The URL can be used to link to this page

2005 NOV 15 CC PACKETAGENDA EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 350 Main Street The City Council, with certain statutory exceptions, can only take action upon properly posted and listed agenda items Unless otherwise noted in the Agenda, the Public can only comment on City- related business that is within the jurisdiction of the City Council and/or items listed on the Agenda during the Public Communications portion of the Meeting 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, NOVEMBER 15, 2005 - 5:00 P.M. 5:00 P.M. SESSION CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Next Resolution # 4443 Next Ordinance # 1389 001 CLOSED SESSION: The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54960, et sue) for the purposes of conferring with the City's Real Property Negotiator, andlor conferring with the City Attorney on potential and/or existing litigation, and/or discussing matters covered under Government Code Section §54957 (Personnel), andlor conferring with the City's Labor Negotiators, as follows CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov't Code §54956 9(a)) — 3 matters 1 City of El Segundo v City of Los Angeles, et al, LASC No BS094279 2 Bressi v City of El Segundo, LASC Case Nos BC288293 and 288292 3 Tom Kennedy v City of El Segundo, WCAB Case No AHM0114150 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956 9(b) -3- potential cases (no further public statement is required at this time), Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956 9(c) -2- matters DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS (Gov't Code §54957) — 0 matter CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54957 6) -0- matter CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956 8) -1- matter 1 Purchase of Real Property (Parcel Nos 4138- 004 -016 (primary parcel), 4138- 004 -008 and 4138 -004 -015) City Negotiator Jeff Stewart, City Manager Property Owner Federal Express Corporation/Thomas Properties SPECIAL MATTERS — 0 matter 0u92 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, NOVEMBER 15, 2005 - 7:00 P.M. 7 :00 P.M. SESSION CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION — Pastor John Svendsen of First Baptist Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Mayor Pro Tem John Gaines Next Resolution # 4443 Next Ordinance # 1389 003 PRESENTATIONS - (a) Proclamation observing November 21, 2005 through Love Toy Drive and encouraging the community contributing toys and non - perishable foods to the November 21, 2005 through December 19, 2005. ROLL CALL December 19, 2005 as the Spark of to support this holiday program by El Segundo Fire Department during 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 (Public Hearing) regarding adopting Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fees and adding a new Chapter 27A in the El Segundo Municipal Code called Development Impact Fees. (Fiscal Impact: Traffic Mitigation Fee increase) Recommendation - (1) Open Public Hearing and take public testimony; (2) Discussion; (3) Introduce and waive first reading of an Ordinance adding Chapter 27A to Title 15 of the El Segundo Municipal Code entitled Development Impact Fees; (4) Schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance on December 6, 2005; (5) Adopt a Resolution establishing Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fees; (6) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 004 C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 2. Consideration and possible action regarding award of contract to RBF Consulting (RBF) for a review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the City of Los Angeles Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) regarding the proposed expansion of the City of Los Angeles' Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant. (Estimated cost: Recommendation - (1) Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract to RBF in a form approved by the City Attorney; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 3. Consideration and possible action regarding a presentation by Shannon David, Inc. on the new business campaign project for the City of El Segundo consisting of forty (40) light pole banners on Sepulveda Blvd. between Imperial Ave. and Rosecrans Ave., three (3) billboards strategically located throughout the Los Angeles region, the development of a business web page and print ads in professional journals. (Fiscal Impact: $125,000 - approved previously) Recommendation - (1) Receive and file presentation; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS E. CONSENT AGENDA All items listed are to be adopted by one motion without discussion and passed unanimously If a call for discussion of an item is made, the item(s) will be considered individually under the next heading of business 4. Warrant Numbers 2550221 to 2550588 on Register No. 03 in the total amount of $1,142,143.56 and Wire Transfers from 10/21/2005 through 11/3/2005 in the total amount of $638,093.61. 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 5. City Council Meeting Minutes of November 1, 2005. Recommendation - Approval. 005 6. Consideration and possible action regarding the annual Resolutions establishing and updating the City /employer's contribution under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act for the City's bargaining units. Recommendation — (1) Adopt the required Resolutions, (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 7. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of an Ordinance to amend the Downtown Specific Plan by expanding the current boundary and incorporating the commercially zoned parcels along the 200 block of West Grand Avenue located between the current westerly boundary of the Plan area and Concord Street. Recommendation — (1) Second reading by title only and adoption of Ordinance No. 1387 for Specific Plan Amendment No. 04 -01, Zone Change No. 04 -01 and Zone Text Amendment No. 05 -01; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item 8. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of plans and specifications for Rehabilitation of Continental Boulevard from El Segundo Boulevard to Grand Avenue. Approved Capital Improvement Program — Project No. PW 05 -12. (Fiscal Impact: $226,000) Recommendation — (1) Adopt plans and specifications; (2) Authorize staff to advertise the project for receipt of construction bids; (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 9. Consideration and possible action regarding participation by the El Segundo Police Department in a "Speed Monitoring and Reduction Project" funded by the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS). Participation includes one -time grant funding in the amount of $72,392.97 which includes $15,000 to support the City's every "Every 15 Minutes" program regarding driving while under the influence. Recommendation — (1) Approve request for the El Segundo Police Department to accept and utilize funds provided by the California Office of Traffic Safety for a Speed Monitoring and Reduction grant; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA F. NEW BUSINESS G. REPORTS — CITY MANAGER — NONE 006 H. REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY — NONE I. REPORTS —CITY CLERK — NONE J. REPORTS — CITY TREASURER K. REPORTS — CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Boulgarides — Council Member Busch — Council Member Jacobson — 10. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of a voluntary limitation on the placement of campaign signs on private property. (Fiscal Impact: None) Recommendation — (1) Approve the attached form entitled "Statement of Responsibility for Temporary Political Signs ", 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item Mayor Pro Tam Gaines — Mayor McDowell — 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 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 0 ttT REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION (if required) ADJOURNMENT POSTED DATE /q /Gs TIME i/rn NAME fjV8 rociamatiott cttp of (EC *eptlbo, cattfortna WHEREAS, In an effort to provide for children who otherwise might not experience the joy of the holiday season, the City of El Segundo Fire Department, for the past ten years, has joined the Los Angeles County Fire Department Spark of Love program and has been a collection site for toys and food items donated during the holidays WHEREAS, The ever upward spiraling cost of living burdens disadvantaged and displaced families who may not be able to give gifts at during the holiday season without help from the Spark of Love program WHEREAS, The true holiday spirit is reflected in unselfish giving and our thoughts and hearts go out to those less fortunate than ourselves. WHEREAS, In the past, with the help of civic - minded citizens who live and work in our community, hundreds of toys plus food items have been collected and distributed to children and families in El Segundo and other South Bay cities NOW, THEREFORE, the Mayor and Members of the City Council of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby proclaim November 21, 2005 through December 19, 2005 as the 9w;'1V0 .401 C 01 Y DRIVE and the community is encouraged to support this holiday program perishable foods to the El Segundo Fire Department, Fire Station No period of November 21 through December 19, 2005 i// by contributing toys and non - 1 at 314 Main Street, during the �niv> nr > (rrr / >ir r rnirry ii. > o> rvi vrn 0 U, � EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE. November 15, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING. Special Orders of Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION Consideration and possible action regarding a public hearing adopting Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fees and adding a new Chapter 27A in the El Segundo Municipal Code called Development Impact Fees (Fiscal Impact Traffic Mitigation Fee Increase) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION. 1) Open Public Hearing and take public testimony, 2) Discussion, 3) Introduce and waive first reading of an Ordinance adding Chapter 27A to Title 15 of the El Segundo Municipal Code entitled Development Impact Fees, 4) Schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance on December 6, 2005, 5) Adopt a Resolution establishing Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fees, and 6) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION• ued on next 1) Ordinance 2) Resolution 3) Exhibit A - Traffic Mitigation Fee Study FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: Traffic Mitigation Fees Amount Requested. N/A Account Number 702- 300 - 8141 -3972 Protect Phase N/A Appropriation Required- _YES X NO ORIGINATED BY DATE. November 8, 2005 Seimone Junis. Dir cto of Plannina and Buildina Safetv DATE: 0/6 Page 2 of 3 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION (cont). On July 19, 2005 the City Council authorized the consulting firm MuniFinancial to update the City's Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee program The purpose of the program is to ensure that new development pays the costs associated with the facilities needed to serve the population growth caused by new development The City has not updated the Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fees since March 1996 The fee study update, conducted by MuniFinanclal, is to adjust the fee to reflect changes in project costs, project phasing, updated land -use projections and modified traffic fee zones in response to a revised and updated Circulation Element, adopted by the City in September 2004 The methodology used in updating the fee begins with the selection of a planning horizon and development of projections for vehicle trips Overall land use is projected to reach 80% of remaining build out through the year 2025 These projections assist in determining a master plan and related facility standards needed to determine impact fees to construct required traffic facilities The facility standard used is the planned facilities method This method calculates the standard based on the ratio of planned facilities to the increase in demand associated with new development In other words, the method determines the traffic mitigation fee based on the total cost of transportation improvements that is to be funded by the fee program divided by the projected amount of traffic generated (trips) by future new development 1996 FEE PROGRAM The March 1996 fee program divided the City Into four zones with a specific fee amount for each zone At the time the 1996 fee program was adopted, the cost of transportation improvements was significantly lower then today's costs The total cost of transportation improvement that is included in the 1996 fee program is $15,822,608 This resulted in the following fee for P M peak trips ZONE 1 $87 ZONE 2 — West of Sepulveda Boulevard $121 East of Sepulveda Boulevard $115 ZONE 3- West of Sepulveda Boulevard $1,478 East of Sepulveda Boulevard $1,403 ZONE 4- $52 2005 FEE STUDY The new fee update study reduced the number of zones in the City from four to three This was accomplished by combining the two zones east of Sepulveda Boulevard into one larger zone Since 1996, the cost of transportation improvements dramatically increased The larger zone east of Sepulveda Boulevard allowed for a spreading of the transportation improvement costs This was found to be more equitable approach in calculating the Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee The total cost of transportation improvements that is to be funded by the new fee program is $32,609,000 The new study resulted in the following rate per PM peak trips 011 Page 3 of 3 ZONE 1- $2,539 ZONE 2- $104 ZONE 3- $115 Staff met with the El Segundo Employees Associations (ESEA) on two occasions to discuss the changes and increases in the Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee study The members of ESEA include Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Mattel, Raytheon, Continental Development Corporation, Honeywell, Chevron, and MAR Ventures Many of these corporations are located east of Sepulveda Blvd and would be impacted the greatest by the new fee program Staff answered ESEA's questions and received a general consensus of acceptance on the proposed study PROPOSED ORDINANCE The proposed ordinance adds a new Chapter 27A to the El Segundo Municipal Code (ESMC) entitled Development Impact Fees This ordinance will provide authority to adopt Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fees It provides for payment, credits, exemptions, refunds, appeals and other needed provisions The new chapter is needed so that the Traffic Congestions Mitigation Fees and future development impact fees can be imposed. PROPOSED RESOLUTION The proposed resolution will set the fees as recommended in the fee study discussed above Because these fees are not just simple "one size fits all" fees, the resolution also provides directions on how to calculate the fees for the various types of land uses Both the ordinance and resolution provide for automatic annual increases in the fees proportional to increases in construction costs RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution authorizing new fees in the Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee program and introduce an Ordinance adding Chapter27A to Title 15 of the El Segundo Municipal Code entitled Development Impact Fees P \Planning & Building SafetoSiurlis \Staff Reports Part 27raffc Congestion Mitigation Fee \Traffic Mitigation Fee CC 11 15 2005 SR doc 012 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 27A, ENTITLED "DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES" TO TITLE 15 OF THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPOSING FEES ON APPLICANTS SEEKING TO CONSTRUCT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. The City Council of the city of El Segundo does ordain as follows SECTION 1 The City Council finds and declares as follows A New land development generates impacts on public services and public facilities for which revenues generated through property taxes and other means are generally insufficient to accommodate, B Policy Objective number LU7 -1 in the Land Use Element of the General Plan for the City of El Segundo states that it is the City's objective to provide the highest and most efficient level of public services and public infrastructure financially possible, C Policy Objective number LU7 -1 in the Land Use Element of the General Plan for the City of El Segundo states that the City should provide adequate maintenance for all public infrastructure facilities, D Impact fees are desirable and necessary for the City to more fully pay for the public costs of new growth and development, E It is the City's intent and desire to have developers pay for their fair share of public costs associated with new development while at the same time facilitating growth that is in the public interest, F The City is mindful of the constitutional limitations and restrictions verified by cases such as City of Monterey v Del Monte Dunes at Monterey, Ltd., at al (1999) 526 U S 687, Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994) 512 U S 374, and Nolan v Cal Coastal Comm'n (1987) 483 U S 825, and Ehrlich v City of Culver City (1996) 12 Cal 4" 854 This Ordinance is intended to, and does, comply with such constitutional limitations on the City's police powers, G The Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code §§ 66000, at seq ) enables and encourages the City to enact appropriate development impact fees, H The imposition of impact fees is one of the preferred methods of ensuring that development bears a proportionate share of the cost Page 1 of 10 0 1 ? of capital facilities necessary to accommodate such development. This must be done in order to promote and protect the public health, safety and welfare, The fees established by this ordinance are derived from, are based upon, and do not exceed the costs of providing capital facilities necessitated by the new land developments for which the fees are levied, The City assumes the responsibility for and is committed to providing public facilities at levels necessary to cure any existing deficiencies in already developed areas Impact fees collected pursuant to this Chapter will not be used to cure existing deficiencies in public facilities, K To the extent that new development in designated benefit areas places demands upon public facilities, those demands should be satisfied by shifting the responsibility for financing the provision of such facilities from the public to the development creating the demands; L The report entitled 'Traffic Impact Fee Study Update" dated November 2, 2005 (and as may be revised from time to time), prepared by MumFinancial, sets forth reasonable methodology and analysis for the determination of the impact of new development on the need for and costs for additional capital facilities improvements in the City M After careful consideration, including a review of the documentary and testimonial evidence submitted during a public hearing on November 15, 2005, the City Council finds that the imposition of impact fees to finance specified major public facilities in designated benefit areas is in the best interests of the general welfare of the City and its residents, is equitable, and does not impose an unfair burden on new development. N It is in the public interest to adopt this ordinance for the purpose of protecting the public health, safety, and welfare SECTION 2 A new Chapter 27A, entitled "Development Impact Fees," and consisting of Sections 15 -27A -1 to 15- 27A -15, is added to Title 15 of the El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC ") to read as follows Page 2 of 10 0 1 Chapter 27A DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES SECTION: 15 -27A -1 PURPOSE. 15 -27A -2 APPLICABILITY. 15 -27A -3 EXEMPTIONS. 15 -27A -4 DEFINITIONS. 15 -27A -5 NOTICE AND HEARING REQUIREMENTS. 15 -27A -6 IMPOSITION OF FEES /AUTOMATIC ADJUSTMENT. 15 -27A -7 IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS. 15 -27A -8 USE OF IMPACT FEE PROCEEDS. 15 -27A -9 REFUNDS. 15- 27A -10 PROTESTS, APPEALS, AND AUDITS. 15- 27A -11 AMENDMENT PROCEDURES. 15- 27A -12 CREDITS. 15- 27A -13 CONFLICTS. 15- 27A -1: PURPOSE: This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to the city's police powers and the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code §§ 66000, et seq ), for the purpose of imposing fees on applicants seeking to construct development projects The purpose of such fees is to minimize, to the greatest extent practicable, the impact that new development has on the city's public services and public facilities Toward that end, the city intends that applicants for such development projects pay their fair share of the costs of providing such public services and public facilities Accordingly, the amount of each impact fee is calculated based upon the gross square footage of nonresidential development, number of residential dwelling units, type or density or intensity of use, vehicle trip generation, or other appropriate methodology which ensures that the fee is roughly proportional to the impacts of new development on public facilities The City assumes responsibility for and will pay for with general city revenues all public facility needs for existing development 15- 27A -2: APPLICABILITY. Unless expressly excepted or exempted, this chapter applies to all fees imposed by the City to finance public facilities attributable to new development, including without limitation A Law Enforcement Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment, B Fire Suppression Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment, C General Facilities, Vehicles, and Equipment, J Page 3of10 vI D Community Library Facilities and Collections, E Public Use (Community Centers) Facilities; Parks /Open Space and Recreation Facilities, and G Road Protect Construction, Right -of -Way Acquisition, and Engineering 15- 27A -3: EXEMPTIONS: This chapter does not apply to A Taxes and special assessments, B Fees for processing development applications, C Fees for enforcing regulations, D Fees collected under development agreements, E. Fees imposed pursuant to a reimbursement agreement between the City and a property owner for that portion of the cost of a public facility paid for by the property owner which exceeds the need for the public facility attributable to, reasonably related to, and roughly proportional to the development, F Fees to mitigate impacts on the environment, or G Fees imposed, levied or collected by other governmental agencies including subdivisions of the state and federal government 15- 27A-4: DEFINITIONS: Unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the following definitions will govern the construction of the words and phrases used in this chapter A `Benefit area" means the geographic area within which impact fees are collected and expended for a particular type of capital improvement serving development projects within such area. B. "Capital improvement' means land or facilities for the storage, treatment or distribution of water, for the collection, treatment, reclamation or disposal of sewage, for the collection and disposal of stormwaters and for watershed preservation purposes, for purposes of transportation and transit, including without limitation, streets, street lighting and traffic- control devices and supporting improvements, roads, overpasses, bridges, airports, and related facilities; for parks and recreational improvements; for public safety, Page 4of10 0 jt' including police and fire facilities, for schools and child care facilities, for libraries and public art, for public buildings of all kinds, and for any other capital project identified in the City's Capital Improvements Plan. Capital improvement also includes design, engineering, inspection, testing, planning, legal land acquisition and all other costs associated with construction of a public facility C "Capital Improvements Plan" means the long term plan for capital improvements, adopted by the City Council, describing the approximate location, size, time of availability and estimated cost of capital improvement projects and identifies sources of funding for capital improvement projects. D "Capital Improvements Project List" means the list attached to a Council resolution setting the base fee amount for each specific impact fee The list must describe the approximate location, size, time of availability and estimated cost of each capital improvement to be funded from a particular impact fee account E "Collection" means the point in time at which the impact fee is actually paid over to the City F "Commitment" means earmarking impact fees to fund or partially fund capital improvements serving new development projects G "New development or development project" means and includes any project undertaken for the purpose of development, including without limitation a project involving the permit issuance for construction, reconstruction, or change of use, but not a project involving permit issuance for operating, remodeling, rehabilitating, or improving an existing structure, nor the rebuilding of a structure destroyed or damaged through natural disaster, nor the replacement of one mobile home with another on the same pad if no dwelling unit is added H "Dwelling unit" means one or more rooms in a building or a portion of a room, designed, intended to be used, or actually used for occupancy by one family for living and sleeping quarters, and containing one kitchen only, and includes a mobile home, but not hotel or motel units "Impact fee" means any monetary exaction imposed by the City as a condition of or in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or some of the cost of or repayment of costs previously expended from other City funds for capital improvements relating to the project Page 5 of 10 017 "Impose" means to determine that a particular development project is subject to the collection of impact fees as a condition of development approval K "Nonresidential development project" means all development other than residential development protects "Residential development protect" means any development undertaken to create a new dwelling unit or units 15- 27A -5: NOTICE AND HEARING REQUIREMENTS: A Any legislative action adopting an ordinance, resolution, or other legislative enactment adopting a new impact fee or approving an increase in an existing fee must be accomplished in accordance with Government Code § 66018 B Any costs incurred by the City in conducting public hearings required by this section may be recovered as a part of the impact fees which are the subject of the hearing 15- 27A-6: IMPOSITION OF FEES /AUTOMATIC ADJUSTMENT: A Except as otherwise provided, persons submitting applications seeking approval for new development protects must pay the City impact fees, in an amount set by city council resolution, as a condition for the City to approve such development protects B No tentative or final subdivision map, parcel map, grading permit, budding permit, final inspection, or certificate of occupancy, or other development permit, may be approved unless the provisions of this section are fulfilled C Impact fees will be imposed by including the following language in any document of development approval "All fees imposed pursuant to Title 15 Chapter 27A of the El Segundo Municipal Code must be paid to the City before this protect is approved " D The Director of Planning and Budding Safety or the Director of Public Works will collect impact fees before the City issues a budding permit, except that the connection fees are collected at the time an applicant seeks to connect to the City's utility system Page 6of10 018 E Unless otherwise revised, the impact fees established by this chapter will be automatically adjusted on an annual basis at the beginning of each fiscal year based on the average percentage change over the previous calendar year set forth in the Construction Price Index for the Los Angeles metropolitan area The first impact fee adjustment cannot be made before a minimum of ten (10) months after the effective date of the ordinance adding this chapter to the code 15- 27A -7: IMPACT FEE ACCOUNTS. A The City must establish an impact fee account for each benefit area and for each type of capital improvement for which an impact fee is imposed Impact fees collected must be deposited in each such account according to type of improvement and benefit area The funds of the account cannot be commingled with the City's other funds Any account previously established for the deposit of funds which would have been developer impact fees under this chapter are deemed an impact fee account for the purposes of this chapter B Each impact fee account must be interest - bearing and the accumulated interest will become a part of the account C The funds of each account will be expended within the benefit area exclusively for the capital improvements for which the impact fees were collected 15- 27A -8: USE OF IMPACT FEE PROCEEDS: Impact fees may be expended only for the type of capital improvements for which they were imposed, calculated, and collected and according to the time limits and procedures established in this chapter Impact fees may be used to pay the principal, interest and other costs of bonds, notes and other obligations issued or undertaken by or on behalf of the City to finance such improvements. 15- 27A -9: REFUNDS A Except as described in this section, upon application of the property owner, the City must refund that portion of any impact fee which has been on deposit over five years and which is unexpended and uncommitted The refund will be made to the then - current owner or owners of lots or units of the development project or projects, provided that the then - current owner submits an application for a refund to the City within one hundred eighty (180) days before the five (5) year period expires B If fees in any impact fee account are unexpended or uncommitted, Page 7 of 10 019 starting with the fifth (5th) fiscal year after the first deposit into the account or fund, and every subsequent five (5) years, the City Council must make the findings required by Government Code § 66001(d) for maintaining funds on deposit If the Council makes such findings, the fees are exempt from the refund requirement C The City may issue refunds through direct payment; offsetting the refund against other impact fees due for development projects by the owner on the same or other property, or otherwise by agreement with the owner If the costs of refunding the impact fees would exceed the amount refunded, the City may instead comply with Government Code § 66001(f) 15- 27A -10: PROTESTS, APPEALS, AND AUDITS. All protests, appeals, and audits must be conducted in accordance with the procedures contained in the Mitigation Fee Act (commencing at Government Code §§ 66020 et seq.) 15- 27A -11: AMENDMENT PROCEDURES. At least once each year, before the City Council's adoption of the budget and revisions to the Capital Improvements Project List, the city manager, or designee, must report to the City Council with A Recommendations for amendments to this chapter and to other parts of this code and to resolutions establishing impact fees, B Proposals for changes to the Capital Improvements Project List, identifying capital improvements to be funded, in whole or in part, by impact fees, C Proposals for changes in the boundaries of benefit areas, and D Proposals for changes to impact fee rates and schedules 15- 27A -12: CREDITS A A property owner who dedicates land or agrees to participate in an assessment district or otherwise contributes funds for capital improvements, as defined in this chapter, may be eligible for a credit for such contribution against the impact fee otherwise due B The Director of Planning and Building Safety or the Director of Public Works must determine (1) whether the contribution meets capital improvement needs for which the particular impact fee has been imposed; (2) whether the contribution will substitute for or otherwise reduce the need for capital improvements anticipated to be provided with impact fee funds, and (3) the value of the Page 8 of 10 �J G.0 developer contribution In no event, however, will the credit exceed the amount of the otherwise applicable impact fee C Any application for credit must be submitted at or before the time of development project approval on forms provided by the City The application must contain a declaration of those facts, under oath, along with the relevant documentary evidence which qualifies the property owner for the credit 15- 27A -13: CONFLICTS. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this chapter and the provisions of any other ordinance or resolution establishing or amending impact fees, the provisions of this chapter govern " SECTION 3 Repeal of any provision of the ESMC, or any other City resolution or ordinance herein will not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before, this Ordinance's effective date Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance SECTION 4 The this ordinance is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq , "CEQA ") and CEQA regulations (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq ) because it establishes fees and charges for the purpose of obtaining funds for capital projects necessary to maintain service within existing service areas. This Ordinance, therefore, is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under Cal Code Regs Title 14, § 15273 SECTION 5 If any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable SECTION 6 The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be entered into the city of El Segundo's book of original ordinances, make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting, and, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law SECTION 7 This Ordinance will take effect on the 31st day following its final passage and adoption. Page 9 of 10 GZi PASSED AND ADOPTED this _ day of , 2005 ly McDowell, Mayor ATTEST Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM Mark D Hensley, City Attorney By Karl H Berger, Assistant City Attorney Page 10 of 10 , , U�� RESOLUTION NO._ A RESOLUTION ADOPTING TRAFFIC CONGESTION MITIGATION FEES IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 15 CHAPTER 27A OF THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of El Segundo as follows SECTION 1 The City Council finds and declares as follows• A This Resolution is adopted pursuant to Title 15 Chapter 27A of the El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC ") for the purpose of calculating development impact fees, B The findings set forth in Ordinance No _ are incorporated by reference into this Resolution as if fully set forth, C This Resolution relies upon the documentary and testimonial evidence submitted to the City during the public hearing held on November 15, 2005 in addition to such additional information that may be in the administrative record, D The report entitled "Traffic Impact Fee Study Update," dated November 2, 2005 and drafted by MumFinancial ( "Fee Report"), sets forth reasonable methodology and analysis for the determination of the impact of new development on the need for and costs for additional capital facilities improvements in the City The Fee Report is attached as Exhibit "A," and incorporated by reference, and E This Resolution relies upon the calculations and traffic modeling set forth in the Report in addition to all other matters in the City's records. SECTION 2 Calculation of Traffic Improvement Fees A The Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee amount is set in accordance with the Fee Report. The Fee is applicable to all new development as set forth in the El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC ") utilizing the following unit rates for projects with a prepared traffic study and trip generation projections from an engineer Page 1 of 6 ) /) 0 Jr-J Rate per P.M. Peak AREA Hour Generated Trip Zone 1 $2,564 Zone 2 $105 Zone 3 $116 Projects that lack specific trip generation projections may use the fees per dwelling unit for residential developments and per square foot for nonresidential uses Traffic Facilities Fee Zone 1 Land Use Fee / Sq. Ft. Commercial $961 Office $382 Industrial $251 Traffic Facilities Fee Zone 2 Land Use Fee / Unit Single Family $105 Multi -Family $63 Land Use Fee / Sq. Ft. Commercial $039 Office $016 Industrial $010 Traffic Facilities Fee Zone 3 Land Use Fee / Unit Single Family $116 Multi -Family $69 Land Use Fee / Sq. Ft. Commercial $043 Office $017 Industrial $011 Page 2 of 6 024 B Each land use category has its own trip generation factor based upon a designated measurement unit The actual computation of the P M peak trips can be determined by a traffic study For example, a single family home in Zone 3 is projected to produce 1 01 P M peak trips The Traffic Improvement Fee for a single family home would therefore be $117 ($116 x 1 01 PM) C Definitions. Unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the following definitions will govern the construction of the words and phrases used in this section "Development" means any discretionary or ministerial action by the city resulting in the issuance of grading, budding, plumbing, mechanical, or electrical permits, conditional use permits, other land use entitlement permits or certificates of occupancy issued by the city to construct, change, or make lawful the use of a budding or property 2 "Future growth" means the level of new development anticipated in El Segundo consistent with the general plan and will be expressed in terms of square footage for commercial and industrial uses and in terms of dwelling units for residential uses 3 "Level of service" means the different operating conditions which occur at an intersection or on a roadway when accommodating various traffic volumes. It is a qualitative measure of the effect of traffic flow factors, such as speed and travel time, interruptions, freedom to maneuver and driver comfort and convenience 4 " Passby trip" means a trip end that is actually a stopping off point along a trip on the way to another destination Passby trips are not included in the calculation of traffic mitigation fees 5 'Roadway improvements" means those improvements necessary to implement the traffic circulation improvement plan, including but not limited to, paving, grading, roadway substructure, curb and gutter, sidewalks, medians with landscaping, drainage facilities, bridges, traffic signals, street lighting, signing, striping, noise walls, utility relocations, rights -of -way and other improvements or actions necessary to mitigate adverse environmental impacts Page 3 of 6 025 6 "Select link model run" means the computerized accounting program, developed by the city's traffic engineering consultant and adopted by legislative action of the city council, which traces trip ends from each category of land use of new development to a traffic impact, excluding passby trips, and then determines the pro rata share of each impact attributable to the new development "Traffic circulation improvement plan" means the program for maintaining and upgrading the city's traffic circulation system consistent with the general plan The plan will contain the improvements necessary to construct the traffic circulation system and all estimated associated costs, including by way of example, and without limitation, engineering, right -of -way acquisitions, and necessary legal fees The traffic circulation improvement plan will be adopted by city council resolution, and be revised as necessary 8 "Trip" means a one - direction vehicular movement with an origin, destination, and no stops in between 9 "Trip end" means the beginning or ending point of a trip D Traffic mitigation fees will be calculated in accordance with the following procedures The computerized traffic modeling study will be used to identify future traffic volumes and the resulting future traffic impacts based on the build -out of the City's General Plan, 2 A traffic facilities plan will be established for mitigating the traffic impacts identified by the computerized traffic modeling study, 3 An estimate will be made of the costs associated with the traffic facilities plan, 4 An estimate will be made of the current and anticipated funding available to finance the improvements identified in the traffic facilities plan, 5 A determination will be made of the difference, if any, between the estimated costs and estimated funding, Page 4of6 026 6 The extent to which the estimated cost exceeds the estimated funding will be the unfunded costs of the improvements to be funded by the traffic mitigation fee, Traffic mitigation fee zones ( "zones ") will be established by City Council resolution based on geographic areas within the city where new development generally impacts the same locations, The Traffic Impact Fee Study Update will be used to determine the share of each impact caused by each new development in each district, 9 The unfunded traffic improvement costs for each improvement will then be distributed to each land use category of new development in each district in accordance with the same pro rata share developed by the Traffic Impact Fee Study Update in determining the percentage of impact attributable to that land use category of new development, E New Mixed Use Buildings Where there are multiple uses within new building (mixed use building), the following applies For each new mixed use building where there are multiple uses proposed, the traffic mitigation fee will be in an amount equal to the combined total of the traffic mitigation fees for each of the uses proposed within the building F Change in Use. For any change in use or uses, if the new use or uses are in a traffic mitigation fee category that has fee amounts greater than the existing use or uses, then the additional traffic mitigation fee will be an amount equal to the difference between the traffic mitigation fee for the new use or uses and the traffic mitigation fee for the former use or uses 2 For any of the uses that cannot clearly be segregated into separate categories, the traffic mitigation fee for the unsegregative uses will be based on the mixed use traffic mitigation fee formula SECTION 3 Schedule of Development Impact Fees. Based upon the foregoing calculations, the Traffic Improvement Fees are established as set forth in the Fee Report Trip Generation Factors are provided on Table 8A — 8C of Exhibit "A " Page 5 of 6 oz; SECTION 4 Exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act. This Resolution is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal Pub Res Code §§ 21000, et seq , "CEQA ") and CEQA regulations (Cal Code Regs Title 14, §§ 15000, et seq ) because it establishes, structures, and approves rates and charges to obtain funds for capital projects needed to maintain service within existing service areas This Resolution, therefore, is categorically exempt from further CEQA review under Cal Code Regs Title 14, § 15273 SECTION 5 Effective Date of this Resolution. The effective date of this Resolution will coincide with the effective date of Ordinance No _, and will remain in effect unless repealed or superseded PASSED AND ADOPTED this 15 day of November, 2005 ATTEST Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM Mark D Hensley, City Attorney a Karl H Berger, Assistant City Attorney Kelly McDowell, Mayor Page 6of6 01-218 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE STUDY UPDATE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO FINAL NOVEMBER 2, 2005 Oakland Office 1700 Broadway 6'" Floor Oakland, Calgorma 94612 Tel (510) 832 -0899 Fax (510) 832 -0898 MuniFinancial A WILLDAN COMPANY Anaheim, CA Industry, CA Jacksonville, FL Lancaster, CA Oakland, CA www muni com Exhibit A Phoenix, AZ San Diego, CA Seattle, WA Temecula, CA Washington, DC TABLE OF CONTENTS TRAFFIC CONGESTION MITIGATION FEE UPDATE Purpose of Study Public Facilities Financing In California Approach MITIGATION FEE ACT FINDINGS.. 1 1 2 3 5 Purpose of Fee 5 Use of Fee Revenues 5 Benefit Relationship 6 Burden Relationship 6 Proportionality 7 TRAFFIC DEMAND FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT ......... ........... ............... 8 Facilities Standards 8 Land Use Scenario 8 Facility Costs to Accommodate Growth 9 Allocation of Fee Responsibility 11 Existing Agreements 15 Fee Schedule 16 Implementation 19 MuniFinanc:al i r} �; City o(EI Segundo Traffic Mitigation Fee Report TRAFFIC CONGESTION MITIGATION FEE UPDATE This report is an update to the Traffic Impact Fee report dated March 19, 1996 The purpose of this update is to adjust the fee to reflect changes in project costs, project phasing, updated land -use projections and modified traffic fee zones. These changes, are prompted, in part, by a revised and updated Circulation Element adopted by the City in September, 2004 This updated element of the General Plan helps to inform and guide the future traffic improvements in the City. This fee update is based on a 20 -year planning horizon for the roadway system in the City of El Segundo. Planned facilities to meet development needs over the next 20 years are shown in Table E Table E: Planned Traffic Facilities Project Description 1) Widening of Aviation Boulevard - Rosecrans to Imperial Highway (Add one lane in each direction) 2) Douglas Street Extension - Park Place to Alaska 3) Convert Nash/Douglas - Two -Way operating between Imperial and El Segundo Boulevard 4) Grand Extension - Duley to Douglas 5) Park Place Extension 6) Miscellaneous Signalization, Widening and Intersection improvements Sources Kimley -Hom and Assoc, City of El Segundo, MuniFinancial PURPOSE OF STUDY The purpose of this update is to adjust the fee to reflect changes in project costs, project phasing, updated land -use projections and modified traffic fee zones in response to a revised and updated Circulation Element, as adopted by the City in September, 2004. This updated element of the General Plan helps to inform and guide the future traffic improvements in the City The primary policy objective of a development impact fee program, also known as a public facilities fee program, is to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with the facilities needed to serve the population growth caused by that new development To fulfill this objective, public agencies should periodically review the need for public facilities fees to serve future growth Mun:Financial 1 031 City ofEl Segundo Tralfc Mitigation Fee Report The primary purpose of this fee analysis report is to develop and recommend fees to facilitate the construction of traffic facilities needed to serve a 2025 population for the City of El Segundo A planning horizon of 2025 was selected, as that year is soon enough to provide reasonable growth projections, yet far enough into the future to provide the City with the flexibility to adjust fees should actual growth either exceed, or be lower than, the growth projections used in this report The City can impose fees under authority granted by the Mitigation Fee Act contained in California Government Code § §66000 - 66025. This report provides the necessary findings required by the Act for adoption of the fees presented in the tables contained herein The five statutory findings required for adoption of the proposed fees in accordance with the Act are summarized in the following section. The determination of fees begins with the selection of a planning horizon and development of projections for population, workers and vehicular trips. These projections assist in determining a master plan and related facility standards necessary for determining fees for necessary facilities These growth projections are shown in Table 1 Imposed fees are set for the following use classifications- Single Family, Multi - Family, Commercial, Office, and Industrial, based on industry- standard density and traffic generation standards PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING IN CALIFORNIA The changing fiscal landscape in California during the past 30 years has steadily undercut the financial capacity of local governments to fund infrastructure Three dominant trends stand out: The passage of a string of tax limitation measures, starting with Proposition 13 in 1978 and continuing through the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996, • Declining popular support for bond measures to finance infrastructure for the next generation of residents and businesses; and • Steep reductions in federal and state assistance Faced with these trends, many cities and counties have had to adopt a policy of "growth pays its own way ". This policy shifts the burden of funding infrastructure expansion from existing rate and taxpayers onto new development. This funding shift has been accomplished primarily through the imposition of assessments, special taxes, and development fees also known as public facilities fees. Assessments and special taxes require approval of property owners and are appropriate when the funded facilities are directly related to the developing property Development fees, on the other hand, are an MuniFinancial 2 J�ri Cat➢ of El Segundo Traffic Mittgatzon Fee Report appropriate funding source for facilities that benefit all development jurisdiction -wide. Development fees need only a majority vote of the legislative body for adoption APPROACH Public facilities fees are calculated to fund the cost of facilities required to accommodate growth The four steps followed in any development impact fee study include 1 Prepare growth projections; 2 Identify facility standards; 3. Determine the amount and cost of facilities required to accommodate new development based on facility standards and growth projections; 4. Calculate the public facilities fee by allocating the total cost of facilities per unit of development Between steps #1 and N2 planned facilities are identified to serve new development These data provides a basis for the facility standards used in this study. Fee revenues alone are insufficient to fully fund all planned facilities. The City of El Segundo will need to identify other sources of funding including but not limited to: local taxes, general fund revenues, regional, State, and federal transportation funds. TYPES OF F-AC ILITY STANDARDS The key public policy issue in development impact fee studies is the identification of facility standards. Facility standards determine new development's total need for new facilities and each development project's fair share of those needs. Standards also ensure that new development does not fund deficiencies associated with existing development. The types of standards that may be used in a development impact fee study include. • Demand standards determine the amount of facilities required to accommodate growth, for example park acres per thousand residents, traffic level of service, or gallons of water per day per dwelling unit • Design standards determine how a facility should be designed to meet expected demand, for example park improvement requirements, street intersection design, and water storage needs. • Cost standards determine the cost per unit of demand based on the estimated cost of facilities, for example cost per capita, cost per vehicle trip, or cost per gallon of water per day. MuniFinanctal 3 033 City of El Segundo Traffic MaWatwn Fee Report OCTCRM /NINO FAC /L /TY STANOARO3 The most commonly accepted approaches to determining a facility standard are described below. • The existing inventory method uses a facility standard based on the ratio of existing facilities to the existing service population. Under this approach new development funds the expansion of facilities at the same standard currently serving existing development. By definition the existing inventory method results in no facility deficiencies attributable to existing development. This method is often used when a long -range plan for new facilities is not available. Only the initial facilities to be funded with fees are identified in the fee study Future facilities to serve growth are identified through an annual capital improvement plan and budget process. • The master plan or system method calculates the standard based on the ratio of all existing plus planned facilities to total future demand (existing and new development) This method is used when (1) the local agency anticipates increasing its facility standard above the existing inventory standard discussed above, and (2) planned facilities are part of a system that benefit both existing and new development. Using a facility standard that is higher than the existing inventory standard creates a deficiency for existing development. The jurisdiction must secure non -fee funding for that portion of planned facilities required to correct the deficiency. • The planned facilities method calculates the standard solely based on the ratio of planned facilities to the increase in demand associated with new development. This method is appropriate when planned facilities only benefit new development, such as a sewer trunk line extension to a previously undeveloped area. This method also may be used when there are specific engineering reports and studies that support the nexus between new development and the need for the facility. In this report, the planned facility method is utilized for traffic fees in the City of El Segundo. MuniFinancial 0 034 City of El SeRUndo Traffic Mitigation Fee Report MITIGATION FEE ACT FINDINGS Traffic facilities fees, also referred to as public facility fees, are one -time fees typically paid when a building permit is issued and imposed on development projects by local agencies responsible for regulating land use (cities and counties). To guide the widespread imposition of public facilities fees, the State Legislature adopted the Mitigation Fee Act (the Act) with Assembly Bill 1600 in 1987 and subsequent amendments The Act, contained in California Government Code Sections 66000 through 66025, establishes requirements on local agencies for the imposition and administration of fee programs. The Act requires local agencies to document five findings when adopting a fee. The five statutory findings required for adoption of the maximum justified public facilities fees documented in this report are presented in this chapter and supported in detail by the report that follows. All statutory references are to the Act PURPOSE OF FEE For the first finding the City must- Identify the purpose of the fee. ( §66001(a)(1)) The policy of the City of El Segundo is that new development will not burden existing development with the cost of public facilities, including traffic facilities, required to accommodate growth. The purpose of the public facilities fee is to implement this policy by providing a funding source from new development for capital improvements to serve that development. The fee advances a legitimate interest of the City by enabling the City to provide municipal services to new development. USE OF FEE REVENUES For the second finding the City must. Identify the use to which the fee is to be put If the use is financing public facilities, the facilities shall be identified. That identification may, but need not, be made by reference to a capital improvement plan as specified in Section 65403 or 66002, may be made in applicable general or specific plan requirements, or may be made in other public documents that identify the public facilities for which the fee is charged. ( §66001(a)(2)) The traffic facilities fee will fund expanded facilities to serve new development All planned facilities will be located within the City of El Segundo These facilities included in the findings presented here include: MuniFinancial 035 City o%EI Segundo TraJjicMzttgatton Fee Report • Roadway widening; • Roadway extension; • Intersection signalization, and, • Other roadway improvements in the City of El Segundo Planned traffic facilities are identified in this report. This report provides the size and cost estimate for each planned facility More detailed descriptions of certain planned facilities, including their specific location, if known at this time, are included in various City planning documents including the General Plan Circulation Element and other studies. The City may change the list of planned traffic facilities to meet changing circumstances and needs, as it deems necessary The fee program should be updated if these changes result in a significant change in the fair share cost allocated to new development. Planned facilities to address existing deficiencies in the roadway system represent approximately 5% of the total project costs. It is estimated that 35% of project costs will be funded from non -fee revenue. Therefore, development impact fees will not be used for the purpose of correcting existing deficiencies in the roadway system BENEFIT RELATIONSHIP For the third finding the City must- Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. ( §66001(a)(3)) The City will restrict fee revenues to the acquisition of land, construction of traffic facilities, and purchase of related equipment to serve new development. Public facilities funded by the fee will provide a citywide network of services accessible to the additional residents and workers associated with new development. Thus, there is a reasonable relationship between the use of fee revenues and the residential and nonresidential types of new development that will pay the fee. The planned facilities that will be funded by the fee are described in the following chapter BURDEN RELATIONSHIP For the fourth finding the City must: Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. (566001(a)(4)) MuniFinancial 6 036 City WEl Segundo Traffic M agazwn Fee Repart New dwelling units and building square footage are indicators of the demand for traffic facilities needed to accommodate growth. As additional dwelling units and building square footage are created, the occupants of these structures will place additional burdens on the traffic facilities The need for the fee is based on traffic engineering reports prepared by the City that quantify the expected traffic impacts of new development. PROPORTIONALITY For the fifth finding the City must. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed ( §66001(b)) This reasonable relationship between the traffic impact fee for a specific development project and the cost of the facilities attributable to that project is based on the estimated vehicle trips the project will add to public roadways. The City has been divided into three fee zones. These three zones are the subject of a computer traffic model to determine the expected impacts of each zone on the traffic network and the need for new facilities The total fee for a specific project is based on number of new dwelling units for residential development and building square feet for commercial development The fee schedule converts the units or estimated square footage of a development project into a fee based on the size of the project and the fee zone in which it resides. Larger projects of a certain land use type will have a higher trip generation and pay a higher fee than smaller projects of the same land use type. Thus, the fee schedule ensures a reasonable relationship between the traffic impact fee for a specific development project and the cost of the facilities attributable to that project MuniFinancial 7 037 City of El Segundo Traflic Maigatton Fee Report TRAFFIC DEMAND FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT This chapter summarizes an analysis of the need for traffic improvement facilities that include roadway and intersection improvements, to accommodate new development. The chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the impact fee for funding of these facilities FACILITIES STANDARDS The City's traffic facility standards are based on a measure of congestion commonly used in traffic planning and known as "level of service" (LOS). LOS is calculated based on the volume of traffic on a roadway or at an intersection compared to the capacity of the roadway or intersection LOS "A," `B," and "C" suggest that delays are insignificant to acceptable. LOS "D" suggests tolerable delays though traffic is high and some short-term back -ups occur. LOS "E" and "F" suggest restricted speeds and significant delays as traffic volumes meet or exceed the capacity of the facility The following policies present the performance standards acceptable to the City of El Segundo- * Strive to maintain level of service (LOS) "D" or better on the City's arterials. LOS "E" or "F" are not considered acceptable. Prevailing traffic conditions in the City were analyzed in conjunction with an updated Circulation Element in September 2004. The study found that most roadways in the City operate at LOS "C" or better Roadway segments currently at the standard LOS "D" and "E" numbered four and two respectively No roadway segments operate at LOS "F ". A number of intersections operate at LOS "E" and "F " Five intersections on Sepulveda Boulevard operate at less than LOS "D," one on Rosencrans Avenue and one on Avaition Boulevard Existing roadways and intersections that do not meet City LOS standards are considered existing deficiencies. For the purpose of this study, the planned facility approach has been utilized to determine facility needs. Because development impact fees may only be used to fund the impacts of new development, existing deficiencies must be funded by other funding sources Existing deficiencies are discussed later in this chapter and listed in Table 5. LAND USE SCENARIO The City of El Segundo General Plan is the basis for estimating future trips in this study Based on the best available determination from the City of El Segundo, overall land use is MuniFinancial ois City ofEl Segundo Traffic Mittgation Fee Report projected to reach 80% of remaining build out through the year 2025. Table 1 lists the existing and projected land uses based on General Plan build out Also shown are trip forecasts by land use for both existing and buildout conditions "P M. Trip Rate" refers to the number of afternoon, peak - period trips generated by residential uses per unit and non- residential uses per 1,000 square feet. The values used are industry standards derived by the Institute of Transportation Engineers Table 7 Land Use Scenario and Total P M Peak Trips Citywide FACILITY COSTS TO ACC ❑MM ❑DATE GROWTH This update includes six projects to accommodate development in the City of El Segundo through 2025 These projects are shown in Figure 1 and listed in Table 2 Project costs are shown net of other available funds and existing fund balances. MuniFinancial '�.3fj Existing Land Use Bulldout Land Use Difference P M Trip Land Use Rate Units(1K a Trips Unitsl AK6f Trips Unitcf iK sT Trips Residential (Units) Single Family 101 2,590 2,616 2,609 2635 19 19 Multi Family' 052 4.881 2,538 4.910 2.553 29 15 7,471 5154 7519 5188 48 34 Non - Residential (1.000 So Ft ) Commercial Retail 375 1,172,267 4,396 2,708800 10158 1,536533 5762 offtM2 149 16,436,913 24,491 24,902 013 37,104 8,465 101 12 613 Light Industrial 098 1 019,366 999 2,651 020 2,598 1 631,633 1 599 Menufactwaq 074 13,117,568 9707 12,552703 9,289 (%4 665) (418) Warehousing 047 1.106.383 520 1.251.064 588 144,681 68 32,852518 40,113 44,065600 59,737 11,213083 19624 Total P M Peak Trips' 32,859,989 46,105 44,073,119 65,763 11,213,130 19,658 Includes epanmunt. for bfiich no 9m h a pnpded in Me General Plan bwldout InGutles Commertael OMCe Office and used Use 'The follovanp nen-nsidenbal land uses an alned, at Nil buAbout and are not listed mdnMUaly but mdudoo in totals Gowmment Of(cs School Padu Post Office Hom Motel Church Club or Lo 1pe These lastl uses represent 608 tops Mod NS been romowd(remWlend use eoeru�ro above ruuWnp nlmwroRU aM mono tanWy tnpa 1000 ppp vsuen rest oro6cenadded Qre to the Concorde te C Ca ampus Purled Sources Mmley-Hom and Aasoc June 8 20)5 Memo El Segundo General Plan City of El Seguntlo FACILITY COSTS TO ACC ❑MM ❑DATE GROWTH This update includes six projects to accommodate development in the City of El Segundo through 2025 These projects are shown in Figure 1 and listed in Table 2 Project costs are shown net of other available funds and existing fund balances. MuniFinancial '�.3fj City ofEi Segundo Traffic Mitigation Fee Report SO 0 �a �E 9. U W O W O 0- M z O O w °- °C z �Q Note: Transportation Improvement Projects shown are components of the adopted Circulation Element MuniFinancial 10 City a El Segundo Traffic Mal atton Fee Report Table 2 Planned Traffic Facilities Lose Other Less Fund Total 1996 Estimated Funding Balance Adjusted Project Description Cost, 2005 Cost' Sources 3 Allocation Project Cost Widening of Aviation Boulevard - Rosecrans to /mpenal Highway (Add one lane rn each direction) $ 4 600,000 $ 12 000 000 $ 5 667,000 $ 397 201 $ 5,735 799 Widening of Sepulveda Boulevard - Rosecrans Avenue to E/ Segundo Boulevard (Add one lane in each direction) - PROJECTCOMPLETE Douglas Street Extension - Park Place to Alaska Convert Nash /Douglas - Two -Way operating between Imperial and E/ Segundo Boulevard Huges Way Extension - 600'E of Allied Way to Douglas Street/ Coral Circle intersection - PROJECT REMOVED' Lauport Extension - Maple to Walnut - PROJECT REMOVED' Grand Extension - Duley to Douglas Park Place Extension 870,000 - - - - 9,500000 32,543000 16,681000 1,027,294 14834,706 500,000 1900,000 1255,000 41,773 603227 7,168000 35,000000 1465,250 18,000000 - - 3,678,000 7,200,000 6200,000 64,764 935236 N/A 17,000,000 - 1,100,996 15,899004 Miscellaneous Slgnalmatlon, Widening and Intersection Improvements 400,000 2.185.000 141,510 2,043,490 Subtotal $ 28,181,000 $126,828,000 $ 30,003,000 $ 2,774,000 $ 40,051,000 'Based on pnor trafic indeed fee report dated March 19 1988 2 Cast estimates pronded by the City of El Segundo Public Works and Engmeenng Department I O1Mr soutces of hadsN mcWde mocrat State and Fed vat giant. and chair proted specific allocabO® x Prolads removed eom fee program based on City of M Segundo determination that facilities volt not be required during the planning hormon of this fee program Removed pmleds represent 42% of the total gross fee costs Note Existing fund balance as of July 2005 allocated to all proieds S 2 7]3 539 Totals may not add due to rounding Sources Evaivahon of a Tieft Conge.hon Mediation Fee Report March 19 19% City of El $"undo Public Works 16mley -Horn and Assoc ALLOCATI ON OF FEE RESPONSIBILITY In the process of creating the Circulation Element of the General Plan, the City of El Segundo created a Traffic Model. The Traffic Model was used to develop an approach for allocating Traffic Mitigation Fee responsibility amongst future development. The build - out land use and network assumptions in the City's current Traffic Model are up to date, as a result of the recently completed Circulation Element update effort by Kimley -Horn and Associates The "No Land Use Change" alternative was used, which reflects General Plan Build -out according to the land uses and Floor Area Ratios (FAR) allowed by current zoning Only trips expected from future development in the City of El Segundo will be subject to the fee program Select Link runs of the model were conducted for each of the improvement projects included in the Fee Program A Select Link run allows isolation of the traffic on a roadway segment where an improvement is planned, and to identify where the traffic that MuniFinancial 11 041 Cate o(El Segundo Tragic Muagataon Fee Report will be using each link is coming from With this information, the cost of the improvement can be fairly apportioned according to which future developments will benefit the most from it For fee assignment purposes, there are four types of trips identified through each Select Link process. 1. Trips that both start and end in the City of El Segundo 2. Trips that have an origin in the City of El Segundo, and a destination outside the City, 3. Trips that have an origin outside the City of El Segundo, and a destination in the City; 4 Trips that have neither an origin nor a destination in the City of El Segundo, but are using a City street to pass through the City. Trip types that fall into Category 4 are "through" trips, and are not subject to the fee program. Although these through trips take up capacity on the roadway and thereby contribute to the need for the improvement, local development cannot be held responsible for the impact of through traffic on the transportation system. The proportion of trips on the selected link that have neither an origin nor a destination in the City will be applied to the cost of the improvement, and that portion of the improvement cost will not be subject to the Traffic Mitigation Fee Program. The portion of the Fee Program that cannot be funded by local development will be the City's responsibility, to be covered with other funding sources, such as local, state, and federal grants; and local gas tax allocations. All other trip types with either an origin or destination or both in the City of El Segundo are subject to the fee program Only trips expected from future development in the City of El Segundo will be subject to the fee program. Output from the Select Link process was used to identify the proportion of each improvement that should be assigned to each fee zone Area in the City, based on the number of trips from each future development that uses the selected link. The final fee structure for each fee zone area is based on the average of the proportioned fees for each of the Fee Program improvements. Fee zones in the City of El Segundo are shown in Figure 2. Munihnancial 12 City of El Segundo Traffic Mattgatton Fee Report 0 O 6 2 W H CO J Q Z O N CO J Q Z Q W LU N U- � V a 2 5 Mun2Financial 13 0 4.: City o {El Segundo Traffic Mitigation Fee Report Based on the methodology discussed above, project costs were allocated to the fee zones as shown in Table 3 Table 3 Allocation of Internal Trips by Project by Zone Grand Extension - Duley to Douglas 935236 91% 9% 849965 9980% 002% 017% Park Place Extension 15$99004 100% 0% 15,899004 9998% 000% 002% Miscellaneous Slgnalustlon Widening and Intersection Improvements 2.043.490 80% 20% 1634792 10000% 000% 000% Subtotal 540,051,000 $35,735,000 ' Plocetone and trip ehrtes based an map motel output prepared by pmky Horn and Assoc September N05 Was Totals may not add due to rounding Sources Tides 1 8 2 Whey Horn and Nam CM of El S i,mdo MumFlnandat Based on the allocations provided by the Select Link model run, Table 4 lists the distribution of project costs to fee zones. Table 4. Allocation of Project Costs by Zone Widening of Aviation Boulevard - Rosecrans to Imperial Highway (Add one lane In each direction) Douglas Street Extension - Park Place to Alaska Convert Nash /Douglas - Two -Way operating between Imperial and El Segundo Boulevard Grand Extension - Duley to Douglas Park Place Extension Miscellaneous Slgnabzatlon, Widening and Intersection Improvements Allocation of Project Costs by Zone Project Cost Subject to $ 3,000,160 $ 2,998,550 $ 805 $ 805 13,773,996 13,771,363 Allocation of New Internal Trips by Zone' 577,403 577,237 83 83 849,965 Project Cost 196 1,472 15,899,004 15,896,390 - 2,614 Adjusted Internal External Subject to Project Descdpbon Project Cost Sharer Sharer Fee Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Widening of Aviation Boulevard - Rosecrans to Impenal Hlghway(Add one lane In each direction) $ 5735,799 52% 48% $ 3000,160 9995% 003% 003% Douglas Slyest Extenson- Park Place to Alaska 14834,706 93% 7% 13773996 9990% 000% 002% Convert Nashrpouglas- Two-Way operating between Imperial and El Segundo Boulevard 603,227 96% 4% 577403 9997% 001% 001% Grand Extension - Duley to Douglas 935236 91% 9% 849965 9980% 002% 017% Park Place Extension 15$99004 100% 0% 15,899004 9998% 000% 002% Miscellaneous Slgnalustlon Widening and Intersection Improvements 2.043.490 80% 20% 1634792 10000% 000% 000% Subtotal 540,051,000 $35,735,000 ' Plocetone and trip ehrtes based an map motel output prepared by pmky Horn and Assoc September N05 Was Totals may not add due to rounding Sources Tides 1 8 2 Whey Horn and Nam CM of El S i,mdo MumFlnandat Based on the allocations provided by the Select Link model run, Table 4 lists the distribution of project costs to fee zones. Table 4. Allocation of Project Costs by Zone Widening of Aviation Boulevard - Rosecrans to Imperial Highway (Add one lane In each direction) Douglas Street Extension - Park Place to Alaska Convert Nash /Douglas - Two -Way operating between Imperial and El Segundo Boulevard Grand Extension - Duley to Douglas Park Place Extension Miscellaneous Slgnabzatlon, Widening and Intersection Improvements Allocation of Project Costs by Zone Project Cost Subject to $ 3,000,160 $ 2,998,550 $ 805 $ 805 13,773,996 13,771,363 - 2,634 577,403 577,237 83 83 849,965 848,297 196 1,472 15,899,004 15,896,390 - 2,614 1.634,792 1 1,634,792 - Subtotal $35,735,000 1 $ 35,727,000 $ 1,000 $ 8,000 Note Totals may not add due to rounding Sources Tables 1,2 A 3 Kimley -Hom and Assoc City of El Segundo, MunlFinanclal MuniFinancial 14 lJ 4 ,t City of El Segundo TralftcMittgatton Fee Report The preceding tables demonstrate the methodology utilized to allocate costs of the planned facilities to the fee program and each of the three zones. Table 5 addresses the allocation of project cost attributable to new development Table 5: New Development Contribution to Planned Traffic Facilities Project Costs Gross Project Costs 72,828,000 Project Cost Subject to Fee Program 35,735,000 Existing Fund Balance 2,774.000 Subtotal 38,509,000 Percentage of Costs Paid by New Development 53% Protects Addressing Existing Deficiencies Aviation Boulevard Widening - Estimated 15% of project attributable to deficiency $ 1,800,000 Miscellaneous Slgnallzatlon, Widening and Intersection Improvements 2,185,000 Subtotal $ 3,985,000 Percentage of Costs Attributable to Existing Deficiencies 5% Note Totals may not add due to rounding Sources Tables 2, 3 &4, Kimley -Horn and Assoc, City of El Segundo Circulation Element, MuniFinancial As shown in the table above, new development is paying approximately 53% of project costs through impact fees. The remainder of funds will come from City general revenues, regional, State, and federal funding sources As discussed earlier, the City of El Segundo has identified existing roadway deficiencies in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Development impact fees may not be used to fund these "existing deficiencies." As shown in the table above, these deficiencies represent approximately 5% of the total project costs and are fully covered by funding sources other than development impact fees. EXISTING AGREEMENTS The City of El Segundo entered into development agreements with a number of developers who are entitled to build large development projects within the City Development Agreements are commonly used by cities throughout the State to better MuniFinancial 15 U 4 .) City of El Segundo Traffic Mitigation Fee Report plan and set the terms for large developments within the land use jurisdiction of the City Because these agreements are in place prior to the adoption of a traffic mitigation fee, these developments will not be subject to the fee. It is necessary, therefore to adjust both future trips and project costs to reflect these agreements Known development agreements in the City of El Segundo are shown in Table 6 Table 6: Existing Development Agreements in Zone 1 Fee P.M Peak Existing Development Agreement Contribution Trips El Segundo Corporate Campus Mattel North @ Continental Way Mattel North @ Grand Avenue Subtotal $ 2,386,385 2,795 433,164 447 298.783 260 $ 3,118,000 3,502 Note Fee contributions and trip assumptions are based on development agreements executed between the City of El Segundo and the parties listed above Totals may not add due to rounding Sources Kimley -Horn and Assoc, City of El Segundo, MuniFinancial FEE SCHEDULE Table 7 shows the calculated equity (cost) per P M. peak trip. For projects with a prepared traffic study and trip generation projections from an engineer, the fee can be calculated by multiplying the equity per trip by the number of trips that will be generated. The subsequent tables, Tables 8A, B, and C, show fees per dwelling unit for residential developments and per square foot for nonresidential uses. These values will be useful for projects that lack specific trip generation projections The fee also includes an administrative charge of 1.0 percent to fund. • A standard overhead charge for legal, accounting, and other departmental and citywide administrative support; • Capital planning, programming, project management costs associated with the share of projects funded by the impact fee, and • Impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses. MuniFinancial 16 04� City of El Segundo Tragic Mah,¢ation Fee Report Table 7: Equity Per Trip Trips New P M Peak Trips at Buildout' Less Existing Agreements Subtotal New Trips at 80% Buildout 2 Fee Prooram Project Costs Allocated Project Costs Less Existing Agreements Subtotal Equity Per P M Peak Trip Administrative Fee of 1 %3 Total Equity per Trip Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Total 19,559 12 87 19,658 (3,502) (3,502) 16,057 12 87 16,156 12,846 10 70 12,925 $ 35,727,000 $ 1,000 $ 8,000 $ 35,736,000 (3,118,000) (3,118, 000) $ 32,609,000 $ 1,000 $ 8,000 $ 32,618,000 $ 2,539 $ 104 $ 115 25 1 1 $ 2,564 $ 105 $ 116 'Total P M Peak Trips based on City of El Segundo General Plan Circulation Element Allocation among zones based on Kimley-Hom Associates traffic model 2 New trips in Table 1 represent total new trips at General Plan Buildout Based on 20 year time horizon, study assumes 80% of General Plan Buildout based on City of El Segundo planning estimates "Administration fee equal to 1 0 percent of base fee to fund (1) a standard overhead charge applied to all City programs for legal, accounting, and other departmental and citywide administrative support, (2) capital planning, programming, project management costs associated with the share of projects funded by the impact fee, and (3) impact fee program administrative costs including revenue collection, revenue and cost accounting, mandated public reporting, and fee justification analyses Sources Tables 1, 4 and 6, Kimley -Horn and Assoc, City of El Segundo Based on the equity per trip calculated above, Tables 8 A, B, and C show the traffic impact fee for the three respective zones Table 8A: Traffic Facilities Fee Zone 1 Equity Per P M. Trip Land Use Trip Rate Fee Fee/ Sa Ft Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet) Commercial $ 2,564 375 $ 9,615 $ 961 Office 2,564 149 3,820 382 Industrial 2,564 098 2,513 251 Sources Table 7, ITE Manual, Kimley -Horn Assoc , City of El Segundo, MuniFinancial MuniFinancial 17 �' 4 i Cuy of El Segundo Traffic ManQation Fee Report Table 8B: Traffic Facilities Fee Zone 2 Equity Per P M Trip Land Use Trip Rate Fee Fee I Sq. Ft Residential (per dwelling unit) Single Family $ 104 1 01 $ 105 Multi - family 104 060 63 Nonresidential (per 1.000 souare feet) Commercial $ 104 375 $ 391 $ 039 Office 104 149 155 016 Industrial 104 098 102 010 Sources Table 7, ITE Manual, Kimley -Horn Assoc, City of El Segundo, MuniFinancial Table 8C: Traffic Facilities Fee Zone 3 Equity Per P.M. Trip Land Use Trip Rate Fee Fee / Sq. Ft Residential (per dwelling unit) Single Family $ 115 1 01 $ 116 Multi - family 115 060 69 Nonresidential (per 1,000 square feet) Commercial $ 115 375 $ 431 $ 043 Office 115 149 171 017 Industrial 115 098 113 Oil Sources Table 7, ITE Manual, Kimley -Horn Assoc, City of El Segundo, MuniFinancial MuniFinancial is City ojEl Segundo Traffic Mitigation Fee Report IMPLEMENTATION This section identifies tasks that the City should complete when implementing the fee programs COUNCIL AOOPTtON The City Council should adopt the proposed fee schedule in compliance with California Government Code Sections 66016 through 66018. The City should. • Send a notice of a public hearing at least 14 days prior to the hearing to any party that has submitted a written request for such a notice Have this report and all supporting documentation such as the updated facility master plans available for review by the public at least 10 days prior to the hearing, • Hold the public hearing to consider adoption of the fee schedule; • Adopt an implementing ordinance to establish the City's authority to impose the proposed fee and automatically adjust the fee annually for inflation, and adopt a resolution to set the fee based on the proposed fee schedule, • Begin collecting the fee no sooner than 60 days following adoption of the ordinance and resolution FEE AccouNTrNc The City should deposit fee revenues into existing restricted fee accounts for each traffic facility zone. Interest earned on fund balances should be credited to the fund PROGRAmmlNQ REVENUES The City should annually update the plan to program all existing fund balances and projected fee revenue to specific capital projects. The City should only use fee revenues for projects that expand the City's ability to expand traffic facilities to accommodate new development. Use of the fees in this manner documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the use of fee revenues programming all fund balances and fees to specific projects also ensures that the City will not violate the statutory limitation against holding undesignated fee revenues longer than five years The City should update its facility master plans as its needs change The City may alter the scope of the planned projects, or substitute new projects as long as the project continues to represent an expansion of the City's general public facility capabilities If the total cost of all planned projects varies from the total cost used as a basis for the fee, the City should revise the fee accordingly MuniFinancial 19 City of El Segundo Tra/%icMaigation Fee Report 1OENTIFY NON-FFEE REVENUE SOURCES The City should identify non -fee revenue sources necessary to fully fund the program. The City should take any actions necessary to secure those funds. The City will need to identify the source and timing of these revenues every five years as part of statutory reporting requirements (see Reporting Requirements, below) 1NFLA7-/ON AO✓UBTMENT The City should adjust the fee annually for inflation in the cost of projects to be funded by the fee. A construction cost index should be based on a reputable and easily identifiable source such as the Engineering News Record. REPORTINO RE47UIREMCNTS The City should comply with the annual and five -year reporting requirements of Government Code 66000 et seq Annually the City must identify the fee revenues received and for what purposes they were expended. For facilities to be funded with a combination of impact fees and other revenues, every five years the City must identify the source and amount of the other revenues. The City must also identify when the other revenues are anticipated to be available to fund the project MuniFinancial 20 ii J EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE. November 15, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING' Unfinished Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding award of contract to RBF Consulting (RBF) for a review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the City of Los Angeles Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) regarding the proposed expansion of the City of Los Angeles' Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant (Estimated cost $10,000) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION, 1) Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract to RBF in a form approved by the City Attorney, and 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION- On June 7, 2005, the City Council authorized staff to solicit proposals from qualified consultants to review the Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) to be released by the City of Los Angeles In late November The City of Los Angeles is required by the Clean Water Act to perform a wastewater facilities study every ten years Since 2000 the City of Los Angeles has been working on a new facilities plan which will integrate not only wastewater but also stormwater /flood control and water reclamation This new plan is Identified as an Integrated Resources Plan The DEIR will need to be reviewed to determine the direct Impacts to the City of El Segundo and its residents No proposals were received in response to the City's formal Request for Proposals (RFP) for reviewing and commenting on the DEIR, with some firms responding with letters stating that they were unable to provide the services requested due to staffing issues After contacting those firms whom did not respond to try to elicit a proposal, only one firm, RBF Consulting, gave a proposal Staff recommends the award of contract to RBF Consulting to help assure that there is adequate time for review and comment on the draft EIR ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. Proposal from RBF Consulting FISCAL IMPACT- Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Appropriation Required d1 Vw S O'Neill, Senior 16 $126,000 $10,000 117 -400- 8601 -6206 _ Yes X No Coordinator DATE: I I �, � 2 CONSULTING October 13, 2005 JN 10- 104707 Mr James O'Neill Program Coordinator City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 -3895 Subject: Proposal — Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant Draft EIR Peer Review Dear James This letter proposal is pursuant to our recent phone discussions and your request for assistance during the environmental phase of the Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant (HTP) 50 MGD expansion project In your request for proposals, dated July 1, 2005, you indicate more tasks than we are proposing here As I indicated in our discussions, due to our current workload we do not have the resources available to provide the City the full extent of services outlined in the RFP However, we can provide the City of El Segundo a peer review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report due to be out for public comment very soon We propose to provide the City with the following services • Meet with City planning staff to receive a copy of the DEIR and discuss specific City concerns, • Review current HTP operating restrictions and construction specifications pursuant to current agreement(s) between El Segundo and Hyperion, • Review the DEIR with an eye toward specification compliance and the construction /operation agreements, • Outline potential construction conditions and ultimate conditions resulting from the proposed expansion project that could adversely affect El Segundo citizens, both from a planning and engineering perspective, in a formalized memorandum We propose to offer these services on a time - and - materials basis not to exceed $10,000, which will provide approximately 80 hours of review and correspondence by our planning and engineering staff experienced in the environmental process and wastewater treatment plant construction and operation If you have any questions please call me at (949) 472 -3416, or Glenn LaJoie at (949) 855 -3663 Sincerely, / Charles A Marr, P E Senior Associate Water Resources W Selmone Jugis, City of El Segundo Glenn Lalole, RBF Accounting, RBF File PLANNING DESIGN CONSTRUCTION 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, CA 9261 8-2 02 7 ■ PO Box 57057 Wine CA 92619 -7057 • 949 472 3505 • Fax 949 472 8373 Offices located throughout California Arizona & Nevada • www RBFcom p—ted 11, Ired Pepe, 0 J EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 15, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding a presentation by Shannon David, Inc on the new business campaign project for the City of El Segundo consisting of forty (40) light pole banners on Sepulveda Blvd. between Imperial Ave. and Rosecrans Ave , three (3) billboards strategically located throughout the Los Angeles region, the development of a business web page and print ads in professional journals (Fiscal Impact $125,000 — Approved previously) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Recommendation (1) Receive and file presentation; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION. On March 15, 2005 the City Council approved Shannon David Earle as a consultant to design and implement a City brand for a new business campaign which consisted of 40 light pole banners, 4 billboards, a web page, and ads for professional journals. On April 25, 2005 a contract was executed for the consultant to design and install the above work Two Council members and two members of the Economic Development Advisory Committee were appointed to form a sub - committee to work with the consultant and approve design concepts On August 4, 2005, a focus group of ten (10) El Segundo citizens, small business owners, and corporate managers reviewed the proposed designs and offered recommendations on the banner and billboard styles, colors, and slogans At this time the sub - committee is bringing the recommended City brand, banners & billboard designs to Council for an update on the project as requested. The presentation will be made by Shannon David Earle ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS- None FISCAL IMPACT: Project approved on March 15, 2005 by Council for $120700 Operating Budget. $120,000 Amount Requested None Account Number* 2401 -6214, 2401 -6201. Project Phase- Presentation of Subcommittee approvals Appropriation Required, _Yes x No n , n DATE: t qI�LJt7� Director of Library & Cable Services R;Fe Y DATE: j y 65 J art, City Manager 3 053 O z OLL O� z m W� mr W � O� U � 3 W N W N N N C W 0 O Z O N a m $ensQ �v ��n$idoRE��B�n� � r aim �nN � °�'mrvwm �oiem N z LL z u o w rc w m z p a F O LL d D o z O�u 7 U d OZ Z Z O�DOg02 6 LLU i WUOh 4z �p.rrz�LLm Zgz w 3LLLL' p N aa�,EU gz ti w (w('' �✓i¢ rc 6 g N N Q OQ N W W W 7 2 z ZQ p p N J W m W F 0 y N 2 U O >> 2 T LL li W R Z LLF' K U LL W w O J O z 7 z O J O U awOQIJ< OId=d i JQQya� w7Z Ow K pW Z�Zzz w z w c (n W p d d 2 p a 00 u d 0 OK K O O d W gg C ? a a J 3 W r11 8U w 3 d O gg p W W �C W aC O 7 S o! W W O a �i n e E 0 fi L m a 6 v v° w 1 aWn °OW z rc Q € `o Ow-z p_U UJ WO pt Q] O 2 W f U a oa ri w m N Y U W_ U O O W O O v E 2 n N c � o m r16 `o Sao v Q w� u°� N Y U W_ U N O f O O > z K t (l i �SE1° u c nm „o m a c Y! g n �a3G E � m ° r m U Y�96O�� E@ 5. E N c p 1 O LLI U a m x o O i' J � CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER 10/21/2005 THROUGH 11/3/2005 Date Payee Amount Description 10/27/05 Health Comp 76924 Weekly claims 10121 10/20/05 La Salle 43,72500 ABAG monthly payment 10/24/05 Federal Reserve 100 DO Employee I Bonds 10/27/05 Lane Donovan Golf Ptr 19,022 62 Golf Course Payroll Trf 10127105 Cal PERS 250,879 50 PERS Retirement 11/1/05 Siemens Financial Services 44,837 50 Qtrly Energy Pmt 11/3/05 Health Comp 530 DO Weekly claims 10/7 1113/05 IRS 202,008 68 Federal Taxes 11/3/05 Employment Development 44,208 54 State Taxes 10/21 - 11/3/05 Workers Comp Activity 32,012 33 SCRMA checks issued 638,093 61 DATE OF RATIFICATION* 11/15/05 TOTAL PAYMENTS BY WIRE: Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by Date ive Service Date D to 638,093.61 on actual expenditures is available in the City Treasurer's Office of the City of El Segundo REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2005 - 5 00 P M 5 00 P M SESSION CALL TO ORDER — Mayor McDowell at 5 00 p m ROLL CALL Mayor McDowell Mayor Pro Tern Gaines Council Member Boulgandes Council Member Busch Council Member Jacobson Present - Present arrived at 5 10 p m Present Present - Present Mark Hensley, City Attorney, announced that the anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956 9(b) pertained to the Downtown Specific Plan CLOSED SESSION. The City Council moved into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54960, et seq ) 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)) — 3 matters City of El Segundo v City of Los Angeles, et al , LASC No BS094275 Yeaton v City of El Segundo, LASC Case No. BS096351 Bressi v City of El Segundo, LASC Case Nos BC288293 and 288292 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956 9(b) -2- potential cases (no further public statement is required at this time), Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(c) -2- matters. DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS (Gov't Code §54957) — 0 matter CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54957 6) -0- matter CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956 8) -1- matter Purchase of Real Property (Parcel Nos 4138 - 004 -016 (primary parcel), 4138 - 004 -008 and 4138- 004 -015) City Negotiator Jeff Stewart, City Manager MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 PAGE NCJ�_ ±�J�i Property Owner Federal Express Corporation/Thomas Properties Council moved to open session at 6 00 p m SPECIAL MATTERS — 6 00 P M 1 Interview of candidates for the Committees, Commissions and Boards (CCBs) regarding Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee (CIPAC) and Community Cable Advisory Committee (Cable), and potential appointment of members to the Committees, Commissions and Boards Interviews will commence at approximately 6 00 p m and will be held In the West Conference Room and are open to the public Council interviewed candidates for the Community Cable Commission. Council recessed at 6 20 p m Council reconvened at 6 40 p m Council Interviewed a candidate for the Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee Mayor McDowell absent Council consensus to appoint A J Paz to the Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee, for a full term to expire 11/30/09 and Nick Gerenday and Joseph Plnchuk to the Community Cable Advisory Committee for full terms expiring 10/31/09 Council recessed at 6 50 p m MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 PAGE NO 2 0 5) I REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2005 - 7 00 P M 7 00 P M SESSION CALL TO ORDER — Mayor McDowell at 7 00 p m INVOCATION — Chaplain, Lt Col Thomas Kelly of the Los Angeles Air Force Base PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Council Member Jim Boulgarides PRESENTATIONS — (a) Mayor Pro Tem Gaines presented a Proclamation in observance of Veterans Day, and inviting citizens to join the City Council in placing a wreath at Freedom Park Memorial, Friday, November 11, 2005 at 9 00 a m , in honor of our patriotic men and women Mayor Pro Tem Gaines presented a proclamation to Rock McNaughton in honor of his mother June McNaughton a Veteran, who unfortunately passed away October 31, 2005 (b) A Certificate of Appreciation by Andy Dellenbach, Chairman, Surfrider Foundation, to City Council, in recognition of El Segundo's passing of the Ordinance banning smoking on the El Segundo Beach and the posting of "No Smoking" signs ROLL CALL Mayor McDowell - Present Mayor Pro Tem Gaines - Present Council Member Boulgarides - Present Council Member Busch - Present Council Member Jacobson - Present PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS — (Related to City Business Only — 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves 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 Brian Crowley, Resident, spoke regarding the purchase of the property for soccer fields from TPG, item 14 on this agenda Chris Powell, President of the School Board, spoke on the formation of the Disaster Council He further spoke regarding the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan, and the possible impact on the School District and requested to be involved in the project. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 PAGE NO 3 'J J i3 Emma Duncan, Resident; spoke regarding the purchase of the property from TPG (Item 14) for soccer fields She also objected to the naming of a street after former Mayor Mike Gordon (Item 18) Janice Cruickshank, Resident, spoke regarding the purchase of the property from TPG (Item 14) for soccer fields She also objected to the naming of a street after former Mayor Mike Gordon (Item 18) Peggy Tyrell, Resident, objected to the naming of a street after former Mayor Mike Gordon (Item 18) She also spoke regarding the purchase of the property from TPG (Item 14) for soccer fields Jane Friedkln, Resident, spoke regarding the purchase of the property from TPG (Item 14) for soccer fields Jull Potter, Resident, spoke regarding the purchase of the property from TPG (Item 14) for soccer fields She also spoke on parallel parking on Douglas Street and the related costs and regarding the purchase of the property from TPG (Item 14) for soccer fields. A PROCEDURAL MOTIONS Consideration of a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions on the Agenda by title only MOTION by Council Member Busch, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgandes to read all ordinances and resolutions on the Agenda by title only MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 B SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS C UNFINISHED BUSINESS Consideration and possible action to amend the Downtown Specific Plan by expanding the current boundary and incorporating the commercially zoned parcels along the 200 block of West Grand Avenue located between the current westerly boundary of the Plan area and Concord Street Selmone Jurps, Planning and Building Safety Director, gave a report Mark Hensley, City Attorney, read by title only RESOLUTION NO 4441 A RESOLUTION OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT NO 645 (EA -645) AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 04 -01 FOR A PROJECT THAT INCLUDES ZONE CHANGE NO 04 -01, ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT NO 05- 01 AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO 04 -01 AND INVOLVES THE EXPANSION OF THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN TO INCLUDE PROPERTIES MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 PAGE NO 4 0'i !i IN THE 200 BLOCK OF WEST GRAND AVENUE FROM THE ALLEY WEST OF RICHMOND STREET TO CONCORD STREET, ADDRESSED AS 218 -228, 219 AND 227 WEST GRAND AVENUE. MOTION by Council Member Busch, SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Gaines to adopt Resolution No 4441 adopting a Negative Declaration approving Environmental Assessment No 645 and approving General Plan Amendment No 04 -01 for a project that Includes Zone Change No 04 -01, Zone Text Amendment No 05 -01 and Specific Plan Amendment No 04 -01 and involves the expansion of the Downtown Specific Plan to Include properties in the 200 block of West Grand Avenue from the alley West of Richmond Street to Concord Street, addressed as 218 -228, 219 and 227 West Grand Avenue MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 Mark Hensley, City Attorney, read by title only ORDINANCE NO 1387 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO 04 -01, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO 04 -01 AND ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT NO 05 -01 AMENDING EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE § 15 -3 -2 TO EXPAND THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN BY INCLUDING PROPERTIES IN THE 200 BLOCK OF WEST GRAND AVENUE FROM THE ALLEY WEST OF RICHMOND STREET TO CONCORD STREET, ADDRESSED AS 218 -228, 219 AND 227 WEST GRAND AVENUE Council Member Busch Introduced the ordinance Council scheduled second reading for November 15, 2005, Regular Meeting 2 Consideration and possible action regarding a presentation by staff on proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan (Fiscal Impact None at this time) Council Member Jacobson left the dais due to a potential conflict regarding the location of his employer and real property Council Member Busch left the dais due to a potential conflict regarding the location of his residence Seimone Jurps, Planning and Building Safety Director, gave a report MOTION by Mayor McDowell, SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Gaines to receive file the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Study and authorize staff to release a Request for Proposal (RFP) for consultant services to prepare an update to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Including environmental review MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 3/0/2 COUNCIL MEMBER JACOBSON AND BUSCH NOT PARTICIPATING DUE TO A POTENTIAL CONFLICT Council Member Jacobson and Busch returned to the dais D REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 PAGE NO 5 3 Consideration and possible action regarding the announcement of the appointments of candidates to the following Committees, Commissions and Boards (GCBs) Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee (CIPAC) and Community Cable Advisory Committee (Cable) Mayor McDowell announced the following appointments A J Paz to the Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee, for a full term to expire 11/30/09, and Nick Gerenday and Joseph Pmchuk to the Community Cable Advisory Committee for full terms expiring 10/31/09 E CONSENT AGENDA All items listed are to be adopted by one motion without discussion and passed unanimously If a call for discussion of an item is made, the item(s) will be considered individually under the next heading of business 4 Approved Warrant Numbers 2549940 to 250220 on Register No 02 in the total amount of $583,917 33 and Wire Transfers from 10/7/2005 through 10/20/2005 in the total amount of $1,921,615 09 Authorized staff to release Ratified. Payroll and Employee Benefit Checks, checks released early due to contracts or agreement, emergency disbursements and /or adjustments, wire transfers Approved City Council Meeting Minutes of October 18, 2005 PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BOULGARIDES Approved the examination plan for the Personnel Merit System fob classification of Police Sergeant Waived the formal bidding process and authorized the purchase of gasoline and diesel fuel for City vehicles and equipment through the use of spot market purchasing (Fiscal Impact Not to exceed $230,000 annually) Approved the enlargement of the City Storm Water Detention Basin /Pump Station No 18 located at 2050 Hughes Way, at developer cost, to accept flows generated from the Plaza El Segundo development located at 680 Sepulveda Boulevard (Fiscal Impact. None) 10 Approved Professional Services Agreement No 3542 with Risk Management Professionals, Inc in the amount of $25,230 to provide professional services for the preparation of the City of El Segundo 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) (Fiscal Impact $30,000) Authorized the City Manager to execute the Professional Services Agreement, as approved by the City Atttorney Approved a contingency in the amount of $4,770 for additional emergency response planning as directed 11 Approved Professional Services Agreement No 3543 between the City of El Segundo and independent contractor Ella Sotelo to provide services as the Los Angeles 9 -1 -1 County Coordinator (Fiscal Impact. None. Expenditure reimbursed by State of California) Authorized the City Manager to execute the Professional Services Agreement approved by the City Attorney Approved appropriations in an amount not to exceed $150,000 per year MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 �, 6 A PAGE NO 6 for services provided by the Los Angeles 9 -1 -1 County Coordinator as set forth In Exhibit "A" Authorized the City Manager to execute extension options in the agreement Authorized the Manager of the Communications Center to approve Invoices for payment, State of California Reimbursement Claim Support Document (TD- 290A), and State of California Reimbursement Claim (TD -290) forms 12 Approved Contract No 3544 between the City and NUVIS Landscape Architecture and Planning for the Lakes Golf Course Driving Range Design (Fiscal Impact $44,350) Authorized the City Manager to execute the contract In a form approved by the City Attorney 13 Awarded Contract No 3545 to S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc for construction related to the Residential Sound Insulation Program's Group 8 (24 residences) (Estimated construction cost and retention $942,909) Authorized the City Manager to execute the contract in a form approved by the City Attorney MOTION by Council Member Busch SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Gaines to approve Consent Agenda Items 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 10, 11, 12 and 13 MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA Consideration and possible action to amend El Segundo Municipal Code Section 2- 2 -4(B), Disaster Council Composition, to Include a City Council Member and a School District Member Council Member Boulgandes suggested that the City Council Member to serve on the Disaster Council with the Mayor to be rotated by seniority Council Member Busch, Jacobson, and Gaines agreed that the second appointment should remain with the Mayor Mayor McDowell suggested to either agendizing or calling a Special Council meeting in advance, before the Ordinance takes effect, for the purpose of Disaster Preparedness training and to discuss other concerns City Attorney Mark Hensley read by title only: ORDINANCE NO 1388 AN ORDINANCE AMEDNING EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE 2 -2 -4 (B) REGARDING DISASTER COUNCIL COMPOSITION MOTION by Council Member Busch, SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Gaines to adopt Ordinance 1388 amending El Segundo Municipal Code Section 2 -2 -4 (B), Disaster Council Composition, to Include a City Council Member and a School District Member MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 PAGE NO 7 (I G-) F NEW BUSINESS 14 Consideration and possible action regarding entering Into a Purchase and Sale Agreement and opening escrow with Thomas Properties Group (TPG) for the anticipated purchase of five acres of land located at the southwest corner of Marposa Avenue and Nash Street (to be used for soccer fields pursuant to the Development Agreement entered Into between the City and TPG in January, 2001) (Fiscal Impact $50,000 deposit Into escrow) Item continued to the meeting of November 15, 2005 15 Consideration and possible action to approve the installation of temporary on- street angled parking on the east side of Douglas Street between El Segundo Boulevard and Mariposa Avenue to facilitate Los Angeles Air Force Base construction (Fiscal Impact None) Steve Finton, Public Works Director, gave a report MOTION by Council Member Boulgarides, SECONDED by Council Member Jacobson to authorize the installation of temporary on- street angled parking on the east side of Douglas Street between El Segundo Boulevard and Mariposa Avenue to facilitate Los Angeles Air Force Base construction MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 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 Jacobson — 16 Consideration and possible action to schedule a point special meeting with the City Council and Planning Commission to discuss proposed amendments to the City's current R -1 development standards on any of the following days November 22nd or 29th- 2005 Council consensus to schedule a point special meeting with the City Council and Planning Commission on Tuesday, November 29, 2005 at 7 00 p m Council Member Jacobson also commented on the showing at the community meeting held regarding the R -1 development standards Mayor Pro Tern Gaines — NONE Council Member Boulgarides — Requested more Input from the public on the R -1 development standards at the point meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 PAGE NO 8 L1 U 3 Council Member Busch — Commented on the Halloween Frolic, and reported on the SBCOG meeting and how the cities can be assisted with energy conservation and stated that assistance can also be provided to School Districts Requested staff obtain a copy of the SBCOG energy savings report for the ESUSD and help to facilitate their Inclusion in the program Mayor McDowell — 17 Consideration and possible action to establish an ad hoc committee for the purpose of making recommendations to the City Council regarding the expenditure of $250,000 for the enhancement, promotion and /or maintenance of the Downtown Specific Plan area (Fiscal Impact None) Council Member Jacobson left the dais due to a potential conflict regarding the location of his employer and real property MOTION by Mayor ProTem Gaines SECONDED by Council Member Boulgandes to establish an ad hoc committee of Brenda Newman, Jewelry Source, Chris Bennett, Good Stuff, along with the Mayor and the City Manager to make recommendations with regard to funds available for the enhancement, promotion and /or maintenance of the Downtown Specific Plan area and appoint to the committee MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 4/0 COUNCIL MEMBER JACOBSON NOT PARTICIPATING DUE TO A POTENTIAL CONFLICT Council Member Jacobson returned to the dais 18 Consideration and possible action to adopt a resolution to implement the honorary memoriallzation of that portion of Imperial Avenue between Center Street and Sheldon Street as "Mike Gordon Parkway /Imperial Avenue." Mark Hensley, City Attorney, read by title only RESOLUTION NO 4442 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO DEDICATING THAT PORTION OF IMPERIAL HIGHWAY FROM CENTER STREET TO SHELDON STREET AS MIKE GORDON PARKWAY /IMPERIAL AVENUE MOTION by Mayor McDowell, SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Gaines to adopt Resolution No 4442 dedicating that portion of Imperial Highway from Center Street to Sheldon Street as Mike Gordon Parkway /Imperial Avenue, effective January, 2006 MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 5/0 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 PAGE NO 9 64 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 Janice Cruickshank, Resident, spoke in defense of the referendum petition on the El Segundo Campus development Peggy Tyrell, Resident, spoke about the condition of the athletic fields Jane Friedkm, Resident; spoke regarding a property on Grand that resembles a "junk yard" She also suggested a beautification committee to police the possible "eyesores" to help identify possible Municipal Code infractions Liz Garnholz, Resident, spoke regarding code enforcement and wanted to know who enforces the Code when City Hall is closed John McCarty, Resident; spoke regarding an agreement announced by Former Mayor Mike Gordon with Mayor Hahn about limiting passenger traffic, and moving the south runway Juli Potter, Resident, spoke regarding R -1 building in her neighborhood MEMORIALS — Virgil Eugene Ernest, long -time resident, Tracey Weiner, Dispatcher with the El Segundo Police Department and June McNaughton, Veteran and long -time resident CELEBRATION — Birth of Matthew Laurence O'Toole, son of Dan O'Toole, the City's Community Cable Supervisor, and his wife Janice CLOSED SESSION - NONE ADJOURNMENT at 8 40 p m Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 PAGE NO 10 06;� EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE November 15, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION Consideration and possible action regarding the annual Resolutions establishing and updating the City /employer's contribution under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act for the City's bargaining units RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION 1) Adopt the required Resolutions 2) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION As required, the City files with the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) the annual Resolutions reflecting changes in the City's contribution for employees and annuitants under the Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act Current Memorandum of Understanding contract provisions with the City's Police Officers Association, Firefighters Association and Police Managers Association provide that the City contribution is based on the average dollar increase in the premiums for HMO's available to all PERS covered employees in the Southern California area. In the 2006 medical year, the maximum City contribution for medical coverage is $805 38 /month per employee The Associations represents approximately 113 employees The City's maximum contribution for Police Officers Association, Firefighter's Association and Police Managers Association annuitants is the same as for an active, represented employee ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Proposed Resolutions FISCAL IMPACT Operating Budget* Amount Requested. Account Number Project Phase Appropriation Required _Yes x No ORI��/'�'� ED. � ^�� DATE- November 4, 2005 Bret M Plumlee, Director of Administrative Services REVIEW / DATE I, e, 11 City Manager agenda541 RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICALAND HOSPITAL CARE ACT FOR THE EL SEGUNDO FIREFIGHTERS' ASSOCIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of El Segundo as follows SECTION 1 The City Council finds as follows A Government Code § 22825 6 provides that a local agency contracting under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act shall fix the amount of the employers contribution at an amount not less than the amount required under Government Code § 22825; B Government Code § 22857 provides that a contracting agency may fix the amount of the employers contribution for employees and the employers contribution for annuitants at different amounts provided that the monthly contribution for annuitants must be annually increased by an amount not less than 5 percent of the monthly contribution for employees, until such time as the amounts are equal, and C The City of El Segundo ( "Employer ") is a local agency contracting under the Act for participation by members of the El Segundo Firefighters' Association SECTION 2 The Employers contribution for each employee will be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of the employee's enrollment, including the enrollment of family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $805 38 per month effective January 1, 2006 SECTION 3 The Employer's contribution for each annuitant will be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of the employee's enrollment, including the enrollment of family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $805 38 per month effective January 1, 2006 SECTION 4 The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Resolution, enter same in the book of original Resolutions, and make a Minute of its adoption in the City's records and in the Minutes of the meeting when it was adopted, SECTION 5 This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of November, 2005 Kelly McDowell, Mayor 0 6x7 ATTEST 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 15 th day of November, 2005, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM Mark D Hensley, City Attorney By Karl H Berger, Assistant City Attorney f UH RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT FOR THE EL SEGUNDO POLICE MANAGERS'ASSOCIATION. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of El Segundo as follows SECTION 1 The City Council finds as follows A. Government Code § 22825 6 provides that a local agency contracting under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act shall fix the amount of the employer's contribution at an amount not less than the amount required under Government Code § 22825, B Government Code § 22857 provides that a contracting agency may fix the amount of the employer's contribution for employees and the employer's contribution for annuitants at different amounts provided that the monthly contribution for annuitants must be annually increased by an amount not less than 5 percent of the monthly contribution for employees, until such time as the amounts are equal, and C The City of El Segundo ( "Employer") is a local agency contracting under the Act for participation by members of the El Segundo Police Managers' Association SECTION 2 The Employer's contribution for each employee will be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of the employee's enrollment, including the enrollment of family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $805 38 per month effective January 1, 2006 SECTION 3 The Employer's contribution for each annuitant will be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of the employee's enrollment, including the enrollment of family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $805 38 per month effective January 1, 2006 SECTION 4 The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Resolution, enter same in the book of original Resolutions, and make a Minute of its adoption in the City's records and in the Minutes of the meeting when it was adopted SECTION 5 This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of November, 2005 Kelly McDowell, Mayor ATTEST 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 15 th day of November, 2005, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote :0 NOES ABSENT G: • ► Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk `a APPROVED AS TO FORM Mark D Hensley, City Attorney By Karl H Berger, Assistant City Attorney zo RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT FOR THE EL SEGUNDO POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of El Segundo as follows SECTION 1 The City Council finds as follows A Government Code § 22825 6 provides that a local agency contracting under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act shall fix the amount of the employer's contribution at an amount not less than the amount required under Government Code § 22825, B Government Code § 22857 provides that a contracting agency may fix the amount of the employers contribution for employees and the employer's contribution for annuitants at different amounts provided that the monthly contribution for annuitants must be annually increased by an amount not less than 5 percent of the monthly contribution for employees, until such time as the amounts are equal, and C The City of El Segundo ( "Employer ") is a local agency contracting under the Act for participation by members of the El Segundo Police Officers' Association SECTION 2 The Employer's contribution for each employee will be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of the employee's enrollment, including the enrollment of family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $805 38 per month effective January 1, 2006 SECTION 3 The Employer's contribution for each annuitant will be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of the employee's enrollment, including the enrollment of family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $805 38 per month effective January 1, 2006 SECTION 4 The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Resolution, enter same in the book of original Resolutions, and make a Minute of its adoption in the City's records and in the Minutes of the meeting when it was adopted SECTION 5 This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of November, 2005 Kelly McDowell, Mayor c•'7 ATTEST 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, .nil attested to by the City Clerk, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 15` day of November 2005, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk 2 APPROVED AS TO FORM Mark D Hensley, City Attorney By Karl H Berger, Assistant City Attorney ,� 1 2 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 15, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION- Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of an Ordinance to amend the Downtown Specific Plan by expanding the current boundary and Incorporating the commercially zoned parcels along the 200 block of West Grand Avenue located between the current westerly boundary of the Plan area and Concord Street RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Second reading by title only, and adoption of Ordinance No 1387 for Specific Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Zone Change No 04 -01 and Zone TextAmendment No 05 -01, and /or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this Item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION, On November 1, 2005, the City Council held a continued public hearing on the amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) and adopted Resolution No 4441 approving Environmental Assessment No EA -645 and General Plan Amendment No 04 -01 The Council also introduced an ordinance to adopt Specific Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Zone Change No 04- 01 and Zone Text Amendment No 05 -01 The Ordinance was read Into the record and Is presented for a second reading and adoption If adopted without change, the provisions will become effective in 30 days ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS' A Ordinance No 1387 FISCAL IMPACT- Operating Budget: N/A Amount Requested, N/A Account Number: N/A Project Phase: N/A Appropriation Required: _Yes X No - 7 P \Planning & Building Safety\PROJECTS\626- 650 \Ea - 645 \Counc4l Dom= Mtg 11105 \Ea -645CC SR 111505 doc ORDINANCE NO. 1387 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 04 -01, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 04 -01 AND ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 05 -01 AMENDING EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE § 15 -3 -2 TO EXPAND THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN BY INCLUDING INCLUDE PROPERTIES IN THE 200 BLOCK OF WEST GRAND AVENUE FROM THE ALLEY WEST OF RICHMOND STREET TO CONCORD STREET, ADDRESSED AS 218 -228, 219 AND 227 WEST GRAND AVENUE. The City Council of the City of El Segundo does ordain as follows SECTION 1 The City Council finds and declares that A On May 18, 2004, Frank Glynn, on behalf of property owners Bill and Loraine Flegenheimer, John Dukakis and Arch Young, and Arthur and Elizabeth Miltenburger filed an application for an Environmental Assessment No EA -645, General Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Specific Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Zone Text Amendment No 05 -01, and Zone Change No 04 -01 to incorporate the properties at 218 -228, 219 and 227 West Grand Avenue into the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) and to designate the subject parcels as the "West Grand Avenue Transitional District" (WGATD), B The applications were reviewed by the City's Planning and Budding Safety Department for, in part, consistency with the General Plan, as required by Government Code § 65454 which states that no specific plan may be amended unless the amendment is consistent with the general plan, and in conformity with the El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC "), C In addition, 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), D An Initial Study was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The Initial Study demonstrated that there is no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment Accordingly, a Negative Declaration was prepared The Notice of Intent to Adopt the Negative Declaration was provided in accordance with the Public Resources Code and the CEQA Guidelines The Negative Declaration was circulated for public review and comment between July 14, 2005, and August 3, 2005, -1- E The Planning and Building Safety Department completed its review and scheduled the public hearing regarding the application before the Planning Commission for August 25, 2005, On August 25, 2005, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive public testimony and other evidence regarding the applications including, without limitation, information provided to the Planning Commission by City staff, public testimony, the applicants /property owners and their representatives, G On August 25, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No 2589 recommending City Council approval of Environmental Assessment No EA -645, General Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Specific Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Zone Text Amendment No 05 -01, and Zone Change No 04 -01, H On September 20, 2005, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the information provided by City staff, public testimony and the applicants and continued the hearing to October 4, 2005, On October 4, 2005, the City Council continued the hearing to October 18, 2005, On October 18, 2005 the City Council continued the hearing to November 1, 2005, K On November 1, 2005, the City Council resumed the hearing, considered the information provided by City staff, and adopted Resolution No 4441 approving Environmental Assessment No EA -645 for General Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Specific Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Zone Text Amendment No 05 -01, and Zone Change No 04 -01, and L This Ordinance and its findings are made based upon the testimony and evidence presented to the Council at its September 20, 2005, October 4, 2005, October 18, 2005, and November 1, 2005 hearings including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Planning and Building Safety Department SECTION 2 Factual Findings The City Council finds that the following facts exist A The subject properties are located in the northwest quadrant of the City of El Segundo dust west of the current Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) boundary at 218 -228, 219 and 227 West Grand Avenue and are comprised of approximately 21,592 square feet in area The subject properties are the parcels fronting on Grand Avenue bounded by Concord Street to the west and the alley '/1 block west of Richmond Street on the -2- 0 7 5 east B The existing General Plan Land Use designation and zoning for the subject properties on the north side of Grand Avenue (219 and 227 West Grand Avenue) is Downtown Commercial and the Downtown Commercial (C -RS) Zone and for the property on the south side of Grand Avenue (218 -228 West Grand Avenue) is Neighborhood Commercial and the Neighborhood Commercial (C -2) Zone C The existing uses of the subject properties include offices and a bakery on the north side of Grand Avenue (at 219 and 227 West Grand Avenue), and retail uses along with offices on the south side of Grand Avenue (at 218 -228 West Grand Avenue) D Surrounding land uses in the area generally consist of multi - family residential dwellings to the north, to the south, and to the west (on the north side of Grand Avenue), and offices, retail, and service - oriented uses to the east and west. The surrounding area is a fully developed urban environment E The proposed re- designation and re- zoning of the properties at 218 -228, 219 and 227 West Grand Avenue would change the General Plan Land Use designation of approximately 496 acres to the Downtown Specific Plan designation and rezone the properties to the Downtown Specific Plan Zone ( "West Grand Avenue Transitional District') F Rezoning the C -2 zoned parcel at 218 -228 West Grand Avenue to DSP would increase the allowable floor area ratio (FAR) of the property from 0 5 1 to 0 7 1 allowing the potential for 374 square feet of additional development to the existing 3,960 square -foot budding G The allowable floor area ratio (FAR) for the C -RS zoned parcels (219 and 227 West Grand Avenue) is the same as the DSP Zone FAR of (1 1) Additionally, the amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan could potentially allow one additional residential unit (for a total of four units) where three are currently allowed under the C -RS zoning standards for these parcels H Rezoning the C -2 zoned parcel at 218 -228 West Grand Avenue to DSP could result in the development of a budding 30 -feet high as compared to the 28 -foot height limit in the C -2 zone Rezoning the C -RS zoned parcels at 219 and 227 West Grand Avenue to DSP could result in the development of a budding 30 -feet high at the highest point at the street and 36 -feet high at the highest point at the rear of the building as compared to the 45 -foot height limit in the C -RS zone -3- 07 r i J Rezoning the properties at 218 -228, 219 and 227 West Grand Avenue would allow the subject property owners to either provide on -site parking or pay the City an in -lieu parking fee for the construction of new buildings and budding additions K The land uses permitted in the Downtown Specific Plan include a variety of commercial uses, residential uses above the first floor, and recreational uses SECTION 3 Zone Change Findings Based on the factual findings of this Ordinance, the proposed Zone Change is necessary to carry out the proposed project because the proposed General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment would change the land use classifications of the subject properties from Neighborhood Commercial and Downtown Commercial to Downtown Specific Plan The proposed Zone Change changing the subject properties from Neighborhood Commercial (C -2) and Downtown Commercial (C -RS) to Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) "West Grand Avenue Transitional District' (WGATD) is required to maintain consistency with the proposed General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan land use designation of Downtown Specific Plan SECTION 4 Zone Text Amendment Findings Based on the factual findings of this Ordinance, the proposed Zone Text Amendment is necessary to carry out the proposed project in order to create the "West Grand Avenue Transitional District' in the Downtown Specific Plan An amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan is necessary to establish development standards and design standards for the West Grand Avenue Transitional District An amendment to ESMC § 15- 3 -2A.4 to list the "West Grand Avenue Transitional District' as one of the use districts within the Downtown Specific Plan within the City is required for consistency with the General Plan SECTION 5 Zoning Map The City Council amends the current Zoning Map to reflect the change of the area bounded by the rear property line of properties at 227 and 219 W Grand Avenue to the north, from Concord Street to the alley '/2 block west of Richmond Street to the east, by the interior side property line of property at 218 -228 W Grand Avenue to the south, and by Concord Street to the west from Downtown Commercial (C -RS) Zone and Neighborhood Commercial (C -2) to Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) The corresponding changes as set forth in attached Exhibit "A" are incorporated into this Ordinance by reference SECTION 6 El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC') § 15 -3 -2 is amended to read as follows "15 -3 -2: SPECIFIC PLAN ZONES: A In order to classify, regulate, restrict and segregate the uses of lands and buildings, to regulate and restrict the height and bulk of buildings, to regulate the area of yards and other open spaces about buildings and to regulate the density of population, the city has adopted the following 7 -, -4- specific plan areas which function as the zoning code for specific areas 1 Smoky Hollow Specific Plan There are four (4) classes of use zones intended to be used within the boundaries of the Smoky Hollow specific plan These zones include SB - Small business zone MM - Medium manufacturing zone MDR - Medium density residential zone GAC - Grand Avenue commercial zone 2 124th Street Specific Plan There is one zone intended to be used within the boundaries of the 124th Street specific plan This zone is 124th Street SP - 124th Street specific plan 3 Aviation Specific Plan There is one use zone intended to be used within the boundaries of the aviation specific plan This zone is ASP - Aviation specific plan zone 4 Downtown Specific Plan There are fwe —six (56) classes of use districts intended to be used within the boundaries of the downtown specific plan These districts include MSD - Main Street district MSTD - Main Street transitional district NRSD - North Richmond Street district RSD - Richmond Street district V The village GAD — Grand Avenue District WGATD — West Grand Avenue Transitional District' 5 Corporate Campus Specific Plan There is one use zone intended to be used within the boundaries of the corporate campus specific plan This zone is CCSP - Corporate campus specific plan zone B The foregoing zones are separate zones and shall- cannot be deemed to be more restrictive or less restrictive than any other zone, but ;h ;;" hp are limited to the uses permitted in the specified zone C Amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan cannot occur more than once every two (2) years beginning November 15. 2005 " SECTION 7 Additional Approvals The City Council approves General Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Specific Plan Amendment No. 04 -01, Zone Change No 04 -01, 7� and Zone Text Amendment No 05 -01 and adopts the Supplement to the Downtown Specific Plan attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated into this ordinance by reference SECTION 8 If any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the city council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable SECTION 9 Repeal or amendment of any provision of the ESMC will not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this Ordinance's effective date Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance SECTION 10 If this the entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal of the ESMC or other the city ordinance by this Ordinance will be rendered void and cause such ESMC provision or other the city ordinance to remain in full force and effect for all purposes SECTION 11 The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be entered into the City of El Segundo's book of original ordinances, make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting, and, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law SECTION 12 This Ordinance will become effective on the thirty-first (31st) day following its passage and adoption PASSED AND ADOPTED this ^ day of 2005 Kelly McDowell, Mayor -6- 0 j ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five, that the foregoing Ordinance No was duly introduced by said City Council at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2005, and was duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the day of 2005, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM Mark D Hensley, City Attorney By Karl H Berger Assistant City Attorney P \Planning & Building Safety\PROJECTS\626- 650 \Ea - 645 \Council Docs \CC Mtg 11105\EA -645 CC Ord A 11 -15 -05 doc -7- 08U MARIPOSA AVE L �� f e N _— PINE AVE -L OG� Feet 0 100 200 300 400 Im L 1. GRAND AVE Surrounding Area Zoning Neighborhood Commemal (G2) 0 Downtown Commercial (C-RS) - Heavy Manufacturing (M-2) N Open Specs (OS) I- Parking (P) L.._.... Public Facilities (P -F) Smgla -Famly Reekkmthal (R -1) Tw FemAy Rea denbel (R -2) M1 ` Mulb- Family Resldenbal (RJ) Small Business (SB) Specific Plan Districts V r i Downtown Speak Plan Boundary Mem Street District ©Mam Street Transibonal District r5;; North Richmond Street DuAnd 1 ® Grand Avenue District Richmond Street District L.! West Grand Avenue Transitional District EXHIBIT A ZONING MAP City of St. Segundo 4p- 081 nw � Nrf'3t N H i R- f J am,g W A MAP., mm, Im L 1. GRAND AVE Surrounding Area Zoning Neighborhood Commemal (G2) 0 Downtown Commercial (C-RS) - Heavy Manufacturing (M-2) N Open Specs (OS) I- Parking (P) L.._.... Public Facilities (P -F) Smgla -Famly Reekkmthal (R -1) Tw FemAy Rea denbel (R -2) M1 ` Mulb- Family Resldenbal (RJ) Small Business (SB) Specific Plan Districts V r i Downtown Speak Plan Boundary Mem Street District ©Mam Street Transibonal District r5;; North Richmond Street DuAnd 1 ® Grand Avenue District Richmond Street District L.! West Grand Avenue Transitional District EXHIBIT A ZONING MAP City of St. Segundo 4p- 081 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 4441 Exhibit F CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE No. 1387 Exhibit B DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN SUPPLEMENT I. INTRODUCTION A. Specific Plan Project Description The proposed project is a Specific Plan for the Downtown area of El Segundo, The Plan envisions a ten year horizon for planning and development purposes Although the Plan will not "expire" in ten years, it is anticipated that the goals of the Plan will be achieved within the ten year planning horizon, and that the Plan will be re- evaluated, updated and revised, if necessary, after ten years The project includes a General Plan Amendment (GPA 99 -2), a Zone Change (ZC 99 -2) and a Zone Text Amendment (ZTA 99 -5) The Downtown Specific Plan encompasses the majority of the Downtown Commercial (C -RS) Zone, as well as the Civic Center Complex, which is zoned Public Facilities (P- F) The Plan area is generally located west of Sepulveda Boulevard and north of El Segundo Boulevard (Exhibits 1 -3) El Segundo's Downtown is the heart of the community Due to its location deep - within the community and awaydistance from regional arterials, Downtown remains a small, distinct district approximately two blocks by five blocks in size The Plan area is currently developed with commercial, residential and public uses, and future development is anticipated to be similar in nature The entire Specific Plan area is approximately 226 3 acres in size, The majority of the lots within the Specific Plan area are 25 feet wide by 140 feet deep, 3500 square feet in area, although many of the lots have been combined and developed under common ownership In general, the purpose of the Specific Plan is to provide the opportunity to implement the Vision of the community for the Downtown, to enhance the quality small town environment that the residents currently enjoy The Plan provides this opportunity by the adoption of new development standards, design regulations, and other criteria The City Council initiated the preparation of a Specific Plan in response to concerns and requests from the community to enhance the Downtown environment that the residents value so highly The Specific Plan will provide land use and development standards for the area including, but not limited to, standards for heights, setbacks, density, lot area, outdoor uses, landscaping, parking, loading, circulation and signage Design standards will also be included within the Specific Plan to regulate site development, street configurations, streetscape (sidewalks, street furniture, bus stops, bicycles), landscaping, lighting (street and pedestrian, decorative and security), architecture and signage The Specific Plan is divided into f+vesix Districts, each having distinct characteristics and standards Two related projects, which are currently separately underway, are the update of the City's Circulation and Housing Elements The current and proposed development standards allow a commercial density or floor area ratio (FAR) of 1 0 1 An example of a FAR or density of 1 0 1 is a 3,500 square foot lot would allow a 3,500 square foot building One strategic site, the City parking lot (17,500 square feet in area) on the northeast corner of Richmond Street and Franklin Avenue, in the 200 block of Richmond Street, is proposed to allow a 1 5 1 FAR The Specific Plan area currently has approximately 560,000 082 square feet of commercial uses For this evaluation, a ten -year horizon was used with an addition of 271,814 square feet of new commercial uses This is 24% of the maximum 1,123,848 square feet of total build -out allowed by the current zoning and General Plan The current zoning allows a maximum of 276 dwelling units within the Plan area This equates to one unit per 25 foot wide lot (12 5 dwelling units per acre), not including the Civic Center site Currently there are approximately 9287 residential units in the Plan area The final Plan will not allow the development of any new residential units, although the existing units may continue and may be rebuilt if accidentally destroyed Two locations for plazas have been identified One is the existing plaza fronting Main Street at the Civic Center and the other is located to the rear of the Pursell Budding, (on the northwest corner of Main Street and Grand Avenue), across the alley from the Village site (on the northeast corner of Richmond Street and Grand Avenue) Plazas are intensively used gathering places and serve as the hub for neighborhood activity They are designed to accommodate resting, eating, strolling and people watching Plazas are typically ringed by restaurants, galleries and other retail uses Food service and goods from portable retail carts or wagons are often available within plazas As part of a zone change adopted in September 2005, the western boundary of the Downtown Specific Plan was expanded to include several properties on the north and south sides of West Grand Avenue between the alley west of Richmond Street and Concord Street to establish the new "West Grand Avenue Transitional District " The West Grand Avenue Transitional District is added to encompass several properties that are similar in nature to those within the Plan Area by moving the western boundary of the Plan Area to Concord Street 2 083 Gmnw -Dmynn mw PLM -_ � 081 MARIPOSA_AVE �C- �I I Y Ir PINE AVE_J -- - � HOLLY AVE H — 6 0 Z O x x_ Q I A 1 _ _ GRAND 1 1 , FRANKLINAVE i -- -- - - - - - -- -- _�� - -� -- I I1 - - ELSEGUNDOBLVD 1----- - -� - -- -�� - - - -�- 1 J Downtown Specific Plan Boundary g__ - �- - - -- - - - Dow ^toM'n SpeciFlC Plan (DSP) Zone - - -- Feet 0 100 200 300 400 MMMM EXHIBIT 3 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN IV City of ea Be`mdo Gmnw -Dmynn mw PLM -_ � 081 B. Specific Plan Boundary The Plan area includes the 100 -500 blocks of Main Street, the 100 -300 blocks of Richmond Street and the abutting property along Grand Avenue The 200 block of West Grand Avenue between Concord Street and the alley west of Richmond Street was incorporated into the Specific Plan area in September 2005 The alleys to the east and west of Main and Richmond Street form the perimeter boundaries of the Plan area, with the exception of the 300 block east side of Main Street as the Civic Center Complex extends east to Standard Street The Downtown is divided by three principal streets - Main Street, Grand Avenue, and El Segundo Boulevard Additionally, three smaller streets- Franklin, Holly and Pine Avenues cross the Plan area, running in an east -west direction Each of the three principal streets connects to major, region - serving arterials or freeways El Segundo Boulevard, on the southern boundary of the Plan area, runs in an east -west direction and connects to the 1 -405 Freeway and to Sepulveda Boulevard Grand Avenue, an east -west street, connects to Sepulveda Boulevard on the east and the beach to the west Main Street runs north and south between El Segundo Boulevard and Imperial Highway, which borders Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Main Street has an 80 -foot right -of -way with 12 -foot sidewalks and 56 feet of paving, curb to curb Richmond Street, which runs in a north -south direction and is one block west of Main Street, has a 60 -foot right -of -way, with 10 -foot sidewalks and 40 feet of street, curb to curb The 1 -105 Freeway is north of the Plan area, immediately north of Imperial Highway Grand Avenue is one of only two City streets that connects to the beach It is the principal east -west street in Downtown El Segundo and crosses both Main and Richmond Streets The portion of Grand Avenue addressed in the Downtown Specific Plan is between Main and Concord Streets Beyond Concord Street, Grand Avenue crests the hill of an ancient sand dune and disappears from view toward the ocean Grand Avenue to the west of Concord Street has recently been planted with Cajeput trees to provide a visual welcome to El Segundo Grand Avenue is one of the widest streets in the City, having formerly been the early alignment of one of the trolley cars that crass- crossed the region before falling victim to the automobile The right - of -way is 100 feet in width with 10 -foot sidewalks on both sides and an 18 -foot center median, including a 4 -foot median and 7 -foot wide parallel parking areas on each side of the center island Parallel parking is also provided on both curb lanes II. OVERVIEW OF THE SPECIFIC PLAN SURROUNDING AREA A. The Community 1 Location Context The Downtown Specific Plan area is located in the northwest quadrant of the City of El Segundo Surrounding land uses in the area are generally residential in nature, one to three stories in height The surrounding area and project area is a fully developed urban environment The El Segundo High School campus, the Library and Library Park are located north of the Specific Plan area on Main Street To the east and west of the 500 block of Main Street is a Two -Family Residential (R -2) Zone, developed mainly with duplexes and two- 4 0. 8;5 family dwellings, on Richmond and Standards Streets To the west of the balance of the Specific Plan boundary is mainly Multi -Family Residential (R -3) zoning, which is developed with small (3 -12 unit) apartment and condominium complexes, on Richmond and Concord Streets Further beyond the R -2 and R -3 Zones is Single -Family (R -1) Residential zoning and development, on Concord and Virginia Streets (Exhibit 4) To ihe west of the SpeGAG Plai; area there aFe a169 a few pamels zoned Downtewn RG To the west of the Specific Plan area there are few parcels zoned Neighborhood Commercial on Grand Avenue and Parkin (P) on El Segundo Boulevard The development of these sites includes offices, apartments and a child day -care facility To the east of the 400 block of Main Street is a Two - Family Residential (R -2) Zone on Standard Street, again developed consistent with the zoning designation To the east of the 300 block of Main Street is largely Multi - Family Residential (R -3), developed similarly to the areas to the west of the Specific Plan boundary Additionally, there are a few parcels zoned and developed as Parking (P), on Standard Street, and Downtown Commercial (C -RS), on Grand Avenue, similar to the west of the Plan area To the east side of the 200 block of Main Street, on Standard Street, is an area that is also zoned and developed as Downtown Commercial (C -RS), again with similar commercial uses and densities To the east of the 100 block of Main Street, on Standard Street, is a small industrial zone within the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area with a zoning designation of Small Business (SB) The land uses in this area (light industrial, warehousing etc ) are consistent with the zoning South of El Segundo Boulevard is the Chevron Refinery, which is zoned Heavy Industrial (M -2), consistent with the land use The majority of the 100 block of the east side of Richmond Street is a surface parking lot for the Chevron Refinery immediately to the south Smaller Chevron parking lots also occupy the west side of Richmond and the 100 block of Main Street. There are four small City owned surface parking lots with a total of approximately 115 parking spaces, which are open and free to the public, within and immediately adjacent to the Plan area All of the Zoning designations on the surrounding properties are generally consistent with the General Plan land use designations Residential and commercial construction dates from the early 1900's to the present day, offering a variety of architectural styles There are no known endangered plant species associated with the proposed Specific Plan area and none that are known to be associated with the immediate locale Similarly, there are no known rare or endangered animal species associated with the area or its locale No known animal life is located in the area Further, there are no known agricultural, biological, or scenic resources of recognized value located within the Plan area nor in the immediate vicinity 5 0 86 R f !3A 2 — GRAND AVE r 7 f FRANKLIN AVE kk r r r Y ✓ �i, `4. EL SEGl1ND0 BLVD m Feet 0 100 200 300 400 EXHIBIT 4 ZONING MAP City of 81 Segundo �w � �{. Y�♦,/� } r 0 z ul ul w a w Surrounding Area Zoning = Neighborhood Commermil (G2) © Downtown Cornmemaal (CRS) _ Heavy Manufacturing (M -2) - DI »n Spam (6S) - Parking (P) _ Public Faolibes (P -F) C Single- Famly Residential (R -1) 7Wo- Family Residential (R -2) - Mua- Family Residential (R -3) ® small SuNness (SB) Specific Plan Districts C3Downtown SWrgc Plan Boundary ® Mein Street District Mein Street Transitional District ® North Rlctanond Street DaInct ®Gran di Avenue Distnct fLctimond Street Disbwt L • West Grand Avenue Transitional DlsinC :J � l IV. SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRICTS The West Grand Avenue Transitional District encompasses the'/ block immediately east of Concord Rfrac4 nn (Srsnri Aa, -- __. __ . - .. _ _ _ 7 ( %86 OISIn Py MWWNWD MV DISTWTS_2 Md 1 -1 V . ) .. . 6 lilili I C 3 f ■ itlmi Jmimi 1 !m!!i mamma fit! ilmi moO tm iO iii IlOOI Imams IOli! IOOm1 min% Emma ii°ER Emma Oman mmmmmitn lommommm • i owns mom +� mom mom mommOmmn momommon . mmmma n no mommomm■ 'Oommomom owns • y'ss moo Imommoomn _ on mmmmommn M� • ts•m ��• tom mtmttmtn z�� fi'fy mom t•F� mom mosommon mmmmmom� mm so noOssw^ no lemma - (� ui w .. r .1r OISIn Py MWWNWD MV DISTWTS_2 Md 1 -1 V . ) VI. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS F WEST GRAND AVENUE TRANSITIONAL DISTRICT (NORTH 200 BLOCK OF WEST GRAND AVENUE BETWEEN CONCORD STREET AND THE ALLEY WEST OF RICHMOND STREET) 1 PURPOSE - This district serves as a -gateway to the Downtown core Standards for this district allow for flexibility and a mixture of commercial uses serving the residents, local employees and visitors to the City 2 Permitted Uses - a First floor street -front level, with a minimum building depth of 25 feet 0 Retail sales and services ii) Restaurants m) Recreational uses iv) Government offices v) Banks vi) General offices vu) Medical- dental offices viii) Clubs and halls ix) Theaters areas), newsstands, coffee carts and flower stands, up to 200 square feet in area, subject to design review and compliance with El Segundo Municipal Code § 15 -2 -16, Outdoor Dining Areas Outdoor uses that are greater than 200 square feet also require an Administrative Use Permit xit) Other similar pedestrian oriented retail- service uses and offices approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by Section V , Administration b Above street -front level i) All uses listed above in subsection (a) ii) Business tenanUowner- occupied residential units iii) Other similar uses approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by Section V, Administration 3 Permitted Accessory Uses - a Any use customarily incidental to a permitted use Noise and Vibration Regulations d Other similar accessory uses approved by the Director of Planning and Budding Safety, as provided by Section V Administration b Off -site sale of alcohol at retail establishments c Outdoor uses includinq dining, gathering areas (such as outdoor party areas), Dmmg Areas 5 Uses Subiect to a Conditional Use Permit - (El Sequndo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -23 a Bars b Video arcades with four or more machines c Other similar uses approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by Section V, Administration 6 Prohibited Uses- a Drive-thru restaurants b Assembly halls c Service stations d Tattoo parlors e Outdoor entertainment and dancing f_ Outdoor amplified sound, which exceeds more than four single events in one calendar year uses detailed under Permitted, Accessory, Administrative, and Conditional Uses. m) All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -17, must be met A minimum of 3,500 square feet is required for new lots. c Height. lines to the peak or the highest point of the structure Additionally, the structure 10 UJ grade at the front and streetside property lines d Setbacks 0 Front and Streetside - Setbacks between a building and the front and streetside review u) Side — Zero setback allowed but 10' if abutting residential zone m) Rear — 10' feet when abutting residential zone e Lot Width A minimum of 25 feet is required for new lots i) Commercial — The total net floor area of all buildings, excluding residential floor area, cannot exceed the total net square footage of the property, or a Floor Area Ratio, FAR, of 1 0 1 u) Residential — The maximum residential density cannot exceed one dwelling unit per 3,500 square foot lot If the lot is less than 3,500 square feet, one unit is allowed g Walls and Fences All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -2, General Provisions, must be met h Access Safe and convenient pedestrian access must be provided between buildings and sidewalks, or modes of transportation, and between buildings for multi - budding ro ects i Landscaping All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code § 15 -2 -14, Landscaping and Section VIII, Design Standards, must be met I Parking and Loading All requirements of Section VII, Parking must be met k Signs; All requirements of Section Vlll, Design Standards must be met 8 Non- conformities- b Except as otherwise provided, non - conforming uses occurring in a building can only be replaced with a conforming use c If a budding or a portion of a budding was used by a non - conforming commercial use 11 A2 G WEST GRAND AVENUE TRANSITIONAL DISTRICT (SOUTH 200 BLOCK OF WEST GRAND AVENUE BETWEEN CONCORD STREET AND THE ALLEY WEST OF RICHMOND STREET) 1 PURPOSE- residents, local employees and visitors to the City 2 Permitted Uses - a First floor street -front level, with a minimum building depth of 25 feet 0 Retail sales and services ii) Restaurants hi) Recreational uses Iv) Government offices vi) General offices vu) Medical- dental offices 200 square feet also require an Administrative Use Permit Administration b Above street -front level I All uses above In subsection (a) u Business tenant/owner - occupied residential units III Other similar uses approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by Section V, Administration 3 Permitted Accessory Uses - a Any use customarily incidental to a permitted use c Indoor entertainment, dancing, and amplified sound, subject to compliance with El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 4 -8, Entertainment Regulations and Chapter 7 -2, Safety, as provided by Section V Administration 4 Uses Subject to an Administrative Use Permit - (El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -22) a On -site sale and consumption of alcohol at restaurants design review and compliance with El Segundo Municipal Code 6 15 -2 -16 Outdoor Dining Areas d Video arcades with three or fewer machines 12 e Other similar uses approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety, as Provided by Section V, Administration b Bed and Breakfast Inns Provided by Section V, Administration 6 Prohibited Uses - All other uses which are not Permitted Uses. Permitted Accessory Uses. Uses Subject to an Administrative Use Permit or Uses Subject to a Conditional Use Permit are prohibited Prohibited uses include, without limitation a Drive-thru restaurants b Assembly hall uses c Service stations g_ Tattoo parlors h Outdoor entertainment and dancing i Outdoor amplified sound, which exceeds more than four single events in one calendar year 7 Site Development Standards - vw) and Outdoor Recreational uses u) All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -16, Developer Transportation Demand Management (TDM) must be met. iii) All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -17, must be met v) All requirements of Section VIII, Design Standards must be met b Lot Area A minimum of 3,500 square feet is required for new lots. c Height New structures abutting a street must be a minimum of 25 feet in height and cannot peak or the highest point of the roof vertically to the existing grade directly below design review n) Front —A 15 -foot setback is required along Concord Street 13 094 m) Side —10' if abutting a residential zone iv) Rear — 10' feet e Lot Width A minimum of 25 feet is required for new lots, f Building Area - (Density) The total net floor area of all buildings cannot exceed the total net square footage of the property, or a Floor Area Ratio. FAR, of 1,0 1 A Cnmmerrial — ThP fntal net flnnr area of all huddinns Prcludinn residential flnnr Ratio. FAR, of 1 0 1 u) Residential — The maximum residential density cannot exceed one dwelling unit per 3,500 square foot lot If the lot is less than 3,500 square feet, one unit is allowed g Walls and Fences All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -2, General Provisions, must be met h Access Safe and convenient pedestrian access must be provided between buildings and sidewalks, or modes of transportation, and between buildings for multi - building proiects i Landscaping All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code § 15 -2 -14, Landscaping, and Section VIII. Design Standards, must be met i Parking and Loading All requirements of Section VII, Parking must be met k Signs All requirements of Section VIII, Design Standards must be met 8 Non-conformities- a All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -21, Nonconforming Buildings and Uses, except ESMC" 15 -21 -6 B and C apply b Except as otherwise provided, non - conforming uses occurring in a building can only can be replaced with a similar or less intense non - conforming commercial use 14 VI. DESIGN STANDARDS E. WEST GRAND AVENUE TRANSITIONAL DISTRICT (200 BLOCK OF WEST GRAND AVENUE FROM CONCORD STREET TO THE ALLEY WEST OF RICHMOND STREET) The West Grand Avenue Transitional District (WGATD) is located adjacent to the west end of the This block is transitional in character and includes retail uses serving the community and commercial office space The uses are compatible with the uses in the balance of the Specific Photo 38 — Retail Uses Photo 39 — Commercial /Office Uses 1 GENERAL a All common standards pertaining to the Main Street District must apply 7 Nnrth Frnnfnnp — compatible with the residentially -zoned property next door as defined below b No service, outdoor storage, excessive and large windows or access must be located along the north side of the District c A landscaped buffer zone of 10 feet with mature trees and shrubs is required between the District and the adjoining property b A 15 -foot setback must be maintained to minimize Impacts to the adjoining residence to the south 4 South Frontage — a The south frontage of the parcel on the south side of Grand Avenue must be compatible with the residentially zoned property next door as defined below b No service, outdoor storage, excessive and large windows or access must be located along the south side of the District c A landscaped buffer zone of 10 feet with mature trees and shrubs Is required between the District and the adjoining residentially -zoned property P \Planning & Building Safety\PROJECTS\EA626- 650 \EA 645 \Council Docs \CCMtg 11105 \EA645 PC Exhibit DSP Supplement 11 -15 -05 v2A doc 15 09 C EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 15, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING. Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of plans and specifications for Rehabilitation of Continental Boulevard from El Segundo Boulevard to Grand Avenue Approved Capital Improvement Program Project No PW 05 -12 (Fiscal Impact= $226,000) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION. Recommendation — (1) Adopt plans and specifications, (2) Authorize staff to advertise the project for receipt of construction bids, (3) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION. The Capital Improvement Program for fiscal year 2005 -2006 includes the Five -Year Street Reconstruction Program encompassing six (6) proposed projects Continental Boulevard has the highest recommendation for rehabilitation in the Fiscal Year 2005 -2006 (Background and discussion continued on the next page......) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Location map FISCAL IMPACT- Operating Budget. Capital Improvement Program. Amount Requested - Account Number- Project Phase, Appropriation Required. ORIGINATED Director of Public Works T $226,300 $226,000 106- 400 - 8203 -8608 Adoption of Plans and Specifications No 11 0 S� DATE- if U�7 8 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: (continued) The existing pavement of Continental Boulevard between El Segundo Boulevard and Grand Avenue is severely deteriorated and has large quantities of alligator cracking and pot holes The Project includes grinding of existing pavement, installation of 2" asphalt concrete overlay, and replacement of displaced curbs and gutters at the median islands Plans and Specifications have been prepared by staff for the rehabilitation of Continental Boulevard Gas Tax funds have been appropriated for this project in the amount of $225,300 through the fiscal year 2005/2006 Capital Improvement Program (JJ& CITY MAP City of El scp do 1 `l , 1 1 4 3MOHl VH JO 0 1 53130" Sol so 1.1H,10O SA�T a lji�L „.,o. a I ..na.00,rF . wm � q erw � r��wAK VF C W0 a uz ..w ❑�{��o m lJW❑ ❑��O O C "W,. wuxN..E W�.,. �� ❑�❑ fl w o, OOO Ems] ®m —.. oob B ®CAB .—.. N �� a.aowm ❑ ❑��❑� Q ® ®B” a?um m o en. �.. DEMO[, ®® ®B m M'.fMU4 V EYC.LLYGN¢0. � B flKUYeW Y4 �B��B m.wwom PP. oF�. �_�❑ aa ®EMIEMM ...+ 6 ^ GyF IT waw. ❑LJ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ 9�� 11 EEE s C s.a / a � 1 m ,LLB ye ,o p GtiC zh a �a lo O 1 U 0 � t; J EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT MEETING DATE: November 15, 2005 AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda Consideration and possible action regarding participation by the El Segundo Police Department in a "Speed Monitoring and Reduction Project" funded by the California Office of Traffic Safety(OTS) Participation Includes one -time grant funding In the amount of $72,392 97 which Includes $15,000 to support the City's "Every 15 Minutes" program regarding driving while under the influence RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION. (1) Approve request for the El Segundo Police Department to accept and utilize funds provided by the California Office of Traffic Safety for a Speed Monitoring and Reduction grant, 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION. The El Segundo Police Department Special Operations Division Intends to increase the quality of life for its residents and motoring public by reducing speeds of motor vehicles on residential roadways and school zones The El Segundo Police Department applied for and was awarded a grant sponsored by OTS to provide funding for specific traffic enforcement tools related to speed monitoring and reduction and the support and continuance of the City's "Every 15 Minutes" program The police department has participated successfully in similar traffic related grants over the past three years The grant funds will reimburse the City for the purchase and deployment of one programmable radar trailer with message board, four portable radar speed feedback signs, and administrative costs in the amount of ten hours per week for data retrieval, analysis and directed enforcement conducted by the police department The grant funds will also reimburse expenditures to support the production of the "Every 15 Minutes" program The project period runs from 10/01/2005 to 12/31/2006 The requested amount shall not exceed $72,392 97. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Grant Agreement FISCAL IMPACT. Operating Budget: $0 Amount Requested. $72,392.97 Account Number. 001 -400- 3101 -8104 Project Phase- Reimbursable Grant Appropriation Required: X Yes _ No ORIG ATED BY: DATE: November 8, 2005 Jack Wayt C ief o ce REVIE DATE- tl N Gt J t Kart,City anag er 9 '° i 11 State of California �a ;' PROJECT NUMBER OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY PT0627 GRANT AGREEMENT PAGE 1 (TD be completed by applicant Agency) 1. PROJECT TITLE SPEED MONITORING AND REDUCTION 2. NAME OF APPLICANT AGENCY 4. PROJECT PERIOD EL SEGUNDO POLICE DEPARTMENT Month - Day - Year From 10/1/2005 3. AGENCY UNIT TO HANDLE PROJECT TRAFFIC DIVISION To 12/31/2006 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION (Provide an overview of the project activities that will address the problem statement, in approximately 100 words Space is limited to six lines) The City of El Segundo intends to Increase the quality of life for Its residents and motoring public by reducing speeds of motor vehicles on residential roadways and school zones This will be accomplished by the purchase and deployment of one programmable radar trailer with a message board unit built into it, and four portable radar speed feedback signs, accompanied by ten hours weekly of data retrieval, analysis, and directed enforcement conducted by the police department in those areas The radar trailer /message board unit and signs will be circulated between various locations within the city to address speed and safety related concerns 6. FEDERAL FUNDS ALLOCATED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT SHALL NOT EXCEED: $72,392.97 7. APPROVAL SIGNATURES A PROJECT DIRECTOR B. AUTHORIZING OFFICIAL OF APPLICANT AGENCY NAME Robert Turnbull PHONE 310 -524 -2254 NAME Jack Wayt PHONE- 310-524-2280 TITLE Lieutenant, Traffic Division FAX 310 - 640 -7683 TITLE Chief of Police FAX 310 - 607 -9171 ADDRESS 348 Main Street ADDRESS 348 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 El Segundo, CA 90245 E -MAIL egundo.or E -MAIL jwayt @elsegundo.org (Signature) (Date) (Signature) Date C. FISCAL OR ACCOUNTING OFFICIAL D. OFFICE AUTHORIZED TO RECEIVE PAYMENTS NAME Bret Plumlee PHONE 310 -524 -2314 NAME Ralph Lamphere TITLE Director of admm Services FAX 310- 640 -2543 c/o City Treasurer's Office ADDREss 350 Main Street ADDRESS 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 El Segundo, CA 90245 E -MAIL bplumlee @elsegundo.org (Signature) (Date) OTS -38 (Rev 5/05) STATE OF CALIFORNIA • OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS OTS -33 (Rev 5/05) APPLICANT Police OTS PROJECT NUMBER The following are Included herein and constitute a part of this Agreement- PT0627 1 OTS -38 —Page 1 5 Schedule C — Quarterly Evaluation Data (when required) 2 Schedule A — Project 6 OTS -33 — Acceptance of Conditions and Certifications Description 3 Schedule B — Detailed Budget 7 General Terms, Conditions, and Certifications Estimate (OTS Grant Program Manual, Volume II, Chapter 6 Volume II, available on -line at www Cis ca eov) 4 Schedule B -I — Budget Narrative TERMS AND CONDITIONS It is understood and agreed by the Project Director and Authorizing Official that any grant received as a result of this Agreement is subject to all federal and state regulations governing grants and to those controls expressed in the California Traffic Grant Program Manuals which include, but are not limited to REPORTS Quarterly Performance Reports and Reimbursement Claims must be submitted by the Project Director to the Office of Traffic Safety by January 31, April 30, July 31, and October 31, during each year of project operation 2 OTS will withhold or disallow grant payments, reduce or terminate grant funds, and/or deny future grant funding anytime a grantee fails to comply with any term or condition of the grant contract or program guidelines (Volume II, Chapter 3.13). This may include, but is not limited to, the following Failure to submit acceptable and timely reimbursement claims Failure to submit acceptable and timely quarterly performance reports, and Failure to submit an acceptable and timely Schedule C, Quarterly Evaluation Data (OTS -38g, applies only when a Schedule C has been required) By October 31, "continuing" projects must submit a September 30 claim and a written justification to support carrying forward prior year unexpended funds. September 30 claims and written justifications, supporting the carrying forward of prior year unexpended funds, submitted after November 30, will not be processed The prior claim (I e., June 30) will be considered the year -end claim in order to close out the federal fiscal year ending September 30. In addition, prior year unexpended funds will be deobligated and allocated to new projects i SUBCONTRACTS 4 Consultants and/or subcontractors shall be selected in accordance with the grantee agency procurement policies and procedures in order to comply with the terms of this agreement and in accordance with the OTS Grant Program Manual, Volume II Chapter 6 Procurement & Contract Administration, and Exhibit 6 -A General Terms, Conditions, and Certifications A fully executed copy of the consultant contract or subcontract and completed Contractual Services Checklist & Questionnaire, OTS 85 shall be submitted to OTS for inclusion in the official project file prior to request for reimbursement The grantee, consultant, contractor and /or subcontractor are subject to all conditions and certifications of the Project Agreement and 49 CFR Part 18, and/or CFR Part 19 whichever is applicable Services shall be provided subsequent to final execution and signature by both parties to the contract and the work shall be consistent with the start and end dates identified in the Project Agreement The State is not obligated to make any payment under any agreement prior to final execution or outside the terms of the contract period Contractor /Applicant Agency expenditures incurred prior to final execution are taken at the risk of that Contractor /Applicant Agency and will be considered unallowable if that agreement/contract is not executed. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS If, during the term of the grant award, federal funds become reduced or eliminated, OTS may immediately terminate or reduce the grant award upon written notice to the project director REVISIONS Project revisions are allowed in accordance with the guidelines detailed in the OTS Volume II, Chapter 3 8 and the revision examples provided in Chapter 3.9. All appropriate documentation required to request a project revision requiring OTS approval (i.e , budget category increases, etc.) must be submitted to OTS No alteration or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto, and no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated herein shall be binding on any of the parties hereto Additional terms and conditions identified in the OTS Grant Program Manual, Volume II, Chapter 6, General Terms, Conditions, and Certifications (Exhibit 6 -A), are incorporated herein by reference and made a part of this document a ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ONLY: Full time personnel funded under this project shall be dedicated in total to traffic law enforcement EXCEPT • In the case of a criminal offense committed in the officer's presence • In the case of response to an officer in distress • In the case of a riot where all available personnel must be committed 10. Equipment funded under this project is subject to the same requirements as No 9 above. We, the officials named below, hereby swear that we are duly authorized legally, to bind the contractor or grant recipient to the above described terms and conditions Executed on the date and in the county below, and is made under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California PROJECT DIRECTOR'S NAME EXECUTED IN THE COUNTY OF Robert Turnbull Los Angeles PRG3E CT 21G�-T �j�) DATE EXECUTED TI Lieutenant, Traffic Division AUTHORIZING OFFICIAL'S NAME EXECUTED IN THE COUNTY OF Jack Wayt Los Angeles AUTHORI ING OFFICIAL'S SIGNATURE DATE EX CUTED �� TITLE Chief of Police -3- 1 o f PT0627 1 tt,t OTS -38d (Rev 5/05) FISCAL YEAR ESTIMATES COST CATEGORY FY -I FY -2 FY -3 10101/05 thru 10/01/06 thru thru TOTAL COST TO PROJECT A PERSONNEL COSTS 09 130106 12131106 Positions and Salaries (1) Motorcycle officer overtime rate of ($52 82 - 7,815 60 $7,81560 $75 15 /hr), 2 hours /week Police officer overtime for DUI saturation patrol 10,000 00 10,000 00 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 Empoloyee Benefits @ 12 45% 97304 97304 Category Sub -Total $18,788.64 $0.001 $0.00 $18178i.64 B. TRAVEL EXPENSE In state travel 1,00000 $1,00000 000 000 Category Sub-TotaII $1,000.001 $0.00 $0.00 $1,00000 C CONTRACTUAL SERVICES None $000 000 000 Category Sub-Totall $0.001 $0.001 $0.00 $0 00 1 tt,t OTS -38d (Rev 5/05) SCHEDULE B PAGE 2 DETAILED BUDGET ESTIMATE PROJECT No. PT0627 �(in CTS -38e (Rev 5105) FISCAL YEAR ESTIMATES COST CATEGORY FY -1 FY -2 FY -3 10101105 thru 10/01/06 thru thru TOTAL COST TO PROJECT D. EQUIPMENT 09/30/06 12/31/06 (1) Fully equipped radar trailer with a message board 19,116 00 $19,11600 (4) Fully equipped radar feedback signs 18,488 33 18,488 33 000 000 Category Sub -Total $37,604.331 $0.001 $0.001 $37,604.33 E. OTHER DIRECT COSTS "Every 15 Minutes" Program 15,000 00 $15,00000 000 000 000 000 000 000 00 000 000 Category Sub -Total 1 $15,000.00 $0.00 $0.001 $15,000.00 F. INDIRECT COSTS None $000 Category Sub -Total $0.001 $0.001 $0.00 $000 PROJECT TOTAL $72,392.97 $0.00 $0.00 $72,392.97 �(in CTS -38e (Rev 5105) SCHEDULE A PROJECT No: PT0627 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE 1 PROBLEM STATEMENT The El Segundo Police Department's traffic division receives numerous reports from citizens regarding speeding. The division's directed enforcement revealed that due to the increasing vehicular traffic on our roads, speeding is still a serious issue This is specifically prevalent in the city's school zones and on residential streets, where the chance of injury or fatal collisions are more likely The city has experienced the following collision history during the past three year period 2002 2003 2004 T. C. INJURY 75 87 76 *T.C. NON - INJURY 322 357 390 *T. C. UNKNO WN INJURIES 84 89 90 — BICYCLE INJURIES FROM T. C. 3 4 3 PEDESTRIAN INJURIES FROM T C. 9 12 4 FATAL T.C. 1 0 0 —PROPERTYDAMAGECOLLISION 88 98 93 —FELONY HIT &RUN 2 3 5 MISDEMEANOR HIT & RUN 50 76 61 DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE T. C. 13 19 10 * Denotes statistics from calls to dispatch (i a 911 calls) Denotes statistics based on reported collisions (i e reports taken) It should be noted that due to the population of El Segundo (under 25,000), it does not have a S WITRS ranking With radar speed feedback signs, the traffic division will be able to track speeds on a daily basis, and enforce accordingly A programmable message board on a radar trailer will be used for various traffic and safety related events and issues such as DUI checkpoints, school zone warnings, congested traffic alerts during school drop off or pick -up times, the town's weekly farmer's market, and can be used in conjunction with the radar speed feedback signs to warn the motoring public A radar transport trailer will be used to display a feedback sign and message board at various locations throughout the city OTS -38b (Rev 5105) V I, � 1 1 SCHEDULE A PROJECT NO: PT0627 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE 2 1 PERFORMANCE MEASURES PROJECT GOALS To maintain the total number of persons killed in traffic collisions at 0% from the calendar 2004 base year total of 0 to 0, from January 151, 2006 to December 31 st, 2006 (2006 calendar year) To reduce the total number of persons injured in traffic collisions 13% from the calendar 2004 base year total of 76 to 66, from January 1", 2006 to December 31st, 2006 (2006 calendar year) To maintain the total number of fatal intersection collisions at 0% from the calendar 2004 base year total of 0 to 0, from January 151, 2006 to December 31 st, 2006 (2006 calendar year). To reduce the total number of injury intersection collisions 19% from the calendar 2004 base year total of 37 to 30, from January 1", 2006 to December 31 st, 2006 (2006 calendar year). To maintain the total number of fatal speed related collisions at 0% from the calendar 2004 base year total of 0 to 0, from January 151, 2006 to December 31 st, 2006 (2006 calendar year) 6 To reduce the total number of injury speed related collisions 20% from the calendar 2004 base year total of 51 to 41, from January 1", 2006 to December 31st, 2006 (2006 calendar year) 7 To increase seatbelt compliance 3 percentage points from the calendar 2004 base year rate of 87% to 90 %, by December 315`, 2006 PROJECT OBJECTIVES 1 To purchase one radar trailer equipped with a programmable message board/radar device 2 To begin deploying the radar trailer /programmable message board at least once per week by January 1, 2006 3 To purchase four radar speed feedback signs 4 To begin deploying the radar speed feedback signs at problem locations by January 1, 2006 5 To conduct speed enforcement deployments within the traffic division twice per month, during the 2006 calendar year The deployments will be based on data gathered from the radar speed feedback signs. 6 To present a speed awareness and/or street racing campaign at the high school This will be presented in conjunction with the Police department's school resource/DARE program and the traffic division 7. To enact a seatbelt and child seat education/enforcement campaign around the high school, middle school, and elementary schools. 8 To issue speed citations equaling at least 50% of total hazardous citations 9 To issue a "hot sheet" to the patrol division of problem locations throughout the residential/ school areas regarding speeds and times gathered from the radar speed feedback signs 10 To initiate a police department/neighborhood speed alert program by January 1, 2006 OTS -38b (Rev 5105) 3 (1 t i SCHEDULE A PROJECT No: PT0627 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE 3 I 11 To increase the total number of vehicles impounded (30 day holds) by 13% from the calendar 2004 base year of 327 to 375, from January 1't, 2006 to December 31 st, 2006 (2006 calendar year) 12 To measure the grant's impact on crime by tracking non - traffic - related arrests that initiate from DUI checkpoints and/or other grant supported activities or operations Some of the crime statistics to be collected include narcotic arrests, confiscated weapons, stolen vehicles recovered, criminal misdemeanor arrests, criminal felony arrests, and felony warrant arrests 13. To conduct seatbelt usage surveys during the months of March and September of each grant year. 14 To increase seatbelt citations as a percent of total hazardous or moving citations issued by 2 percentage points from the 2004 base year rate of 27 % to 29 % by December 315`, 2006 "Note: Number]] reflects 2004 statistics, and projected goals for 2006. 2005 statistics were not included in this proposal due to the fact that the year has not been completed and would not represent accurate figures with a projection. Note: Nothing in this agreement shall be interpreted as a requirement, formal or informal, that a police officer issue a specified or predetermined number of citations in pursuance of the obligations hereunder. Media Obiectives a. To issue a press release announcing the kick -off of the project by January 1, 2006 The press releases and media advisories, alerts, and materials must be forwarded to your OTS Regional Coordinator and the OTS Public Information Officer at plo(a)ots ca ggv for approval 5 days prior to the issuance date of the release b To submit resulting electronic media articles by 9 a.m. to the OTS Public Information Officer by e-mail at pio(a,ots cagov and OTS Regional Coordinator, or fax printed clips to (916) 262 -2960 Include publication name and date the article was published on all clips. c. To use the following standard language in all press, media, and printed materials "Funding for this program was provided by a gran tfrom the California Office of Traffic Safety, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration". d To e -mail the OTS Public Information Officer at piogots ca gov and OTS Regional Coordinator at least one month in advance, a short description of any new traffic safety event or program OTS -38b (Rev 5105) + 0 0 SCHEDULE A PROJECT No: PT0627 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PAGE 4 1 METHOD OF PROCEDURE Phase 1— Program Preparation (October 2005 — December 2005) Purchase the radar feedback signs and radar /message board trailer, learn the workings of the equipment, and formulate a plan of deployment based on problem locations Phase 2 — Program Operations (January 2006 — December 2006) We will deploy the radar feedback signs and trailer followed by data retrieval, problem assessment, enforcement, and education as outlined in the project objectives. Phase 3 —Data Gathering & Reporting —(Throughout Project Period) Agencies are required to collect and report quarterly, appropriate data that support each of the goals and objectives progress Statistical data relating to the project goals and objectives will be collected, analyzed, and Incorporated in Quarterly Performance Reports (QPRs). QPRs for the quarter ending September 30 will include year to date comparisons of goals and objectives If required the Quarterly Evaluation Data Form, Schedule C, will be completed each quarter and submitted as part of the QPR These reports will compare actual project accomplishments with the planned accomplishments They will include information concerning changes made by the project Director in planning and guiding the project efforts Reports shall be completed in accordance with OTS requirements specified in the Grant Program Manual, Chapter 7, and submitted in compliance with the signed Acceptance of Conditions and Certifications (OTS -33) Included within this agreement METHOD OF EVALUATION Using the data compiled In Phase 3, the project manager will evaluate: (1) how well the stated project goals and objectives were accomplished, (2) if all the activities outlined in the "Method of Procedure" were performed in accordance with the project agreement, and (3) was the project cost effective9 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT This program has full support of the El Segundo Police Department Every effort will be made to continue the activities after the project conclusion OTS -38b (Rev 5/05) 1 1 SCHEDULE B -1 PROJECT NO. PT0627 BUDGET NARRATIVE Page 1 PERSONNEL COSTS Motorcycle officers from the traffic division will be responsible for deploying and retrieving the data from the radar speed feedback signs /radar trailer, assessing the data, and enforcing problem locations Sworn officers will be deployed on saturation patrol sweeps for the primary enforcement of DUI drivers The projected overtime costs, as outlined in schedule B, represent a range from a bottom step motor officer without education (OT rate) to a top step motor officer with education and longevity Increases (OT rate) Benefit costs are at 55 45% for sworn officers Paid holiday 6% Retirement 33% Medicare 145% Medical Insurance 15% 55.45% TRAVEL EXPENSE One officer to attend the 2006 Police Traffic Services Seminar CONTRACTUAL SERVICES None EQUIPMENT Radar Feedback Signs - These devices are capable of recording speeds of oncoming vehicles and can be mounted on a post or other type of pole. They will have the option of running on rechargeable batteries or by a solar panel The display will be projected by LED lights and have a strobe light which is flashed at high speed vehicles. Radar trailer with a message board - This trailer will be portable and transported by being towed by a vehicle The trailer will be equipped with a radar feedback sign and a programmable message board. The device will be powered by a portable 110 volt battery pack (rechargeable), or by plugging into a 12 volt cigarette adaptor in a vehicle The city of El Segundo assures the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) that the purchase of the above listed equipment with OTS grant funds will only be done for devices to be located on roadways off of the Federal Aid System. Equipment purchases for installations on non - qualifying roadways cannot be funded with OTS grant funds OTS -38f (Rev 5105) y 1 SCHEDULE B -1 PROJECT No. PT0627 BUDGET NARRATIVE Page 2 OTHER DIRECT COSTS "Every 15 Minutes" program is scheduled to take place in the year 2007 Funds for this project will go towards a make -up artist, make -up supplies, t- shirts, hotel expenditures, crash scene supplies, and other related costs Educational/Promotional items will include brochures, presentations, and promotional items which may include posters, banners, brochures, bumper stickers, literature, pens, cups, t- shirts, bags, pins, stickers, etc All promotional items purchased under this grant will contain a traffic safety message that relates to this project and whenever practical and possible, appropriate logos INDIRECT COSTS None PROGRAM INCOME No program income will be generated from this project OTS- 38f(Rev 5105) i 9 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 15, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING. Councilmember Jacobson AGENDA DESCRIPTION. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of a voluntary limitation on the placement of campaign signs on private property (Fiscal Impact None) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Approve the attached form entitled "Statement of Responsibility for Temporary Political Signs," 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this Item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION. As the Council is aware, I have sought to Institute limitations on the number of campaign signs for each candidate placed on street frontages during political campaigns In researching the issue, it is possible that the mandatory implementation of such provision would be considered unconstitutional. However, the City could limit the number of campaign signs on a voluntary basis by requesting candidates and campaigns to agree to limit the number of such signs placed on private property. Such a request would be in keeping with previous efforts by the City to improve the political campaign process For example, the City Clerk's office currently requests candidates for local public office and the campaigns for other ballot measures to sign a form called the "Code of Fair Campaign Practices " (Please see attached page marked "Background & Discussion ") ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. Form entitled "Statement of Responsibility for Temporary Political Signs " FISCAL IMPACT: N/A Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: _Yes _ No ORIGINATED: DATE. ovem er , Carl Jacobson, ouncilmember REVIEW DATE' r Je rt, City Manager 0 i.3 Background & Discussion (con't:) Specifically, I am requesting that the City Council approve the following form requesting candidates and /or campaigns to voluntarily agree to place only one campaign sign on street frontages Frontage, for the purposes of this form, is defined as the area of the property that is parallel to the street The definition would also include the side of a property if it is located on a corner lot The intent is to allow two signs per candidate or ballot measure on properties located on corner lots and one sign per candidate or ballot measure on properties not located on corner lots In addition, the form restates the current municipal code requirement to remove campaign signs within 48 hours of an election Should the Council agree to approve the attached form, I request that the City Clerk incorporate the form in materials distributed to candidates who seek to run in the upcoming April 2006 City Council election i14 STATEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR TEMPORARY POLITICAL SIGNS Election Date Candidate's Name Office sought or Ballot Issue Name of Responsible Party Address Phone Number (Include Area Code) The undersigned accepts responsibility for placement and removal of signs in respect to the above candidate and /or ballot issue as stated in the El Segundo Municipal Code § 15- 18 -10, and in accordance with Section 5405 3 of the California Business and Professions Code It is understood and agreed that not more than one sign per candidate and /or ballot issue may be placed on the street frontage or front yard of any property, except on properties located on corner lots On corner lots, one sign may be placed along each street that parallels the lot, for a total of two signs Frontage, for the purposes of this document, shall be defined as that area of the property that is parallel to the street In addition, any signs placed and not removed within 48 hours after the election may be removed by the City and the undersigned hereby agrees to pay the costs of removal upon submission of an invoice by the City Signature of Responsible Party Date Printed Name 1 5