least once every two hours of active operations (D -2). • Site access points must be swept/washed within thirty minutes of visible dirt deposition (D -3). 28 052 o On -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or rusty material must be covered or watered at least twice daily (D- 4). o All haul trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials must either be covered or maintain two feet of freeboard (D -5). o All haul trucks must have a capacity of no less than twelve and three - quarter (12.75) cubic yards (D -6). o At least 80 percent of all inactive disturbed surface areas must be watered on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind- driven fugitive dust (D- 7). o Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended when winds exceed 25 mph (D -8). o Traffic speeds on unpaved roads must be limited to 15 miles per hour (D -9). o Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended during first and second stage smog alerts (D -10). o Haul trucks must be staged in non - residential areas (D -11). o Haul truck routes must be planned to avoid residential areas, schools, and parks (D -12). NOx Emissions o Equipment must be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes (D -13). d) Finding: The City finds that incorporation of such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City. The City finds that although the temporary construction related air quality NOx impact will remain significant and unavoidable, no feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen the impact below a level of significance. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact. 29 `J i 2. Noise. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Temporary construction noise impacts associated with proposed intersection improvements associated with implementation of the proposed Circulation Element update would be expected to vary throughout the construction period. Projected noise levels resulting from the employment of construction equipment during various phases of the construction cycle would result in generation of noise levels in excess of 65 dBA and would have the potential to exceed existing ambient noise levels at sensitive receptors by greater than 5 dBA. These resulting noise levels during construction activity could be experienced in the vicinity of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda site and at the following intersections where identified traffic mitigation measures could be constructed near residential areas. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for roadway improvements proposed to be constructed on the Sepulveda / Rosecrans site and intersection improvements proposed to be constructed at the intersections located adjacent to residential areas, as listed in the DER. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: • A project - specific construction noise analysis must be prepared that calculates, based on project - specific parameters and identification of the site - specific sensitive receptors that could be affected by construction activities, the noise levels that would be experienced at sensitive receptors located adjacent to that site. If noise levels resulting from construction activity would result in temporary construction noise levels that exceed 65 dBA at a sensitive receptor, or cause an incremental increase of 5 dBA over the existing ambient sound level, if the existing ambient sound level at the sensitive receptor location is 65 dBA or more, then the study must identify feasible mitigation measures to be applied to that roadway or intersection improvement project from the list of mitigation measures K -1 through K -4 below. C) Mitigation: (1) Construction contracts must specify that all construction equipment is equipped with properly working 30 054 mufflers and other applicable noise attenuation devices (K- 1). (2) All property owners located within 400 feet of the construction site must be sent a notice regarding the construction schedule of the proposed project. All notices must indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints (K -2). (3) A "noise disturbance coordinator" position must be established for the project. The disturbance coordinator is responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad mufflers, etc.) and would be required to implement reasonable measures such that the complaint is resolved. All notices that are sent to the property owners within 400 feet of the construction site must list the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator (K -3). (4) As stated in the El Segundo Municipal Code, construction is restricted to the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at anytime on Sunday or a Federal holiday (K -4). d) Finding: (1) Temporary construction noise impacts would be significant and unavoidable for planned improvements, except the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation. (2) The City finds that incorporation of such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City. The City finds that although the temporary construction related noise impacts will remain significant and unavoidable, no feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen the impact below a level of significance. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact. 3. Transportation and Circulation. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Future traffic levels generated as a result of land uses within the City were estimated for year 2025 based on the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations. 31 0 S Y PC The analysis used the SCAG regional traffic model as the basis for factoring in traffic growth from outside the City. (2) An analysis was conducted to determine the capability of the roadway system set forth in the adopted Circulation Element to accommodate future traffic projected to occur under the No Land Use Change scenario. In the absence of the proposed Circulation Element Update, it would be reasonably foreseeable that the City's roadway system would continue to develop in accordance with the designations and policies set forth in the adopted Circulation Element. An additional analysis was conducted to determine the capability of the roadway system that would result from the proposed Circulation Element Update to accommodate future traffic, reflecting the modifications to the existing Circulation Element roadway system and policies that are contained in the proposed Circulation Element Update. (3) The ICU and LOS values for the "Without Project" and "With Project" scenarios were compared against the City's threshold of significance to determine locations where significant impacts would occur. With respect to the proposed Circulation Element Update, an "impact" represents a location where the future growth in traffic would exceed the City's level of service standard, in spite of implementing all feasible improvements at the intersection. A total of six intersections would be unable to accommodate year 2025 traffic in at an acceptable LOS D or better in the a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour or both, after implementation of all feasible intersection improvements. The remaining 49 study intersections would not exceed the level of service standard under future conditions and would not be significantly impacted. Implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would improve the ICU value at 21 intersections in the a.m. peak hour and 21 intersections in the p.m. peak hour, which would constitute a beneficial impact of the proposed Circulation Element Update. (4) Analysis of freeway segments or designated intersections would not be required under the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP), based upon trip generation. No additional traffic beyond that already anticipated in the El Segundo General Plan and SCAG regional model would be expected to utilize Sepulveda Boulevard (State Route 1). Thus, implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would not impact Sepulveda Boulevard and could potentially have beneficial effects with regard to future traffic levels that would use that roadway. The proposed Circulation Element 32 O55 b) C) d) Update would include roadway intersection improvements designed to accommodate growth in traffic levels projected to occur in the City through 2025. The Circulation Element roadway network would be designed to operate in a manner that would allow for effective flow of traffic through the City on surface streets and thus would not cause additional traffic to utilize the surrounding freeways to bypass conditions of congestion within the City. As such, the proposed Circulation Element Update would not cause additional traffic congestion on the Century Freeway (1 -105). Impacts of the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to the CMP would be less than significant. Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. Mitigation: (1) The proposed Circulation Element policies that provide for the intersection improvements t intersections throughout th e feasible mitigation measure s the six locations where the would be exceeded. Update includes implementation of all feasible o achieve LOS D or better at City. There are no further that could be implemented at City's level of service standard (2) Because no significant impacts would occur with respect to the Congestion Management Program, no mitigation measures are required. Finding: (1) Because no additional mitigation measures are available, impacts at the six intersections where the City's level of service standard would be exceeded would be significant and unavoidable. Impacts at the remaining 49 intersections would be less than significant. Impacts related to the CMP would be less than significant. (2) The six intersections that would exceed the City's level of service threshold, even after implementation of all feasible intersection improvements, are: • Aviation Blvd. /Imperial Hwy. • Aviation Blvd./El Segundo Blvd. • Aviation Blvd. /Rosecrans Ave. • Sepulveda Blvd. /Rosecrans Ave. 33 056 • Sepulveda Blvd./El Segundo Blvd. • Douglas St./El Segundo Blvd. (3) The City finds that incorporation of such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City. The City finds that although the transportation and circulation impact will remain significant and unavoidable, no feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen the impact below a level of significance. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact. E. Insignificant Cumulative Impacts. The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter do not identify or contain substantial evidence which identifies significant adverse cumulative environmental effects associated with the Project with respect to the areas listed below. 1. Transportation and Circulation 2. Aesthetics 3. Air Quality 4. Agricultural Resources 5. Cultural Resources 6. Geology and Soils. 7. Hydrology and Water Quality 8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 9. Land Use 10. Mineral Resources 11. Noise 12. Population, Housing, and Employment 13. Public Services 14. Recreation 15. Utilities and Service Systems 34 051, F. Cumulative Impacts Identified as Potentially Significant But Which Did Not Exceed Significance Thresholds in the EIR. The City Council finds that although the following cumulative environmental effects were identified as potentially significant in the FEIR, changes or alterations within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and the City have been adopted by such other agencies or can and should be adopted by such other agency to avoid or lessen the potential significant environmental effects listed below to a level of insignificance. 1. Biological Resources (Endangered Species, Wetlands, or Habitat) a) Facts /Effects. (1) The proposed Circulation Element Update, in conjunction with future development projects within the City of El Segundo, has the potential to produce cumulative biological resources impacts. (2) The proposed Circulation Element Update would include components that would affect one of the few remaining, relatively undeveloped areas within the City and could potentially impact sensitive species and wetlands. (3) No impacts to biological resources would occur with the changes in roadway designations as they would not result in a physical change to the existing environment. (4) The development of a roadway network on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site has the potential to significantly impact biological resources. This area may contain wetlands /riparian habitat or vernal pools that could potentially be affected by construction of new roadways. In addition, this site may include other species in areas that have not been disturbed. (5) Most of the intersections where the identified intersection improvements would be implemented are located in areas that are completely developed and contain no biological resources. However, intersection #25 (Sepulveda / Rosecrans) is located in an area that has or may have biological resources. Any modifications to this intersection would have a potentially significant impact. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed construction of a new roadway system on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and any proposed improvements to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection to identify potential biological resources 35 058 impacts. Before constructing new roadways on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and any proposed improvements to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection, impacts associated with biological resources must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: A general biological assessment must be conducted to determine the presence /absence of sensitive biological resources and wetlands. If sensitive biological resources are identified, measures must be identified to reduce impacts to these resources to less than significant levels. C) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance d) Finding: (1) Cumulative Impacts of the improvements at the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection and the roadway network on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site would be determined by the subsequent environmental documentation. (2) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying a significant cumulative contribution to any significant unavoidable environmental effects of the Project with respect to Biological Resources. 2. Transportation and Circulation a) Facts /Effects. (1) Future traffic levels generated as a result of land uses within the City were estimated for year 2025 based on the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations. The analysis used the SCAG regional traffic model as the basis for factoring in traffic growth from outside the City. (2) An analysis was conducted to determine the capability of the roadway system set forth in the adopted Circulation Element to accommodate future traffic projected to occur under the No Land Use Change scenario. In the absence of the proposed Circulation Element Update, it would be reasonably foreseeable that the City's roadway system would continue to develop in accordance with the 36 059 designations and policies set forth in the adopted Circulation Element. An additional analysis was conducted to determine the capability of the roadway system that would result from the proposed Circulation Element Update to accommodate future traffic, reflecting the modifications to the existing Circulation Element roadway system and policies that are contained in the proposed Circulation Element Update. (3) The ICU and LOS values for the "Without Project" and "With Project" scenarios were compared against the City's threshold of significance to determine locations where significant impacts would occur. With respect to the proposed Circulation Element Update, a project "impact" represents a location where the future growth in traffic would exceed the City's level of service standard, in spite of implementing all feasible improvements at the intersection. A total of six intersections would be unable to accommodate year 2025 traffic in at an acceptable LOS D or better in the a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour or both, after implementation of all feasible intersection improvements. The remaining 49 study intersections would not exceed the level of service standard under future conditions and would not be significantly impacted. Implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would improve the ICU value at 21 intersections in the a.m. peak hour and 21 intersections in the p.m. peak hour, which would constitute a beneficial impact of the proposed Circulation Element Update. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation: (1) The proposed Circulation Element Update includes policies that provide for the implementation of all feasible intersection improvements to achieve LOS D or better at intersections throughout the City. There are no further feasible mitigation measures that could be implemented at the six locations where the City's level of service standard would be exceeded. d) Findings: (1) The analysis of traffic impacts of the proposed Circulation Element Update considers the effects of both background growth in the region, as reflected in the SCAG regional model, and within the City, in accordance with the existing land use designations of the City's General Plan. 37 060 (2) Consequently, impacts of cumulative growth are already incorporated into the 2025 traffic model and are equivalent to those indicated for the Without Project and With Project conditions in Table IV.13-3 in the DER. G. Significant Unavoidable Cumulative Impacts. The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter do not identify or contain substantial evidence which identifies a cumulatively considerable contribution to any significant unavoidable cumulative environmental effects associated with the Project. H. Project Alternatives. 1. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration. Various alternatives to the Proposed Action were considered and dismissed without further study because they failed to accomplish the objectives of the Project or were otherwise not feasible. CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(c) requires EIRs to identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process, and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency's determination. During the City's 90 year history, its roadway system became highly developed and its land use patterns are well - established. Accordingly, there is no land currently available for constructing major new roadways or realigning the existing roadway system to provide substantial additional roadway capacity. Moreover, it is improbable that substantial land area will become available within the City's current boundaries without major displacement of existing commercial or residential uses. Absent available land area for roadway development, the potential range of changes to Circulation Element roadways or policies is limited to relatively minor, incremental changes to the City's built roadway network. The proposed Circulation Element Update addresses all locations within the City's roadway network where such minor changes would be reasonably expected to change the performance of the Circulation Element roadway network. The only alternative roadway network that could reasonably be analyzed would be one which does not include the proposed changes in roadway designations and proposed deletion of currently designated roadway segments. However, this alternative is reflected in the No Project alternative which analyzes the existing Circulation Element roadway network. Therefore, the City rejected the consideration of alternative Circulation Element roadway networks, which would include alternative locations where Circulation Element designations or policies could be applied, as infeasible. In addition, the City considered the alternative of taking no action (i.e., modification of the Circulation Element to reflect the status quo, leaving the City's roadway network as it currently exists and not undertaking any further roadway or intersection improvements), as this alternative would avoid impacts related to construction activities. The City rejected this alternative because traffic growth both inside and outside of the City will continue because of other factors (economic development, population growth), even if the Circulation Element were modified in that 38 061 manner. It would be unreasonable for the City to take no action in the face of this continued growth in traffic. 2. No Project Alternative. a) Description. Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed Circulation Element Update would not be implemented and the policies set forth in the adopted Circulation Element would remain unchanged. The Circulation Element roadway network would remain as currently set forth in the adopted Circulation Element. Roadway and intersection improvements would be constructed to implement the adopted Circulation Element roadway network and the proposed Circulation Element Update policy that would limit identified intersection improvements to those that are feasible (i.e., would not affect building, freeway supports, or railroad rights -of -way) would not be included in the Circulation Element. Nash and Douglas Streets would not be converted from one -way to two -way operation. Traffic growth from land uses within the City of El Segundo would be governed by the adopted General Plan land use designations and increased regional traffic that would use the City's roadway system would be as currently anticipated in adopted SCAG regional growth forecasts and associated regional transportation models. b) Comparison to Project. There would be an increase in traffic impacts at three additional locations compared to the proposed Circulation Element Update, under which 6 intersections would exceed the City's level of service standard under future traffic conditions. Traffic impacts of the No Project alternative would be greater than the proposed Circulation Element Update and would be significant and unavoidable. Aesthetic, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, land use, and population, housing and employment impacts would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and less than significant. Impacts of the No Project alternative would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and significant and unavoidable with respect to NOx emissions during construction. Impacts of the No Project alternative with respect to construction noise would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and would be significant and unavoidable. Although impacts of the No Project Alternative would be slightly higher than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to traffic noise, those impacts would be less than significant. Although impact of the No Project alternative would be higher than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to local CO concentrations, those impacts would be less than significant. Impacts of the No Project alternative would be lower than the proposed Circulation Element with respect to hazards and hazardous material and less than significant. 3. FAR 0.8 Alternative. a) Description. Under the FAR 0.8 alternative, the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan and associated zoning classifications would be amended to provide for a maximum FAR of 0.8 in the areas of the City that are currently zoned Urban Mixed -Use North (MU -N) 39 06<' and Corporate Office (CO). Under the existing General Plan designations and zoning classifications, development in the MU -N zone is presently permitted to a maximum FAR of 1.3, while development in the CO zone is limited to a maximum FAR of 0.8. Thus, under the FAR 0.8 alternative, maximum development density in the MU -N zone would be reduced to 0.8 FAR, while the maximum development density in the CO zone would remain the same. This would result in lower traffic levels than would be experienced under the proposed Circulation Element Update, where no land use designations would be changed. All other land use designations set forth in the General Plan and zoning code would remain the same. Future levels of regional traffic that would utilize the City's roadway system would remain as currently anticipated in adopted SCAG regional growth forecasts and associated regional transportation models. The proposed changes to Circulation Element policies and roadway configurations would be the same as under the proposed Circulation Element Update. Nash and Douglas Streets would be converted from one -way to two -way operations. b) Comparison to Project. Impacts of the FAR 0.8 alternative would be greater than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to the number of impacted intersections, but more beneficial than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to improved operating values at a greater number of intersections. More intersections would be impacted under the FAR 0.8 alternative and therefore total construction emissions would be greater than the proposed Circulation Element Update. However, with respect to individual construction projects required to implement the FAR 0.8 alternative, impacts would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and significant and unavoidable with respect to NOx emissions. Impacts of the FAR 0.8 alternative would be greater than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to local CO concentrations and both would be less than significant. Impacts of the FAR 0.8 alternative with respect to construction noise would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and would be significant and unavoidable. Although impacts of the FAR 0.8 Alternative would be slightly lower than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to traffic noise, those impacts would be less than significant. Aesthetic, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, land use, and population, housing and employment impacts from the FAR 0.8 Alternative would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and less than significant. Subsequent environmental documentation shall be prepared, similar to the proposed project, to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration for the construction of new roadways and intersection improvements identified in the Circulation Element. 40 063 4. FAR 1.0 Alternative. a) Description. Under the FAR 1.0 Alternative, the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan and associated zoning classifications would be amended to provide for a maximum FAR of 1.0 in the areas of the City that are currently zoned Urban Mixed -Use North (MU -N) and Corporate Office (CO). Under the existing General Plan designations and zoning classifications, development in the MU -N zone is presently permitted to a maximum FAR of 1.3, while development in the CO zone is limited to a maximum FAR of 0.8. Thus, under the FAR 1.0 alternative, maximum development density in the MU -N zone would be reduced to 1.0 FAR, while the maximum development density in the CO zone would increase to 1.0 FAR. This would result in substantially similar traffic levels as would be experienced under the proposed Circulation Element Update, where no land use designations would be changed. Future levels of regional traffic that would utilize the City's roadway system would be as currently anticipated in adopted SCAG regional growth forecasts and associated regional transportation models. The proposed changes to Circulation Element policies and roadway configurations would be the same as under the proposed Circulation Element Update. Nash and Douglas Streets would be converted from one -way to two -way operations. b) Comparison to Project. Impacts of the FAR 1.0 alternative would be greater than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to the number of impacted intersections. Ten intersections would exceed the City's standard for Level of Service. This would be an increase of four intersections compared to the proposed Circulation Element Update, under which six intersections would exceed the City's level of service standard under future traffic conditions. More intersections would be impacted under the FAR 1.0 alternative and therefore total construction emissions would be greater than the proposed Circulation Element Update. However, with respect to individual construction projects required to implement the FAR 1.0 alternative, impacts would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and significant and unavoidable with respect to NOx emissions. Impacts of the FAR 1.0 alternative would be slightly higher than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to local CO concentrations and both would be less than significant. Impacts of the FAR 1.0 alternative with respect to construction noise would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and would be significant and unavoidable. Although impacts of the FAR 1.0 Alternative would be slightly higher than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to traffic noise, those impacts would be less than significant. Aesthetic, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, land use, and population, housing and employment impacts from the FAR 1.0 Alternative would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and less than significant. Subsequent environmental documentation shall be prepared, similar to the proposed project, to determine whether 41 (1b a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration for the construction of new roadways and intersection improvements identified in the Circulation Element. 5. FAR 1.3 Alternative a) Description. Under the FAR 1.3 Alternative, the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan and associated zoning classifications would be amended to provide for a maximum FAR of 1.3 in the areas of the City that are currently zoned Urban Mixed —Use North (MU -N) and Corporate Office (CO). Under the existing General Plan designations and zoning classifications, development in the MU -N zone is presently permitted to a maximum FAR of 1.3, while development in the CO zone is limited to a maximum FAR of 0.8. Thus, under the FAR 1.3 alternative, maximum development density in the MU -N zone would remain the same, while the maximum development density in the CO zone would increase to 1.3 FAR. This would result in higher traffic levels as would be experienced under the proposed Circulation Element Update, where no land use designations would be changed. All other land use designations set forth in the General Plan and zoning code would remain the same. Future levels of regional traffic that would utilize the City's roadway system would be as currently anticipated in adopted SCAG regional growth forecasts and associated regional transportation models. The proposed changes to Circulation Element policies and roadway configurations would be the same as under the proposed Circulation Element Update. Nash and Douglas Streets would be converted from one -way to two -way operations. b) Comparison to Project. Impacts of the FAR 1.3 alternative would be greater than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to the number of impacted intersections. This would be an increase of fifteen intersections compared to the proposed Circulation Element Update, under which six intersections would exceed the City's level of service standard under future traffic conditions. More intersections would be impacted under the FAR 1.3 alternative and therefore total construction emissions would be greater than the proposed Circulation Element Update. However, with respect to individual construction projects required to implement the FAR 1.3 alternative, impacts would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and significant and unavoidable with respect to NOx emissions. Impacts of the FAR 1.3 alternative would be higher than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to local CO concentrations and both would be less than significant. Impacts of the FAR 1.3 alternative with respect to construction noise would be similar to the proposed Circulation Element Update and would be significant and unavoidable. Although impacts of the FAR 1.3 Alternative would be slightly higher than the proposed Circulation Element Update with respect to traffic noise, those impacts would be less than significant. Aesthetic, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, land use, and population, housing _ 42 065 and tolnyEentimpactsfro ment Update the FAR 1,3 Alternative documentation shall be pdate and ative would a new less than significant. be similar to the Initial Study would Pared, similar to the Subse proposed Negative initial Station be required proposed Subsequent environmental improve for the 'project to determine whether improvements identified in the elation Ele a prepared lead' Ele °f new g to either an EIR or ment. roadways and intersection 6, Findin s Re ardin Alternatives. a} Reasonable alternatives to Council finds Range of Alternatives. the that that (a) the 'EIR Project and would Project, which could feasibly escribes (b) the a avoid or substantially Y attain a reasonable ran Y Council evaluated Y lessen most of the basic Objectives of the comparative any s� nificant effects bJectives of the m merits of the of the Pro' b) Environmentally Project; and mentally Superior Alternative. ►'rojectCEQA Guidelines § 15126.6 re Furthermore one quires more if the alternative that an anal environmentally as the environmentally °f alternatives e EIR must also identify the a mentally superior to the alternatives. y mental) alternative is the «No p enor nviron alternative. Y superior alternative from ct alternative, From a strict) among the other all others. Y environmental standpoint, the None of the NO Action Alternative is superior unavoidable i alternatives to air mpacts of the is in this EIR quality and construction proposed Circulation would avoid the significant would be to conduct no noise. The only Element gnificant and Element Update. construction Y Option available to sPect to roadway pdate. o activity in conjunction Construction aY network in the pttOn of taking ti action Junction with the these impact roadway network City with r Proposed Cir Circulation s because as it currentlJ e ' modifying the Circulatio�ct to the use traffic growth both Y exists Circulation Element other factors inside and was considered Element to leave the reasonable development of the Cit and rejected by the City ity's nable poticY for the Cit pment Y would continue Council traffic. Similar) , Y to take population growth ntinue significant impacts all of no action in )and it would as a not suit of pacts with the alternatives examined face E fRthis continued growth a roadway operational noise, and populat on t to aesthetics d in this or intersection im r would have wth n housing and e ' Operational air less than only way to eliminate p Ovements in the mplOYment as are quality, land use, City, these impacts and was simia i` king no actionuwouldmPlementing Y considered and r also be the related to thoe ability differen elected by the City ability of the Cs between the ty to the year 2025 alternatives to acco alternatives examine superior to the ►n this regard the F mmodate Projected din this EIR is would exceed teoposed Circulation Pro growth in traffic in the ElementR 0.8 alternative would be environ compared City's level of service even thou have beneticiahei Proposed Circulation threshold gh one additional intersectiolln impacts (i.e., reducing U under the FAR Ding ICU Pdate, the FAR 0 0.8 alternative value) at 10 more 8 alternative would intersections during the 43 0 66 a.m. peak hour and 8 more intersections during the p.m. peak hour than would the proposed Circulation Element Update. However, the FAR 0.8 alternative would not meet the objectives of the proposed "No Land Use Change" project as described in the project description of the DEIR, as it would reduce allowable development density in the MU -N zone from 1.3 to 0.8, which would potentially affect the City's economic and employment base, and would therefore be inconsistent with the policies of the General Plan Economic Development Element. Overall, the No Project, the FAR 1.0 and the 1.3 alternatives would have traffic impacts that are similar to or higher than the proposed Circulation Element Update and would not be environmentally superior to the proposed Circulation Element Update. III. GROWTH- INDUCING IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES. The City Council finds on the basis of the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter that: A. Growth Inducing Impacts The proposed Circulation Element Update would accommodate future growth by upgrading the existing circulation system to adequately handle the amount of traffic anticipated by 2025. The proposed Circulation Element Update would foster economic growth by adding temporary construction jobs to the surrounding area. These individuals could, in turn, patronize other local businesses and services in the area. However, no permanent employment would be created by the implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update. The proposed Circulation Element Update does not include housing and therefore would not include (direct) permanent population growth. As discussed in Section IV.L of the DEIR, construction workers typically do not relocate to the area in which they are doing construction, as these employment periods tend to be short-term. Therefore, no additional housing would be required. Accordingly, no significant population, housing, or employment impacts would be created by the proposed Circulation Element Update. As discussed below, the proposed Circulation Element Update also would not induce growth in an area that is not already developed with infrastructure to accommodate such growth. The City of El Segundo is located in a highly urbanized and developed area of Southern California. The existing utility infrastructure is sufficient to operate any additional intersection hardware (e.g., traffic signals) which may be implemented as part of the proposed Circulation Element Update. This infrastructure is located adjacent to the roadways and intersections proposed for modifications. Therefore, the project would not result in significant growth inducing impacts. B. Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes. The type and level of construction associated with the implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would consume limited, slowly renewable, and non- renewable resources. Such resources would include the following construction supplies: aggregate materials used in concrete and asphalt such as sand, gravel, and stone; metals such as steel, copper, and lead; petrochemical construction materials 44 0 6 r' such as plastics; and water. Fossil fuels such as gasoline and oil would also be consumed in the use of construction vehicles and equipment. The implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update would not add additional traffic to local roads beyond what is already anticipated by the year 2025. Construction of the roadway and intersection modifications would result in short-term increases in ambient noise levels. Potential irreversible damage from environmental accidents associated with the proposed Circulation Element Update are unlikely and would be avoided by compliance with the mitigation measures proposed in this EIR as well as existing city, county, state, and federal safety regulations. IV. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. The City Council finds on the basis of the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter that the unavoidable significant impacts of the Project are acceptable when balanced against the benefits of the Project. This determination is based on the following factors and the substantial public, social, economic, and environmental benefits flowing from the Project as identified in the FEIR and the record of proceedings in the matter. A. The infrastructure and other improvements proposed as part of the updated Circulation Element will help address future traffic growth in the City. This will help ensure the community maintains its economic competitiveness with surrounding communities by facilitating the orderly flow of vehicle traffic throughout the City's boundaries. B. The proposed project will help the City address the forecasted growth in regional traffic. C. The proposed conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operations will improve vehicle access to adjacent properties, thereby improving the marketability and desirability of properties on the two affected streets. D. The proposed conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operations will improve emergency services by providing more direct access from Fire Station No. 2 to properties in the northeast portion of the City. E. The incorporation of policies to create significance thresholds for review of development projects will establish objective criteria for evaluating traffic impacts of new commercial and residential development, which will help ensure that all mitigation is properly evaluated and fairly distributed. F. The incorporation of a policy to update the congestion mitigation fee program will help ensure the City continues to study and evaluate the effectiveness of its circulation system and ensure that new development supports its fair share contribution to future traffic growth. G. The project facilitates the long -term economic health of the City and its neighboring cities and communities by providing a comprehensive evaluation of 45 ()G8 future traffic growth, which can be used by the community to guide land -use decision making in the future. V. RECIRCULATION. A. Facts. 1. The City received comments on the DEIR from members of the public and from public agencies in both written and oral form. The FEIR contains written responses to all comments ('Responses to Comments ") received on the DEIR as of August 26, 2004. Some comments were incorporated into the FOR as factual corrections and minor changes. Sections I - IV of the FEIR sets forth all factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR. B. Finding. Pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15088.5 and Public Resources Code § 21092.1, and based on the FOR and the record of proceedings in this matter, the City Council finds that: 1. Factual corrections and minor changes are set forth as additions and corrections to the DEIR; and 2. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR are not substantial changes in the DEIR that would deprive the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment on a substantial adverse environmental effect of the Project, a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect, or a feasible Project alternative; and 3. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR will not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of the significant effects previously disclosed in the DEIR; and 4. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR will not involve mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the DEIR that would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment; and 5. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR do not render the DEIR so fundamentally inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment would be precluded. Thus, the City Council finds that none of the conditions set forth in CEQA Guideline § 15088.5 or Public Resources Code § 21092.1 requiring recirculation of a draft environmental impact report were met. The City Council further finds that incorporation of the factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR into the FOR does not require that the FEIR to be recirculated for public comment. 46 06,9 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. _ IX. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PROCEDURES Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires a Lead Agency to adopt a "reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment" (Mitigation Monitoring Program, Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines provides additional direction on mitigation monitoring or reporting). The Community, Economic and Development Services Department for the City of El Segundo is the Lead Agency for the El Segundo Circulation Element Update. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared to address the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. Where appropriate, this environmental document identified project design features or recommended mitigation measures to avoid or to reduce potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is designed to monitor implementation of requirements for subsequent environmental documentation' and mitigation measures identified for the El Segundo Circulation Element Update. The MMRP is subject to review and approval by the Lead Agency as part of the certification of the EIR and adoption of project conditions. The required subsequent environmental documentation and mitigation measures are listed separately and categorized by impact area, with an accompanying identification of the following: • Monitoring Phase, the phase of the project during which the mitigation measure must be monitored; Pre- Construction, including the design phase Construction Post- Construction • The Implementing Party, the agency with the power to implement the mitigation measure; • The Enforcement Agency, the agency with the power to enforce the mitigation measure, and In addition to mitigation measures, requirements for the preparation of subsequent environmental analysis and documentation are identified in the EIR. These requirements are intended to provide guidance for environmental review of future projects that would implement the Circulation Element Update, using the Program EIR. Because these requirements would also work to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment in accordance with PRC Section 21081.6, they have been included in this MMRP. El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -1 071 City of El Segundo August 2004 • The Monitoring Agency, the agency to which reports involving feasibility, compliance, implementation and development are made. The MMRP performance must be monitored annually to determine the effectiveness of the measures implemented in any given year and re- evaluate the mitigation needs for the upcoming year. I. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC Subsequent Environmental Documentation No subsequent environmental documentation is required. Mitigation Measures The proposed Circulation Element Update includes policies that provide for the implementation of all feasible intersection improvements to achieve LOS D or better at intersections throughout the City. There are no further feasible mitigation measures that could be implemented at the six locations where the City's level of service standard would be exceeded. No mitigation measures are required with respect to the Congestion Management Program. II. AESTHETICS Subsequent Environmental Documentation Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any intersection improvement project proposed at any of the following four intersections: Aviation Boulevard /El Segundo Boulevard; Aviation Boulevard /Utah Avenue; Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue; El Segundo Boulevard /Isis Avenue; to identify potential impacts on sensitive receptors that could result from additional lighting. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: • Before constructing specific intersection improvements, impacts associated with increased night lighting in the area must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. This examination must address the potential of the subsequent activity to increase ambient lighting levels beyond the threshold identified in the Program EIR. The analysis must incorporate the mitigation measures identified below as appropriate. Mitigation Measures C -1. Street lights must be designed and located to minimize spill over of light into residential areas. El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -2 072 City of El Segundo August 2004 Monitoring Phase: Construction, Post - Construction Implementation Party: City of El Segundo Enforcement Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division C -2. New lighting sources must be shielded to direct light downward and not toward the sky to minimize atmospheric light pollution. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: III. AIR QUALITY Subsequent Environmental Documentation Construction, Post - Construction City of El Segundo Public Works Department, Planning Division Public Works Department, Planning Division Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any roadway or intersection improvement project identified in the proposed Circulation Element Update to identify emissions associated with construction of that specific roadway or intersection improvement. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: • Before constructing specific roadway or intersection improvements, impacts associated with temporary construction related emissions must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. This examination must provide quantified estimates of construction related emissions based upon the specific site, schedule and construction equipment utilization characteristics of the proposed roadway or intersection improvement and compare the estimated emissions to the SCAQMD thresholds for construction emissions. The analysis must incorporate the mitigation measures identified below as appropriate, along with any other mitigation measures identified by the project - specific analysis. Mitigation Measures Construction Fugitive Dust, PM,o Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, including without limitation the following: D -1. The construction area and vicinity (500 -foot radius) must be swept (preferably with water sweepers) and watered at least twice daily. Site wetting must occur often enough El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program �l Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -3 V 7 City of El Segundo August 2004 to maintain a 10 percent surface soil moisture content throughout all earth- moving activities. Monitoring Phase: Construction Implementation Party: City of El Segundo Enforcement Agency: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department D -2. All unpaved roads, parking and staging areas must be watered at least once every two hours of active operation. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Construction City of El Segundo SCAQMD Public Works Department D -3. Site access points must be swept/washed within thirty minutes of visible dirt deposition. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Construction City of El Segundo SCAQMD Public Works Department D -4. On -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or rusty material must be covered or watered at least twice daily. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Construction City of El Segundo SCAQMD Public Works Department D -5. All haul trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials must either be covered or maintain two feet of freeboard. Monitoring Phase: Construction Implementation Party: City of El Segundo Enforcement Agency: SCAQMD Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department D -6. All haul trucks must have a capacity of no less than twelve and three- quarter (12.75) cubic yards. Monitoring Phase: Construction Implementation Party: City of El Segundo El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 13'14 Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -4 City of El Segundo August 2004 Enforcement Agency: SCAQMD Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department D -7. At least 80 percent of all inactive disturbed surface areas must be watered on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind - driven fugitive dust. Monitoring Phase: Construction Implementation Party: City of El Segundo Enforcement Agency: SCAQMD Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department D -8. Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended when winds exceed 25 mph. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Construction City of El Segundo SCAQMD Public Works Department D -9. Traffic speeds on unpaved roads must be limited to 15 miles per hour. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Construction City of El Segundo SCAQMD Public Works Department D -10. Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended during first and second stage smog alerts. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Construction City of El Segundo SCAQMD Public Works Department D -11. Haul trucks must be staged in non - residential areas Monitoring Phase: Construction Implementation Party: City of El Segundo Enforcement Agency: SCAQMD Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department D -12. Haul truck routes must be planned to avoid residential areas, schools, and parks. Monitoring Phase: Construction Implementation Party: City of El Segundo Enforcement Agency: SCAQMD El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 0 Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -5 City of El Segundo August 2004 Monitoring Agency: NO= Emissions Public Works Department D -13. Equipment must be turned off when not in use for more than 5 minutes. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Operation Construction City of El Segundo SCAQMD Public Works Department No mitigation measures are required with respect to operational impacts. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Subsequent Environmental Documentation Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed construction of a new roadway system on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and any proposed improvements to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection to identify potential biological resources impacts. Before constructing new roadways on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and any proposed improvements to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection, impacts associated with biological resources must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be requiredto be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: • A general biological assessment must be conducted to determine the presence /absence of sensitive biological resources and wetlands. If sensitive biological resources are identified, measures must be identified to reduce impacts to these resources to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Subsequent Environmental Documentation Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed project on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site to identify potential impacts to cultural resources (archaeological, paleontological or historic). Impacts to cultural resources must be examined in light of this Program El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 10176 Final Environmental Impact Repon Page IX -6 City of El Segundo August 2004 EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading either to an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following and must incorporate mitigation measures identified below as appropriate: • A records search and /or Phase I Archaeological Survey must be conducted by a qualified archaeologist before the implementation of physical changes to the existing roadway network, involving the construction of new roadways. If the survey identifies resources within the construction area of the roadway, follow on studies must be conducted in accordance with the recommendations of the records search before commencement of construction. Mitigation Measures F -1. In the event that archaeological or paleontological resources are encountered during the course of grading or construction, all development must temporarily cease in these areas until the resources are properly assessed and subsequent recommendations are determined by a qualified archaeologist. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Subsequent Environmental Documentation Construction City of El Segundo Public Works Department Planning Division Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any new roadway construction or intersection improvement project located within areas with expansive soil hazard, which include the following intersections: • Aviation Boulevard /Imperial Highway • Aviation Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue • Aviation Boulevard /El Segundo Boulevard • Aviation Boulevard /Utah Street • Atwood Way /I -105 Eastbound Ramp Entrance • Douglas Street/El Segundo Boulevard • El Segundo Boulevard /Isis Avenue • Sepulveda Boulevard /Imperial Highway • Continental Boulevard /Grand Avenue El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program r, Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX-7 U 7r City of El Segundo August 2004 The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: • Before constructing new roadways or specific intersection improvements, impacts associated with expansive soil hazards must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The analysis must include a comprehensive geotechnical investigation which must be submitted as part of the design process for individual portions of the proposed Circulation Element Update and must also incorporate the mitigation measures identified below, as appropriate. Mitigation Measures G -1. Specific design recommendations presented in a comprehensive geotechnical report, discussed under Subsequent Environmental Documentation, must be incorporated into the final design and approved by the City Engineer and City Council before construction. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Pre - construction City of El Segundo Public Works Department Public Works Department G -2. Specifications for site grading must be subject to approval by the City Engineer. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Pre - construction City of El Segundo Public Works Department Public Works Department G -3. Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per hour (mph). Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Construction City of El Segundo Public Works Department Public Works Department No mitigation measures are required for the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation. VII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Subsequent Environmental Documentation El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX-8 0 17 City of El Segundo August 2004 Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed roadway construction or intersection improvement project at any of the 14 intersections listed below to identify potential impacts on the storm drain system. Before construction of specific roadway or intersection improvements, impacts to the storm drain system must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. • Aviation Boulevard /Imperial Highway • Aviation Boulevard /El Segundo Boulevard • Aviation Boulevard /Utah Avenue • Aviation Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue • Sepulveda Boulevard /Imperial Highway • Sepulveda Boulevard /Maple Avenue • Sepulveda Boulevard /Mariposa Avenue • Sepulveda Boulevard /Grand Avenue • Sepulveda Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard • Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue • Atwood Way /I -105 Eastbound Ramp Entrance • Douglas Street/El Segundo Boulevard • Continental Boulevard /Grand Avenue • El Segundo Boulevard /Isis Avenue The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following • The City must prepare a master drainage plan for any area of the City affected by implementation of the proposed Circulation Element Update. This plan must include detailed hydrology /hydraulic calculations and drainage improvements, showing quantitatively how the project that implements the proposed Circulation Element Update would eliminate the potential for downstream flooding due to increased storm water runoff. • The City must design a conveyance and detainment system to meet the LACDPW limits on storm drains that would convey the discharge from the new and modified roadways and intersections. El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program O ,7 Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -9 City of El Segundo August 2004 Mitigation Measures No specific mitigation measures related to drainage systems are identified at this time. The subsequent environmental documentation described above may identify mitigation measures pertinent to a specific roadway or intersection improvement project. No mitigation measures are required for the conversion of Nash and Douglas from one -way to two -way operation. VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Subsequent Environmental Documentation Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed intersection improvements or construction of new roadways to identify potential impacts that could result from exposure to contaminated sites. Impacts associated with contaminated sites must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be preparedleading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: • A Phase One Environmental Site Assessment must be conducted for any of the proposed roadway and intersection modifications to identify potentially contaminated sites. If contaminated sites are identified within the boundaries of the project site, appropriate measures must be taken to protect the well -being of the construction workers and the surrounding population. Investigative and remedial activities undertaken in accordance with this requirement must be undertaken under the oversight and to the satisfaction of the cognizant regulatory agency(ies) including but not be limited to: Department of Toxic Substances Control, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region and /or South Coast Air Quality Management District. Mitigation Measures No specific mitigation measures are identified at this time. The subsequent environmental documentation described above would identify the measures required to address any conditions related to contamination or hazardous materials that may be encountered by future roadway or intersection improvements. No mitigation measures are required for the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation. El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 8 Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -10 O City of El Segundo August 2004 IX. LAND USE Subsequent Environmental Documentation No subsequent environmental documentation is required. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. X. NOISE Subsequent Environmental Documentation Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for roadway improvements proposed to be constructed on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and intersection improvements proposed to be constructed at the intersections located adjacent to residential areas, as listed above. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: • A project - specific construction noise analysis must be prepared that calculates, based on project- specific parameters and identification of the site - specific sensitive receptors that could be affected by construction activities, the noise levels that would be experienced at sensitive receptors located adjacent to that site. If noise levels resulting from construction activity would result in temporary construction noise levels that exceed 65 dBA at a sensitive receptor, or cause an incremental increase of 5 dBA over the existing ambient sound level, if the existing ambient sound level at the sensitive receptor location is 65 dBA or more, then the study must identify feasible mitigation measures to be applied to that roadway or intersection improvement project from the list of mitigation measures K -1 through K -4 below. Mitigation Measures K -1. Construction contracts must specify that all construction equipment must be equipped with properly working mufflers and other applicable noise attenuation devices. Monitoring Phase: Implementation Party: Enforcement Agency: Monitoring Agency: Pre - construction City of El Segundo Public Works Department Public Works Department K -2. All property owners located within 400 feet of the construction site must be sent a notice regarding the construction schedule of the proposed project. All notices must indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone 081 El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -11 City of El Segundo August 2004 number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints. Monitoring Phase: Pre - construction, construction Implementation Party: City of El Segundo Enforcement Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division K -3. A "noise disturbance coordinator" position must be established for the project. The disturbance coordinator is responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator would determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad mufflers, etc.) and would be required to implement reasonable measures such that the complaint is resolved. All notices that are sent to the property owners within 400 feet of the construction site must list the telephone number for the disturbance coordinator. Monitoring Phase: Pre - construction, construction Implementation Party: City of El Segundo Enforcement Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department, Planning Division K -4. As stated in the E1 Segundo Municipal Code, construction is restricted to the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at anytime on Sunday or a Federal holiday. Monitoring Phase: Construction Implementation Party: City of El Segundo Enforcement Agency: Public Works Department Monitoring Agency: Public Works Department No mitigation measures are required for the conversion of Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation. XI. POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT Subsequent Environmental Documentation No subsequent environmental documentation is required. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. PAPlanning & Building Safety\Projects \576- 599\Ea- 579\EA- 579.CEQA Resolution Exh B MMRP.doc El Segundo Circulation Element Update IX. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program } Final Environmental Impact Report Page IX -12 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. EXHIBIT C El Segundo General Plan - 1992 4. Circulation Element Table of Contents page Introduction 4 -1 Summary of Existing Conditions 4 -2 Future Conditions 4 -12 Master Plan of Streets 4 -19 Alternative Modes of Travel 4 -30 Goals, Objectives, and Policies 4 -44 Goal C1: Provision for a Safe, Convenient, and Cost Effective Circulation System 4 -44 Goal C2: Provisions for Alternative Modes of Transportation 4-47 Goal C3: Development of Circulation Policies that are Consistent with other City Policies 4 -51 Goal C4: Compliance with all Federal, State, and Regional Regulations 4 -53 0 83 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 Introduction 4. Circulation Element The circulation system is one of the most important of all urban systems in determining the form and quality of the El Segundo environment. The circulation modes used, location of routes, operational policies and the operating levels of service influence the nature of urban development, the physical organization of the City, and can enhance or limit the social and economic activity within the City. Purpose and Authority The purpose of the Circulation Element is to assist the City in providing a safe, convenient, and efficient circulation system. The Circulation Element identifies a system capable of responding to growth occurring consistent with the policies and Land Use Plan presented in the Land Use Element. The Circulation Element identifies physical improvements that will be needed to attain the Circulation goals and objectives, as well as alternative techniques to improve the City's circulation system. The Circulation Element is part of the City of El Segundo's General Plan. State law requires that a circulation element be incorporated into the general plan. The pertinent government code sections are as follows: • Government Code Section 65302(b): The general plan shall include ... a circulation element consisting of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the land use element of the plan. • Government Code Section 65303: The general plan may ... address any other subjects which, in the judgment of the legislative body, relate to the physical development of the County or City. 084 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 44 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 Related Plans and Circulation issues and travel patterns extend far beyond the El Programs Segundo city limits. Consequently, the circulation system within the City is heavily impacted by land use and circulation plans and developments of other jurisdictions. The impact to the City's circulation system of projected land use changes and circulation system improvements of other jurisdictions, as projected during the development of the General Plan, were incorporated into the analysis and preparation of the Circulation Element. Summary of Existing Conditions Existing Street System The City of El Segundo is served by the existing network of roadways shown on Exhibit C -1. The existing street network is essentially a grid system of north/south and east/west roadways. The primary north/south roadways are Aviation Boulevard, Douglas Street, Nash Street, Sepulveda Boulevard, Center Street, Main Street, and Vista Del Mar. The primary east/west streets are Imperial Highway, Imperial Avenue, Maple Avenue, Mariposa Avenue, Grand Avenue, El Segundo Boulevard, and Rosecrans Avenue. Each of these arterial roadways is described in the Existing Conditions Report. Daily Operating Conditions on Existing Street Network Daily operating conditions were analyzed on each of the arterials designated on the City's Master Plan of Roadways. This was done by comparing the average daily traffic volume for each arterial to the estimated daily capacity and developing a corresponding Level of Service (LOS) estimate of operating conditions. The daily traffic volume, and estimated roadway capacity, and resulting LOS for each of the key roadways in the City are shown on Exhibit C -2. A definition of Level of Service (LOS) for urban arterial roadway segments is included in Exhibit C -3. A review of Exhibit C -2 reveals that most roadways in the City of El Segundo operate at LOS "C" or better. Several roadway links operate at LOS "D," which is considered marginally acceptable. These are: • Aviation Boulevard between Hawaii Street and Rosecrans • Avenue • Imperial Highway between Main Street and California Street • Sepulveda Boulevard between El Segundo Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue • Sepulveda Boulevard between Mariposa Avenue and Grand Avenue 085 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-2 e N z a as W W C7 0 A w a W W 0 r H U 1� U O N Z O c N W rn c N �X W 08 N U c O (0 L Q O z cu a � a 3 a -a ca ry Q 'co w c' W Cl) x O W U O L, N E E 08 Level of Service (LOS) Operating Conditions A Free flow, with no restrictions on maneuvering or operating speeds. Minimal or no delay. B Stable flow, with some restrictions on maneuvering or operating speeds. Nominal delays. C Stable flow, with more restrictions on speed and maneuverability. Some delays. D Approaching unstable flow. Restricted speed and maneuverability. Delays encountered at intersections. E Unstable flow, with some stoppages. Constitutes maximum capacity by definition. Extensive delays at some locations. F Forced flow, with many stoppages. Low operating speeds, extensive queuing and very extensive delays. CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN Level of Service Description 'Y for Urban Arterials c -3 088 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 The following roadway segments operate at LOS "E," which is considered unacceptable: • Sepulveda Boulevard between Imperial Avenue and Mariposa Avenue • Rosecrans Avenue between Douglas Street and Aviation Boulevard While no traffic volumes on any of the roadways in the City now exceed LOS E traffic volume thresholds, portions of Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard carry traffic volumes very close to the threshold. Analysis of Peak Hourly Operating Conditions on Existing Street Network In addition to the analysis of roadway segments on the basis of daily traffic volume and capacity, peak hourly traffic conditions at several key intersections throughout the City were also evaluated. Analysis of intersection operations was conducted using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. An explanation of the ICU methodology and Intersection LOS is included in Exhibits C -4 and C -5 respectively. The results of the intersection analysis are presented graphically on Exhibit C -6. A review of Exhibit C -6 reveals that according to the peak hour intersection analysis, several intersections within the City currently operate at unacceptable Levels of Service (LOS). The following intersections currently operate at LOS "E" or "F" during the AM or PM peak hour: • Sepulveda Boulevard at Imperial Highway (LOS E AM Peak only) • Sepulveda Boulevard at Mariposa Avenue (LOS E in AM Peak only) • Sepulveda Boulevard at Grand Avenue (LOS E in both AM and PM Peak) • Sepulveda Boulevard at El Segundo Boulevard (LOS E in AM Peak, LOS F in PM Peak) • Sepulveda Boulevard at Rosecrans Avenue (LOS F in PM Peak only) • Rosecrans Avenue at Aviation Boulevard (LOS E in AM Peak, LOS F in PM Peak) Aviation Boulevard at El Segundo Boulevard (LOS E in AM and PM Peak) During the AM and PM peak hours, at least one movement carries higher volumes than the available capacity at the unsignalized intersection of Douglas Street at Utah Avenue. 0 8 9 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O• G E N E R A L P L A N 4-6 The ability of a roadway to carry traffic is referred to as capacity. The capacity is usually greater between intersections and less at intersections because traffic flows continuously between intersections, and only during the green phase at intersections. Capacity at intersections is best defined in terms of vehicles per lane per hour of green; if the green phase is 50 percent of the cycle and there are three lanes, then the capacity is 1,600 times 50 percent times 3 lanes, or 2,400 vehicles per hour. The technique used to compare the volume and capacity of an intersection is known as Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU). ICU, usually expressed as a percent, is the proportion of an hour required to provide sufficient time to accommodate all vehicles on all approaches. If an intersection is operating at 80 percent of capacity, then 20 percent of the signal cycle is not used. The signal could show red on all indications 20 percent of the time and the signal would just accommodate approaching traffic. ICU analysis consists of (a) determining the proportion of signal time needed to serve each conflicting movement of traffic, (b) summing the times for the movements, and (c) comparing the total time required to the total time available. For example, if for north -south traffic, the northbound traffic is 1,600 vehicles per hour, the southbound traffic is 1,200 vehicles per hour, and the capacity of either direction is 3,200 vehicles per hour, the northbound traffic is critical and requires 1,600/3,200 or 50 percent of the signal time. If for the east -west traffic, 30 percent of the signal time is required, then the ICU is 50 plus 30, or 80 percent. When left -turn phases exist, they are incorporated into the analysis. The critical movements are usually the heavy left - turn movements and the opposing through movements. In the ICU computation, an inefficiency or "lost time" factor is also included. Level of Service is used to describe the quality of traffic flow. Levels of Service "A" to "C" operate quite well. While Level of Service "C" is considered desirable, Level of Service "D" is encountered commonly at busy urban intersections. Most jurisdictions consider "D" to be an acceptable Level of Service. Level of Service "E" is the maximum volume a facility can accommodate and will result in possible stoppages of momentary duration. Level of Service "F" occurs when a facility is overloaded and is characterized by stop- and -go traffic with stoppages of long duration. A description of the various levels of traffic services appears in Exhibit C -5, along with the relationship between ICU and level of traffic service. The ICU calculation assumes that an intersection is signalized and that the signal is ideally timed. Although calculating ICU for an unsignalized intersection is invalid, the presumption is that a signal can be installed and the calculation shows whether the geometrics are capable of accommodating the expected volume. It is possible to have a ICU well below 100 percent, yet have severe traffic congestion. This would occur if one or more movements is not getting sufficient time to satisfy its demand, and excess time exists on other movements. This is an operating problem which should be remedied. The ICU technique is a tool to quantify existing as well as future intersection operation. The impact of adding a lane can be quickly determined by examining the effect the lane has on the intersection capacity utilization. CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN fM116f Explanation of Intersection C_4 Capacity Utilization 0 90 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LEVEL OF RANGE SERVICE TRAFFIC QUALITY OF ICU (a) A Low volume; high speeds; speed not restricted by other vehicles; all signal cycles clear with no vehicles waiting through more than one signal cycle. B Operating speed beginning to be affected by other traffic; between one and ten percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak hour traffic periods. C Operating speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by other traffic, between 11 and 38 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods; recommended ideal design standard. D Tolerable operating speeds; 31 to 70 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods; often used as design standard in urban areas. E Capacity, the maximum traffic volume an intersection can accommodate; restricted speeds; 71 to 100 percent of the signal cycles have one or more vehicles which wait through more than one signal cycle during peak traffic periods. 1111.1 0.61 -0.70 0.71 -0.80 ,1 1 ' 1 0.91 -1.00 F Long queues of traffic; unstable flow; stoppages of long duration; Over 1.00 traffic volume and traffic speed can drop to zero; traffic volume will be less than the volume which occurs at Level of Service "E." (a) ICU means Intersection Capacity Utilization. Refer to Exhibit C -4 for explanation. UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level of Service Average Control Delay (s /veh) A 0 -10 B >10 -15 C >15 -25 D >25 -35 E >35 -50 F >50 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN rxhbk Level of Service Description c -5 for Intersections 091 z a a a w w L7 0 A O w a w w O F A U c O cu L CL O c O U O U) L c i O O 2 Y (Q d c N .X W 4- O c6 E E 092 4. Cimulation Element Draft 917104 Street Classification and Function The magnitude of traffic volumes on a particular street represents but one element of hierarchy in an overall circulation system. The system provides a balanced linkage between high traffic corridors and low volume streets. The presently adopted City circulation system consists of local streets, collector streets, secondary arterials, major arterials and freeways. There are a myriad of other categories or names for the components of a circulation system. However, it should be recognized that the classification is not as important as the function to be fulfilled. The functions of the above street categories are as follows: • Local Streets principally provide vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle access to property abutting the public right -of -way with movement of traffic acting only as a secondary function. • Collector Streets are intended to serve as the intermediate route to handle traffic between local streets and arterials. In addition, collector streets provide access to abutting property. • Major and Secondary Arterials function to connect traffic from collectors to the major freeway system. They move large volumes of automobiles, trucks and buses, and link the principal elements within the City to other adjacent regions. • Freeways are controlled access, high speed roadways with grade separated interchanges intended to expedite movement between distant areas in a metropolitan community or region. The basic principles of network circulation, using these various functional street types, is important because it establishes the rationale by which the existing and recommended El Segundo circulation system was evaluated, and by which new proposals should be evaluated in the future. The variety of street types is designed for a specific function to provide adequate service to the community. In addition to the desired function within the circulation system, the differing roadway classifications should be designed to carry differing amounts of traffic volumes. The capacity of a specific roadway section will be affected by a number of factors, including street width, number of travel lanes, number of crossing arterials and collectors, the number and type of signals, amount of parking, and the number of driveways. Although the capacity on a given roadway link will vary, daily capacities for each of the City's roadway classifications listed, in Exhibit C -7, were determined to be representative of roadway operating conditions in the City of El Segundo. Therefore, these capacity estimates are presented for general planning purposes and for use in traffic analysis throughout the City. 093 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-10 ESTIMATED DAILY ROADWAY CAPACITY Master Plan Roadway Number of Roadway Estimated Daily Roadway Classification Lanes (a) Capacity (b) Major Arterial 8LD 70,000 Secondary Arterial (Six 6LD 53,000 Lane Divided) Collector (4 -Lane Divided) 4LD 40,400 Collector 4 -Lane 4LU 31,000 Collector 2 -Lane 2LU 14,000 Local 2LU 10,000 (a) 8 LD = Eight (8) lanes divided 6 LD = Six (6) lanes divided 4 LD = Four (4) lanes divided 4 LU = Four (4) lanes undivided 2 LU = Two (2) lanes undivided (b) Estimated Daily Roadway Capacity at Level of Service "E" is considered to be the carrying capacity of the roadway. Numbers indicate vehicles per day for roadway system planning. Volume to Capacity (v /c) ratios are computed on the basis of LOS E capacity. If the v/c ratio exceeds 1.00, the roadway LOS would be F. A v/c ratio between 0.81 and 0.90 indicates LOS D, and a v/c ratio between 0.91 and 1.00 indicates LOS E. Note: It is the goal of the City of E1 Segundo to achieve and maintain LOS D or better on the City's arterials. The City considers LOS C to be desirable and LOS D to be marginally acceptable for roadway segments. LOS E and LOS F are not acceptable. I CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN I taHGt Estimated Daily Roadway Capacity C -7 09 4. Circulation Element Future Conditions Draft WID4 Streets and Highways The Circulation Element goals and objectives presented later in this Element, combined with the future traffic demand as indicated by the Land Use Element, formed the basis for planning the future system of streets in El Segundo. Et Segundo Street Classifications and Standards The recommended street classifications and standards are illustrated in Exhibit C -8 and described in the following paragraphs. These are consistent with regional standards and classifications. For example, the Los Angeles County Plan of Highways indicates a 100 -foot right -of -way for a major highway. This would be equivalent to a secondary arterial in the El Segundo Circulation Element. Any street segment which is constructed to geometrics that are inconsistent with the geometrics shown on Exhibit C -8 for the corresponding street classification is generally considered to be substandard. When new roadways are constructed or existing roadways are improved, the standards shown on Exhibit C -8 should be used as a guide to ensure that adequate rights -of -way exist to provide sufficient width of travel lanes, parking lanes, curbs, sidewalks, and medians where appropriate. It should also be noted that right -of -way may be needed beyond the standards shown in Exhibit C -8 in special locations, such as approaches to major intersections. The right -of -way, lane and on- street parking widths shown in Exhibit C -8 are intended to be minimum widths. Ranges are provided in order to provide flexibility depending on the existing and future anticipated development, roadway volumes, and right -of -way widths, as well as conformance with the goals, policies and objectives of the General Plan. The evaluation of future development should consider all of these issues in order to determine the appropriate right -of -way dedication. Freeways Freeways are controlled access, high speed roadways with grade - separated interchanges intended to expedite movement between distant areas in a metropolitan community or region. Planning, design, and construction of freeways in California are undertaken by Caltrans. As a result, they fall outside the jurisdiction of a city. Nonetheless, the City played an important role in the selection of the I -105 Freeway alignment, in determining the number of lanes required to carry projected traffic loads, and in locating the major interchanges along the freeway to serve the City street system. Since, T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-12 J .� w• -w u' w�_y ��x• I lo• IT. J 1 1 uT -la MAJOR ARTERIAL (S LANES MINIMUM) Iv v.l•_e , n• IP I �ia• -�av 30" Ip IP gIT IV IT IT IP u• er I SECONDARY ARTERIAL COLLECTOR (4 LANE DIVIDED) e' )c r I Ia i Ip' l e• .I e. 16 ao• 30' '° I H iv'v.ta 1 1�ir.la.r�.. w-ea• COLLECTOR LOCAL STREET LOCALSTREET (2 or 4 LANE) (RESIDENTIAL) (COMMERCIAL) CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN Street Classification and Standards ..eaott m 0 To 4. Circulation Element Dian snro4 the Century (I -105) Freeway carries significant traffic volumes and plays an integral role in the City's roadway system, it is included in the City's Master Plan of Streets. Major Arterials Major arterials function to connect traffic from collectors to the major freeway system as well as to provide access to adjacent land uses. They move large volumes of automobiles, trucks and buses, and link the principal elements within the City to other adjacent regions. These facilities handle inter -city and intra -city vehicular trips in the magnitude of 40,000 to 75,000 vehicles per day (vpd). They should be planned for eight lanes of through traffic. In the majority of cases in El Segundo, curb parking will be prohibited during peak periods. Bicycle traffic would travel with vehicular flow or be separated by a path behind the curb. Raised medians can be used to separate opposing flows of vehicular traffic as necessary. Access points, (i.e., driveways and minor intersecting streets) should be minimized. Separate left -turn lanes at major signalized intersections would be mandatory with double left -turn lanes the rule rather than the exception. Separate right -turn lanes which also serve as bus loading areas would be considered at locations indicating high turn volumes. At some intersections up to three left turn and up to two right turn lanes may be provided, if needed, and if acquisition of additional right -of -way is practical. Secondary Arterials Secondary arterials are similar to major arterials in function. They connect traffic from collectors to the major freeway system. They move large volumes of automobiles, trucks and buses, and link the principal elements within the City to other adjacent regions. These streets handle intra -city trips in the magnitude of 25,000 to 55,000 vpd and are not as continuous in length as major arterials. At least six through lanes should be provided to handle these needs along with single or double left -turn lanes (the latter preferably) at major signalized intersections. Curb parking would be prohibited during peak periods. Bicycle traffic would have to use paths behind the curb, separate bicycle lanes, or travel in the street with autos, trucks and buses. Collector Streets The collector street is intended to serve as an intermediate route to handle traffic between local streets and arterials. In addition, collector streets provide access to abutting property. Collector streets are anticipated to carry traffic volumes between 15,000 to 40,000 vpd and serve important internal functions within the community. A collector street may have one through lane per 097 T H E C 1 T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-14 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 direction; but more realistically, it should have a minimum of two through lanes (at least during peak periods). In some cases, a 4 -lane collector may have a median divider. Curb parking can be accommodated if abutting property owners have insufficient off - street parking. The function of the collector, however, is to "collect" vehicles from the local street system and transport them to the arterial system as efficiently as possible. Signalization of collector /local street intersections should be timed to permit the majority of the traffic flow on the collector while allowing local street access. Restriction of free flow along collectors due to unwarranted STOP controls should be discouraged. Local Streets Local streets principally provide vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle access to property abutting the public right -of -way. Cross sections of local streets vary, depending on the abutting land uses, parking requirements, street trees, and other considerations. Where both sides of the street are served equally in residential areas, the common right -of -way width for a local street is 60 feet with a 36 -foot pavement width. In multi - family areas where there is continuous parking throughout the day, a minimum of 40 feet of pavement may be required to provide room for two moving lanes of traffic in addition to street parking on both sides. In commercial and industrial areas, a minimum pavement width of 40 feet is considered necessary. In industrial areas, consideration of the predominant type of trucking, and whether or not maneuvering of trailers must be provided, may require a pavement width of more than 44 feet. When pavement widths exceed 40 feet on local streets, rights -of -way should be increased above 60 feet. Each parkway width should be 12 feet, including landscaped area and sidewalk. Sidewalk width should be 4 feet in residential areas and 5 feet in commercial or industrial areas. The overall system design of local streets can greatly affect traffic. Unduly long streets build up traffic volumes and act as collectors. Cross streets and intersections with acute angles are likely to contribute to accidents. Good practice precludes carrying local streets into arterials since such intersections create unnecessary friction points and cause related congestion on the arterials. A far better approach is to bring local streets into collectors which then feed into arterials. 098 T H E C I T Y O P E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-15 4. Circulation Element Dreg 9!/104 Planned or Funded Roadway Improvements A series of roadway improvements are either planned, funded or currently under construction. The traffic model forecasts have included these roadway improvements since they will be completed prior to buildout of the Land Use Element. These roadway improvements are illustrated in Exhibit C -9 and listed below. Widening of Aviation Boulevard - Rosecrans Avenue to Imperial Highway. The scope of work involves adding one lane in each direction. The following intersections will benefit from this project. • Aviation Boulevard/Imperial Highway - Add one through lane in each direction for northbound and southbound movements, resulting in dual lefts, 3 through and one right turn only lane for both movements. • Aviation Boulevard/120th Street - Add one through lane in each direction for northbound and southbound movements, resulting in one left and 3 through lanes for both movements. • Aviation Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard - Add one through lane in each direction for northbound and southbound movements, resulting in one left, 3 through and one right turn only lane for the southbound movement; one left and 3 through lanes for the northbound movement. • Aviation Boulevard/Utah -135th Street - Add one through lane in each direction for northbound and southbound movements, resulting in one left and 3 through lanes for both movements. • Aviation Boulevard/Rosecrans Avenue Improvements - The intersection improvements are being implemented by the City of Hawthorne. The proposed lane additions are: Add second left -turn lane on northbound, southbound and eastbound approaches. ➢ Add a fourth through lane and one exclusive right lane on the southbound movement. ➢ Add a third through lane on the westbound approach. ➢ Add an exclusive right -turn lane on the northbound and eastbound approaches. Construct left -turn pocket for northbound Continental Boulevard at Grand Avenue - This improvement will result in one left and three through lanes for the northbound movement. U 9 =y T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-16 IR TWO � U J n a � cn a �cc C W � z � o o Q- �a E '0 N a � w c o � d H v 100 4. Circulation Element Draft 917194 Douglas Street Extension from Park Place to Alaska Avenue — This improvement will connect the discontinuous street between Park Place and Alaska Avenue. Construct left -turn pocket for southbound Sepulveda Boulevard at Grand Avenue. Convert one through lane to a shared through/left -turn lane on eastbound El Segundo Boulevard at Sepulveda Boulevard. Convert Nash and Douglas Streets to two -way operation between Imperial Avenue and El Segundo Boulevard. Make all necessary intersection improvements to accommodate two -way operation. Other Additional Intersection Improvements identified in the Traffic Analysis Report and EIR for the Circulation Element to further improve intersection levels of service which may require additional rieht -of -way bevond the street classifications in Exhibit Future Travel In order to plan for the future travel conditions in El Segundo, traffic Forecasts forecasts were developed for buildout of the City's Land Use Plan as presented in the Land Use Element. The traffic forecasts incorporated the type and density of future land uses within the City, the location and potential interaction of various land use types, as well as the characteristics and capacity of each of the City's roadways. The following types of development activity in the City have been considered: • Approved and Active Projects - Those projects which have already received discretionary approval or are being reviewed. Approved or active projects are summarized in Table III -3 of the Traffic Analysis Report for the Circulation Element. • Vacant Parcels - Potential development of all vacant parcels has been assessed, assuming appropriate zoning categories and floor -area- ratios. The results are presented in Table III -4 of the Traffic Analysis Report for the Circulation Element. • Recyclable Parcels - Parcels which currently have buildings but which are likely to be recycled within the time frame of the Circulation Element have been assessed. Potential development on vacant parcels and recyclable parcels is summarized in Appendix C of the Traffic Analysis Report for the Circulation Element. 101 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-18 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 Due to the fact that El Segundo is located in an urbanized area with many jurisdictions and a variety of planners and decision makers, planning for the City's future must incorporate projected activities in the jurisdictions neighboring the City and in the region as a whole. Therefore, projected traffic using the City's streets that would be generated by land use changes outside the city was incorporated into the analysis of buildout traffic conditions. In addition, regional initiatives and activities, due to air quality and congestion concerns, are projected to have an impact on future travel patterns and traffic conditions in the region. The effect of regional air quality and congestion reduction activities was also considered and incorporated into the analysis of future traffic conditions. Master Plan of Street The Master Plan of Streets is presented in Exhibit C -10. The Master Plan of Streets has been revised since the existing Master Plan was adopted in 1992 and has been developed taking into consideration existing street alignments, constraints in the City, the potential for new routes, and future traffic volumes, all predicated on the types of existing and future land uses and their spatial relationships. The Master Plan of Streets designates a preferred number of traffic lanes to support buildout of the General Plan Land Use Element. Accordingly, the Master Plan of Streets would be developed with the full cross section of lanes for each street designation, as shown in Exhibit C -8. Thus, all streets designated as 6 -lane roadways would have three through lanes in each direction (six through lanes total) in the future, all streets designated as 8 -lane roadways would have four through lanes in each direction. The Master Plan of Streets differs from the Master Plan of Streets adopted in 1992 in the following aspects: The previously planned extension of Grand Avenue from Douglas Street to Aviation Boulevard is no longer included in the Master Plan of Streets. The previously planned extension of Mariposa Avenue from Douglas Street to Aviation Boulevard is no longer included in the Master Plan of Streets. The previously planned direct connection of Nash Street north of Rosecrans Boulevard is no longer included in the Master Plan of Streets. The previously planned direct connection of Hughes Way to Utah Avenue is no longer included in the Master Plan of Streets. 102 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-19 Hall I ' U z cn m w C/) z w ti- O o C Q � � a ai LTA cn V. m r � H U 103 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 Nash and Douglas Streets are designated as two -way streets between Imperial Avenue and El Segundo Boulevard, representing a change from the existing one -way operation on those streets The designation of a future transportation corridor in the southeastern part of the city to include extensions of Park Place and Allied Way. The designation of Park Place between Nash Street and Douglas Street as a collector, rather than a local street. A discussion of these changes and the reasons for change are presented in the following paragraphs. Unconstructed Master Plan Street Extensions The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included some unconstructed street system extensions. None of these street extensions would be expected to serve through traffic since none would provide continuous travel routes for regional through trips. Therefore, the main purpose of each street extension is to serve local parcels of land as they are developed and provide access to each parcel. In general, given the grid -like circulation system, the parcels can be efficiently served by a series of well designed access points, driveways and internal roadways as opposed to new through streets. One of the serious concerns associated with the previously planned east/west through streets is the potential to also increase traffic flow on streets west of Sepulveda Boulevard. This concern is especially critical for Mariposa Avenue and Grand Avenue. Extension of either street through to Aviation Boulevard would likely result in increased traffic volume on those streets to the west of Sepulveda Boulevard as a result of the creation of new convenient routes. Grand Avenue The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included the extension of Grand Avenue from Duley Road east to Aviation Boulevard. Based on significant traffic growth in the vicinity of Grand Avenue between Continental Boulevard and Douglas Street, Grand Avenue is maintained in the Master Plan as far as Douglas Street. This will help to relieve congestion at the intersections of Nash Street/El Segundo Boulevard and Douglas Street/El Segundo Boulevard. The segment of Grand Avenue from Douglas Street to Aviation Boulevard is no longer included in the Master Plan of Streets. This will protect the segment of Grand Avenue west of Sepulveda Boulevard from becoming a through route for commuter traffic. 404 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-21 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 Mariposa Avenue The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included the connection of Mariposa Avenue from Douglas Street to Aviation Boulevard. The construction of this street extension would primarily serve the land uses in that vicinity as they are developed. This would likely increase traffic volumes on Mariposa Avenue in the residential neighborhoods west of Sepulveda Boulevard. For this reason, the street extension has been deleted from the Master Plan. Lairport Street The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included the connection of Lairport Street from Maple Avenue to Selby Street. This connection would serve though traffic volumes from the area south of Maple Avenue, however, little growth is forecast in the area between Maple Avenue and Imperial Highway. This link would connect Lairport Street to Imperial Highway relatively close to the intersection with Sepulveda Boulevard. This street extension is maintained in the Master Plan. Douglas Street The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included connection of Douglas Street from its current terminus through to existing Douglas Street near Park Place (for connection through to Rosecrans Avenue). Given the significant forecast congestion on both Sepulveda Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard, as well as the forecast increase in trips along Douglas Street north of Rosecrans Avenue, this connection is warranted and remains in the Master Plan. The future traffic model forecasts included the Douglas Street extension improvements as an assumed baseline condition since it is anticipated to be completed prior to buildout of the Land Use Element. Nash Street The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included the direct connection of Nash Street from El Segundo Boulevard to the existing terminus north of Rosecrans Avenue. Due to current and anticipated future land use patterns, this connection is not likely to be feasible within the time frame of the Circulation Element. It is therefore not included in the Master Plan. Hughes Way The Master Plan of Streets, adopted in 1992, included the connection of existing Hughes Way to Utah Avenue to the east. Due to current and anticipated future land use patterns, this connection is not likely to be feasible within the time frame of the Circulation Element. It is therefore not included in the Master Plan. 105 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-22 4. Circulation Element Draft 917,D4 Future Transportation Corridor At this time, there are emerging plans for redevelopment of a significant portion of the southeast portion of the City (north of Rosecrans Avenue and east of Sepulveda Boulevard). If redevelopment activity occurs in the future, there may be a need for additional roadway capacity to support the increased trips that would occur as a result of the development activity. Although the Nash Street and Hughes Way extensions are not warranted at this time, and neither is included in the Master Plan of Streets, the City expects to establish a future transportation corridor in that quadrant of the City. The Corridor will allow the City to reserve potential right -of -way, to be determined as development is proposed, to complete the necessary transportation networks which will serve the new development. At this time, it is not possible to designate the precise alignment of roadway connections; however, it must be recognized that additional east/west and north/south circulation capacity will be required. This may include an extension of Park Place from Nash Street to Sepulveda Boulevard and an extension of Allied Way south to connect to Park Place. The City should evaluate the need for additional east/west and north/south capacity based upon development proposals as they arise. The alignment of the transportation facilities will be determined based upon further studies and should include capacity to serve the new development as well as anticipated through traffic that may use the new roadways. With the potential extension of Park Place, it is appropriate to redesignate the portion of Park Place between Nash Street and Douglas Street from a local street to a collector street to be consistent with the designation of the Park Place extension. Nash /Douglas One Way Couplet Versus Two -Way Traffic Flow Nash and Douglas Streets currently operate as one -way streets from El Segundo Boulevard to Imperial Highway. In 1996, the change to one- way operation was completed in response to the opening of the I -105 Freeway and concerns associated with freeway access and related congestion. Since the conversion to one -way operation there have been concerns related to the circuitous travel paths created for some businesses. Conversion to two -way flow, with appropriate mitigation measures would provide more desirable traffic operating conditions. Based on the technical findings and the City's strong desire to return to two -way flow, these two streets are included as two -way streets in the Master Plan of Streets. Future Redevelopment of the Chevron Refinery 10 6 The current land uses and activities on the Chevron Refinery site are expected to remain throughout the life of this General Plan and Circulation Element. However, potential redevelopment of this site T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-23 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 will have a significant impact on all aspects of the City, including circulation. Redevelopment of the Chevron site will require reevaluation and possibly an update of the General Plan and require reevaluation of the Circulation Element. The potential redevelopment of this site may require significant roadway system improvements beyond those identified in the Master Plan of Streets. All future roadways within the Chevron site would be planned and constructed consistently with the City's Master Plan of Streets to ensure system continuity and use of appropriate standards. Projected Traffic Volumes on El Segundo Arterial Roadways The projected future traffic volumes are shown on Exhibit C -11 for each of the City's arterial roadways. Transportation System and Transportation Demand Management It is recognized that there are physical limitations to the amount of street width that can be provided. The buildout traffic projections in many instances cannot be accommodated solely by conventional roadway widening techniques. The use of Transportation System Management (TSM) and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) techniques (discussed later in the Circulation Element) to handle the projected "person trips" in the area must also be considered. Such TSM and TDM techniques should be considered both: • As a general augmentation to implementation of the Master Plan of Streets and Highways generally; and • As an alternative to site specific Master Plan implementation if it can be reasonably demonstrated that the TSM alternative will have at least as great a mitigating impact, and the property owner is willing to enter into a legally binding agreement with the City to implement such TSM alternatives. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Nearly every jurisdiction in southern California has experienced roadway congestion problems that cannot be solved simply by adding roadway capacity. This is for several reasons including the lack of right -of -way to accomplish various widening projects as well as the environmental impacts associated with major roadway enhancements. As an alternative and supplemental improvement, many local agencies are implementing Intelligent Transportation Systems projects using advanced computer and communication technologies. The ITS projects that are being implemented provide improved traveler information, manage the flow of traffic, and utilize existing transportation systems more efficiently. 107 T H E C 1 T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-24 o C) G a) w E CD a � a 0-0 a > (0 VJ N o �a 'M a o� w a� o U N J CD O 0 a� 0 a .. 108 4. Circulation Element Draft W104 The goals of ITS are to reduce travel times, provide more reliable travel times, improve safety, reduce delay and reduce congestion. The high concentration of employment in the northeast quadrant of El Segundo makes it an area that is well- suited for application of advanced technology to accomplish the goals of ITS. This is because of the high density of employment, the large number of peak hour trips, the potentially high growth rate and the constraints on physical improvements. Examples of ITS system components include a centralized computer transportation management center, advanced transportation monitoring systems such as closed circuit TV (CCTV), transit traveler information, dynamic information displays at activity centers, bus priority treatment, real -time traffic management, coordination of local circulators, corporate Intranet information and other elements. In other jurisdictions, these types of improvements have resulted in significant savings in vehicle and motorist delay, significant travel time reductions and significant environmental benefits all without major roadway widening or reconstruction projects. Recent deployment of ITS technologies has occurred throughout Los Angeles (ATSAC and other systems), Orange County (SMART STREETS), the South Bay, Santa Monica and many other agencies. Due to its many benefits and cost effectiveness, ITS could be considered as an integral part of the future transportation system of El Segundo. Similar to the City of Los Angeles methodology, a ten percent enhancement in capacity has been incorporated into the traffic modeling for the projected traffic volumes at buildout to represent the savings in vehicle stops and delays that would occur as a result of an ITS system in the City. Truck Routes The residents and businesses of El Segundo rely heavily on trucks for the efficient movement of goods in an economical and safe manner. For this reason, the truck route system within and through the City is an important aspect of the Circulation Element. Current City Truck Routes The El Segundo Municipal Code officially authorizes the City Council, by resolution, to designate truck routes on streets where vehicles in excess of three tons may travel. Existing truck routes are provided with appropriate sign posting to guide truck traffic through the City. These existing routes are shown in Exhibit C -12. Truck Route Considerations Selection of a truck routing system necessitates the determination of the impact of truck traffic on abutting land uses. There are land use categories that benefit from heavy truck access. Among these are industrial and commercial uses that require streets and alleys accessible to their development. Industry has to be served by trucks 109 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-26 of ii! i ` U z U) a � 0 Y U o � (yy� — W � a=+ W Vi w X o W F U 110 4. Cimulation Element Draft 917104 for deliveries of raw materials, the transfer of inventory, and the out- flow of finished goods. Commercial land uses also require access to trucks primarily for the transfer of inventory. Conversely, there is a need to protect those land uses that are adversely affected by heavy truck traffic. In E1 Segundo, these include the single - family, two - family, and multi - family residential uses in the northwestern portion of the City. Heavy truck traffic within residential neighborhoods produce annoying and often excessive levels of noise, fumes, vibrations, and unsightliness. Areas in which schools, hospitals, churches, convalescent homes, and mortuaries are located must also be considered. Establishment of a truck route system must basically follow the arterial street system. These routes must be located along those arterials designed to accommodate large vehicle traffic, and must, at the same time, seek to avoid fully developed residential areas where there are close and reasonable alternatives. They should also concentrate in areas of need such as the primary commercial and industrial areas in the southwest and easternmost portions of the City. The gross maximum weight restriction (6,000 pounds) in El Segundo is consistent with the weight limit imposed by most cities for non- truck route streets. The streets selected for the truck route system must be designed to support loads in excess of this limitation. Provisions must also be made for vehicles transporting hazardous materials into and through the City along the truck route system. Current Municipal Code sections in El Segundo adequately account for such provisions. Master Plan Truck Route System The Recommended Master Plan Truck Route System is shown in Exhibit C -13. It incorporates the following roadways as recommended additions to the existing truck route system in El Segundo: Grand Avenue between Sepulveda Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard Douglas Street between Imperial Avenue and Rosecrans Avenue Nash Street between Imperial Avenue and El Segundo Boulevard The recommended truck routes differ from those recommended in 1992 as follows: 111 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-28 N N a o a � Y W U z =3 W L Q C7 C W � .a W O � O H V v ry 112 4. Circulation Element Draft WIN Nash Street from El Segundo Boulevard to Park Place is removed since that street extension is deleted. Grand Avenue from Douglas Street to Aviation Boulevard is deleted since that street extension is deleted. Grand Avenue from Main Street to Sepulveda Boulevard is added. Grand Avenue from Main Street to Sepulveda Boulevard is retained since it has been implemented and is no longer recommended for deletion. Truck Loading Zones There are presently narrow streets and alleys within some of the industrial areas of the City that serve as impediments to truck operation on the present street system. Current land uses and future development require truck access in many of these areas. The City needs to work toward widening the streets and alleys, eliminating the impediments for truck operation from the City's street system. In addition, the City should work toward implementing the appropriate policies listed later in the Circulation Element in order to minimize the truck access impediments wherever street widening is not feasible. Alternative Modes of Travel Public Transportation The automobile has traditionally been the primary method of transportation in the Southern California region. However, changing lifestyles, economic pressures and greater social and environmental concerns have increased the need for alternatives to automobile travel. Public transportation is one of the alternative modes of travel that can possibly reduce the region's and the City's dependence on the present auto - oriented transportation system. In order for a transit system to attract users away from the automobile, it must be as convenient and affordable as possible. Compared to the convenience, flexibility, and privacy of travel by car, transit travel is perceived to be less appealing, especially for recreational purposes. Thus, for transit service to provide a viable alternative to the automobile in the City of El Segundo, the City must take an active role in planning and supporting the provision of various transit opportunities. Existing Public Transit The current transit service in El Segundo is provided by the Metro Green Line light rail system and fixed bus routes operated by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) and a Dial -a- Ride service by the City of El Segundo. The Green Line route and stations in El Segundo and the current fixed MTA bus routes operating within the City are shown on Exhibit C -14. T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-30 C a a a CD O A w w w O v v • U N O ry m N X C CO N C J C N N L O N N U N C (0 LL r �X W i '! 4. Circulation Element Dreg 917104 The Municipal Area Express, or MAX Transit Service, is funded cooperatively by eight cities and Los Angeles County. It is a directional bus service primarily provided for the workers in the El Segundo area. Buses run on two routes from residential areas in the South Bay to El Segundo in the AM, and from El Segundo back to the South Bay residential areas in the PM. Demand Responsive Transit Service (Dial -a -Ride) In El Segundo, the City provides one twelve- passenger van that operates on a "Dial -a- Ride" basis in response to specific demand. This service has been in operation since 1975. Residents phone for appointments, with a door -to -door response time of approximately 10 minutes. The service is currently funded by Proposition A funds. Dial -a -Ride service is free to El Segundo residents and only operates within the City limits. The van operates from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM Monday through Friday, and from 10:00 AM to 3:00 PM on Saturday. Ridership levels have stabilized over the years to approximately 38 passengers per day (approximately 12,000 passengers per year).The predominant users of this service are senior citizens, accounting for approximately 80 percent of the trips. The City also operates a fixed -route beach shuttle from mid -June to Labor Day. The service operates from 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM everyday and carries approximately 200 riders daily. Downtown Lunchtime Shuttle The City of El Segundo operates a lunchtime downtown shuttle service, with four 12- passenger vans. Two routes are operated, one along Grand Avenue and one along Imperial Avenue, both between Sepulveda Boulevard and the downtown area. Hours of operation are between 11:30 AM and 2:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Shuttles are operated with a frequency of about one van every 10 minutes. Considering Public Transit Alternatives Presently, the City has a variety of transit alternatives, including the Metro Green Line, the MTA bus services, the MAX Transit System, the City of El Segundo Dial -A -Ride, and Route 8 of the Torrance Transit System. Public investment regionally in transit services can be a viable means of mitigating the effects of automobile usage while providing increased mobility to all groups of citizens and employees. It must be 11:; T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-32 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 emphasized that transit bus or rail service cannot substitute for all automobile travel in the City, nor should it be intended to do so. The private automobile is an attractive means of travel for many people, offering an unmatched advantage for certain types of trips. Transit alternatives are only one component in the total transportation system serving the City, yet certainly the most environmentally respectful in the urban context. Certain areas are more suitable for transit services than others. The following conditions exist and overlap in the City and adjacent urban areas and suggest that transit service would be appropriate within the City: • High population concentration of housing and/or employment • Excess auto demand on present highway system • Fragile residential environment Rail Rapid Transit As illustrated in Exhibit C -14, the 2.9 mile Metro Green Line Extension running from the Century Freeway south through El Segundo provides access to the regional rail rapid transit system via rail stations at various locations in El Segundo. The following stations provide access to the Metro Green Line: • Douglas/Rosecrans Station • El Segundo/Nash Station • Mariposa/Nash Station • Aviation/I -105 Freeway Station (adjacent to the eastern boundary of El Segundo) The Metro Green Line provides light rail service along the I -105 Freeway from Norwalk to Los Angeles Airport (LAX). Through transfer to the Metro Blue Line, Metro Red Line and Metro Gold Line, it provides El Segundo with rail service to downtown Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hollywood and Pasadena. The Metro Green Line is elevated through all of the City, along the alignment shown in Exhibit C -14. Service is provided seven days a week from 5:30 AM to 1:30 AM with 6- minute headways during the peak and 20- minute headways during the off -peak. Parking is provided at the Nash/El Segundo station. Connecting bus or shuttle service is also available at all stations. Implementation of the Metro Green Line provides the eastern portion of the City with direct rail service. The service attracts some commuters and visitors away from the automobile and thus, positively impacts the roadway system within the City. Projected impacts and usage of the Metro Green Line service and increased T H E C I T Y O F E L 5 E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-33 116 4. Circulation Element Draft sn104 emphasis on transit regionally were incorporated into the analysis and development of the Circulation Element. To ensure that the Metro Green Line is integrated into the City's circulation system, and City activities in general, consideration of the rail line should be incorporated into all aspects of City planning activities and the development review process. This is particularly important in the vicinity of the rail line stations. In addition, the pedestrian and bicycle circulation system must be designed to allow convenient access to each of the stations. Further, the City should monitor the MTA and incorporate all Metro Rail planning and development into the City's planning process. Park - and -Ride "Park- and -ride" facilities provide an interface between the private automobile and public transit/mass transit. Park- and -ride facilities enable the public to access the transit system by driving to a park - and -ride facility, parking the car, then riding the transit system to complete the trip. When the location of a park- and -ride facility is coupled with highly efficient fixed transit service and an adequate collection and distribution service at the commercial end of the trip, this concept is an integral part of public transportation. Metro Green Line Within the City, a park- and -ride facility is provided at the El Segundo/Nash Metro Green Line station in addition to the Aviation/I- 105 Metro Green Line station just east of the city limits. Additionally a multi -modal transit center with a park -and -ride facility is planned to be constructed on City property adjacent to the Douglas Street Metro Green Line Station as part of the Douglas Street extension project. Bicycle Facilities The bicycle is increasing in popularity as a mode of transportation for commuter travel as well as for recreation. This is due to the growing cost of motor vehicle operation, the significantly shorter portal -to- portal time when bikes are used on short trips, the increasing awareness and desire of travelers to utilize clean-air travel methods, and the acceptance of the bicycle for personal health, exercise, and increased mobility. There is a need to meet the growing demand for safe places to ride bicycles, both for recreation and commuter activities. For many years, roadway facilities have been built exclusively to meet the needs of the motorized vehicle, resulting in street geometries, lane widths, and intersections that have not been designed for bicyclist concerns. Bicycle safety is jeopardized due to bike /auto and bike /pedestrian confrontation on the street, and the lack of space given to bicycle movement. Conflicts between bicycles and pedestrians at intersections and on sidewalks results in the need to 1 17 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-34 4. Circulation Element Draft 811104 separate these three modes, wherever possible, to provide a safer and more efficient operational environment for each. Definitions To clarify any discussion on bicycles, a distinction must be made between the type of bicycle facilities in use. The following definitions (recognized Statewide) are identified below, and used throughout the Circulation Element: Bicycle Path - Class I This facility is a special path for exclusive use of bicycles which is separated from the motor vehicle traffic by space or a physical barrier. Bicycle Lane - Class II A bicycle facility where a portion of the paved area is marked especially as a lane for use of bicycles. It is identified by BIKELANE signing, pavement marking and lane line markings. Usually, special ordinances are necessary to legally define the area's exclusive use of bicycle traffic and to exclude mopeds and infringement by motor vehicles. Bicycle Route - Class III A bicycle way designated within a public right -of -way. The purpose of the bike route is primarily that of transportation, allowing the bicyclist to travel from one point in the City to another. A "shared bicycle route" is a street identified as a bicycle facility by BIKE ROUTE signing only. No special markings on the pavement are provided. Existing Bicycle Route System The existing system of bicycle facilities in the vicinity of El Segundo currently is limited to bicycle paths (Class I) along Imperial Highway, along the beach (Los Angeles County implementation), and portions of Grand Avenue approaching the beach. Exhibit C -15 illustrates existing and planned bicycle routes in the City. All routes shown on the exhibit are future planned routes unless specifically indicated as existing on the map. Bicycle Route Guidelines and Standards Implementation of any bicycle route facility, as designated on the Bicycle Master Plan, would be subject to applicable design standards and guidelines. The State of California has prepared and approved "Standards and Guidelines for the Implementation and Design of Bicycle Facilities." The evolution of design concepts for this mode of transportation continues today, but the basic conclusions and basis for design remain with the State Guidelines. The principle bicycle design areas that should be adhered to include: 118 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-35 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 • Minimum widths (8 -foot minimum for two -way path; 5 -foot minimum for one -way) • Signing and striping of routes, lanes, and paths • Design speed • Horizontal alignment; i.e., curvature and super - elevation of paths • Stopping sight distance • Grades, length of crest vertical curves • Adequate structural section • Treatment of bicyclist at intersections • Treatment when passing over at -grade railroad crossings, drainage grates, manhole covers, and driveway access points Master Plan of Bicycle Routes The need to link the City with a system of bicycle facilities led to the development of a Master Plan of Bicycle Routes, adopted in 1992. It includes existing routes, and routes that are, or could be, developed into major bicycle - carrying corridors. The Master Plan of Bicycle Routes, shown on Exhibit C -15, is an integral part of the city's Circulation Element. No changes are proposed to the adopted Master Plan of Bicycle Routes. Pedestrian Circulation The pedestrian is an integral part of the circulation system and requires appropriate attention in the Circulation Element. The sidewalk is an area of refuge that represents a convenient and safe route for pedestrian transport. The relatively high percentage of elderly residential population in El Segundo, plus school children coupled with mid -day walkers for shopping trips and jogging, necessitate the establishment of a pedestrian circulation system that will support and encourage walking as a mode of transportation. The El Segundo Municipal Code Section on "Street and Sidewalks" does not address the issue of sidewalk design nor the policies for sidewalk implementation. The City Department of Public Works, however, has prepared Standard Plans and Specifications for the installation of sidewalks. The primary criteria is minimum width of sidewalk on new installation which is standard at 4 feet for residential streets. Sidewalks in commercial areas should be a minimum of 8 feet wide. The only exception for commercial streets is the case where the distance from face of curb to property line is 5 feet. The sidewalk minimum requirement then becomes 4 feet, 6 inches. Installation of sidewalks is mandatory with all new improvements in the City. Existing locations that do not have sidewalks can only require implementation on an assessment district basis; i.e., petition 119 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4.36 LO z I ! ' z a a c cu d W L co cu yyQ w U a w U_ O m U 120 4. Circulation Element Draft WIN from the homeowners with City installation and cost of the sidewalk distributed to each homeowner on the basis of their street frontage. The City has pursued sidewalk installation on the basis of the 1911 Act. This Act allows installation of a sidewalk by an agency in all blocks where over 50 percent of the block has existing sidewalk. Protest from the citizens can be made to nullify installation under this Act with the final decision resting with the City Council. The City of El Segundo in the past has used this Act to install sidewalks to "close the gaps" in many of the residential areas. It is necessary to keep the sidewalk area free of obstructions to allow for the free flow of pedestrians. When there is a need to place certain obstructions, i.e., traffic signal poles, they should be designed to present the least interference to pedestrians. In the areas of new planned development, the separation of pedestrians from autos must be considered. Utilizing pedestrian overpasses between buildings is one method of accomplishing this. The removal of the pedestrian from at -grade crossings significantly improves signal timing conditions, thus improving traffic flows. Transportation System Transportation System Management (TSM) and Transportation and Demand Demand Management (TDM) techniques are cost - effective methods Management of improving traffic conditions. Roadway system expansion alone will not be enough to serve all projected circulation needs within the City of El Segundo. TSM and TDM techniques will have to be incorporated as an integral part of the City's package of transportation services provided in the future. The City currently has regulations in place, Municipal Code Chapters 15 -16 and 15 -17, which serve this function. Transportation System Management (TSM) Transportation System Management (TSM) techniques are generally low cost methods relative to capital improvements. They involve changes to the existing system that permit improvements in operation. Caltrans defines TSM projects as "those projects designed to increase the number of person trips which can be carried on the system without significantly increasing the design capacity or the number of through lanes." The City should evaluate a variety of TSM techniques and implement those that are deemed appropriate. Suggested TSM programs for consideration should include but are not limited to: • Auxiliary lanes, such as acceleration and deceleration lanes • Intersection improvements including addition of turn lanes, channelization, and implementation of signal coordination system 121 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-38 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 Restriction of peak hour parking • Commuter Information Systems, such as changeable message signs, highway advisory radio, computer bulletin boards, telephone call- in systems, and related links with other city or state traffic operations centers Improvements designed to assist traffic flow related to transit vehicles, such as bus turnouts and signal preemption systems Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs are geared toward reducing the number of vehicle trips wishing to use the circulation system. TDM techniques can be an effective tool in reducing air pollution, as well as traffic congestion. In fact, the Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), through Regulation 2202, has required TDM plans and programs throughout the region for companies of 250 or more employees. This includes many of the businesses and a significant portion of the workers located within El Segundo. The City should encourage and assist all the businesses in El Segundo to plan and maintain TDM programs. This should be done directly or through cooperation with and support of the El Segundo Employers Association (ESEA). Potential TDM programs and techniques should include but are not limited to: • Flexible work schedules to reduce demand during the peak commuting periods • Carpooling and vanpooling • Employer subsidized transit passes • Provision of bike storage areas and showers • Telecommuting, such as working at home through telephone, internet and FAX machine use • Provision of bike access and storage facilities at future Metro Green Line stations to encourage internodal bike /rail use, reducing auto use and the need for parking at the stations Several companies also operate employee shuttle services between their facilities contributing to an overall reduction of vehicle miles traveled. Transportation The City of El Segundo is located in one of the fastest developing Systems Interface urban centers in the nation. The proximity to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), active railroad lines (Union Pacific, BNSF), and a major street and freeway network, dictates the need for close interface between transportation modes and systems other than the automobile. Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) 122 T H E C 1 T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-39 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 The Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) is adjacent to the City on the north. This includes the West Imperial Terminal and Imperial Cargo Complex which are located on Imperial Highway. The Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) encompasses a total of almost 3,500 acres. Approximately 1,257 acres of the property are utilized for landing, takeoff, and ground maneuvering. The remaining acreage is used for the terminal complex, automobile parking facilities, airline maintenance facilities, fuel storage systems, industrial purposes, air cargo complex, and related facilities. Some land has not yet been devoted to specific airport uses, including those acquired because of noise impact. Circulation within and around LAX is by automobile, bus, and parking lot trams. For the general public, surface traffic circulation between major facilities is on public streets. A Central Terminal Area (CTA) serves scheduled airline operations, while the West Imperial Terminal, located along the southern boundary of the airport, services charter flights and other non- scheduled operations. The Central Terminal Area is situated at the hub of the runways with passenger boarding facilities located in satellite buildings around its periphery. Inward from the satellites, and linked by underground passageways, are their respective ticketing buildings. These front on World Way, the main inner loop street serving all terminals. Within the loop itself is central parking, the airport administration and control tower building, the airport theme building with an elevated restaurant, and other facilities. Air freight operations are presently concentrated east of the Central Terminal Area (CTA) serving over two million tons of freight in 1997, forecasted to increase to over three million tons by 2005. This area is served by both Century and Aviation Boulevards. Extensive parking facilities are provided for the public, employees, and car rental firms. About half of the passenger parking spaces are located within the loop formed by World Way. The balance is located on the perimeter of the airport. The outlying spaces are lower priced and served by free buses to the CTA. Total parking spaces number approximately 24,000. Ground access to LAX is predominantly by means of motor vehicles using the street and highway system. The I -405 Freeway is aligned in a north/south direction easterly of the airport. The I -105 freeway provides east/west access to LAX. The major access route from the freeway to LAX is Century Boulevard, a major east/west thoroughfare. Alternative access routes are Imperial Highway and Lincoln Boulevard. In a north/south direction, Sepulveda Boulevard 12 ;i T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-40 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 leads directly to LAX via an interchange at Century Boulevard. Aviation Boulevard leads to the existing cargo facilities and the Imperial Cargo Complex located just north of Imperial Highway. The west end of the airport is served via City of Los Angeles streets, Vista Del Mar, and Pershing Drive. Pershing Drive terminates at Imperial Highway on the south and allows east/west flow into and out of the area. Vista Del Mar continues northerly into the Marina Del Rey /Westchester area. To the south, it serves the Manhattan and Hermosa Beach communities. Annual passenger demand at LAX has risen steadily from 22 million in 1972 to 26 million in 1976, 32.7 million in 1981, 49.8 million in 1990 and 67.3 million in 2000. The Proposed LAX Master Plan will include an additional projected passenger growth to approximately 78 million passengers versus the 67.3 million passengers recorded in 2000. LAX is undergoing a master planning process that may result in extensive modifications including extension of the Metro Greenline from the I -105 to the CTA, relocation of cargo facilities and rental car facilities, and potential construction of a new passenger terminal east of the CTA. These changes could significantly alter the current transportation patterns to and from LAX and impact traffic patterns in El Segundo. The City must monitor future plans and development at the airport, Because of the interrelationship of the City's economy and circulation system to the activity at LAX, The City must also ensure that airport plans and development are incorporated into all aspects of the City's planning process. Railroad Freight Considerations The City has several railroad lines that are actively used for freight transport and are shown on Exhibit C -16. Most prominently located in the southeast portion of the City are the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) and the Union Pacific Railroad. These rail lines do not provide public transportation service. There are twenty -one at -grade crossings of railroad lines with arterial roadways within the City of El Segundo. The crossing of freight trains disrupts vehicular traffic on the City's streets considerably, contributing to delay and congestion. Two major grade separations of the BNSF railroad span El Segundo Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue. The former crossing occurs immediately west of Aviation Boulevard while the latter separation diagonally crosses the intersection of Aviation/Rosecrans. 124 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4AI 4. Circulation Element Draft W7104 The El Segundo /Aviation railroad crossing has a middle support due to the long span across the west leg of the intersection. While the grade separation eliminated railroad/auto conflicts, its position over the road and its supports preclude roadway widening unless a large cost is incurred. Likewise, the diagonal orientation of the separation across Rosecrans Avenue at Aviation Boulevard precludes widening of either street. 125 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-42 0 0 E ' U N z � a J a. -p O c6 o+� a C w L LL .a w 0) o c F N W 12 6 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 The proximity of the railroad approach embankment necessitates railroad relocation or an extremely long span if major widening were to occur. The grade separation of the highway and rail facilities allows both to operate more safely and efficiently. Grade separation at additional rail crossings within the City should be analyzed and encouraged. However, the necessary structures should be configured to allow future alterations or expansions of both the highway and rail link without necessitating reconstruction. Port Considerations The City does not have a deep water port nor any small craft harbors along its jurisdictional boundary. Chevron does have a marine terminal to moor offshore for the loading and unloading of its large oil tankers. The marine terminal is located in the Santa Monica Bay, and consists of three (3) berths that are comprised of mooring buoys permanently anchored to the ocean floor. Each of the three berths has a transfer pipeline to the refinery shore facilities for discharge and loading of crude oil and refined products. Chevron currently has no plans for expansion of the operations, nor to increase capacity through the use of supertankers. Small Craft Harbors While the Countywide demand for small craft harbors continues to grow, there are no plans for harbor facilities within the El Segundo jurisdiction. Marina Del Rey, the world's largest man-made harbor, lies to the north of El Segundo, while Kings Harbor in Redondo Beach provides berthing and mooring capacity to the south. 127 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-43 4. Circulation Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies Draft 911104 Circulation goals, objectives, and policies are presented as part of the Circulation Element for the City of El Segundo to guide policy makers and City staff in the planning and provision of the City's circulation system. The goals, objectives, and policies were developed through consideration of existing circulation issues, projected circulation needs associated with the Land Use Element, growth outside of the City, and the interests of the residents and businesses of El Segundo. Each of the goals identifies the general direction for the City's circulation system. The objectives outline more specific circulation guidelines for the City's decision makers and staff to work toward. The implementation policies are actions or policies that will assist the City in achieving the identified goals and objectives. Goal C1: Provision for a Safe, Convenient, and Cost Effective Circulation System Provide a safe, convenient, and cost- effective circulation system to serve the present and future circulation needs of the El Segundo community. Objective CIA Provide a roadway system that accommodates the City's existing and projected land use and circulation needs. Policy C1 -1.1 Maintain and update the citywide traffic model as needed for purposes of evaluating project - related and external traffic impacts on the City circulation system. Policy C1 -1.2 Pursue implementation of all Circulation Element policies such that all Master Plan roadways are upgraded and maintained at acceptable levels of service. Policy C1.1.3 Provide adequate roadway capacity on all Master Plan roadways. Policy C1 -1.4 Construct missing roadway links to complete the roadway system designated in the Circulation Element when needed to improve traffic operating conditions and to serve development. 128 T H E C 1 T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-44 4. Circulation Ekment Draft 917104 Policy C1 -1.5 Implement roadway and intersection upgrades to full Circulation Element standards when needed to improve traffic operating conditions and to serve development. Policy C7 -1.6 Ensure that planned intersection improvements are constructed as designated in Exhibit C -9 to achieve efficient operation of the circulation system at a Level of Service "D" or better where feasible. Policy C1 -1.7 Provide adequate intersection capacity to the extent feasible on Major, Secondary, and Collector Arterials to maintain LOS D and to prevent diversion of through traffic into local residential streets. Policy C1 -1.8 Provide all residential, commercial, and industrial areas with efficient and safe access to the major regional transportation facilities. Policy C1 -1.9 Provide all residential, commercial, and industrial areas with efficient and safe access for emergency vehicles. Policy C1 -1.10 Ensure that new roadway links are constructed as designated in the Master Plan and link with existing roadways within the City such that efficient operation of the circulation system is maintained at an operating Level of Service of "D" or better. Policy C1 -1.11 Ensure that the transition from any Master Plan roadway to another Master Plan roadway at a higher classification operates safely and efficiently, incorporating the appropriate intersection configuration and any turn lanes that are necessary. Policy C1 -1.12 Convert Nash Street and Douglas Street from a one -way couplet to a two -way roadway operation between El Segundo Boulevard and Imperial Highway, incorporating appropriate signage, traffic controls, and other modifications to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety and efficient traffic operations. Policy C1 -1.13 Establish and maintain a citywide traffic count program, to ensure the availability of data needed to identify circulation problems and to evaluate potential improvements. Policy C14.14 129 T H E C 1 T Y O F E L S E G U N D O 0 G E N E R A L P L A N 4-45 4. Cimulation Element Draft 917104 Require a full evaluation of potential traffic impacts associated with proposed new developments prior to project approval. Further, require the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures prior to, or in conjunction with, project development. Mitigation measures may include new roadway links on segments that would connect the new development to the existing roadway system, intersection improvements, and other measures. Mitigation measures shall be provided by or paid for by the project developer. Policy C1 -1.15 Pursue and protect adequate right -of -way to accommodate future circulation system improvements. Policy C1 -1.16 Encourage the widening of substandard streets and alleys to meet City standards wherever feasible. Policy C1 -1.17 Encourage cooperation with other governmental agencies to provide adequate vehicular traffic movements on streets and through intersections by means of synchronized signalization. Policy C1 -1.18 Review future developments to ensure uniformity of street naming and avoidance of name duplication or name inconsistencies on a continuous link. Policy C1 -1.19 Continue to monitor the impacts of the I -105 Freeway on local El Segundo streets. If it is determined that freeway traffic is using local streets like California Street as a short cut through the City, evaluate potential mitigations. Objective C1 -2 Provide a circulation system consistent with current and future engineering standards to ensure the safety of the residents, workers, and visitors of El Segundo. Policy C1 -2.1 Develop and maintain a circulation system which shall include a functional hierarchy and classification system of arterial highways that will correlate capacity and service function to specific road design and land use requirements. Objective C1 -3 Ensure that the City's Master Plan Truck Route System efficiently serves the shipping needs of the commercial and industrial land uses in El Segundo while balancing potential conflicts with residential and recreational land uses throughout the City. 130 T H E C[ T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 446 4. Circulation Element Draft 917N4 Policy C1 -3.1 Ensure that the City's designated truck routes provide efficient access to and from the I -105 Freeway. Policy C1 -3.2 Ensure that the development review process incorporates consideration of off - street commercial loading requirements for all new projects. Policy C1 -3.3 Require that all new construction on streets or corridors that are designated truck routes have a Traffic Index calculation as stated by the State Department of Transportation in order to provide a roadway structural section that will accommodate the projected truck volumes and weights. Policy C1 -3.4 Prohibit parking within the public right -of -way on either side two - way alleys. Parking on one side of a one -way alley could be allowed if the alley width is a minimum of 19 feet. Policy C1 -3.5 Ensure that the trucks from the cargo facility north of Imperial Highway at Main Street stay on the City truck route system and do not travel along Main Street. Goal C2: Provisions for Alternative Modes of Transportation Provide a circulation system that incorporates alternatives to the single - occupant vehicle, to create a balance among travel modes based on travel needs, costs, social values, user acceptance, and air quality considerations. Objective C2 -1 Provide a pedestrian circulation system to support and encourage walking as a safe and convenient travel mode within the City's circulation system. Policy C2 -1.1 Encourage the development of pedestrian linkages to and from the Metro Green Line stations to encourage and attract internodal transit/ walking trips. Policy C2 -1.2 Develop a citywide system of pedestrian walkways, alleviating the conflict between pedestrians, autos, and bicyclists throughout .t1w City. 13 1 T H E C 1 T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-47 4. Circulation Element Draft 917,D4 Policy C2 -1.3 Encourage new developments in the City to participate in the development of the citywide system of pedestrian walkways and require participation funded by the project developer where appropriate. Policy C2 -1.4 Ensure the installation of sidewalks on all future arterial widening or new construction projects, to establish a continuous and convenient link for pedestrians. Policy C2 -1.5 Encourage the continued use of the 1911 Act to provide missing sidewalk sections where applicable in residential and commercial areas. Policy C2 -1.6 Encourage shopping areas to design their facilities for ease of pedestrian access. Policy C2 -1.7 Closely monitor design practices to ensure a clear pedestrian walking area by minimizing obstructions, especially in the vicinity of intersections. Objective C2 -2 Provide a bikeway system throughout the City to support and encourage the use of the bicycle as a safe and convenient travel mode within the City's circulation system. Policy C2 -2.1 Implement the recommendations on the Bicycle Master Plan contained in the Circulation Element, as the availability arises; i.e., through development, private grants, signing of shared routes. Policy C2 -2.2 Encourage new development to provide facilities for bicyclists to park and store their bicycles and provide shower and clothes changing facilities at or close to the bicyclist's work destination. Policy C2 -2.3 Develop off - street bicycle paths in corridors where appropriate throughout the City. Policy C2 -2.4 Encourage the use of bicycles for trips to and from elementary, middle, and high schools in the area as well as parks, libraries, and other public facilities. 132 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-48 4. Circulation Element Draft 917104 Policy C2 -2.5 Continue coordination of bicycle route planning and implementation with adjacent jurisdictions and regional agencies. Policy C2 -2.6 Encourage design of new streets with the potential for Class I or Class II bicycle routes that separate the automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian to the maximum extent feasible. Policy C2 -2.7 Although Hillcrest Street is closed between Imperial Avenue and Imperial Highway to allow emergency vehicular access only, ensure that the link in the Master Plan of Bicycle Routes is maintained, via the Hillcrest Street right -of -way or any appropriate alternative route. Policy C2 -2.8 Evaluate bikeway system links with the Metro Green Line rail stations and improve access wherever feasible. Objective C2 -3 Ensure the provision of a safe and efficient transit system that will offer the residents, workers, and visitors of El Segundo a viable alternative to the automobile. Policy C2 -3.1 Work closely with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), Torrance Municipal Bus Lines, the El Segundo Employers Association (ESEA), and private businesses to expand and improve the public transit service within and adjacent to the City. Policy C2 -3.2 Ensure that transit planning is considered and integrated into all related elements of City planning. Policy C2 -3.3 Evaluate and implement feeder bus service through the City where appropriate. Feeder bus service could potentially take commuters from the fixed transit services (rail and bus) in the eastern portion of the City to the industrial and commercial areas to the west. In addition, midday shuttling of workers east of Sepulveda Boulevard to the Downtown retail area should also be maintained. Policy C2 -3.4 Pursue potential Proposition A and Proposition C funds for bus transit shelters, signing, advertising, and bus turnouts to encourage bus ridership. 133 T H E C 1 T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-49 4. Circulation Element Dreg W104 Policy C2 -3.5 Continue the Dial -a -Ride operation and City subsidy to serve all residents of El Segundo, especially the elderly and handicapped. Policy C2 -3.6 Continue to support the Downtown Lunchtime shuttle operation. Policy C2 -3.7 Explore the feasibility of using excess government right -of -way, purchased property, or land use arrangements for multiple use of existing facilities, in order to establish or construct park- and -ride services of benefit to El Segundo residents and employees. Policy C2 -3.8 Encourage the implementation of park -and -ride facilities proximate to the I -405 and I -105 Freeways for shuttle service into El Segundo. Policy C2 -3.9 Investigate all MTA programs which may be beneficial to the City. Policy C2 -3.10 Encourage the MTA to provide bike storage facilities at the Metro Green Line rail stations. Objective C2 -4 Ensure the use of Transportation System Management (TSM) measures throughout the City, to ensure that the City's circulation system is as efficient and cost effective as possible. Policy C24.1 Establish and maintain a citywide traffic count program to ensure the availability of data needed to identify necessary operational improvements to the roadway system. Policy C24.2 Continue to increase operational efficiencies of the transportation system by implementing all appropriate Transportation System Management (TSM) measures, including but not limited to improving design standards, upgrading and coordination of traffic control devices, controlling on- street parking, and using sophisticated electronic control methods to supervise the flow of traffic. Objective C2 -5 Ensure the use of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures throughout the City, where appropriate, to discourage the single- occupant vehicle, particularly during the peak hours. In addition, ensure that any developments that are approved based on TDM plans incorporate monitoring and enforcement of TDM targets as part of those plans. 134 T H E C I T Y O F E L 5 E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-50 4. Circulation Element Draft 917N4 Policy C2 -5.1 Ensure that Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures are considered during the evaluation of new developments within the City, including but not limited to ridesharing, carpooling and vanpooling, flexible work schedules, telecommuting and car /vanpool preferential parking. Policy C2 -5.2 Coordinate activities with neighboring jurisdictions and the El Segundo Employers Association (ESEA) to optimize the effectiveness of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) activities. Policy C2 -5.3 Encourage the provision of preferential parking for high occupancy vehicles wherever possible. Goal C3: Development of Circulation Policies that are Consistent with other City Policies Develop a balanced General Plan, coordinating the Circulation Element with all other Elements, ensuring that the City's decision malting and planning activities are consistent among all City departments. Objective C3 -1 Ensure that potential circulation system impacts are considered when the City's decision makers and staff are evaluating land use changes. Policy C3 -1.1 Require all new development to mitigate project - related impacts on the existing and future circulation system such that all Master Plan roadways and intersections are upgraded and maintained at acceptable levels of service through implementation of all applicable Circulation Element policies. Mitigation measures shall be provided by or paid for by the project developer. Policy C3 -1.2 The minimum acceptable level of service (LOS) at an intersection is LOS D. Intersections operating at LOS E or F shall be considered deficient. If traffic caused by a development project is forecast to result in an intersection level of service change from LOS D or better to LOS E or F, then the development impact shall be considered significant. If a development project is forecast to result in the increase of intersection volume /capacity ratio (V /C) of 0.02 or greater at any intersection that is forecast to operate at LOS E or F, the impact shall be considered significant. 135 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-51 4. Circulation Element Draft 96104 Policy C3 -1.3 Limit intersection improvements to feasible improvements that do not affect buildings, freeway supports, or railroad rights -of -way. Such improvements should not include more than three left -turn lanes, four through lanes, and two right -turn lanes on any approach to an intersection Policy C3 -1.4 Encourage development projects that effectively integrate major transportation facilities with land use planning and the surrounding environment. These joint uses will obtain economic and aesthetic benefits of coordinated design, achieve land conservation in space - short urban areas of El Segundo, and maintain neighborhood continuity in built -up areas affected by future major transportation routes. Policy C3 -1.5 Ensure that transit planning is considered and integrated into all related elements of City planning. Policy C3 -1.6 Apply planning principles and Circulation Element goals, objectives, and policies should apply consistently to all land uses in the City. Policy C3 -1.7 Require submittal and implementation of a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) for all projects within the Urban Mixed -Use area, and encourage a TMP for all projects within the northeast quadrant. Policy C3 -1.8 Require the provision of adequate pedestrian and bicycle access for new development projects through the development review process. Policy C3 -1.9 Ensure that the driveway stacking distance for multi- family housing is evaluated during the development review process. Objective C3 -2 Ensure the consideration of the impacts of land use decisions on the City's parking situation. Policy C3 -2.1 Ensure the provision of sufficient on -site parking in all new development. 136 Policy C3 -2.2 Ensure that the City's parking codes and zoning ordinances are kept T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-52 4. Qrculafion Element up -to -date. Draft WIN Goal C4: Compliance with all Federal, State, and Regional Regulations Ensure that the City remains in compliance with all Federal, State, and Regional regulations, remains consistent with the plans of neighboring jurisdictions and thus remains eligible for all potential transportation improvement programs. Objective C4 -1 Cooperate to the fullest extent possible with State, County, and regional planning agencies responsible for maintaining and implementing the Circulation Element to ensure an orderly and consistent development of the entire South Bay region. Policy C4 -1.1 Actively participate in various committees and other planning forums associated with County, Regional, and State Congestion Management Programs. Policy C4 -1.2 Ensure that the City remains in compliance with the County, Regional, and State Congestion Management Programs (CMP) through the development of appropriate City programs and traffic impact analyses of new projects impacting the CMP routes of Sepulveda Boulevard, the I -105 Freeway, and the I -405 Freeway. Policy C4 -1.3 Investigate and evaluate the feasibility and merits of adding more routes, that are impacted by external traffic sources, to the County CMP highway system. Objective C4 -2 Ensure that the City's circulation system is consistent with those of neighboring jurisdictions. Policy C4 -2.1 Ensure that new roadway links are constructed as designated in the Circulation Element, and link with existing roadways in neighboring jurisdictions to allow efficient access into and out of the City. Policy C4 -2.2 Carefully assess adjacent local agencies' plans to ensure compatibility across political boundaries. This does not imply that such compatibility is a requirement for adoption of the Circulatiog 3 Element. 1 T H E C 1 T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-53 4. Circulation Element Draft WIN Policy C4 -2.3 Continuously monitor and evaluate Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) master planning and evaluate the impacts of LAX on the City's Circulation Element. Policy C4 -2.4 Encourage cooperation with other governmental agencies to provide adequate vehicular traffic movements on streets and through intersections by means of synchronized signalization. Objective C4 -3 Establish the City's short-term (5 -year) Capital Improvement Program (CIP) consistent with the Circulation Element and the entire General Plan, and ensure that the CIP incorporates adequate funding for the City's circulation needs. Policy C4 -3.1 Identify and evaluate potential revenue sources for financing circulation system development and improvement projects. Policy C4 -3.2 Update the City's 1996 Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee Program, to reflect changes in planned improvements requiring funding changing needs and changes in the construction cost index. PAPlanning & Building Safety\PROJECTS \576- 599\EA- 579 \Circulation Element Text Documents \Draft Circulation Element 6-23 - 04.doc 138 T H E C I T Y O F E L S E G U N D O • G E N E R A L P L A N 4-54 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO Exhibit B to Staff Reporr PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PUBLIC HEARING: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: REQUEST: PROPERTY INVOLVED: Introduction August 12, 2004 Environmental Assessment No. 579 and General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1 City of El Segundo Various Update of the Circulation Element of the General Plan Citywide The proposed project is an update to the Circulation Element of the El Segundo General Plan (proposed Circulation Element Update). The City last revised and adopted its Circulation Element as part of its comprehensive General Plan update in 1992. The current revision was initiated in 2002. The City has developed a series of policies and actions that constitute the proposed Circulation Element Update. The proposed project addresses deletions of planned roadways (to conform to existing physical constraints); changes in Circulation Element policies to convert Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation; and changes in Circulation Element policies to define feasibility of physical intersection improvements. The revised Circulation Element also addresses constructing physical improvements to modify and improve the City's planned roadway system. 11. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue this item until August 26, 2004 due to scheduled absences for two Planning Commissioners from the August 12, 2004 hearing. The Planning Commission should open the public hearing, receive public testimony from anyone who may not be available at the next hearing, and continue the public hearing until the meeting on August 26, 2004. 139 Prepared by: Paul Garry, Senior Planner Kimberly Chri ensen, AICP, Planning Manager Community, conomic and Development Services r.. Ja�] s M, Hansen, Director Coriimuhity, Economic and Development Services PAPlanning & Building Safety\Projects \576- 599 \Ea - 579 \EA- 579.sr.8- 12- 04.doc 2 140 Exhibit B to Staff Report CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PUBLIC HEARING: August 26, 2004 SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment No. 579 and General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1 PROPERTY OWNERS: Various APPLICANT: City of El Segundo REQUEST: Update of the Circulation Element of the General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Circulation Element Update PROPERTY INVOLVED: Citywide I. Introduction On February 7, 2002, the City Council authorized Planning staff to begin the process of updating the Circulation Element of the General Plan. A series of Council workshops followed to define the scope of the project and review progress reports on the project. On October 8, 2003, the Council directed staff to begin preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to study the environmental impacts of the revised Circulation Element. The Draft EIR has been completed and was circulated for a 45 -day public review period on June 25, 2004. The public review period ended on August 9, 2004. The Draft EIR and revised Circulation Element are ready for review and action by the Planning Commission. The City Council will take final action on the Planning Commission's recommendation. On August 12, 2004, staff distributed the staff report for the August 26, 2004 Planning Commission public hearing for the update of the Circulation Element. This staff report supplements the previous analysis with a summary of the comment letters received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). II. Recommendation Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the revised Circulation Element and Draft Environmental Impact Report; and, adopt 141 Resolution No. 2572, recommending approval of Environmental Assessment No. 579 and General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1 (Exhibit A). III. Draft Circulation Element California Statute (Gov't. Code §§ 65300- 65457) requires cities to prepare a General Plan consisting of seven mandatory Elements, one of which is the Circulation Element. The General Plan is considered the constitution for all future developments and its goals and policies may be used as a basis for dedication and fee requirements. The purpose of the Circulation Element is to establish a set of goals, objectives and policies of the City related to the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, and other public utilities, all correlated with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The Circulation Element is intended to provide an assessment of the levels at which the existing circulation infrastructure operates, and forecast future infrastructure needs based upon anticipated future land use projects. The current Circulation Element was adopted along with the comprehensive General Plan update that was completed in December 1992. There is no statutory requirement to update the Circulation Element at any given time. The Draft Circulation Element summarizes the key findings of the traffic analysis completed for the project. By nature, a Circulation Element is more general than the traffic report. Its purpose is not to provide detailed solutions to every specific planning. The Draft Circulation Element includes a summary of existing conditions, forecasted future conditions, a discussion of the Master Plan of Streets, street classifications, intersection improvements, alternative modes of transportation, and revised Goals, Objectives, and Policies. Staff requests that the Planning Commission review the Draft Circulation Element and provide comments and any recommended changes to the document. Such revisions will be incorporated into the Draft Circulation Element and submitted to the City Council for their review and approval. IV. Background Project History The City Council first initiated an update to the Circulation Element in 1998 and ended the process in 2001 when consensus could not be reached on the key issue of including any changes to land use densities as part of the project. The City Council reinitiated the Circulation Element update process in May 2002 2 142 by directing staff to conduct scoping meetings with community stakeholders. The purpose of these meetings was to illicit input on the issues that should be studied in the Circulation Element update. Scoping meetings with the public were held on June 5, 2002 and June 25, 2002. Approximately 40 people attended the two meetings. A Request for Proposal (RFP) was distributed on September 18, 2002 for consultant services after receiving direction from the City Council on the scope of work to include in the RFP. On November 19, 2002, the City Council selected Kimley -Horn and Associates to prepare the Circulation Element update and Christopher A. Joseph and Associates to prepare the Environmental Impact Report for the project. Context It is important to note the City of El Segundo is located in Los Angeles County, home to over 9,500,000 people. Like so many communities in this region, thousands of people on their way to and from work drive through this city. Sepulveda and Aviation Boulevards are especially impacted by this phenomenon that creates traffic congestion above and beyond levels generated by our businesses and residents. Because this is beyond the direct control of the City, it adds to the challenge of both planning and funding transportation improvements. Methodology and Assumptions Staff and the consultants began work on the Circulation Element by preparing methodology and a set of data assumptions that would be used in preparing the traffic model to study the traffic that would be forecast for the year 2025. This review included determining the list of intersections to study, identifying major projects to incorporate into the background growth (i.e., LAX expansion, Playa Vista, Campus El Segundo, LAAFB expansion, etc.), reviewing the use of data from the Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG) regional transportation model for regional through traffic inputs, reviewing inventories of vacant and recyclable land in the City to assess future buildout, and reviewing previous assumptions regarding planned roadway extensions and the conversion of the Nash - Douglas one -way couplet to two -way operations. The City Council reviewed the methodology and assumptions at its February 4, 2003 meeting and approved a working set of assumptions for the traffic modeling to begin. The attached City, Council staff report, dated February 4 2003 (Exhibit B), includes a detailed discussion of the methodology and assumptions that were developed and approved for the update of the Circulation Element. Traffic Model The next step in the update process was for Kimley -Horn and Associates to prepare the traffic model and present the results of the validation process to the City Council. The validation process is intended to make sure the traffic model will accurately predict future traffic growth by comparing the results of the model Lt 3 .i inputs versus the current traffic levels which were measured by new counts of all signalized intersections in the City. The model was also run against the projected buildout in the existing General Plan. This analysis provided a point of comparison for the projected future traffic that would be expected from the new Circulation Element assumptions. The validation results showed that the model was accurately depicting the current conditions so it could be relied upon to provide accurate forecasts as well. On August 5, 2003, the Council reviewed the results of the validation effort and directed staff to begin the traffic modeling for three land use scenarios that it wanted studied as part of the update process. The attached City Council staff report (Exhibit C) includes a detailed discussion of the validation process. Development Density Scenarios In an effort to address the density concerns of many stakeholders that were raised in the aborted Circulation Element update process initiated in 1998, the Council directed staff to study three different land use buildout scenarios in the Mixed -Use North (MU -N) and Corporate Office (CO) Zones. The three Floor Area Ratio (FAR) scenarios (0.8, 1.0, and 1.3) would help the decision makers understand if lowering or raising the density limitations in these two zones would significantly affect the future traffic volumes in the City. Floor area ratio is the ratio between building size and lot size. The larger the permitted FAR the larger the development may be on a given size property. Staff returned to the City Council with the results of the traffic modeling on October 8, 2003. At that time staff presented a comparison of the three land use alternative scenarios, which also included a comparison with a "No Land Use Change" scenario. The results from the traffic model concluded that traffic would increase approximately 20 -50 percent (depending on the intersection) between now and 2025. The difference in traffic volume between the three land use scenarios was approximately 2 -11 % depending on the location within the City. as the proposed project that would be studied in the Environmental Impact Report. The Council concluded that the there were not sufficiently significant traffic improvements that would be derived from reducing the density in the MU- N and CO Zone versus leaving the current land use densities in place. The October 8, 2003 City Council staff report attached as Exhibit D includes a detailed discussion of the floor area ratio comparison. At this time the City Council directed staff to begin preparation of the EIR and the draft Circulation Element document, incorporating the "No Land Use Change" scenario and other assumptions related to planned roadway extensions, truck routes, and intersection improvements. Staff and the consultants have prepared a Draft Circulation Element, which was distributed separately to the Commission on June 25, 2004. The Draft Circulation Element updates the existing Circulation Element in the General Plan adopted in 4 14 1992. Appendix C of the EIR contains the Traffic Report, prepared by Kimley- Horn and Associates, which provides additional details about the process employed to update the Circulation Element. The draft Circulation Element itself is also included in Appendix C of the EIR and is also attached to draft Resolution No. 2572 in Exhibit A to this report. V. Analysis As briefly mentioned above, the purpose of the Circulation Element is to spell out the means by which the City will identify a system capable of responding to the growth that is occurring and that will occur during the life of the plan (2025) consistent with the Land Use Plan presented in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The Circulation Element identifies the location and extent of existing and proposed thoroughfares, transportation routes, and other circulation programs. Level of Service (LOS) The draft Circulation Element summarizes the existing traffic conditions in the City using Level of Service (LOS) criteria; defines the type of street network that would be appropriate to serve the community though the proposed Master Plan of Streets; and analyzes how the proposed network will perform in handling the traffic that could be generated though the buildout of the City as permitted in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Level of Service (LOS) measures the volume of traffic compared to the capacity of the roadway. Roadways with LOS A, B, C, and D are generally considered to be acceptable levels with little or no delays. Roadways with LOS E are considered deficient and LOS F means the volume exceeds the design capacity of the roadway. This criterion should always be referenced with some level of qualification. For instance, on Problematic turning movement at an otherwise well functioning intersection can lower the LOS. Exhibit C -3, C-4, and C -5 in the draft Circulation Element (attached to Draft Resolution No. 2572) provide a more detailed discussion of LOS criteria. In 2002, the City Council developed a series of policies and actions that constitute the proposed Circulation Element Update. The proposed project addresses deletions of planned roadways (to conform to existing physical constraints), changes in Circulation Element policies to convert Nash and Douglas Streets from one -way to two -way operation, changes in Circulation Element policies to define feasibility of physical intersection improvements and constructing physical improvements to modify and improve the City's planned roadway system as it would be set forth in the updated Circulation Element. Changes in Roadway Designations • Deleting the previously planned portion of Mariposa Street between Douglas Street and Aviation Boulevard. • Deleting the previously planned portion of Grand Avenue between Douglas Street and Aviation Boulevard. 5 145 • Deleting the east -west Secondary Arterial Street between Hughes Way and Douglas Street. • Deleting Nash Street as a Secondary Arterial between El Segundo Boulevard and Park Place. This action would also result in deleting the truck route along this segment. • Converting Nash Street from a one -way southbound street to a two -way Secondary Arterial between Imperial Highway and El Segundo Boulevard. • Converting Douglas Street from a one -way northbound street to a two -way Secondary Arterial between Imperial Highway and El Segundo Boulevard. • Retention of the Grand Avenue truck route between Main Street and Sepulveda Boulevard in the Recommended Truck Route Plan. • Re- designation of Park Place between Nash Street and Douglas Street from a street classification as a local commercial street to a collector street. Physical Changes in Roadway Configurations • Developing a street system within the site located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue (the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site) consistent with the development concept of that site. It is expected that there will be a north - south, two -lane, albeit circuitous, roadway connection between El Segundo Boulevard and Park Place in lieu of the Nash Street Secondary Arterial (to be deleted). This connection may not be a linear route and may entail several turns. A two - lane, east -west connection between Sepulveda Boulevard and Nash Street along a new alignment would be provided through the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site. • Converting Nash Street from a one -way southbound street to a two -way secondary arterial between Imperial Highway and El Segundo Boulevard. • Converting Douglas Street from a one -way northbound street to a two -way Secondary Arterial between Imperial Highway and El Segundo Boulevard. • Intersection modifications along Nash and Douglas Streets associated with the change from one -way to two -way operation. • Incorporation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) improvements onto the roadway network. Intersection Improvements and Revisions to Circulation Element Policies • The proposed Circulation Element Update includes planned intersection improvements designed to achieve LOS D or better. The proposed project includes modifications to Circulation Element policies that would limit potential intersection improvements to those that can be feasibly implemented, by limiting lane additions beyond the existing right -of -way to those that would not affect buildings, freeway supports or railroad rights - of -way. • Creation of a significance threshold policy for development project review. s 146 There is a discussion of each of these topics in the draft Circulation Element. Additionally, staff has reviewed the goals, objectives and policies in the Circulation Element and has proposed a number of changes to consolidate and clarify several policies. Most importantly, staff is proposing Policy C3 -1.2 which would formally establish the significance threshold for use in evaluating the impacts of development on the roadway network. The proposed threshold would consider a project to create a significance impact if it causes a Level of Service traffic would be considered a significant impact. Another policy change of note would be in C4 -3.2. If adopted, this policy would direct the City to update its Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee Program. Since the proposed Circulation Element contains an updated list of intersection improvement projects, which will require funding, an update of the fee program study could create a mechanism to raise funds from developers to pay for a portion of these improvements. VI. Environmental Review The update of the Circulation Element is considered a "project' under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, an analysis of the potential environmental impact of the programs and policies in the revised Circulation Element is required. Based on an Initial Study of Environmental Impacts that was prepared for the project, staff determined that a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be required for the Circulation Element update. The City contracted with Christopher A. Joseph and Associates to prepare the EIR. A Notice of Preparation was prepared and distributed for public review from December 30, 2003 to January 29, 2004. A revised Notice of Preparation was also prepared and distributed from May 7, 2004 to June 7 2004. The Draft EIR was completed based upon the project description approved by the City Council on October 8, 2003; and, made available for public review on June 25, 2004. The required 45 -day public review period for the Draft EIR ended on August 9, 2004. The Draft EIR was distributed separately to the Planning Commission for review on June 25, 2004. The Draft EIR discusses the environmental impacts associated with each of the proposed project elements (i.e., conversion of Nash - Douglas one -way couplet to two -way operations, street extensions and deletions, and intersection improvements) and recommends mitigation measures where appropriate if a significant impact is likely to be caused by the project. As required by CEQA, the Draft EIR also examines alternatives to the proposed project. There are four alternatives, including a "no project' alternative, and buildout of the General Plan using the 0.8, 1.0 and 1.3 FAR scenarios. The Draft EIR concluded that there would be significant and unavoidable traffic and circulation impacts at six of the 55 studied intersections in the City. No feasible mitigation measures could be identified which would reduce the traffic 14i 7 impacts at these intersections to a level of insignificance (see discussion on page IV.B -17 of the DEIR). However, feasible traffic improvements for five of the six intersections are proposed to help improve traffic conditions from what they would otherwise be without the proposed Circulation Element. The sixth intersection (Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue) was recently improved as part of the Sepulveda Boulevard widening project. Additional improvements would require significant interagency coordination (i.e., Caltrans and Manhattan Beach) and dedications of land from properties abutting the intersection. The Draft EIR also identified potentially significant and unavoidable air quality impacts for Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) due to the construction activities associated with the recommended intersections improvements. Since it cannot be known with certainty how future intersection improvements projects will be structured, staff assumed that a prototypical project would involve improvements at three intersections. The construction emissions for such a project would exceed the emissions thresholds established by the Air Quality Management District. There is no feasible mitigation to reduce this impact to a less than significant impact (see discussion on pages IV.D -17 to IV.D -18 of the Draft EIR). Significant and unavoidable temporary construction noise impacts were identified at five intersections as a result of construction activities associated with intersection improvements. The Draft EIR includes several mitigation measures (K -1, K -2, K -3, and K-4) which would reduce these impacts to a level of insignificance. However, the impacts would remain significant and unavoidable (see discussion on pages IV.K -5 to IV.K -6 of the Draft EIR). An EIR may not be certified by the City with significant and unavoidable impacts. Consequently, in order for the City to certify the EIR, a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) would have to be approved by the City Council for the unavoidable significant traffic impacts at six intersections, construction related NOx impacts, and construction related noise impacts at five intersections. An SOC acknowledges that a project has significant impacts, but finds that other aspects of the project, such as economic benefits, outweigh the unavoidable environmental impacts of the project. The proposed Circulation Element identifies traffic improvements that will help alleviate traffic impacts caused by growth within the City and caused by regional pass through traffic. These improvements, along with the other modifications to the Circulation Element, will improve the overall traffic conditions in the City compared to the current programs in the adopted Circulation Element. While there will be unavoidable temporary construction related air quality and noise impacts due to the improvements incorporated into the proposed Circulation Element, the long term traffic benefits outweigh the temporary impacts. Improved traffic flow will help reduce air quality impacts over time. Additionally, none of the construction related noise impacts would be adjacent to residential uses in El Segundo. 8 14 8 Comments on the EIR As of August 12, 2004, staff has received ten comment letters regarding the Draft EIR. They are included as Exhibit E. Now that the public review period has ended (August 9, 2004), staff is preparing a response to comments received on the DEIR. Staff will submit a Final EIR, including responses to all comments received, to the City Council for certification along with adoption of the revised Circulation Element. Letters were received from the State Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC), the El Segundo Fire Department, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the El Segundo Chamber of Commerce, the El Segundo Employers Association (ESEA), the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the City of Manhattan Beach, Kilroy Realty Corporation, and two letters from El Segundo resident Brian Crowley. The following is a summary of the most important issues raised in each of the correspondence: State Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) The comments of DTSC related to determining if the construction sites as part of the Circulation Element would involve hazardous wastes or contain contaminated soil. All future construction projects that would implement the Circulation Element and the Program EIR would be required to undergo subsequent site specific analysis to address soil conditions before such projects could be constructed. El Segundo Fire Department The issues raised by the El Segundo Fire Department related to the Douglas Street extension were addressed in Environmental Assessment No. 597, which was approved by the City council in 2003. Additionally, all underground contamination associated with road construction on the Honeywell site will be evaluated as part of the EIR currently being prepared for the development project on that site. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) SCAG acknowledged that the Circulation Element project is not a regionally significant project. El Segundo Chamber of Commerce The Chamber of Commerce stated all their concerns had been addressed in the Draft EIR. 9 1 4q El Segundo Employers Association (ESEA) ESEA stated they were in agreement with the policy direction of the draft Circulation Element. State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Caltrans commented that because traffic growth on Sepulveda Boulevard cannot be fully mitigated, the City should consider taking control of the street from Caltrans through its relinquishment process. This is a policy decision that would require City Council direction. If control were relinquished, the City would not have to consult with Caltrans on modifications to Sepulveda Boulevard. However, the City would also be responsible for maintenance of the street if it were relinquished. Caltrans commented that deletion of the planned roadway extensions should be studied. The City Council in establishing the project description determined that extending Grand and Mariposa Avenues to Aviation Boulevard would be infeasible given the existing land uses that would be impacted. Therefore, the deletions are part of the baseline analysis and were not studied separately. City of Manhattan Beach The City of Manhattan Beach commented that the proposed Manhattan Village Shopping Center Expansion project was not included as a related project in the Draft EIR. With a few notable exceptions (i.e. LAX expansion and Playa Vista), no specific development projects outside the City boundaries are included in the traffic projections. The traffic projections use the traffic growth predicted from the regional SCAG traffic model to account for future traffic that will originate from outside of El Segundo. Additionally, Manhattan Beach did not mention the project in their comments on the Notice of Preparation. The City of Manhattan Beach expressed concern with the operational parameters which the Circulation Element proposes to use to determine the extent of possible intersection widenings. While very large intersections can become problematic, the City chose the maximum design parameters with operational characteristics (i.e., impact on pedestrian and turning movements) in mind. The City Council determined as part of formulating the project description that the largest operationally acceptable intersection could include three left turns, four through lanes, and two right turn lanes. Such large intersections have been constructed, particularly in Orange County. The City of Manhattan Beach also suggested that the City's traffic mitigation fee program be used to pay for subregional roadway improvements, not just improvements within El Segundo. Staff thinks a subregional approach to mitigation may be worthwhile if the South Bay Cities Council of Governments were to take the lead. However, staff's opinion is that one City should not unilaterally agree to require developers to fund improvements outside its 10 iJU boundaries unless all the cities in the South Bay agree to do the same. Currently, the City of Manhattan Beach does not even have a traffic mitigation fee for development within its own boundaries. Kilroy Realty Corporation Kilroy Realty Corporation commented that "related" projects were not discussed as part of the cumulative analysis that is a required part of an EIR. The growth assumptions built into the Circulation Element traffic forecasts include a specific list of projects as well as projected development on vacant land and projected development by recycling existing buildings. A list of "related" projects was included in Appendix C to the EIR as part of the project Traffic Report. This list includes expansion of Los Angeles International Airport, Playa Vista, the Campus El Segundo project, the modernization of Los Angeles Air Force Base, and the development of the Honeywell property. Since all of these projects have been incorporated into the project, they are not considered as cumulative projects. Kilroy Realty Corporation also commented on various aspects of the conversion of the Nash - Douglas one -way couplet. Their comments questioned projected levels of service on Atwood Way and the impacts of truck movements on service levels. The projected Level of Service (LOS) A for Atwood Way is an accurate assessment of the future road conditions taking into account all types of vehicles, all the development anticipated to occur until 2025, and the completion of the Douglas Street Gap Closure Project. Since there are no potential traffic impacts on Atwood Way, it would not be appropriate to require any dedication of land to widen Atwood Way. All potential access issues with respect to the Campus El Segundo project were evaluated as part of the environmental review for that project, including requirements related to the conversion the Nash - Douglas one -way couplet. Brian Crowley Brian Crowley, an El Segundo resident, submitted a number of comments, which are too extensive to be individually addressed in this report. The comments generally relate to the following topics: bicycles; the relationship between the original process to update the Circulation Element and the current process; reductions in rail traffic; incorporation of the Campus El Segundo project and other "related" projects into the Circulation Element analysis; the effectiveness of the use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), the conversion of the Nash - Douglas Street one -way couplet; the number of impacted intersections; feasible mitigation measures, sensitive receptors for air quality analysis, the lunchtime shuttle, and bus routes. Incorporation of the Campus El Segundo project and other 'related" projects into the Circulation Element analysis have been addressed as stated in the City of Manhattan Beach and Kilroy Realty Corporation sections. The conversion of the 11 151 Nash - Douglas Street one -way couplet is discussed in the Kilroy Realty Corporation section. There is no discussion in the project description section of the EIR about a prior update to the Circulation Element because that project was not approved or adopted and has no bearing on the current update process; it is not a "related" project; and, it has no impact on the physical environment. This topic is addressed earlier in this staff report. Staff will prepare complete responses to all of Mr. Crowley's comments along with all of the other comments received during the public review period for the EIR that will be incorporated into the Final EIR. VII. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Commission adopt Draft Resolution No. 2572 recommending approval of Environmental Assessment No. 579 and General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1 and adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations. VIII. Exhibits A. Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 2572 B. City Council Staff Report, February 4, 2003 C. City Council Staff Report, August 5, 2003 D. City Council Staff Report, October 8, 2003 E. Comment letters on Draft EIR F. Draft EIR, Traffic Analysis and Draft Circulation Element (previously distributed) Prepared by: Paul Garry, Senior Planner Kimberly Chrtonomicand nsen, AICP, Planning Manager Community, Development Services � V J Ja es Hansen, Director C nity, Economic and Development Services PAPlanning & Building Safety\Projects%576- 599TEa- 579 \EA- 579.PC SR 8- 26- 04.combined.doc 152 12 Exhibit C to Staff Report MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA AUGUST 12, 2004 Vice - Chairman Miller Sheehan called the meeting of the El Segundo CALL TO ORDER Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the City of El Segundo City Hall, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California. Commissioner Schiltz led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag;;" PLEDGE TO FLAG PRESENT: CARLSON, MILLER SHEEHAN, SCHI ABSENT: FUNK, KRETZMER None. Vice - Chairman Miller Sheehan presented the None. ROLL CALL TIONS CONSENT CALENDAR CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Schilt ved, 9 onded by C' mmissioner Carlson, to MOTION approve the July 22; ,Minutp as submifti% ^passed 3 -0. None. � „� � >r4 . wk� ,` WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Vice Chai'r� Miller presented Agenda Item No. H -2, Environmental Assessments 579, Gengtal Plan Amendment No. 02 -1. Project: kw.. Circulation Ele rlt Update,, %Applicant: City of El Segundo. Address: Citywide. Planning Manager Christensen commented on the importance of having a full Commission present to discuss this matter and noted the Planning Commission's previous discussion to continue this matter to the August 26th meeting, wherein a full Commission is expected. She noted that staff will provide a full presentation at the next meeting. Vice- Chairman Miller opened the public hearing. No public input was given. NEW BUSINESS, EA NO. 579, GPA NO. 02 -1 The proposed project is an update to the Circulation Element of the El Segundo General Plan (proposed Circulation Element Update). The City last revised and adopted its Circulation Element as part of its comprehensive General Plan update in 1992. The current revision was initiated in 2002. Several different density scenarios for the Urban Mixed -Use North (MU -N) and the Corporate Office (CO) areas of the City were analyzed as part of the project, but no changes in land use designations, as presently set forth in the General Plan Land Use Element or zoning classifications, are proposed as part of the project. El Segundo Planning Commission 1 J Minutes, August 12, 2004 Commissioner Carlson moved, seconded by Commissioner Schiltz, to MOTION continue EA No. 579 and General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1 to the August 26th Planning Commission meeting. Passed 3 -0. None. CONTINUED BUSINESS Planning Manager Christensen noted that at the end of the meeting, she REPORT FROM would distribute an initial staff report and attachments to the,C,kculation DIRECTOR Element Update to the Planning Commissioners for the 6Igust 26th meeting, including related written communications re; "` cr by the Planning Division, noting that this will allow the Plan ission additional time to review the materials. Due to ,the, ort tur` ound time between the end of the public comment period and this eve's meeting, she explained that staff was not ak�4 4o include a com ae review of those letters with responses to cor" mi in t.40 initial s'' report, but that the letters have been included in t ttb'rials and tht�'' August 26 agenda packet will include an expanded' Staff report. She advised that the public may obtain copPtas, of these iYlaterials at the Planning Division. Planning Manager ( include an item for a Commission had pr( redesigned. Te 7M There P.M. b PASSED AND 2004. further( lar meeti added Mat the no*,,agend&�'Wll also minium pt9iect at 3` boo rd; that the %wed, n96 that the project has been meeting was adjourned at 7:12 .2004. Passed 3 -0. ON THIS 9" DAY OF SEPTEMBER, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT James Hansen, Secretary of Janet Miller Sheehan, Vice - Chairman of the the Planning Commission Planning Commission and Director of Community, City of El Segundo, California Economic and Development City of El Segundo, California 15:{ 2 E( Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 12, 2004 Exhibit C to Staff Report MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA AUGUST 26, 2004 Chair Funk called the meeting of the El Segundo Planning Commission CALL TO ORDER to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the City of El Segundo City Hall, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California. Chair Funk led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PRESENT: SCHILTZ ABSENT: None. None None None Chair Funk OF... gnte No. 644, Subs fol 02. Applicant and F 322 Concord Street. Planning Technician KRETZMER, No. H -1, Environmental Assessment M No. 60772) and Variance No. 04- 320 Concord, LLC. Address: 320- presented the staff report (of record). Chair Funk opened the hearing for public input. Cheryl Vargo, representing the applicant Ms. Vargo commented on the history of this proposed project, its former design, and the previous concerns from the Fire Department with regard to how the units would be accessed. Ms. Vargo explained that the project has been redesigned and that it is now a far superior project than what had previously been proposed. She noted that the living area is PLEDGE TO FLAG ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT CALENDAR WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS NEW BUSINESS, EA NO. 644, SUBD. NO. 04 -06 (VTM NO. 60772), and VAR NO. 04 -02 An application for a Subdivision and Variance to construct a three -unit condominium development on an existing parcel. El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 15 54 located on the second and third levels and that the new design has achieved better site circulation and parking plans. Ms. Vargo explained that in trying to meet the intent of the building modulation code, it becomes more difficult when a parcel is under 50 feet in width; and noted that it can negatively affect rooms within that living space. She stated that when the code was adopted requiring the building modulation, it was to add interest to a building when there were many flat walls; and that it was more focused on homes that were situated on a corner lot or building masses fronting the street, visible from the public right -of -way, rather than the interior side yards where one has two that are abutting each other. She expressed her be, has achieved the intent of the modulation codq" accomplished this with increments that add up t& She added that the Commission has been provided . rendering of the north side of the property that achie code — pointing out that this is the reason for the v the variance, she noted that the project, as di standards of the development code; and stated concurs with the conditions of approval. Commissioner Carlson in commenting asking for with the variance questioned unit or any project that is 40 feet in wid Carlson's inquiry, Ms. Vargo expressed of step with ,what on this tvoe ©f lot. agprojects architect o'"'•;.that he E f tfi# ap#jnt is N#,icab zany In q,_O,ommiiii br er at;it could be. IPeries this code is out a building of this size Ms. Vargo cpress6 belief, #bat it would be prudent for the City to reconsider tl%, wwy the' ""d e is vded; stated that the applicable code section is vE Y ief a d bat it' oes not allow what the applicant is achieving here, which i .q. r product than what the code would dictate. Concurring with Comirioner Carlson's concern, Chair Funk requested v%5 that staff take a look at fftat specific language in the zoning code and how it relates to properties that are less than 50 feet in width. Planning Manager Christensen stated that staff could research the issue and provide the Commission with an analysis. Chair Funk noted her appreciation of the applicant for taking the steps to satisfy the concerns of the Planning Commission that were expressed at the February 2004 Commission meeting. El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 1 15 ra There being no further input, Chair Funk closed the public hearing. Vice -Chair Miller Sheehan questioned if there are other projects similar to this one wherein the same problems have been experienced. Responding to Vice -Chair Miller Sheehan's inquiry, Planning Manager Christensen stated that staff has not researched the number of properties that have been affected by this code requirement and that she is not aware of any similar projects that have come before the planning department in the past year. Commissioner Kretzmer stated that he is please& 'th th project and the quality of the staff report; and d s change the specific code language with regard to #h a w k ., width and smaller. He stated that the variance �' W", without knowing exactly what the uniformity of the Idt&tTe City ought to be careful in crafting new language to"'` making provisions for lots that are less than 50 feet in that unless the City is going to have a large n,,, ": ber ofd projects, it might be better to address these on a basis. Director Hansen stated that staff sized projects and present the Col that the CommissiJ06.1 -mj9ht W hd$Jtatibn to relql8et in worke s' ell and t d the x, "g k He ste ty of `ase ry of 'sirar giving some which present Assistant (, Attot l Karl �e}ger irform6d the Commission that they would need' to discus`s this r est of staff under Item M, "Other Business ", s hce tkiis WNkt is no on the agenda. Chair Funk reopened thering�or public input. Ms. Vargo stated that t4r�knowledge, there have been a couple other similar cases on the s treet — noting that in these cases, the parking is a difficult feat and th` design have been inferior to this project; she commented on the applicant's burden of filing for a variance; and expressed her belief that this problem would be more manageable if the City changes the standards to apply to these properties that are under 50 feet in width. Chair Funk closed the hearing on public input. Commissioner Kretzmer moved, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to MOTION concur with the staff recommendation, thus adopting Resolution No. 3 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 157 2571. Passed 5 -0. Jim Fasola, oroiect architect Mr. Fasola briefly commented on the staggered setback for this project and he distributed to the Commission samples of projects that meet the letter of the code and others that don't. Chair Funk presented Agenda Item No. H -2, Environmental Assessment NEW BUSINESS, No. 579 and General Plan Amendment No. 02 -1. Applicant:,,, City of El EA NO. 579 and Segundo. Project: Circulation Element Update. Address: Cj(vide. GPA N0.02 -1 k*,k The proposed project is an update to the Circulation Element of the Director Hansen commended Senior Planner * rrr and Yining El Segundo General Plan �.k y'" Manager Christensen for their efforts that have gon ga o this pFQ and (proposed Circulation Element Update) The City last revised noted that Senior Planner Garry has been involved a i on and adapted is Circulation Element as part of its Element process since 1998. .'" X, " comprehensive General Plan ~,; �' update in 1992. The current ~ti~' revision was initiated in 2002. k .k. Assistant City Attorney Berger reminded the Commission t thiss' Several different density scenarios for the Urban Mixed North -Use continued public hearing from the last Planning CQTTx1 mission. � etm ;'� (MU -N) and the Corporate Office yK't+ (CO) areas of the City were analyzed as part of the project, Senior Planner Garry provided background on th of but no changes in land use designations, as presently set > - `�•` this project and the environmental review. r the CiiY ulatton Efik ent forth in the General Plan Land use Element Update; and stated that Traffic Consultant fnan �.., ctyan {�, or zoning classifications, are proposed as o Part of the project. giving a presentation on some of the f chrnoaf ti ec e Circul tttn Element Update kk ;:. 1��. -!.r.. Senior Planner Garry noY� 'PC ft dbW*t Circulation Element was adopted, the � { reh+opst xeneral Plan Update, in December J;b92, a8hied that ts�o statutory requirement to update the Circula Ele '' any gfit time; and noted that the City initially started this ss in,,..' He sued that the draft Circulation Element summarizes th ey fih'O' of th traffic analysis that was prepared for the project and noted t; it Is ;tin amendment to an existing plan — pointing out that many of ifatures of the plan have not been changed, such as bike routes, p rfan facilities, and transit facilities in the City. He explained that the plan is limited in its scope to a number of things, such as planned roadway extensions, the Nash and Douglas Streets conversion from a one -way street to a two -way street, and proposed new roadways in the area of Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue. Senior Planner Garry stated that City Council directed staff to re- initiate the Circulation Element Update process in May 2002; that staff was directed to conduct a number of scoping meetings with community stakeholders to identify the issues that should be addressed in the Circulation Element Update; advised that several scoping meetings were held in June 2002; that the City obtained the consulting services of 158 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc., in November 2002, to prepare the Circulation Element Update; and obtained the services of Christopher A. Joseph & Associates to prepare the Environmental Impact Report that would go along with this project. He advised that the City and the consultants conducted a series of workshops with City Council to define the scope of the project, methodologies, assumptions, data to be used and the types of improvements that would be defined for the project; and that in October 2003, Council had directed staff to begin preparation of the EIR based on the scope of the project that had developed over the preceding year. Senior Planner Garry stated that .,,the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was completed . and w; . irculated for public review on June 25, 2004; and advised k e review period ended on August 9, 2004. Senior Planner Garry stated that the DEIR concluded after its study that there would be significant and unavoidable traffic imps t 6 of intersections that were analyzed; noted that five of the 2 intersecttctt were identified with some feasible traffic improvement ' t coule be imposed at those intersections, but that they stiEFiwould rt cbpnpi`tely mitigate those intersections — pointing out that;pn4 Rf those tIbns, 9 P 9 Sepulveda /Rosecrans, was recently impYoved k end th h , rther improvements would require significant coortfination is with other jurisdictions and Caltrans. He advise at tTetpEIR a ' tided pot Y significant and unavoidable air ualit 7m ac g q y p �'relatetl to "nitrogen oxide due to constru�U avtties that Auld e a ociated with the recommended in #er`sac{>�tk :gip a e[s3 that in order to study the aiquality; staftrmed a t#iical construction project would involve three ttersecti • "t ote time r one of these roadways; and that tl const ' on imfs associate with that type of project would exceed the thE." "", est hed by the Air Quality Management District (A ) Hded fat there are no feasible mitigation measures that * -uld rettu thos* temporary construction impacts to a less- than - significant Senior Planner Garry y Rf"that the final significant and unavoidable .•. impact relates to temptizary construction noise impacts that would also be associated with this`'prototypical construction project involving three intersections; and advised that there are several mitigation measures proposed as part of the DEIR, but even with these measures, the impact would still remain significant and unavoidable. He advised that the project itself cannot be approved unless the EIR is certified with a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which would have to acknowledge that the project has significant impacts; and advised that there are other aspects of the project, such as the traffic improvements that will be accrued, economic benefits, social benefits, etc., that outweigh the environmental impacts of the project. 5 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 155 ) Senior Planner Garry advised that as part of the public review, staff received ten comment letters from public agencies and members of the public, which are included in the agenda packet; stated that staff has also prepared a summary of the issues that were raised in those letters; and stated that a full response to comments will be prepared by staff and incorporated into the Final EIR, which will be presented to City Council for consideration on September 7, 2004. Senior Planner Garry stated that one of the issues raised in,,,several of the letters referred to related projects and the cumulative sis; and explained that the related projects are not treatecV ,a s >: item because they are incorporated into the growth assd'trtptiotas that Gsed to build the traffic model, and as such, they are part die rota. not separate entities or projects. He mentioned that a reAjdi;resolUt O`:dad been distributed to the Planning Commission this eveEtt with a change on Page 4; and that the Commission had bd ` ovlded page errata sheet which reflects additional improvements , ,ersee#�ons that are proposed. He stated that this same infotmation ! to the public. With the aid of a power point present*n Howl Basrin consultant traffic engineer, provided ove" of ess Ilea ed to the Circulation Element changes;; advi k that :ofie," of the major changes being proa the collye k of ?a#kgfuglas Streets from the current one way`opaf4�ft 'Jo 8 Y opt . a change that will necessitate terse on ti route to accommodate two -way tra is H tated an0 the1 e being proposed is the deletion froi the CrYeatl tion Ent of the' i111ariposa Avenue extension between Di9las nd Avt on Boulevard and the deletion of the Grand Avenue ;ext'6J i"'n be en Douglas Street and Aviation Boulevard. F � bted .. "Onoth change is the area near Sepulveda Boulevard and Rose crAve, where there's an active planning s process fora potential,;;,, :tfopment; and advised that the actual Circulation Element ch In this area will depend on the outcome of that planning process. Mr. Basmaciyan explained that the analysis and methodology is based on the SCAG regional transportation document; and noted that the reason for using the SCAG model is to ensure that the planning process is in keeping with regional transportation decisions and regional growth. He advised that the model has inherently included the planned /known development throughout the region; and for the land uses within the City, the plan has also included the major approved /known projects and potential development of vacant parcels. He added that level -of- service ratings and ITS (Intelligent Transportation System) technologies have 160 6 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 been built into the plan, such as synchronization and traffic control, advance information for travelers, incident management and other techniques that can benefit traffic flow. He explained that even with improvements, there are still six intersections where the Circulation Element changes would have an impact and could not achieve any higher than a "D" level -of- service rating even with the feasible improvements, as identified in the environmental documentation. Vice -Chair Miller Sheehan commended all involved for their work throughout this process. Vice -Chair Miller Sheehan questioned) how staff came up with a calculation of three intersection projects at on8, 'tine. Senior Planner Garry explained that staff believedstttis' um ' Wbe a realistic estimate of how many intersections might �constru V %l one time as part of a project, especially along one of the majo'i " is k corridors. , Commissioner Carlson commended all involved this process. Planning Manager Christensen pointed o also extensively studied as part of this F those intersections with the criteria of.wha overall circulation within the City, 14 Jti~ter: improvements within:th t scope tol# i in the City, reg tstci; regarding for their *0 througboilf 3f 55{.inter2cti ''were t, a h In lout at be dry �o improv8 the Its wi1� Fiatie a varle } f XXI circulation system Put in place. Department's comments Addressing'is Carlsi 's question, Senior Planner Garry stated that one , . the Veparf, fient comments particularly related to the Douglas Street extenstii pact; advised that that project is currently in its design phase; and thk My,Gd its own environmental review that was - ' approved by the City Gg�iYlast year. He added that the relocation of pipelines will be takettre of through that project. He stated that another comment relate "ti to the project that staff is currently processing on the Honeywell property. An Environmental Impact Report will address the soil conditions where the roads will be placed; and he indicated that those issues would be evaluated in detail as part of that project. He added that some of the future projects that will follow on from the Circulation Element will have additional studies that will look at more specific, possible impacts of those construction projects. Commissioner Carlson questioned if anyone had raised an objection to making Nash or Douglas two -way streets. 7 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 161 Senior Planner Garry advised that Brian Crowley had submitted a letter questioning who was proposing that idea; and he noted his understanding that the business community along those areas are in support of the two -way proposal. Commissioner Kretzmer mentioned that Brian Crowley's letter also raised significant safety concerns with ingress /egress if these roadways become two -way streets. Senior Planner Garry reiterated that staff is currently pX" wring full responses to all comments in Mr. Crowley's I wh,ul be presented to City Council.' Commissioner Kretzmer commended everyone tnv67ti o for thbffw s with this process. He noted that he was stunned ding the e, current forecast indicates a difference of 48,000 les, bs thane' previous forecast that was prepared. He strongly urge k ,.,City t1 be proactive in coordinating with other jurisdictions /re�lons forfft ..qo #rol. He noted the importance of stronger coordina re tion elements and questioned the effectiveness ti a e t fc s not sufficient coordination with other jurisdictions v ;. Planning Manager Christensen and cooperation, 1 ' `5,4ewnal planning programs; on enviroi jurisdiction that staff re there are n working on come is the Commissioner Kretzmer with Assemblymen and, coordination. mtecf off„ the \' i V19 participation �s an ous communities in is v tion management icipates and comments tprtSeE projects from adjacent he C'ify's Planning office; stated COG meetings, etc., noting that participates outside of the City in �onger efforts on the part of working in addressing more effective regional Director Hansen explained that early on with the introduction of this document, staff recognized the impact and reality of pass- through traffic; and expressed his sense of optimism in El Segundo's ability to effectively work in the region based upon the track record of the City Council over the past few years on regional transportation issues, such as LAX, where the City has not just developed a presence, but has been able to coordinate and garner support from communities throughout the region towards a common cause. He noted his belief that El Segundo has a reputation for being solution- driven and that he believes this community 8 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 162 will continue to make a difference. Chair Funk opened up the hearing for public input. Brian Crowley. resident Mr. Crowley highlighted the letter that had been provided to the Planning Commission; stated that the DER from 2000 had a lot more information in it than the current DEIR; and questioned if the report includes the new 450 -unit housing project that's proposed for Del Aire or t4 housing project that is being proposed on the L.A. Air Force. Base p, orty. He stated that it would be helpful to see a table that I .ve that was included in the study; and stated that the stu wSh'otrI ai 3 elude statistics on the various shuttle buses in this tow'yxhic" hetp', tceep cars off the roadways. He requested that the stuy ;also Incl' the possibility of changeable center lanes on Aviation Bogjrd and the City to be creatively futuristic in its ideas for traffiitttigation. asked that the City consider asking for land to wig " ". Corner 8aa intersections when a large project is proposed. Mr. Cro "' c his concern with the safety and effective ness, :,oU•: .q ing las Streets two ways, stating that he does not see a � ea s n ving the streets back to a two -way operation, arid, he d wwwi ,the money will come from to do the project' not i, oncefri �Rith pedestrian safety on crossing Sepulvetl Boud Ms. Garnh z co ?ti ente&%• ,I than ed s Crowley for his analysis on k.: y*. k this item. There being nQ;furtEt .. public 40ut, Chair Funk closed the public testimony porfil f the` Wng. Commissioner Schiltz inq, O bout the cost of the Nash /Douglas Street couplet. Planning Matte' hristensen responded that staff does not have a precise figure at an estimating would not be prepared until actual work was going proceed since it can change over time and that is not within the scope of the Circulation Element Update. In response to Chair Funk's inquiry regarding the location of the roadway for the Honeywell project, Planning Manager Christensen explained that the precise alignment of that proposed thoroughfare does not develop until specific plans are developed for the improvements of the roadway; and that the reference to it in the report is only meant as an approximate location as a connector east/west street that would connect from Sepulveda Boulevard to the currently existing Park Place. 9 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 163 Chair Funk questioned if the current studies include the major projects that were referenced by some of the individuals that submitted correspondence. Planning Manager Christensen stated that Table 3 -3 includes a list of approved and pending projects and that Page 23 in Appendix C has a list of projects that were folded in on top of the SCAG regional model. She added that the baseline was the SCAG regional model which takes into account General Plan documents of surrounding jurisdictions in the region, land uses, and the land use densities that are appCVed under those General Plans for regional growth. Addltlonillyl, she that staff factored in known, existing, approved and p6ringr matcif }�jects within El Segundo as well as the Playa Vista arid. ision projects. > >. Chair Funk questioned if the ITS system is currently in Senior Planner Garry advised that the City ITS in place; explained that there are two developed: one exclusively for the City o funded and is currently being designed, w Department as the lead agency — add appropriated by Congress a number f ye< stated that the oft 41f te a t COG for a south a� � in Segundo on, an expnde r9isfbF factored cu the � ty,>Publ Works ,that funds Were ego for EI'Segundo ,i e �I' by the South Bay ll atauld connect to El fe signal coordination and ese programs have been Chair Funk a lie; c`:0 i x:*n the actual number of intersections that will remajrtth a rad' for level of service and questioned if there are any strategies ,►;�theazik that might mitigate the problems at those intersections. Senior Planner Garry d that the EIR indicates that six intersections will remain at a low level of service even with improvements; and he stated that the final EIR will have responses that address the actual number. Senior Planner Garry stated that there could be other strategies, such as grade separations or reversible lanes, but that the report does not call those out specifically. Assistant City Attorney Berger stated that this is an update to the General Plan; advised that every project that comes before the City has to conform with the General Plan; and explained that if a Circulation Element Update were made by the City Council after it fully considered 10 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 16-4 the environmental impacts of that update, that Circulation Element would then become part of the General Plan and each new project that came in would then be subject to environmental, General Plan and zoning review. He noted that staff could make a determination on what type of impact a project would have on that particular street and then make a determination of whether that particular project would have to dedicate property, pay an impact fee, or take some other type of measure in order to meet the Circulation Element. He added that this is a conceptual type of element the Planning Commission is considering this evening; that the environmental impact analysis contemplates reasonably foreseeable elements that are possible in order to generate the,.analys;.; " "'' pointing out that it can't anticipate every specific, single pregk that „g to come through, which is one of the reasons for a Gt3iiera't Planefefore, he added that the City can outline these general cortcepts' nd sure that as each project comes through, they are subCec NX. -Ious a�es to get them into conformance with the overall plan for . e entire City ff stated that as a project comes through, that protect m" requir dedicate property for a specific expansion of a road N it's keen determined that that project will have an impact a'n a parts uC T fq1 ay, even with the existence of a Statement of Overt Core is of this document. Planning Manager Christensen pointed out #hat th' 'inters t1s which cannot be mitigated below the tftreshoCd Iel are s 11 proposed for some improveme e ti dlcated an tra 8ney6is; and explained \k4 %.'. that even with tfios74 i14 t�tf5� p en rty ski a aid "ot fully mitigate the level of servtee at he In rte "eld",,'WiM"�threshold of significance over the life an o � -`e Circd Elemerr p? Chair Funk Ahanke comrho ded everyone involved for the hard work that wer? rsato th ppess a expressed her comfort level with the work and tho6bhiful anaCsr f that nt into this document. Commissioner Kretzmer,%, ed if there is a benefit to the City taking control of Sepulveda j7ard through the Caltrans relinquishment process, as referenced o, age 10 of the staff report. In response to Commissioner Kretzmer's inquiry, Director Hansen explained that staff has not been directed by Council to consider that possibility at this point in time; and advised that there are considerable maintenance costs involved with that and noted his doubt that the City's existing budget would be able to absorb those costs if the City made that decision. He added that at a considerable cost, the City currently maintains all the landscaping along Sepulveda Boulevard, from Imperial Highway all the way down to Rosecrans Avenue. He noted that some cities have undertaken this process and have been pleased with the El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 165 11 results, but stated that staff would have to analyze this to determine if there are any benefits for El Segundo. Commissioner Kretzmer questioned if the City is required to do an analysis within the residential areas, and questioned if safety factors are included. He highlighted the increasing number of vehicles parked on residential streets, including recreational vehicles, making it more difficult to safely maneuver; and he noted his concern with encouraging the use of bicycles, golf cart type vehicles, and pedestrian travel in residential areas if nothing is being done to make maneuvering on this these streets less hazardous. Director Hansen explained for Commissioner Kretzf r that thy.,, f7asis of this document has been on areas that City Co ftl a rect ``" to examine for change, improvement or deletion of road"'';' nd t re was no direction given on making changes in reside't, teas that there is minimal discussion of that in the documen Pointed.,, that it does not mean there aren't safety concerns and thej {3e Clty<Sn addressing them; and advised that many of these resf ip ffic concerns are being addressed on an on gongbast's„throthfaffic Committee as issues arise. Planning Manager Christensen mentioned t when r�hducti intersection analysis, none of the resitientlal ections were im in terms of level A Commission,o Kr mer` test-, th±�:: of Virginia Street that borders theilayinld at t dleschgr being one major area of concern for pedest safety. %� Director H '' . sta " `;at it vutuld be more effective to deal with specific r is I tr problt is by directly contacting the City Manager or himself so th *`particular concern can be specifically targeted through the sy *'il addressed at the Traffic Committee level; and he encoura h residents to contact staff with any traffic concerns. Commissioner Kretzmer noted his concern with the number of four -way stops in residential areas and the emissions that result from those vehicles having to frequently stop and go in these areas. He stated that it would be helpful to see statistical analysis that monitors traffic conditions with the use of the various mini -buses and shuttles. He highlighted Mr. Crowley's comments that there is a lot of statistical information in the 2000 EIR that would be helpful that is not being addressed in the most recent EIR, with an emphasis on encouraging alternative types of transportation. He suggested that the document 12 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 188 expand on the use of alternative modes of transportation, such as bicycle, walking, shuttle buses, and golf cart type vehicles. Commissioner Kretzmer reiterated his desire that traffic circulation /mitigation be approached on a regional basis, sharing the costs and the responsibility, and he urged the City to double its efforts for this coordination. Commissioner Miller Sheehan urged staff to be creative and futuristic in its plans for traffic control and to encourage the use of mass transit. Commissioner Carlson questioned what type of re btjld be on the gap closure project for Douglas Street if the Clecided nQ tp fake Douglas a two street and questioned if it Is`�xntempla , the document that Douglas will be a two -way street. Addressing Commissioner Carlson's inquiries, stated that if this element is not adopted, the allow the one -way portion of the Nash /Douglas noted that the City is going forward with tht $ impacts of those two projects as they relate . ► e� the Douglas gap project has been separatelfi, Senior Planner Garry expressed his;;;belie, two -way streets were studied. k Commissioner, M'lli r ;, 1 Schiltz, to cgAcur v+�tth No. 2572. 96tion ied 4- None. ner that *� by Commissioner is adopting Resolution Kretzmer voting no. MOTION CONTINUED BUSINESS Planning Manager Christ en. §tated that the next Planning Commission REPORT FROM agenda on September =` X004, will include an administrative DIRECTOR determination regard ingrv2' occupancy for second -unit dwellings. None. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Schiltz stated that as a resident of a house on a 25 -foot PLANNING wide lot, he knows firsthand how limited /restrictive the modulation code is COMMISSIONERS' and he urged the City to study the possibility of amending the language COMMENTS in this code for small lots. Commissioner Miller Sheehan announced that this is her last meeting because she has made her first home purchase in Ventura County and 13 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 1R" that she will soon be leaving El Segundo. She thanked and commended staff; stated that she has enjoyed working with Chair Funk and the new Commissioners; and encouraged the residents to apply for a rewarding and challenging position on the Planning Commission. Chair Funk stated that Commissioner Miller Sheehan will be missed; wished her the best in her new town; and thanked her for her outstanding job on the Commission and for her service to the City. Staff was directed to bring back a staff report that examines the current OTHER BUSINESS status of properties that may be affected, alternatives in te(, of code text amendments and /or administrative remedies. There being no further discussion, the meeting p.m. to the regular meeting of September 9, 2004. PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 9th DAY James Hansen, Secretary of the Planning Co .; ,.. and Director" City of SE 10 ADJOURNMENT if"W, Chair of1Yttie Commission Segundo, California 14 El Segundo Planning Commission Minutes, August 26, 2004 168 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 7, 2004 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Special Orders of Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action (Public Hearing) regarding the FY 2004 -2005 Preliminary Budget and Five -Year Capital Improvements Plan including discussion and possible direction regarding all City revenues and expenditures. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Open Public Hearing; 2) Discussion; 3) Close or Continue the Public Hearing to September 21, 2004; 4) Schedule the budget adoption for the September 21, 2004 meeting; 5) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The FY 2004 -2005 budget process began on May 5, 2004 with the budget kickoff for staff. Departments were given budget instructions and specific guidelines as directed by the City Manager. On July 16th, 2003, the City Council held a Strategic Planning Session with the City Manager and all department heads. During this planning session, the City Council reviewed departmental projects and recommended program reductions, established priorities and set the general direction for the next fiscal year. Programs, reductions or changes were made to the preliminary budget based on the recommendations of the City Council. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None FISCAL IMPACT: Discussion to Adopt FY 2004 -2005 Preliminary Operating and Five -Year Capital Improvement Budget Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: —Yes _ No ORIGINATED BY: DATE: ,4n- X �_ 9 - -oy Bret M. Plumlee, Director Administrative Services REVIEWED B DATE: Mary Styerhn, City Manager BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The budget impacts of new projects are included in the FY 2004 -2005 Preliminary Budget. The Preliminary FY 2004 -2005 Operating and Five -Year Capital Improvement Budget were distributed to the City Council on August 3, 2004. On August 17, 2004 a budget workshop was held to discuss the budget in detail. The final steps in the process are a public hearing on September 7, 2004 and final budget adoption on September 21, 2004. As part of the final adoption of the budget staff will prepare a reconciliation of changes from the preliminary to the final adopted budget. 170 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 7, 2004 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding a report to Council on requested additional information: costs, impacts, and workload for alternative "run short" scenarios (to "run short" means that on a given day and temporary basis, not filling a vacant position with overtime personnel). These scenarios were developed as a result of the Fire Department's budget reduction proposal (running short in fire suppression staffing up to one person per rank/assignment as vacancies occur). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Receive and review information; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: Since emergencies are random in their nature, frequency, and severity - fire departments routinely cover emergency response by balancing their staffing with the use of Mutual Aid. No community can afford to depend solely on their own staffing levels, nor can they use Mutual or Automatic Aid to cover 100% of their potential emergencies. Also, on a daily basis a department may have to modify its staffing and available apparatus for short periods of time in order to transport a patient or to deal with other unique operational circumstances. Any disruption of the balance between a community's staffing and Automatic or Mutual Aid, can only be short-term in order to avoid loss of such aid. Continued next page ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1. Historical Average workload statistics (Attachment A) 2. Historical pattern of vacancies (Attachment B) 3. Examples of possible staffing configurations under scenarios (Attachment C) 4. Matrix of scenario's, estimated savings, operational impacts and assumptions (Attachment D) FISCAL IMPACT: None Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: _Yes X No ORIGINATED BY: DATE: 08/26/04 Norm Angelo, Fir Chief REVIEWED BY: DATE: Al Mary St n, City Manager ° f' Let BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION, continued: Recognizing that fiscal concerns were projected over the next two years, the Fire Department analyzed all department services, previous methods used to address relatively short-term budget reductions, and the overall impact on the department's ability to deliver balanced services. Based on this analysis, the Fire Department proposes that the remainder ($545,000) of the department's assigned target reduction number be met by running short up to one suppression person in each of four (4) ranks /assignment as vacancies occurred. This strategy is a short-term strategy for the projected two years of fiscal concern. At the strategic session, the department was asked to determine the savings and impacts of only running short up to two (2) members as vacancies occurred on a daily basis. Multiple scenarios were analyzed under the "Run Short 2" concept. The scenario that brought us closest ($535,000) to the target required having to draw from any of the ranks /assignment to meet the target number. The background and impacts of that scenario were presented to CD v d 3 C3 C a CTS N N � m d 0 0 � O CD d N O N CA) 8 n fN B C to O fU v X 3 ro m W O A 0 c Ol [U CD n c CD F v CD CL _a N CL 0 C CD d N O .7 O m d CD m D_ i K --i -n — o N 01 a v KGCn D_ m m 3 N D 7 N T N? CD C CD n -0 n 7 CD d CD W A CVO m 0 V" CD 3 !1 (D (0 N N Q N n CD CD O (D N 0 (� f_n N j N O (D n CD N N CD N CO V N Ln m N N V m Cn V 00 V N (D CO N co D N 73 C// CD N O 00 A A W N Ln co A (DD w CJ7 N -+ W W m m m W m W V m � i w m W O N 01 N m 7 D_ CD T 7 = CD V 00 n -0 n CD cn d O m W A CVO m 0 V" C: Ul D E N CD (D 0 N m O (D n � CD co CO V Ln m N N V m Cn V 00 V N (D CO N co D :3 73 C// N N O 00 A A W O O cn co O J � � O A N O O 00 V m N M N co 00 W A N W W W N W W _ _ ul .mA m W N co A —• O O 0 0 O N V m CT N co O V A -4 C7l N V m � Ln co A (DD w CJ7 N -+ W W m m m W m W V m � 0 G y ID 4 m m a 3 A O G CD W Of i m W O A 01 N m 7 D_ CD T 7 = CD CD n -0 n CD cn d CD m 0 C: c D E N CD (D 0 (D n � CD n C 1 CZ N Cn n N O1 (D D :3 73 C// N N O O O D O N N N N M 0 G y ID 4 m m a 3 A O G CD W Of i D_ i CD CD m m 7 w D 7 = CD CD N 3 m 1 T N fD 'O d M o. T » V _ 'O N N d p� A 0 00 moo? a f m m m T! �do ;o�m d �. 3 O y N P. j � N m o. o o m m c CD y m � No 0.-8 d 0 0 CD ' N n CD M. N 2 N CD 3 N .i y 3 W 5D o i m m 3 n w m y N O O N CL m o �i CD CD a F o N F o � c n C CD x � fD N CD O N �. C (D A CA w co A D CD v CD O L N N CD CD N � 174 n S 3 m A w m O m nai chi a DI N N N N N a a 0 o o 0 0 0 > > a C 0 0 0 0 Ni i i i i V Of (11 A co .D CD 7 61 N O R O 0 c J i O O O O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 o f/1 CA w co A D CD v CD O L N N CD CD N � 174 n S 3 m A w O o0 7 Q 0 c x � W a CD 5' CL sv CD (n D G) O (D CD CD CD :3 � O r- -I 0 0- mi, CCD 7 N Q _ N �CD Qm �CD C (� N co C) O CCDD O O� 7 C� CD CD m m C� on .-F CD TI n rZ n M. W sv as o' m n c� CD h MIL TI CD n z 3 CD C2 C7' I N C Z Cn 2 O Cn C) m z D Cv C) 3 CD 7 9 1175 N s CD w r O 3 3 CL m Ml 00 sv sv 0 m n 0) .a m 7 cc m m m M m mn MO m m a0i a0i m m cc Q mn mn m mn m mn n a0i m c� X r� c CD t Q c ET n c Q CD O� w CD� h X m m X m N 0 t/1 (Q (C C) _. + _. _. CD CD N W W W W W IV N W j MA 0) .a m 7 cc m m m M m mn MO m m a0i a0i m m cc Q mn mn m mn m mn n a0i m c� X r� c CD t Q c ET n c Q CD O� w CD� h . . . . . . . . cn 0 -1 Mon N 0 3 CD lw W O 0 a1 to X m m X m v, Q co U) + c� + � (D (D C W W N N mn n mn rt 7 (Q W W W n sv 10 m m X mn mn m ma M i) m co V , 0 M- 1 '1 \T V O -R N 0) OD O O O 17f _ . 0 0 W N D s 9 CD w W r rt 0 n 0 n m c� m m m T-q M U) c c� w N mn m m ca. CD CA) N 7 (Q T rn c�. CD w w n 2) 00 rt cQ m mn m m m ma ic CD c CD w mn mn m 3 m c�. w co' 3 m < CD v Q. 0 m co O FML, I D cn 3 CD N cn VC Jw, O O 1YS 2 0) 0 CD CD w cn 0 CL CD Ml W .�f o' 0 n h 0 0 a) 0 m mn X m mn mn n FOOL m cc m T1 z to w c� m T X CD m X m cQ N n + + �. C c w C. N w w N N 0 a) 0 m mn X m mn mn n FOOL m cc m T1 z to w c� m T X CD m cQ n + �. C w w T n A) cQ a O N T1 X c CL O 1 W N O O O I'7 ) m 3 CD A Ch O Q cD W 03 rt rt 0• n 7' CD N C� W N n S11 rr 7 T TI N mn TI n W W W N W � 0 m CQ TI 'TI 0 m 7 CG n mn mn mn Ma n 2) V =' O CD < CD Q C O N O ml N I D cn 3 CD r--f 1 '-69 V ' C) C) C) 180 (1) �Q (t2 0 + (Q + CD CD CD CD (D N mn TI n W W W N W � 0 m CQ TI 'TI 0 m 7 CG n mn mn mn Ma n 2) V =' O CD < CD Q C O N O ml N I D cn 3 CD r--f 1 '-69 V ' C) C) C) 180 D obi n s CD CD f 0 3 CL m WN w as 0 0 3 F h A n w N n m 0 co T� • • . . • • • N mn mn w w n� w MWL n m c� mn mn 0 m c� m fm I m -v 3 7 ca. w v 0 m 1 0 0 0 1 C � CL X v O r W I D cn cn cam' 3 (D D 'I V ' 44h. V ' V O O O 181 m m can ca ca cn + o r CD a N mn mn w w n� w MWL n m c� mn mn 0 m c� m fm I m -v 3 7 ca. w v 0 m 1 0 0 0 1 C � CL X v O r W I D cn cn cam' 3 (D D 'I V ' 44h. V ' V O O O 181 D v s 3 CD M • cn n 0 3 3 C. m .ter O 7 �D -�h n w N fu r-r iQ m mn --4 X • • • • • • • X m m X CD Cl) c� (.0 + W 0 + _ CD CD cD m .p m an 0 rr (Q on w w N W � 0 cu 00 rr 0 mn n mn mn mn c� v 0 N cn O P_ -p i v cn v cn U) 3 CD r!- cn V � V O O O 182 T N 'p0 d 3 m tD C w d �Tl N O1 a w m A O J O � N 1 0 3 m 1 0 A W N N r Q N 6 N u C w C y C w C w C H C < J < J < J < J < J < J 2 Cl) 2 Cl) Cl) E cn 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 Q qqq � N ppp a• N ef7l m CD C C CD 3 3 3 ' 3 3 3 o m T T a- 01 (') m T T Q 01 n m T T 0, O T T Q (D n Z O- T 0 a- T N ➢ Z ,TD T DT Z v T v Z TT T T� T 9 9 O EA O O N N N N (/1 W 0) O O O O O O O 00 r r d a T1 T T T El Er m C Er EF J N N N lI( m w C e a N' 3 w K K K K 0 u 0 CD CD u D) 3 Ol D) D) d N v °o O (D (D ill 01 m' • • Cl) 0) • • S • y 0) • c • m -u • a-) • to d 0) • • • • mmm J J J • • m • • 0 • • Dm 3 S (D 3 O m N S 4. a < D) N y J< Jt' 0) 3 a S f0 t0 (0 0. < 0) CD D) 0 J< 0) (D < D) (D N J (D C 0) 0- J p - O d (D N J N (D a- 0) 0)(D N O N Df 0) - m m (JD 0) 'a0 m f0 0 C 3 0) (D (Oi) o- i �' �D < N (D A o m `G J d n •< a CD '� W W N w W W d 0 O (D `G J n n (D `G J n t0, `< 7 D) W d W CD S J Q S y CD C n N C C< N y y y y D) 0 N 0 9 0 N (� C 0) (D .Js lI)' (// N S N' (D y (D �. < D) J _ J lD _ J y J J _ � J 0 _ m J _ J d y C N N (p 0- N 0- a) = `� CD O- c r c O 3 N V O (JD N a 6 p' m m J y m a y N T, N m'< m m d a m C N y J (p 0 J y Z 0) Z O- = a (D Z N Z J Z m p- �'a J �,o - OL)CL00 'a sy o-(D v 3 L�QTG�pOa o v o >' N n ni J N 7 0N > (D n n. s o -O yp J > (D J N DC JD D a n Dp- _. D o D o a C w i ( aj 0-- 0 -n a 0 a_o -� - -1- 'a-n T O �m i a n 3 ID j t0 0 0 F3 0 f a y O ^ O O 0 y O m S (D T _ y C y y 0 J T W O J J to N a J d a 3 J im �(D 0 O g m Sr y N (D (D v S y a , ' y o (D m N N - O Ddl o (_S D Q 3 -0 3 y O J 0 N (D y 0- O (D O 0- y O' N = 01 a -. y N D N 0 CD Fy of � 3 0"(° of my 0. = 0 CD N CD "O lw c .., d c �, d 0 .J.. CD CD ZY 1 CL < 'O Q N J J . (D J Q O= 0 C (D N fpi( y y. N n 0 a m 0 m y n� d Q y. (D y(D 3' (D (D .c.. D' fj y .O. (D (a O a ql D) O N -p N y0 y `2 N �! O O. 0 - y Q =i O N J 3 J CD 01 O J_ J T < J= 0 y CD CD o •00 3 _ 0 H m y n 3° J •0< p m 3 C m o r m CD CD a CD CD p < m CD N CD 1 0 3 m 1 0 T N O N d 3 co ?D ?7 N -D _ m m d �_ N o 0m -n-nA �� Awrv�y DZmTIm (7 II 7 00 _0 n O C 7 7 7 .� 0 3 M° 6 0 0 0 0 c( 0m ?176 � -a�a0 03=r D) f0 �' (O 'O j' =r N r A W N (D ± m 0 7 n O N < m 7 N ,� 7 S M m m m m 3 < O< o 0 DI D) N O) N 5-1 7 3 m CC (p O 7 7 7 7 D) D) 0) m D) O O O O D N >• (D (D (D CD (D Oa 0- 7 S S S S y 7 0 0 �' 0 �' 7' 7' 7 7 7 7 7 7 S CL d m (O f0 (O (O 0 N p 7 '6 EP r O O O O< N DI D) d N D) m O 3333 N «D)7 m d v m 3 CD (D x. x. x. x m 3 3 3 3 5 m° m 3 3 3 3 -o 0? < m 0 0 0 0 m m A W N + O to al N 0 m O 0 7 O O o y "O "O ,0 U) T N F m m 7 = N cc >>>> 7 ms3 N 01 D) p) N 7 (n Co Cc m m '. Z m m 0 T 7 7 7 7 L CD aaaa �co D) D) D) D) t< C S v f m S S S S O O O O O O m D) D) W i3 mm'm0 3 7 j (D 7 7 7 < O_ a v 0 0 0 Da) m N w d Nom. 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 A m 7 CD CL CL a c-c v C C c y 7 V ar M. {U W 0) DI 7 2. c N O C c C z 01 Z o a O O O " O O N O O O N _ d D) D) N p' 7 7 7 7 N N (A 0 y. 3. 0 x w, x DDDD to to c C C C c c c -0 3 ' o o' o 7 7 7 7 D) D) O N 0v-0 -0 -o 'o 'o v 1 a n m m 0 8 n a v m