Loading...
2005 OCT 04 CC PACKETREVISED 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 lenoth 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 NOTE: ONE (1) ADDITIONAL ITEM WAS ADDED TO CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov't Code U54956.9(a) REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2005 - 5:00 P.M. Next Resolution # 4438 Next Ordinance # 1387 5:00 P.M. SESSION CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL CLOSED SESSION: The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54960, It se) for the purposes of conferring with the City's Real Property Negotiator, and /or conferring with the City Attorney on potential andlor 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, at al, LASC No BS094279 2 Yeaton v City of EI Segundo, LASC Case No BS096351 3 Bressi v City of El Segundo, LASC Case Nos SC288293 and 288292 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956 9(b) -1- potential case (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 POSTED DATE TIME �t- Of%JyJ NAME 2 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 length In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, it 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, OCTOBER 4, 2005 - 7:00 P.M. Next Resolution # 4438 Next Ordinance # 1387 7:00 P.M. SESSION CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION — Reverend Elizabeth Morse of Saint Michael, the Archangel Episcopal Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Council Member Jim Boulgandes 0 3 PRESENTATIONS - (a) Proclamation encouraging the EI Segundo community to observe Fire Prevention Week, October 9 through October 15, 2005, by practicing fire prevention and fire safety year -round and heeding the message "Use Candles with Care. When you go out, blow out"' (b) Proclamation celebrating the El Segundo Public Schools Bond completion and inviting the community to join in the celebration by taking a tour of the high school. ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Onlv - 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 only. Recommendation - Approval B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. 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. Recommendation - (1) Discussion; (2) Adopt a Resolution approving Environmental Assessment No. EA -645 and General Plan Amendment No. 04 -01; (3) Introduction of an Ordinance for Specific Plan Amendment No. 04 -01, Zone Change No 04 -01 and Zone Text Amendment No. 05 -01; (4) Schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance on October 18, 2005, (5) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 0 4 lg 2. Consideration and possible action on an overview of the City of El Segundo's emergency readiness and capability. (Fiscal Impact: None) Recommendation - (1) Receive and file an overview of the City's emergency readiness and capability; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 3. Consideration and possible action regarding a presentation by members of the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Committee (ASNAC) regarding comments submitted by the Committee on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the LAX South Airfield Improvement Project. Recommendation - (1) Receive and file report and comments from members of ASNAC; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. E. CONSENT AGENDA All items listed are to be adopted by one motion without discussion and passed unanimously. if a call for discussion of an item is made, the dem(s) will be considered individually under the next heading of business 4. Warrant Numbers 2549408 to 2549651 on Register No. 24 in the total amount of $749,758.74 and Wire Transfers from 9/9/2005 through 9/2212005 in the total amount of $1,422,409.43. 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 September 20, 2005. Recommendation - Approval. 6. Consideration and possible action to approve agreements with Cassidy & Associates and The MWW Group for work related to the City's efforts regarding Los Angeles International Airport, lobbying efforts in Washington, D.C. and Recommendation - (1) Authorize Mayor to execute consultant agreements with Cassidy & Associates and The MWW Group effective October 1, 2005; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. Q 5 7. Consideration and possible action for final acceptance of the Clubhouse HVAC Refurbishment (located at 300 E. Pine Avenue) — Project No. PW 05 -04 (Final Contract Cost = $25,000), and for the Clubhouse Roof Refurbishment and Maintenance Project — Project No. PW 05 -05 (Final Contract Cost = $16,921). Recommendation — (1) Accept the work as complete; (2) Authorize the City Clerk to file Notices of Completion in the County Recorder's Office; (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA F. NEW BUSINESS G. REPORTS — CITY MANAGER — NONE H. REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY — NONE REPORTS —CITY CLERK — NONE J. REPORTS — CITY TREASURER K. REPORTS — CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Boulgarides — 8. Consideration and possible action to create an ad hoc committee to consider and make recommendations to the City Council regarding the implementation of the Aquatics Master Plan. Recommendation — (1) Authorize the creation of an ad hoc committee to consider the implementation of the Aquatics Master Plan; (2) Approve the appointment of members to that committee, (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 9. Consideration and possible action regarding a City Council Committee to discuss and make recommendations on the City's emergency services plans, including emergency preparation, notification and response. Recommendation — (1) Discuss and decide upon appropriate composition of a Council Committee regarding the implementation of City's emergency services plans; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item 6 0 6 Council Member Busch - Council Member Jacobson - Mayor Pro Tem 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, et seep) 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, andlor discussing matters covered under Government Code Section §54957 (Personnel), and/or conferring with the City's Labor Negotiators REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION (if required) ADJOURNMENT POSTED DATE TIME• —30 / 'Vm NAME L 0 rodamationCitp of Cl Aiegunbo, California WHEREAS, Approximately 80% of all United States fire deaths occur in the Home, and every three hours someone looses their life in a home fire, with cooling, heating and electrical fires representing the three leading causes of home fires, WHEREAS, The vast majority of home fires can be prevented by taking simple safety precautions, WHEREAS, The El Segundo Fire Department, which is dedicated to the safety of life and property from the devastating effects of fires and other emergencies, is joined by concerned citizens of our community, as well as businesses, the school district, service clubs and other organizations, in its fire safety efforts NOW, THEREFORE, the Mayor and Members of the City Council of the City of El Segundo, California, in commemoration of the great Chicago Fire of 1871, which lulled 250 persons, left 100,000 homeless, and destroyed more that 17,400 buildings, and in order to raise the awareness in the community of the importance of practicing fire prevention and fire safety to avoid needless loss of property and life, do hereby proclaim the week of October 9 through October 15, 2005 as FIRE PREVENTION WEEK FURTHER, The Mayor and Members of the City Council join Fire Chief Norm Angelo in inviting the El Segundo community to observe Fire Prevention Week by practicing fire prevention and fire safety year -round and heeding the message "Use Candles with Care When you go out, blow out f" 0 s rortamatton fity of Q1f Orounbo, Gftfornia WHEREAS, El Segundo's commitment to public education is reflected in the remarkable campuses built to house its students The stately edifice of El Segundo High School has graced Main Street for nearly 80 years and its distinctive brick buildings and Romanesque architecture, including a bell tower, has been a favorite of the Film Industry This campus has been the city's most recognizable landmark since it was originally completed in 1927 with a $500,000 school bond Richmond Street Elementary School was rebuilt in the 1930'e, with Art Deco design details, after a fire destroyed the original 1920's building In 1949, Center Street Elementary School's sprawling eaetside campus was built to accommodate the district's growing population The El Segundo Junior High School occupied several locations before the first standalone jumor high campus, now known as El Segundo Middle School, was completed on Center Street in 1965 WHEREAS, By the 1990's it became apparent the El Segundo Unified School District's aging campuses were in desperate need of restoration and modernization, creating a situation that could only be remedied through a commumtywide effort WHEREAS, The voters overwhelmingly approved two school bonds and eagerly watched the complete renovation, restoration, and modernization of the four school sites Voters passed Measure C, a $24 million bond, by 77 1% on November 4, 1997 On November 6, 2001 the voters passed Measure E by more than 75% WHEREAS, Two bond measures and eight years later, El Segundo Unified School District's modernization projects are finished, within budget and well ahead of schedule El Segundo students now attend schools that are safe, modem, and equipped to provide them with a quality public education After enduring the dust, noise and nuisance, patient students, faculty and staff now enjoy state of the art academic environments within park -like settings, built to withstand the impacts of earthquakes and natural disasters and last for decades to come NOW, THEREFORE, the Mayar and Members of the City Council of the City of El Segundo, California, express their gratitude to the community and its leaders for this tremendous accomplishment and join the El Segundo Unified School District in inviting the community to a Community Celebration and High School Open House at the El Segundo High School campus, Saturday, October 15, 2005 from 1 �00 — 4 00 p in /Z�,, . /, /l EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE October 4, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING Unfinished Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION, 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 RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION, 1) Discussion, 2) Adopt a Resolution approving Environmental Assessment No EA -645 and General Plan Amendment No 04 -01, 3) Introduction of an Ordinance for Specific Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Zone Change No 04 -01 and Zone Text Amendment No 05 -01, 4) Schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance on October 18, 2005, and /or 5) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION, On September 20, 2005, the City Council held a public hearing on the amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) After receiving public testimony and reviewing the documents, the City Council directed staff to modify the Resolution for Environmental Assessment No EA- 645 and General Plan Amendment No 04 -01 and to modify the Ordinance for Specific Plan ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS• A Draft Resolution Including Initial Study of Environmental Impacts and Negative Declaration B Draft Ordinance FISCAL IMPACT Operating Budget. N/A Amount Requested: N/A Account Number- N/A Project Phase N/A Appropriation Required Yes X No DATE Seimone Junis, Director of Planning and Bulldina Safetv DATE: Oil) Manager 1 STAFF REPORT September 20, 2005 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: (cont.) Page 2 Amendment No 04 -01, Zone Change No. 04 -01 and Zone Text Amendment No 05 -01 and return to Council at Its next meeting The draft Resolution and Ordinance reflect the Council's direction Specifically, the modifications include the reduction of the floor area ratio (FAR) for the "West Grand Avenue Transitional District- South" (218 -228 West Grand Avenue) to 0 7 and the reduction of the height limitation for the "West Grand Avenue Transitional District North" (219 and 227 West Grand Avenue) to 2 stories and a maximum of 30 feet The Council affirmed that it is not proposing to modify the 1 0 FAR proposed for the "West Grand Avenue Transitional District- North" and the proposed height limitation of 2 stories and a maximum of 30 feet for the "West Grand Avenue Transitional District -South " The Council had concerns regarding frequent requests for amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan Therefore, the Ordinance also reflects a limit of amending the Downtown Specific Plan to once every 2 years Parking Staff has surveyed the number of vehicles for both Concord Street and the parking structure Staff verified on September 27, 2005 at 145 pm that there were 19 vehicles parked along the curb in the 200 block (approximately 90% full) and 20 vehicles parked along the curb in the 300 block of Concord Street (approximately 65% full) Also, it was verified there were 28 vehicles parked on the top two levels of the parking structure (137 parking spaces are provided, the City leases 100 spaces) and 26 vehicles parked on the lowest level serving Cooke's Market (43 parking spaces provided) The parking structure has a total of 180 parking spaces with the City leasing 100 parking spaces from the top two levels Of the 100 parking spaces leased, the City has allocated 50 of them towards the monthly permit parking program Next month staff will return to City Council with an item to discuss the status of the parking in -lieu fee program further Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the draft Resolution No approving Environmental Assessment No EA -645 and General Plan Amendment No 04 -01 Staff also recommends that the City Council Introduce an Ordinance to approve Specific Plan Amendment No 04 -01, Zone Change No 04 -01 and Zone Text Amendment No 05 -01 Second reading and adoption of the Ordinance would occur on October 18, 2005 P \Planning & Building Safety\PROJECTS \626- 650 \Ea - 645 \Council Docs\CC Mtg 10405 \Ea -645CC SR 10405 Version 2 doc Oil RESOLUTION NO. 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 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 resolve as follows SECTION 1 The City Council finds and declares that B 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 (EA -645), General Plan Amendment (GPA 04 -01), Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 04 -01), Zone Text Amendment (ZTA 05 -01), and Zone Change (ZC 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), C The applications were reviewed by the City's Planning and Building 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 "), D 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), E 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, -1- 012 The Negative Declaration was circulated for public review and comment between July 14, 2005, and August 3, 2005, F The Planning and Budding Safety Department completed its review and scheduled the public hearing regarding the application before the Planning Commission for August 25, 2005, G 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, and the applicants /property owners and their representative, H The Planning Commission considered the information provided by City staff, public testimony, representatives of the subject property owners, and adopted Resolution No 2589 recommending City Council approval of Environmental Assessment (EA -645), General Plan Amendment (GPA 04- 01), Specific Plan Amendment (SPA 04 -01), Zone Text Amendment (ZTA 05 -01), and Zone Change (ZC 04 -01), On September 20, 2005, the City Council held a public hearing and considered the information provided by City staff, public testimony and the applicants /property owners and their representative and continued the hearing to October 4, 2005, On October 4, 2005, the City Council resumed the hearing and considered the information provided by City staff, and K This Resolution and its findings are made based upon the testimony and evidence presented to the Council at its September 20, 2005 and October 4, 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 just 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 '/2 block west of Richmond Street on the 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 ja -2- 0 (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 -foot 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 building 30 -foot high as compared to the 45 -foot height limit in the C -RS zone 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 01 MCI 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 Environmental Assessment Because of the facts identified in Section 2 of this Resolution, the proposed project was analyzed for its environmental impacts and a Draft Initial Study was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15063 The Initial Study found that the project could not have a significant effect on the environment Therefore, a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is proposed for this project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15070 Accordingly, based upon the evidence presented to the City Council, the City need not prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the proposed project SECTION 4 General Plan As required under Government Code § 65454 the amendment of the Downtown Specific Plan conforms with the City's General Plan as follows A The El Segundo General Plan land use designation is Downtown Specific Plan This designation is intended for neighborhood serving commercial and residential uses B The proposed Downtown Specific Plan West Grand Avenue Transitional District South designation allows a maximum FAR of 0 7 1 whereas the Neighborhood Commercial designation of the General Plan allows a maximum FAR of 0 5 1 However, since the application includes a General Plan amendment to allow the increase in FAR, this would not create an inconsistency The proposed Downtown Specific Plan West Grand Avenue Transitional District North designation allows a maximum FAR of 1 1 consistent with the Downtown Commercial designation of the General Plan which allows a maximum FAR of 1 1 C The amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan conforms with several General Plan goals, objectives and policies related to Economic Development, Land Use, and Housing The amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan is consistent with the Economic Development Element Goals, Objectives and Policies Specifically, the amendment is consistent with Goal ED3, Objective ED3 -1, Policy ED3 -1 2, Policy ED3 -1 3, and Policy ED3 -1 5, in that the amended Downtown Specific Plan will strive to preserve and improve the business environment and image of Downtown El Segundo through the use of design standards and the option to pay an in -lieu fee instead of providing on -site parking, create an economically viable and stable Downtown area that uniquely contributes to El Segundo's commercial options through development standards that facilitate the revitalization of underdeveloped property in the Downtown area, encourage the revitalization efforts that improve the appearance of the Downtown area business, improve traffic circulation and parking by -4- collecting in -lieu fees to pay for constructing parking facilities in the Downtown, and improve pedestrian access through Development and Design Standards that establish 0 -foot to 15 -foot front and street side setbacks while providing the opportunity for a mix of commercial services D The amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan conforms with several Land Use Element Goals, Objectives and Policies Specifically, the amendment is consistent with Goal LU1, Objective LU1-4, Goal LU4, Objective LU4 -2 1, Objective LU4 -2 5, and Objective LU4 -2 6, in that the amendment to the Specific Plan will further the goal of maintaining a "small town" atmosphere as additional parcels will be subject to the standards of the Specific Plan, will maintain the City's Downtown as integral to the City's appearance and function by adding the subject parcels to the Downtown Specific Plan which will be regulated by the Development and Design Standards that help to maintain the City's Downtown appearance and function, provide a stable tax base for the City through development of new commercial uses, revitalize and upgrade commercial areas, making them a part of a viable, attractive, and people - oriented commercial district with consideration to aesthetic architectural improvements, zoning and shopper amenities, the Downtown area will provide adequate parking by either developers or by the public by spending parking in -lieu fees collected from developers, and the Downtown area will maintain and encourage low -scale architectural profile and pedestrian - oriented features, consistent with existing structures E The amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan conforms with several Housing Element Goals, Objectives and Policies Specifically, the amendment is consistent with Goal 3, Policy 3 3 and Goal 4, in that the amendment to the Specific Plan will provide opportunities for new housing construction in a variety of locations and a variety of densities in accordance with the land use designations and policies of the Land Use Element since business /tenant owner - occupied residential units will be permitted above the street -front level and no residential units currently exist on the affected parcels, permit vacant and underdeveloped property designated as residential to develop with a diversity of types, price and tenure since affected parcels are underdeveloped property and business /tenant owner - occupied residential units will be permitted to be constructed above the street -front level, remove governmental constraints on housing development since business /tenant owner - occupied residential units above the street -front level will be allowed by either providing on -site parking or paying an in -lieu fee The amendment will allow residential units on the second floor without additional parking required as specified in Downtown Specific Plan Section VII 3 a i SECTION 5 Approvals M 016 A The City Council adopts the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for 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 as set forth in attached Exhibit 'A," which is incorporated into this Resolution by reference B The City Council amends the proposed Land Use Plan of the Land Use Element ( "Northwest Quadrant" subsection) of the General Plan 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 and Neighborhood Commercial to Downtown Specific Plan The corresponding changes as set forth in attached Exhibit "B" are incorporated into this Resolution by reference C The City Council amends the 1992 General Plan Summary of Existing Trends Buildout (Exhibit LU -3) of the Land Use Element 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 Y2 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 and Neighborhood Commercial to Downtown Specific Plan The corresponding changes as set forth in attached Exhibit "C" are incorporated into this Resolution by reference D The City Council amends the General Plan Land Use 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 1/2 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 and Neighborhood Commercial to Downtown Specific Plan The corresponding changes as set forth in attached Exhibit "D" are incorporated into this Resolution by reference E The City Council amends the Downtown Specific Plan Land Use 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 '/� 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 and Neighborhood Commercial to Downtown Specific Plan The -6- 017 corresponding changes as set forth in attached Exhibit "E" are incorporated into this Resolution by reference F The City Council adopts the Downtown Specific Plan Supplement 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 '/Z 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 and Neighborhood Commercial to Downtown Specific Plan The corresponding changes as set forth in attached Exhibit "F" are incorporated into this Resolution by reference SECTION 6 Reliance on Record Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole SECTION 7 Limitations The City Council's analysis and evaluation of the project is based on the best information currently available It is inevitable that in evaluating a project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the project will not exist One of the major limitations on analysis of the project is the City Council's lack of knowledge of future events In all instances, best efforts have been made to form accurate assumptions Somewhat related to this are the limitations on the City's ability to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national problems and issues. The City must work within the political framework within which it exists and with the limitations inherent in that framework SECTION 8 Summaries of Information All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact SECTION 9 This Resolution will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent resolution SECTION 10• This Resolution is the City Council's final decision and will become effective immediately upon adoption PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of 2005 Kelly McDowell, Mayor -7- 018 ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five, that the foregoing Resolution No was adopted by said City Council at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2005, 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 a Karl H Berger Assistant City Attorney P \Planning R Building Safety\Projects \626 - 650 \Ea - 645 \Council Docs \CC Mtg 10405 \EA -645 CC Reso 10 -4 -05 doe -8- {Jlii CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT A e4y 14 El 511%"04 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING SAFETY INITIAL STUDY/ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM PROJECT No. EA -645, GPA 04 -01, SP 04 -01, ZC 04 -01 BACKGROUND Project Title: Downtown Specific Plan Amendment 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 524 -2344 FAX (310) 322 -4167 www.elsegundo.org 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of El Segundo, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, CA 90245 Contact Person and Phone Number: Art Bashmakian, Interim Senior Planner. (310) 524 -2342 4. Project Location (Subject Site): 200 block of West Grand Avenue (218 -228. 219 and 227 West Grand Avenue) 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: • Arthur and Elizabeth Miltenburaer 219 West Grand Avenue. El Sequndo. CA 90245 • John Dukakis and Arch Young 218, 220, 222, 224, 226, & 228 West Grand Avenue, El Segundo, CA 90245 • Bill and Loraine Flegenheimer 227 West Grand Avenue, El Segundo, CA 90245 6. General Plan Designation: 219 -227 W Grand Avenue is designated Downtown Commercial and 218 -228 W Grand Avenue is designated Neighborhood Commercial 7. Zoning: 219 -227 W Grand Avenue is zoned Downtown Commercial (C -RS) and 218 -228 W Grand Avenue is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C -2) 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation Attach additional sheets if necessary) The proposed project is an amendment of the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) involving the expansion of its current boundary by including adjacent parcels to the west on Grand Avenue The amendment will involve both changes to the text contained within the DSP and changes to the current zoning designations of the properties to be added to the DSP area There are four parcels involved in the zone change Three on the north side of West Grand Avenue and a single parcel on the south side of West Grand Avenue All four parcels are immediately west of the existing border of the DSP area The parcels are currently developed with retail, office, parking and commercial service uses The zoning designations of the three parcels to the north are currently Downtown Commercial (C -RS) and the single parcel on the south side is Neighborhood Commercial (C -2) The subject parcels for this new Gateway District of the O4:U Downtown Specific Plan area encompasses the alley to the west of Richmond Street and terminates on the east side of Concord Street along West Grand Avenue The incorporation of the subject parcels into the DSP will allow the property owners to benefit from a parking in -lieu fee program currently offered to properties within the DSP This Program allows expansion and new construction to take place without having to provide code required parking when the developer chooses to pay fees to the City in -lieu of providing parking Changing the zoning designation to DSP will increase the allowable maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the parcel at 218 -228 W Grand Avenue from 0 5 1 (maximum for C -2 Zone) to 1 1 As the existing building is 3,960 square feet, the change in FAR can potentially allow 2,232 square feet of additional development The FAR for both the C -RS Zone and DSP Zone is the same Therefore the properties at 219 — 227 W Grand Avenue have the same maximum potential development under the DSP zone as they currently do under the C -RS Zone The DSP height standards are more restrictive (30' at street front and street side and 45' towards the rear of a parcel) compared to the C -RS Zone which allows 45' on the entire property The C -RS Zone has a 10 -foot rear setback whereas the DSP Zone does not have a required setback as part of its Development Standards but requires an approximate 10 foot buffer (setback) as part of its Design Standards instead (along the north property line of the Grand Avenue district) The proposal involves requiring similar 10 -foot setbacks as part of the Design Standards for the proposed West Grand Avenue Transitional District The design of the proposed project for the property at 227 West Grand Avenue maintains a minimum 10 -foot buffer zone as measured from the building (including the 2nd story addition) to the north property line Although the DSP Zone development standards allow zero -foot setbacks, the aforementioned design standard requiring the 10 -foot rear landscape setback (with mature trees and shrubs) will result in the same rear setback as required in the C -RS Zone The DSP's height standards are less restrictive than the C -2 Zone as the maximum height for C- 2 properties is 28' However, the DSP limits height at the street front (Concord Street) and side street (Grand Avenue) to two - stories and 30' for the property at 218 -228 W Grand Avenue Because this property is relatively small and it is a corner lot, combined with the required setbacks to make sure future development is compatible with the residential uses to the south, the area of the parcel that can be built to the maximum allowable height of 45 feet is limited Although the DSP Zone does not have setbacks, as this property adjoins residential uses to the south, the accompanying design standards proposed by staff of a 10 -foot side and rear setback and a 15 -foot front setback adjacent to residential uses would require the same front and side yard setbacks as currently required in the C -2 Zone Therefore, the potential development resulting from the change to DSP will not be much different that currently allowed under the C -2 zoning designation The proposed project also includes a 4,923 square -foot second story addition to an existing 5,350 square -foot building located at 227 West Grand Avenue The building will maintain a 10- foot rear setback and have a height of 29' 7" along the street frontage and 33' 5" at the rear portion of the building This development is contingent upon the City's approval of the proposed DSP Amendment as the applicant desires to take advantage of the parking in -lieu fee program and not provide the required 14 parking spaces on site 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings) 219 -227 W Grand Avenue North Multi - Family Residential (R -3) and developed with multi - family residential dwellings 021 East Downtown Specific Plan and developed with single -story vacant tenant spaces designed for retail/service /office uses South Neighborhood Commercial (C -2) and developed with single -story retail /service West Neighborhood Commercial (C -2) and developed with a multi - family apartment and preschool 218 -228 W Grand Avenue North Downtown Commercial (C -RS), developed with offices and a bakery East Downtown Specific Plan, developed with retail and residential in a two -story building South Multi - Family Residential (R -3) and developed with multi - family residential dwellings West Neighborhood Commercial (C -2), developed with two -story offices 10 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e g, permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) None 02%, %, ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below ( X) would be potentially affected by this protect, involving at least one impact that is a Potentially Significant Impact as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this Initial Study of Environmental Impact, the Planning Commission of the City of El Segundo finds the following. I find that the proposed protect COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a Aesthetics NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared Hazards & Hazardous I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will Public Services not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the protect have been made by or agreed to by the protect proponent A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared Materials I find that the proposed protect MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required Agricultural Resources I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potential significant impact' or "potentially significant Hydrology/Water Quality unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately Recreation analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed Air Quality by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets An Land Use /Planning ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to Transportation/Traffic be addressed Biological Resources I find that although the proposed protect could have a significant effect on the environment, because Mineral Resources all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE Utilities /Service Systems DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to Resources that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are Noise imposed upon the proposed protect, nothing further is required Mandatory Findings of 1ECultural Si nificance Geology /Soils Population /Housing DETERMINATION: On the basis of this Initial Study of Environmental Impact, the Planning Commission of the City of El Segundo finds the following. I find that the proposed protect COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a X NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the protect have been made by or agreed to by the protect proponent A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that the proposed protect MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potential significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed I find that although the proposed protect could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed protect, nothing further is required .2005 Seimone Jurtts Date Director of Planning and Building Safety, City of El Segundo 023 IV. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to protects like the one involved (e g the protect falls outside a fault rupture zone) A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project- specific factors as well as general standards (e g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project- specific screening analysis) 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project- level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required 4) "Negative Declaration Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Significant Impact " The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross - referenced) 5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration Section 15063 (c) (3) (d) In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following (a) Earlier Analysis Used Identify and state where they are available for review (b) Impacts Adequately Addressed Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis (c) Mitigation Measures For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,' describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the protect 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e g general plans, zoning ordinances) Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated 7) Supporting Information Sources A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats, however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected 9) The analysis of each issue should identify (a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question, and (b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance 024 Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Less than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact With Impact Mitigation 1 AESTHETICS Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic X highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site X and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely X affect day or nighttime views in the area? a) There are no scenic vistas within the subject area Thus, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated In addition, the type, size and height of development, possible as a result from the project is not much different than currently allowed, under current zoning and in fact the DSP is more restrictive regarding height b) None of the above referenced resources exist in the project area In addition, none of the subject buildings have been designated as historic and they are not located within a State scenic highway c) Although the Development Standards section of DSP does not require setbacks, the Design Standards section of the DSP stipulates setbacks and buffers to safeguard adjacent residential uses in order to maintain compatibility between uses These setback requirements together with other design standards will ensure development that protects the visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings d) The project involves the expansion of the current DSP boundary involving the zone changes described above This change in itself will not create new source of light or glare The anticipated light and glare would be no different than what is possible under current zoning In addition, the amount and type will be subject to all current regulations 2 AGRICULTURE RESOURCES In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland Would the project? a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to X the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency to non - agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act X contract c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- X agricultural use? a), b) and c) None of the above mentioned agricultural resources are located within or near the subject or surrounding area 3 AIR QUALITY- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations Would the project a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan X b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation X 1-,,, Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an Impact With Impact applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including Mitigation X releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone Inco orated c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including X releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? X e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? X a) The land uses and densities resulting from the project do not exceed those standards that are already existing and permitted, with few exceptions The project could result in one additional residential unit if the subject parcels currently zoned C -RS are subdivided into four parcels However, to achieve the subdivision in order to facilitate the one additional unit would involve the demolition of existing structures The other exception is the allowance of 1 1 FAR compared to 0 5 1 FAR for the C -2 zoned parcel The difference in FAR could at most allow 3,096 additional square feet of development than currently allowed as the parcel is only 6,192 square feet, should the existing building be demolished However, if the existing building remains no more than 2,232 square feet can be added to the building The project also involves the construction of a 4,923 square -foot 2nd story office addition to an existing single -story office The project as a whole will not conflict or obstruct implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) as the project's air quality impacts were analyzed per criteria established by the Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) using the URBEMIS 2002 model The pollutant levels possible from this project are below the thresholds established by SCAQMD b) As stated above the project's air quality impacts were analyzed per the criteria established by SCAQMD The pollutant levels possible from this project are below the thresholds established by SCAQMD Therefore, the project will not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation c) As stated above the project's air quality impacts were analyzed per the criteria established by SCAQMD The criteria and the accompanying URBEMIS model account for cumulative impacts The established thresholds are very conservative as they factor in the region's existing high pollution levels that exceed current state and federal standards Therefore the project will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant d) As discussed above the project will not result in the emission of substantial pollutants Also, any anticipated future occupants of the site will not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations as the surrounding uses are such that substantial pollutants are not anticipated Surrounding uses are residential, small scale office and retail /service e) Future anticipated uses in the 2nd story addition are most likely to be office uses Such uses and others that are permitted by right in the DSP are typically found in urbanized areas such as bakeries, restaurants, and general retail and offices These uses do not generally create objectionable odors that could affect a substantial number of people 4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, X or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U S Fish and Wildlife Service b) Have a substantially adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified In local or regional plans, policies, X regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U S Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc ) through direct removal, filling, X hydrological interruption, or other means? 6; : 6 Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact fish or wildlife species or with established native resident migratory Impact With Impact X wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites'? Mitigation e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological Incorporated X d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident migratory X wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites'? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological X resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, other approved local, regional, X or state habitat conservation plan? a) The subject site is fully developed with surface parking and buildings The immediate adjacent parcels are also fully developed The site is not a known habitat for any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U S Fish and Wildlife Service Therefore, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U S Fish and Wildlife Service b) The subject site is fully developed with surface parking and buildings The immediate adjacent parcels are also fully developed The site does not contain nor the immediate surrounding area riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies and regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U S Wildlife Service Therefore, the project could not have a substantially adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies and regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U S Wildlife Service c) As the site is fully developed and no wetlands are present, the project could not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc ) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means d) As the site is fully developed and is located within an urbanized area surrounded by other urban uses, the project could not interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites e) The City does not have a policy or ordinance protecting biological resources in or adjacent to the subject site In addition the site is fully developed with parking, buildings and some landscaping The project could result in the trimming or removal of some Ficus street trees However, these trees are not identified as a biological resource f) The site and the surrounding area are not within a Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or any other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan Therefore, the project could not conflict with such plans 5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical X resource as defined in Section 15064 59 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an X archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064 5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or X unique geologic feature d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal X cemeteries 027 Issues and Supporting Information Potenhally Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact not involve any excavation Impact With Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, Including the risk of loss, injury or death involving (I) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most Mitigation recent Alqust- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the Incoi orated a) The subject site does not contain any historical resource as defined in Section 15064 5 The project in and of itself would not result in any changes except for the 2nd story addition However, this aspect of the project (2nd story addition) would result to the preservation of the existing single -story budding b) The subject site does not contain any archaeological resources as defined in Section 15064 5 c) No paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature is known to exist on the site In addition the project does not involve any excavation d) No excavation is involved with the 2nd story addition In addition, there is no indication that there are any human remains within the project site 6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, Including the risk of loss, injury or death involving (I) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alqust- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence X of a known fault') Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42 (u) Strong seismic ground shaking? X (III) Seismic- related ground failure, including liquefaction? X (iv) Landslides? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- X or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -a -B of the Uniform X Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not X available for the disposal of waste water? 9 01(-'8 Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact rupture due to faulting is considered remote, as is the potential for ground failure or other seismic hazards Therefore, Impact With Impact could be subject to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake However, compliance with the design and construction standards contained in the California Building Code (CBC) and the El Segundo Municipal Code would reduce potential seismic impacts to less than significant levels for the 2nd story addition and any other new Mitigation people or structures to geologic and soil hazards as it merely changes the zoning designation of the sites that already contain existing buildings (III) The project area is not considered to be an area of high risk for liquefaction Therefore, the project would not have a significant impact Incorporated slopes are present on the site No impact is likely to occur b) The site is fully developed with surface asphalt parking and buildings No grading or soil work is anticipated a) (I) The project site is located within the seismically active Southern California region, therefore, as with any development, site occupants would be subject to similar seismic risks as other developments of a comparable size and use which are located in the vicinity of the Specific Plan However, no known geologic features exist on the sites, and no known active or potential active faults are located on or near the proposed project areas The risk of surface rupture due to faulting is considered remote, as is the potential for ground failure or other seismic hazards Therefore, the potential to expose people to impacts from fault rupture resulting from seismic activity during the design life of the existing buildings, new additions and future buildings is considered less than significant (u) As indicated above, the project site is located in the seismically active Southern California region and therefore could be subject to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake However, compliance with the design and construction standards contained in the California Building Code (CBC) and the El Segundo Municipal Code would reduce potential seismic impacts to less than significant levels for the 2nd story addition and any other new construction The project in and of itself (other than the 2nd story addition and future buildings) would not expose people or structures to geologic and soil hazards as it merely changes the zoning designation of the sites that already contain existing buildings (III) The project area is not considered to be an area of high risk for liquefaction Therefore, the project would not have a significant impact (iv) The project site and the immediate surrounding areas are predominantly flat with a gentle slope No large hills or slopes are present on the site No impact is likely to occur b) The site is fully developed with surface asphalt parking and buildings No grading or soil work is anticipated Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project c) The project involves a 2nd story addition and a zone change As such no excavation, grading or fill is required Thus, the proposal would not result in or expose people to potential impacts involving the on or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse d) The project involves a 2nd story addition and a zone change No excavation grading or fill is involved Thus, the proposal would not result in or expose people to potential impacts involving expansive soils e) The site is located in an urbanized area and is already connected to existing sewer infrastructure Since the project would not involve the use of septic systems, no impact would occur 7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project? a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the X routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous matenals9 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the X likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or X proposed school d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962 5 and, as X a result would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public X use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 10 �� Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the protect Impact With Impact X area? Mitigation g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted Incorporated X f) For a protect within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the protect result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the protect X area? g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted X emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to X urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a) The protect will create a less than significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials other than common cleaning solutions and other common materials used in business and residences, disposed of in accordance with applicable statues The change of zone in itself will not create nor increase such hazards However, additional square footage that will be permitted as a result of the zone change will not create a significant hazard as the hazardous materials will be common cleaning solutions and other common materials used in businesses b) The type of uses that would be permitted (office, retail or residential) in the 2nd story addition (or in expanded or a new building as a result of the zone change) will not involve operations that could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment c) As stated above, the likely uses (primarily offices, retail and residential) possible on the subject area will not Involve operations that could emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school d) According to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites List, there are no such sites in the subject area No impact would occur e) The protect will not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the protect site as the maximum permissible height of structure is limited to 45 feet and LAX is one -half mile north of the protect site f) The site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip No impact would occur g) The protect will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan as future development (of size and mass as described in the protect description) would only occur on the private properties that are designated and recognized by the City and emergency plans as sites that allow commercial, office and residential development h) The subject site is not adjacent to wildlands or inter -mixed with wildlands Therefore, no loss, injury or death involving wildland fires would occur 8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the protect a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? X b) Substantially degrade groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e g , X the production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been ranted 6 0 11 Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Less than Less Than No Impact including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, to a Significant Significant Significant X manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - Impact With Impact site? Mitigation d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, Incot orated c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, to a X manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or X substantially increase the rate or surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off site? e) Create or contribute runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial X additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g) Place housing within a 100 -year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood X hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would X impede or redirect flood flows? I) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee X or dam? I) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? X 03i 12 Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact as a groundwater recharge area No impact would occur Impact With Impact surrounding area does not contain streams or rivers Therefore, no impact would occur d) (see c above) e) As stated above the project will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or Mitigation alter the size in any manner that would increase runoff The project will not result in runoff that would provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff nor decrease the quality of water, as no changes are foreseen that would alter the quality of the storm water runoff f) (see a above) Incorporated h) (see g above) I) There are no levees or dams in or near the project site And as stated above the site is not within a flood hazard area a) The protect will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements as long as the future construction and operations adhere to all applicable laws regulating water quality and waste discharge standards There is no indication that the protect could reasonably violate such standards No impact would occur b) The project's size would not result in the type of development and density that could substantially deplete groundwater supplies The site is fully developed and covered with asphalt, concrete and buildings, thus it does not currently serve as a groundwater recharge area No impact would occur c) The site is fully developed Any future additions would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on —or off -site The project could not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area as existing runoff flows to gutters and storm drains designed specifically to handle runoff The site and surrounding area does not contain streams or rivers Therefore, no impact would occur d) (see c above) e) As stated above the project will not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems as the 2nd story addition (and possible future additions or new building) will not alter the size in any manner that would increase runoff The project will not result in runoff that would provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff nor decrease the quality of water, as no changes are foreseen that would alter the quality of the storm water runoff f) (see a above) g) The site is not within a 100 -year flood hazard area Therefore, no impact would occur h) (see g above) I) There are no levees or dams in or near the project site And as stated above the site is not within a flood hazard area Therefore, no impact would occur j) Inundation of the site by seiche, tsunami or mudflow is highly unlikely Although the site is approximately 4,000 feet east of the Pacific Ocean, most tsunamis are not likely to impact the site as the elevation of the subject site is 127 feet above sea level Therefore, there is a less than significant impact 9. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project a) Physically divide an established community? X b) Conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) X adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural X community conservation plan? 13 0 .32 Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact conflict with any mitigation measures adopted as part of the Negative Declaration for the Downtown Specific Plan and as Impact With Impact 10 MINERAL RESOURCES Would the protect a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would Mitigation X be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Incorporated a) The protect could not physically divide an established community as the protect involves a 2nd story addition over an existing single -story office building and the potential to increase the size of future development by 2,232 square feet on the C -2 zoned site b) The protect would be in compliance with the General Plan and the zoning ordinance as the zoning ordinance contains provisions for the City to consider a zone change and general plan /specific plan amendments The amendment would not conflict with any mitigation measures adopted as part of the Negative Declaration for the Downtown Specific Plan and as part of the EIR for the General Plan c) The site is not within or near any habitat conservation or natural community conservation plan Therefore, no impact would occur 10 MINERAL RESOURCES Would the protect a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would X be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other X land use plan? a) Should there be a mineral resource on the site that is of value to the region and the residents of the state, the project would not result in the loss of availability of such a resource as no excavation or removal of any minerals is proposed or could result from the protect No impact would occur b) There are no known mineral resources within the subject site or any mineral resource recovery sites delineated on the general plan or specific plan Any oil fields underlying the protect site will not be impacted nor will its availability be limited by the project No impact would occur 11 NOISE Would the protect result in a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or X applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne X vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the protect X vicinity above levels existing without the protect d) A substantially temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in X the protect vicinity above levels existing without the protect e) For a protect located within an airport land use plan, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public X use airport, would the protect expose people residing or working in the protect area to excessive noise levels? f) For a protect within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the protect area to excessive X noise levels? 14 033 Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact b) (see a above) Impact With Impact levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project Similarly, any new addition at the 218 -228 W Grand Avenue property will likely be retail, office (and possibly residential on the 2nd floor) Such uses are not likely to substantially increase the ambient noise levels Therefore, there would be less than significant impacts Mitigation e) The subject site is approximately one mile from the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) The subject site is in the 65 CNEL noise contour, which is not considered a severely impacted noise area No impact would occur f) The site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip No impact would occur 12 POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project Incorporated a) The 2nd story addition at 227 W Grand Avenue will involve construction activities that will be short-term in nature (approximately 4 to 6 months in duration) and will occur only between 7 AM to 6 PM Monday - Saturday as allowed by City regulations In addition, vibration attributable to construction activities is expected to be minimal due to the type of construction equipment generally employed for development of this nature and compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance Therefore, there would be less than significant impacts and no mitigation is required b) (see a above) c) The use of the 2nd floor addition at 227 W Grand Avenue is proposed to be an office however retail and residential uses are also permitted Noise that could be generated from such uses stemming from a floor area that is less than 5,000 square feet will not be at levels that will result in a substantial permanent, temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project Similarly, any new addition at the 218 -228 W Grand Avenue property will likely be retail, office (and possibly residential on the 2nd floor) Such uses are not likely to substantially increase the ambient noise levels Therefore, there would be less than significant impacts d) (see c above) e) The subject site is approximately one mile from the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) The subject site is in the 65 CNEL noise contour, which is not considered a severely impacted noise area No impact would occur f) The site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip No impact would occur 12 POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for X example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction X of replacement housing elsewhere? a) The project at most could result in one additional residential unit than otherwise possible without the project Also, the project could result in approximately 3,000 square feet of additional retail /office space if the C -2 zoned parcel is recycled or 2,232 square feet of additional floor area if the existing building on the C -2 zoned parcel is maintained The size of the project is such that it could not induce substantial population growth in the area b) The project will not displace any existing housing as the site does not contain housing c) The project will not displace substantial numbers of people as the site does not contain housing nor will the project involve demolition of existing businesses 13 PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services a) Fire protection? X b) Police protection? X c) Schools? X d) Parks? X e) Other public facilities? X 15 034 Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact Impact With Impact parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical Mitigation X deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated'? Incorporated b) Does the protect include recreational facilities or require the a — e) The size of the protect is such that it will not necessitate the need for new or physically altered government facilities as the acceptable service ratios will not be affected for all the services listed above, including the County Sanitation District 14 RECREATION a) Would the protect increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical X deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated'? b) Does the protect include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an X adverse physical effect on the environment? a) The potential of one additional unit, the 2nd story addition and approximately 3,000 square feet of additional commercial space could result In additional people who will work or reside at the site However, the number of additional people that is reasonably possible as a result of the protect (and who may use the existing neighborhood or regional parks) will be so few that no substantial physical deterioration is likely to occur should those people use the facilities b) The project does not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities Therefore, no impact would occur 15 TRANS PORTATIONITRAFFIC. Would the protect a) Cause an increase in the traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i e , result in a X substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for X designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety X risks? d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e g , sharp curves or X dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e g farm equipment) e) Result in inadequate emergency access X f) Result In Inadequate parking capacity? X g) Conflict with adopted policies or programs supporting alternative transportation (e g , bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? X 16 035 Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact Impact With Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) The roadways and intersections within the project area currently operate at Level of Service (LOS) A, B and C As evaluated in the Circulation Element of the General Plan, even with the increased density (one residential unit and approximately 3,000 square feet of additional development) plus the 2nd story addition, the roadways and intersections will not experience any significant impacts The maximum amount of PM peak trips that can be generated from the increased density is 38 (worst case scenario) The roadway capacity on Grand Avenue is 31,000 vehicles per day The volume of vehicles projected in the year 2025 is 12,800 between Vista del Mar Boulevard and Main Street and 17,500 between Main Street and Center Street The number of vehicular trips that could be generated by the project will not cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic In addition, the models that forecasted the traffic volume for the year 2025 include increased densities resulting from future anticipated development Therefore, most of the trips attributed to the project are already anticipated by the traffic models The street intersection at Main Street and Grand Avenue is currently at LOS A and it is anticipated to remain at LOS A in 2025 even with the anticipated growth of the project area Therefore, the impact will be less than significant b) The nearest CMP designated roadway is Sepulveda Boulevard The traffic study that was prepared for the City's Circulation Element indicates that there will be no significant impact to any CMP routes as the subject area is located almost one mile west of the nearest route c) As stated previously, the project will not result in a change in location of air traffic patterns due to the size and height of the project In addition, the size and density of the project is such that an increase in air traffic levels is not anticipated No impact would occur d) The proposed 2ntl story addition at 227 W Grand Avenue and the potential additional development at 218 -228 W Grand Avenue will not alter the existing vehicular circulation system either on site or off -site on public streets No new driveways are proposed The type of vehicles anticipated to access the sites and surrounding area will be no different than the type of vehicles that will access the site and the surrounding area without the project The anticipated vehicles are personal vehicles requiring a Class C California Driver's license such as cars, pick -up trucks and SUVs Therefore, there will not be a substantial increase in hazards due to a design feature e) The project does not involve any modification to existing roads and driveways that could result in inadequate emergency access No impact would occur f) The redevelopment of the subject site involving the removal of all existing parking spaces and the construction of new buildings to maximum allowable size Is possible with the parking In -lieu fee program, however, It Is very unlikely Most businesses, particularly retail, are not likely to lose existing parking spaces as such an action could reduce the marketability of retail space Having on -site parking is a commodity for retail uses Therefore, loss of all existing parking spaces is not likely It is more likely that additional floor area could be added to the properties at 218 -228 W Grand Avenue and 219 W Grand Avenue (similar to the current proposal involving the 2 n story addition at 227 W Grand Avenue) while the existing parking is maintained The additional on -site parking that would be required for the potential additions at 218 -228 and 219 W Grand Avenue could be offset if the owner(s) elect to pay fees in accordance with the parking in -lieu fee program Fees in -lieu of the number of required parking spaces must be paid to the City before building projects are completed and occupied The City will use the fees to purchase, lease or construct new parking facilities to meet the parking needs of the Downtown Specific Plan area Although the proposed 2nd story addition at 227 W Grand Avenue would result in the payment of fees for 14 parking spaces, (as the proposed development would only provide the existing 14 on -site spaces and 28 are required for the proposed project), adequate parking spaces are available near the project site to accommodate the demand for 14 parking spaces, including potential parking needs resulting from potential additions to the aforementioned properties g) The project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation As less parking will be provided on site, users and visitors of the site will be more likely to take alternative forms of transportation and actually support such policies and plans A lunch time shuttle between the hours of 11 30 a m and 2 15 p m (weekdays) provides alternative transportation to other areas of the City and other public transit routes 17 0 3 G Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Less than Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Impact With Impact facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which Mitigation X could cause significant environmental effects? Inco orated 16 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional X Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which X could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which X could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded X entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which services or may serve the project determined that it has adequate X capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs g) Comply with federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to X solid waste 18 0 3 "1 Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Significant Less than Significant Less Than Significant No Impact b) The wastewater that could be generated by one additional apartment unit, the 2 n story addition and the potential of Impact With Impact c) As stated previously, site drainage will not be altered nor will drainage increase Therefore, the protect will not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities No impact would occur Mitigation day for the potential 3,000 square feet of additional retail space and 187 gallons per day for the one residential unit for a total of 2,592 gallons per day Based on a recent analysis for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development, the estimated consumption of water will be adequately served by current water supplies The impact will be less than significant Incorporated demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments The impact will be less than significant f) The projects could produce approximately 212 pounds of solid waste per day Existing landfills in the area have a) Wastewater generated by the 2nd story addition and any other future additions would be from office, retail and residential uses, for which wastewater are treated by standard (primary, secondary, and tertiary) treatment processes Any new additions or development on the subject area with or without approval of this project must comply with all applicable wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board No significant Impact would occur from the project b) The wastewater that could be generated by one additional apartment unit, the 2 n story addition and the potential of 3,000 square feet of additional office and /or retail use will be negligible and will not result in the construction of new treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects No impact would occur c) As stated previously, site drainage will not be altered nor will drainage increase Therefore, the protect will not require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities No impact would occur d) The estimated water consumption for the protect is 1,235 gallons per day for the 2"d story addition, 1,170 gallons per day for the potential 3,000 square feet of additional retail space and 187 gallons per day for the one residential unit for a total of 2,592 gallons per day Based on a recent analysis for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development, the estimated consumption of water will be adequately served by current water supplies The impact will be less than significant e) As stated in b) above, the wastewater treatment provider has adequate capacity to serve the project's protected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments The impact will be less than significant f) The projects could produce approximately 212 pounds of solid waste per day Existing landfills in the area have sufficient capacity to serve the solid waste disposal needs However, the cumulative effect of solid waste in the region will necessitate new or expanded landfills or further recycling efforts The impact will be less than significant g) There is no indication that the project would not comply with federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to solid waste The type of uses and the type of solid waste that will be generated is anticipated and accommodated with trash bins, enclosures and regular solid waste pick -up No impact would occur 17 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the X number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in X connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or X indirectly? 1g J.)O Issues and Supporting Information Potentially Less than Less than Significant Significant Significant Impact With Impact Mitigation a) The subject parcels proposed for rezoning to DSP are currently developed with surface parking and buildings No fish or wildlife habitat exists on site The proposed 2nd story addition at 227 W Grand Avenue and the potential on the existing C -2 zoned site at 218 -228 W Grand Avenue for a building to be added on or recycled to a size that is approximately 3,000 square feet greater than its current size, will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory No significant Impact would occur and no mitigation measures are required b) The incremental effects of the project are not significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probably future projects The proposed project does not include any significant short-term environmental effects, and therefore would not be detrimental to the achievement of long -term environmental goals No impact would occur Although there are other past, current and probable future projects In the area surrounding the subject site, the project's contribution to cumulative, traffic, air quality and other impact areas would be de minimis (I a environmental conditions would essentially be the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented) No significant impact would occur and no mitigation measures are required c) As noted in the evaluations above, the proposed project would not result In any significant Impacts Thus, the proposed project would not have the potential to result in substantial adverse effects on human beings No significant impact would occur and no mitigation measures are required Source List City of El Segundo Subdivision and Zoning Code City of El Segundo General Plan and supporting traffic counts City of El Segundo Downtown Specific Plan Downtown Specific Plan Negative Declaration /Initial Study Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC's) Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese List) AQMD Air Quality Analysis Guidance Handbook Final Environmental Impact Report for Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development Assignment of Amalgamated System Sewage Generation Factors to County Use Codes P \Planning & Budding Safety\PROJECTS \626- 650\EA- 645 \EA645 Initial Study Checklist doc 20 039 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT B General Plan Amendment Text 3 Land Use Element Proposed Land Use Plan Northwest Quadrant The northwest quadrant of the City has the most varied mix of uses within the City All of the City's residential units, the Downtown area, the Civic Center, and the older industrial area of Smoky Hollow, are located in this quadrant The 1992 Plan retains the three residential designations found on the old Plan single - family, two - family, and multi - family, plus a new designation of Planned Residential Development The Plan shows 357 2 acres of single - family, 57 4 acres of two - family, 119 3 acres of multi - family and 5 7 acres of planned residential development This includes the re- designation of Imperial Avenue School, which is no longer used for educational purposes, from Public Facility to Planned Residential Development The total number of dwelling units projected by the Plan is 7,674 One of the major goals of the 1992 Plan is to preserve the residential neighborhoods (Ord 1209, GPA 93 -1, 11/2/93, Ord 1244, 2/6/96, Ord 1272, GPA 97 -1, 6/17/97, Ord 1279, 10/7/97) The Smoky Hollow area, which houses many of the City's older industrial uses, has been designated Smoky Hollow Mixed -Use, in recognition of the existing Smoky Hollow Specific Plan The Specific Plan allows a combination of industrial, retail, office, and residential uses The Smoky Hollow area is approximately 92 2 acres (Ord 1272, GPA 97 -1, 6/17/97, Ord 1279, 10/7/97) The Downtown area is designated as Downtown Commercial (8-88 4 acres) and Downtown Specific Plan (2-826 3 acres), where existing uses are already of a community- serving nature There are also 7-47 0 acres designated for Neighborhood Commercial uses along Grand and Imperial Avenues and at Mariposa and Center Streets These have been designated only where there are existing neighborhood - serving commercial uses (Ord 1279, 10/7/97, Ord 1319, GPA 99 -2, 8/1/00) The public schools, private schools, Library, and other public uses are all shown as Public Facilities The Civic Center is included in the Downtown Specific Plan area In addition, each of the existing public parks are designated as such The open space areas under utility transmission corridors and the preserve for the Blue Butterfly are designated as Open Space (Ord 1319, GPA 99 -2, 8/1/00) The areas designated for parking on the Plan include public- and privately - owned lots which are necessary to serve existing businesses and the Downtown area The southwest corner of Sepulveda Boulevard and Imperial Avenue is designated Corporate Office (17 8 ac) allowing a mix of office uses, similar to what exists there now, with retail in the lobby There are General Commercial uses indicated along Sepulveda Boulevard, where there are existing commercial uses including the Hacienda Hotel There is also one General Commercial area along Imperial Avenue, where the Crown Sterling Suites Hotel now exists v�U CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. Pape 1 of 1 EXHIBIT C 1992 General Plan Summary of Existing Trends Buildout Land Use Category Acres DweHing Units Souare Footaee Single- Family Residential 357.2 2,858 — Two-Family Residential 574 934 — Planned Residential 57 65 — Multi- Family Residential 1197 3,389 — eighborhood Commercial _ --1 7.0 85 ■ 09Teee 96,909 Downtown Commercial 8 -8 8.4 18 ' 83 T 3 -28376 , 328 General Commercial 44.3 — 1,930,000 Corporate Office 211.2 — 12,351,000 Commercial Center 85.8 850.000 - Smoky Hollow 94.1 268 2,019,454 Urban Mixed -Use North 232.5 — 13,166,010 Urban Mixed -Use South 70.6 — 3,997,936 124th Street Specific Plan 3 9 1 73,530 Aviation Specific Plan 54 — 66,000 Downtown Specific Plan -23-8 26.3 232 1,137,030 Corporate Campus Specific Plan 46.5 — 2,550,000 Parking 11.8 — — Light Industrial 356.1 — 18,529,000 Heavy Industrial . 1, 001.0 — — Public Facilities 87.9 — — Federal Government 90.6 — — Open Space 78.3 — — Parks 500 — — Street & Railroad R 0 W 442.6 — — Totals 3,4943 1 7,850 56,768,197;, Population Projection 1 17,287 Emstrtq oonaeuwon and scantly Constructed ranomW oommer,=W oemers acid legal ronfonforminp rewalntial uses x derty"s tnar we arnerary hgrw tl++n atno ad q' tine avid we eewgnvmrta in the yen we, not reahstreatty I 00nreried W rrtuea mmrsrvaVresWen" was and DAM bAidngs are esoedde0 to remain for the life of the Plan •. The heavy moustnal ehrun on the ptan ndu0es Me Chavrun Refinery and tormer SourAm C;aldon is Edison Generation Station Am t nose nnaoes nave proa'ssrng eoupmerd uW tames ranter iron ounrnnps and are expeoeo to remain for the Yoe of the Ptah 7heratere ro asr1imatao bwdrtp tot are footage is snows Swm, City or El Segundo Planrsng Department and The Lightfoot Ptarvurq Group Amendments Ord 1209 110193 Ord 1244 2/6198 Ord 1272 6/17197 Ord 1279 10r7197 Ord 1309 8117199 Ord 1314 1717199 Ord 1309 8/17199 Ord 1314 12!7/99 Ord 1319 8112000 Ord 1345 1=2 Ord 13B2 311105 I CITY OF EL SEGUNDO • GENERAL PLAN I 1992 General Plan exhtb/t Summary of Existing Trends Buildout LU -3 041 1 I city of Los Angeles N V\ \ vA W SV� LAND USE DESIGNATIONS RESIDENTIAL O SINGLE FAMILY 0 TWO-FAMILY ® MULTI FAMILY O PLANNED RES DEV COMMERCIAL - NEIGHBORHOOD COML DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL ® GENERAL COMMERCIAL F 7 CORPORATEOFFICE SMOKY HOLLOW URBAN MIXED-USE NORT URBAN MIXED -USE SOOT _ PARKING INDUSTRIAL UGHT INDUSTRIAL - HEAVY INDUSTRIAL PUBLIC USE O PUBLIC FACIUTY FEDERALGOVT OPEN SPACE ® OPEN SPACE Em PARKS \I 1 1\ 1 \\ 1' \ II I' I I, l li l I I I li I' I i i I 1 I„ SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRICTS \ 124TH SPECIFIC PLAN AVIATION SPECIFIC PL DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PL A SPECIFIC CAMPUS C PLAIN \\\ \L\ \ `\ TRAIN STATIONS \ EXISTING GREEN UNE STATION \\ \\aq wccw�ave V 3 I I � I HOL Y AVE i H IH el W Q �O G U �7 Z i U f1 t* EL SEGUNDO BLVD m Feet 0 100 200 300 400 a Imp T I ^0�� I � r � z n 4 t m Z z 0 z GRAND AVE _,.t ( j --- Legend //�J� • s ®Nelghborhootl Commercial Downtown Commemol y, -Heavy Manutadunng r "r - •� III■ open BPaca Public Facilities _Single - Famiy Residential i/ // t ""} �r`M• A-" Tva-Family Residential v VIII( Multi- Family Residential L. "'� --� �'"'��'•' ` Small Bualness Specific Plan Districts r- / ; -° •+ Downtown Swific Plan Boundary Main Street District Mom Street Transitional Detnd ®NOM Richmond Street Dislnd Grand Avenue Dlstnd +4� Richmond Street Dminct G • �'1 West Grand Avenue Transitional District EXHIBIT E PROPOSED LAND USE MAP City of BI Segundo IMF 044 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. _ Exhibit F CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE No. 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 fA*six 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 560,000 045 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 8257 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 Building, (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 October 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 MARIPOSA AVE PINEAVE EXHIBIT 3 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN City of El Segundo 046 � H + w + EXHIBIT 3 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN City of El Segundo 046 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 October 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 Cafeput 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 cuss- 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 11. 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- 4 047 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 the west of the Specific Plan area there are few parcels zoned Neighborhood Commercial on Grand Avenue and Parking (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 048 i MARIPOSA AVE PINE AVE - -- ■ mownI now ■iii. -i''� _to—No GRAND AVE ! Surrounding Area Zoning �, Neighborhood Commercial (G2) ©Downtown Commercial (C -RS) Heavy Manufacturing (M-2) Open Space (()-S) I .... _ P L Public (P) FaalNea (P -F) .._._ — FRANKLINAVE _ Single - Family ResMenirel (R -t) r ( Two-Family Rewdent,al (R -2) t i � MuIM1- Family Residential (R3) _ Smell Business (SB) SpecMic Plan Districts i M Downtown Specific Plan Boundary • i • Main Street Transitional ' i f• Mom Street and Sltreet D seta E I + � North Richmond Street District �� Grand Avenue District Richmond Street District 0 '100 - Oeet West Grand Avenue Transroonal Distnct EXHIBIT 4 ZONING MAP City of El Segnedo 0410 it 2' Q C ov ■ mownI now ■iii. -i''� _to—No GRAND AVE ! Surrounding Area Zoning �, Neighborhood Commercial (G2) ©Downtown Commercial (C -RS) Heavy Manufacturing (M-2) Open Space (()-S) I .... _ P L Public (P) FaalNea (P -F) .._._ — FRANKLINAVE _ Single - Family ResMenirel (R -t) r ( Two-Family Rewdent,al (R -2) t i � MuIM1- Family Residential (R3) _ Smell Business (SB) SpecMic Plan Districts i M Downtown Specific Plan Boundary • i • Main Street Transitional ' i f• Mom Street and Sltreet D seta E I + � North Richmond Street District �� Grand Avenue District Richmond Street District 0 '100 - Oeet West Grand Avenue Transroonal Distnct EXHIBIT 4 ZONING MAP City of El Segnedo 0410 IV. SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRICTS F. West Grand Avenue Transitional District (200 Block of West Grand Avenue from Concord Street to the alley % block west of Richmond Street) The West Grand Avenue Transitional District encompasses the %= block immediately east of Concord Street on Grand Avenue between Concord Street and the alley west of Richmond Street This area is seen as a gateway from the west entry of the City of El Segundo to the Downtown core This district is one half of an acre in size The proposed West Grand Avenue Transitional District has neighborhood office, retail and service uses that complement the existing Downtown businesses in the area The district is bounded by the Richmond Avenue Districts to the east, multi - family envisioned for the Downtown Specific Plan serving neighborhood needs 0 50 GIs P��—,W Mq_DISTRICTS_2 —d 051 _ MARIPOSA AVE p}p}jj a _Q Q U Q PINEAVE I HOLLYAVE t o�i m � F rn I 2 D Z V) " rc i O i 2, > O U �T GRAND AVE ] w FRANKLIN AVE L11� 111.d j L` Specific Plan Districts _ _ �y Downtown Specific Plan Boundary _ i ,• }"P Strategic Sites Main Street District i " ti ,� ---µ• Main Street Transitional District ® North Richmond Street District Grand Avenue District Richmond Street Distnct EL SEGUNDO BLVD ++------ •--------- -•-- --- .__,.._.._._ West Grand Avenue Transitional District m Feet 0 100 200 300 400 EXHIBIT 5 SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRICTS AND STRATEGIC SITES City of BI Segundo GIs P��—,W Mq_DISTRICTS_2 —d 051 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- residents, local employees and visitors to the City i) Retail sales and services ii) Restaurants iii) Recreational uses iv) Government offices v) Banks vi) General offices vu) Medical- dental offices viii) Clubs and halls ix) Theaters x) Schools 200 square feet also require an Administrative Use Permit b Above street -front level i) u) w) as provided by Section V , Administration. 3 Permitted Accessory Uses - a Any use customarily incidental to a permitted use b Outdoor storage, subiect to compliance with El Segundo Municipal Code & 15 -2 -8 Screening 4 Uses Subiect to an Administrative Use Permit - (El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -22) a On -site sale and consumption of alcohol at restaurants 9 0 5 b Off -site sale of alcohol at retail establishments d Video arcades with three or fewer machines 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 - All other uses which are not Permitted Uses, Permitted Accessory Uses, Uses Subiect to an Administrative Use Permit or Uses Subiect to a Conditional Use Permit are prohibited Prohibited uses include, without limitation 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 7 Site Development Standards - a General Provisions i) All uses must be conducted within a fully enclosed building, except the outdoor Transportation Demand Management (TDM), must be met must be met v) All provisions 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 may not are made at the front and streetside property lines (,;6'3 10 front and streetside property lines d Setbacks i) Front and Streetside - Setbacks between a building and the front and streetside reytew A minimum of 25 feet is required for new lots f Budding Area - (Density): 0 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 n) 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 projects i Landscaping i Parking and Loading 8 Non- conformities- 11 I' J 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 - This district serves as a gateway to the Downtown core Standards for this 2 Permitted Uses - a First floor street -front level, with a minimum budding depth of 25 feet i) Retail sales and services ii) Restaurants m) Recreational uses iv) Government offices vi) General offices vii) Medical- dental offices viii) Outdoor uses including dining, gathering areas (such as outdoor party 200 square feet also require an Administrative Use Permit b Above street -front level i All uses above in subsection (a) as provided by Section V. Administration 3 Permitted Accessory Uses - a Any use customarily incidental to a permitted use b Outdoor storage, subiect to compliance with El Segundo Municipal Code 6 15 -2 -8. Screening Noise and Vibration Regulations d Other similar accessory uses approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by Section V Administration 4 Uses Subiect to an Administrative Use Permit - (El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -22) a On -site sale and consumption of alcohol at restaurants Dining Areas d Video arcades with three or fewer machines e Other similar uses approved by the Director of Planning and Budding Safety, as provided by Section V. Administration 12 0 :J I) 5 Uses Subject to a Conditional Use Permit - (EI Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -23) a Bars b Bed and Breakfast Inns 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 Dnve -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 - wu) a General Requirements 0 All uses must be conducted within a fully enclosed budding, except the outdoor Transportation Demand Management (TDM) must be met. iii) All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -17, Emplover /Occupant Transportation Systems Management (TSM), must be met iv) All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -2. General Provisions, must be met A minimum of 3.500 square feet is required for new lots. c Height point of the roof vertically to the existing grade directly below iii) Side —10' if abutting a residential zone iv) Rear —10' feet Opt, 13 e Lot Width A minimum of 25 feet is required for new lots f Building Area - (Density) 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 sidewalks, or modes of transportation, and between buildings for multi - building projects 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 8& 15 -21 -6 B and C apply can be replaced with a similar or less intense non - conforming commercial use 14 0 J; 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) This block is transitional in character and Includes retail uses servinq the community and Photo 38 — Retail Uses Photo 39 — Commercial /Office Uses 1 GENERAL a All common standards pertaining to the Main Street District must apply 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 adioining property 3 West Frontage — to the south P \Planning & Budding Safety\PROJECTS\EA626- 650 \EA 645 \Counai Docs \CC Mtg 10405 \EA645 CC Exhibit DSP Supplement 10 -4- 05 doc i58 15 ORDINANCE NO. 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, de E The Planning and Budding Safety Department completed its review and scheduled the public hearing regarding the application before the Planning Commission for August 25, 2005; F 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 resumed the hearing, considered the information provided by City staff, and adopted Resolution No 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 J This Ordinance and its findings are made based upon the testimony and evidence presented to the Council at its September 20, 2005 hearing and its October 4, 2005 hearing including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Planning and Budding 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 just 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 % block west of Richmond Street on the 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 CGfl -2- 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 building 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 -foot 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 building 30 -foot high as compared to the 45 -foot height limit in the C -RS zone 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 -3- {; 6 i uses SECTION 3 Zone Change Findings Based on the factual findings of this Ordinance, the proposed Zone Change is necessary to cant' 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 specific plan areas which function as the zoning code for specific areas Smoky Hollow Specific Plan, There are four (4) classes of use zones intended to be used within the boundaries of the Smoky Hollow specific plan These zones include SB - Small business zone MM - Medium manufacturing zone -4- �i . 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 We -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 -T;e� ^'o!age -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 shal4-be -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 October 4, 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, 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 -5- U i 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 G. ( g 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 A Karl H Berger Assistant City Attorney P \Planning & Budding Safety\PROJECTS \626 - 650 \Ea - 645 \Council Docs \CC Mtg 10405 \EA -645 CC Ord 10 -4 -05 doe -7- ti , GIW pyrtjgla�ri�ypaPbp 2GNING m mM MARIPOSA AVE 7.� PINE AVE _ K {C` — HOLLY AVE VI L L tt- o a: I (_ 0 Z i y.• Q �. GRAND AVE _ ♦ t '1'f Surrounding Area Zoning It `yf� ® Neighbomood C nnaraal (C -2) Downtown Commercial (C -RS) Z a - Heavy Manulactunng (M-2) Open Space (0 -S) Parking (P) Public FaolNes (P-F) i FRANKLIN AVE y ''''���-TTT /� /( /( //r'''���--- rn ;/ �/ / /' E�,� - -� j { y Smgla -Family Reamenhal(R -1) k� •'lr , Two - Family ResMenbal (R-2) { � MuPo -Family Realdenhal (R3) - Small Baseness (SB) y Specific Plan Districts iff t MDowntown Spectflc Plan Boundary y. �L.......�.I. Mao S reel Distinct Mam Street Trensleonel District North Richmond Street District 1L b...' Grand Avenue District Rchmond Street Dim¢t Feet 0 100 200 300 400 "� West Grand Avenue Transitional District ` . y EXHIBIT A ZONING MAP City of EI Eel fcusdo GIW pyrtjgla�ri�ypaPbp 2GNING m mM CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. _ Exhibit F CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE No. 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 24-626 3 acres in size, while the G RS Zene 16 appFaximately 30 8 aGre6 IR 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 #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 budding 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 06 7 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 8287 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 chance adopted in October 2005, the western boundary of the Downtown Specific Plan was expanded to include several properties on the north and south sides of West Grand 2 068 r z R' MARIPOSA AVE PINE AVE HOLLY AVE m 0 s z2 H N kilow 0 y r a a z J W U a W r N 2 a r H a 2 W- a FRANKLIN AVE I w� EXHIBIT 3 Ambk DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN City of El Segundo fa J ..d 06� 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 in October 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 Cateput 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- 4 070 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 the west of the Specific Plan area there are few parcels zoned Neighborhood Commercial on Grand Avenue and Parking (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 5 071 MARIPOSA AVE I I PINE AVE I 1 EL SEGUNDO BLVD �7F 0 100 200 300 400 EXHIBIT 4 ZONING MAP City of El Segundo ij f w, y - q, ©�I .. aY ♦ fit.': O 4 D ar f• i,; q ag' a it �;ku�i a r w k 4 � FY J � e,h z a �, ice, a a. t L GRANDAVE PmAl, �F..�...,., t.-- lr� I _i Surrounding Area Zoning ® Neighborhood Commercal (G2) © Dovmlown Commercial (C -RS) - Heavy Manufacturing (M -2) - Open Space (O-S) - Parking (P) Public Faalibes (P -F) Single- Family Residential (R -7) -ir -Faru)y Resident.] (R -2) Multl-Family Residential (R -3) Small Business (SB) Specific Plan Districts Downtown Specdic Plan Boundary Main Street District Main Street Transibural Dnanct North RicMnond Street Distnd Grand Avenue District OZZ Richmond Street District ['__ I' Waal Grand Avenue TransAonal Duend 072 IV. SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRICTS F. West Grand Avenue Transitional District (200 Block of West Grand Avenue from Concord Street to the alley % block west of Richmond Street) The West Grand Avenue Transitional District encompasses the % block immediately east of Concord neighborhood office, retail and service uses that complement the existing Downtown businesses in the area The district is bounded by the Richmond Avenue Districts to the east, multi - family 7 0 113 Gla4repy�ygwinrypSPpp DIamICTS_2—m 0 7.1 MARIPOSA A_ VE- +%--- ...... - --�—+ z rc a W =I. PINE AVE { HOLLY AVE - ii• ! i I i FN r~e N Q O O H Z W 0 O Z z GRANDAVE t a W p t FRANKLIN AVE _____ Specific Plan Distracts Downtown Spect is Plan Boundary Strategic Sites _ k _ Main Street District Main Street Transitional District North Richmond Street District _ r Grand Avenue Distract Rchmond Street District _ EL SEGUNDO BLVD West Grand Avenue Transitional District m Feet 0 100 200 300 400 EXHIBIT 5 SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRICTS AND STRATEGIC SITES City of BI Segundo Gla4repy�ygwinrypSPpp DIamICTS_2—m 0 7.1 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- 2 Permitted Uses- m) Recreational uses iv) Government offices v) Banks vi) General offices vu) Medical- denta( offices vin) Clubs and halls ix) Theaters x) Schools xi) Outdoor uses includinq dining, gathenng areas (such as outdoor party areas), newsstands, coffee carts and flower stands, up to 200 square feet in area, subiect to design review and compliance with El Segundo Municipal Code 6 15 -2 -16, Outdoor Dining Areas Outdoor uses that are greater than 200 square feet also require an Administrative Use Permit. xii) Other similar pedestrian oriented retail- service uses and offices approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by Section V , Administration u) Business tenanttowner- occupied residential units iii) Other similar uses approved by the Director of PI Screening Noise and Vibration Regulations d. Other similar accessory uses approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by Section V Administration 4. Uses Subiect to an Administrative Use Permit - (El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -221 a On -site sale and consumption of alcohol at restaurants 9 07 5 b Off -site sale of alcohol at retail establishments design review and compliance with El Segundo Municipal Code 6 15 -2 -16, Outdoor Dining Areas Provided by Section V, Administration 5. Uses Subject to a Conditional Use Permit - (El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -23) a. Bars 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 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 7 Site Development Standards - a General Provisions i) All uses must be conducted within a fully enclosed building, except the outdoor uses detailed under Permitted. Accessory, Administrative, and Conditional Uses, and Outdoor Recreational Uses it) All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -16, Developer Transportation Demand Management (TDM), must be met jv) All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -2, General Provisions b. Lot Area A minimum of 3,500 square feet is required for new lots. the peak or the highest point of the roof vertically to the existing grade at the front and streetside property lines 10 07 6 d Setbacks i) Front and Streetside - Setbacks between a budding and the front and streetside Property lines on the street level are prohibited except pedestrian - oriented plazas review u) Side —Zero setback allowed but 10' if abutting residential zone w) Rear —10' feet when abutting residential zone e Lot Width A minimum of 25 feet is required for new lots f Building Area - (Density) i) Commercial — The total net floor area of all buildings, excluding residential floor 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 voiects i Landscaping All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code § 15 -2 -14, Landscaping, and Section k. Signs All requirements of Section VIII, Design Standards must be met 8 Non- conformities- 11 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- 2 Permitted Uses- n) Restaurants w) Recreational uses iv) Government offices w) General offices ix) Other similar pedestrian oriented retail- service uses and offices approved by the Director of Planning and Budding Safety, as provided by Section V Administration b Above street -front level i All uses above in subsection (a) as provided by Section V, Administration. 3 Permitted Accessory Uses - a Any use customarily incidental to a permitted use b Outdoor storage, subject to compliance with El Segundo Municipal Code 6 15 -2 -8, Screening c Indoor entertainment, dancing, and amplified sound, subject to compliance with El Seaundo Municipal Code Chapter 4 -8, Entertainment Regulations and Chapter 7 -2, Noise and Vibration Regulations d Other similar accessory uses approved by the Director of Planning and Budding Safety, as provided by Section V Administration 12 678 b Bed and Breakfast Inns 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 Dnve -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 - viii) a General Requirements i) All uses must be conducted within a fully enclosed budding, except the outdoor uses detailed under Permitted, Accessory, Administrative, and Conditional Uses, w) All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 15 -17, 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 may not point of the roof vertically to the existing grade directly below d Setbacks iv) Rear — 10' feet 13 () 7 ) 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 0 7 1 0 Commeraal — The total net floor area of all buildings, excludmg residential floor area, cannot exceed the total net square footage of the property, or a Floor Area allowed g Walls and Fences All requirements of El Segundo Mumcmal Code Chapter 15 -2, General Provisions, must be met sidewalks, or modes of transportation, and between buildings for multi - budding projects I Landscaping All requirements of El Segundo Municipal Code 6 15 -2 -14. Landscapna. and Section VIII, Design Standards, must be met k Signs All requirements of Section VIII, Design Standards must be met Buddjngs and Uses, . except ESMC ", 15 -21 -6 B and C apply b Except as otherwise provided, non - conforming uses occurring in a budding can only be replaced with a conforming use c If a budding, or a portion of a building was used by non - conforming commercial use 14 080 VI. DESIGN STANDARDS approaching Downtown EI Segundo from the west Photo 38 — Retail Uses Photo 39 — Commercial /Office Uses a The north frontage of the parcels on the north side of Grand Avenue must be c A landscaped buffer zone of 10 feet with mature trees and shrubs is required between the District and the adoring property 3 West Frontage — a The west frontage of the parcel on the south side of Grand Avenue must be to the south 4 South Frontage — a The south frontage of the parcel on the south side of Grand Avenue must be along the south side of the District P 1Plannmg & Building SafetyAPROJECTStEA626 -65MEA 6451Counal Docs= Mtg 104051EA645 CC Exhibit DSP Supplement 10-4- 05 doc 15 081 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 4, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING- Unfinished Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION. Consideration and possible action on an overview of the City of El Segundo's emergency readiness and capability Fiscal Impact None RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION' 1) Receive and file an overview of the City's emergency readiness and capability, 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION This report provides an overview of the City of El Segundo's existing disaster threats, outlines actions the City has taken to prepare fordisasters, describes current capabilities, and outlines recommendations that may be needed to Improve the City's overall emergency response readiness and capability A variety of state and federal statutes provide the City's basic authority for conducting emergency operations following a proclamation of a Local Emergency, State of Emergency or State of War Emergency by the Governor and /or appropriate local authorities, consistent with the provisions of the statute The El Segundo Municipal Code provides the statutory basis for emergency management under Title 2, Chapter 2 (Emergency Services) The Municipal Code identifies the City Manager as the Director of the Office of Emergency Services, the power and duties of the Director, the "Emergency Organization" of the City, the establishment of responsibility for the emergency plan and line of succession, and penalties for violation of the ordinance The City of El Segundo has adopted a comprehensive Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) which Is mandated by local, state and federal law The local emergency plans are by law, extensions of the California Emergency Plan Continued on next page ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS None FISCAL IMPACT Operating Budget, None Amount Requested None Account Number: N/A Project Phase, N/A Appropriation Required _ Yes X No ORIGINATED DATE: 09122105 Kevin S Smith, Acting Fire Chief REVIEW DATE 2 Je , ity Manager Ian BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION (continued) Page 2 The City of El Segundo EOP identifies a variety of legal statutes pertaining to development of the plan, a detailed threat assessment, and covers the four tenets of "all hazard" emergency management preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation The EOP 1 Establishes the emergency organization (all city employees and contractors), 2 Assigns tasks, specifies policies and procedures; and 3 Provides for coordination of planning efforts of the various emergency staff utilizing the Standardized Emergency Management System Threat Assessment The City of El Segundo has identified several mayor threats (not ranked) 1 Seismic Activity - Major Earthquake 2 Tsunami (near source and oceanic) 3. Hazardous Material Incident 4. Pipeline Emergency (Jet Fuel, Oil) 5. Severe Weather (Tornado) 6. Transportation: (Aviation Incident, Commercial Transportation Incident) 7. Civil Unrest 8. National Security Emergency 9 Domestic Terrorism (chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear - CBRN) 10 Fire or conflagration 11 Public Health Emergency (influenza pandemic, SARS, etc.) Most likely scenarios to have a significant impact (subjective analysis) 1 Earthquake of significant magnitude (sustained greater than 6.0) 2 Domestic terrorism attack (chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear - CBRN) 3 Hazardous Material Release or Pipeline Emergency (Refinery) Actions Taken by the Citv to Prepare for Disasters Staff conducts "all hazards" training on a regular basis, particularly personnel in the fire and police departments who train regularly on search and rescue, mass - casualty, hazardous materials response, civil unrest, law enforcement tactical operations, and incident command The City's Emergency Services Coordinator in 2006 will complete the certification process for "Certified Emergency Manager", the only national certification available in the United States The City's Emergency Operations Center (EOC) has evolved into a functional support facility The City conducted functional EOC exercises in years 2000 through 2003 to establish EOP policy and procedure In 2004 the City focused on terrorism readiness and preparation The City has a full -time Emergency Services Coordinator The Emergency Services Coordinator is responsible for coordinating activities related to managing, recovering from, and preparing for disasters The City has established a business and industry emergency preparedness committee that 083 meets regularly to discuss planning, coordination, and com Meets regularly a town have Page 3 established their own preparedness and burs ness continuit The County of Los Y of the large exercises Angeles and State of California Y plans since 1999 related to statewide a have conducted Joint annual EOC tabletop broterrorism coordination El Segundo has emergency medical services mutual aid and participated in these events annually. The City has improved its mobile and portable radios Publ e and ty communications system The City has replaced its correspond with whatever meet current Compliance standards thearadios California and the westen United States. capability 9 digital, developed by the various communication entities in The City established a low a resource to alert the P °werAM radio station community in the event of airs of an emergency (AM 104 various in 2003. This capability disaster y and Provides emergency on to des y instruction to the The City Is acquiring an Emergency gency Command vehicle to be capabilities that a vehicle emergency will function as a mobile command used by Area "G" Police and an interconnect switch services radios, Post and have allowing for wide area interoPera phone, mobile data computers The City has issued a perability , hazard mitigation I grant proposal to cover the costs related to the development expected to be a pan. The grant proposal has been accepted the Git ' approved in May of 2006, pted and the final of a local City's strategy in all areas of hazard identification rid itigation plan serves as la map is zoning, mixed use, business and residential occu is required b mitigation strategies related to grant funding federal statute in order for the City and re p paring for disasters The Plan y to maintain eligibility for hazard mitigation The City annually coordinates with special needs. with Southern California Edison to identify and assist residents y s Information Systems Division (ISD Of the City's electronic data is ) has established a s ability to establish a maintained off site. T system in which a co Program that would back up emergency he Division is currently PY °tall Progr m t enable the City to y website on request. ISD is also currently testing a Additionally, the City has the ability o transmintain it information nd utilize a a Direct TV Internet connection located in the EOC disaster notification email list. uninterru l sin er emergency through the use e ptible power supplies which provide All servers and most workstations generators to begin operation power for at least 10 minutes which allows foh he The City's main computer All servers are mounted in seismically rated equipment thick reinforced concrete walls was originally as a fallout shelter and has one foot Y desl ned and has o racks The City has provided Community approximately 50 members of business Emergency Response Tea CERT training is currently funded throw and Indust m (CERT Chevron provides a si 9h the Fire Department's and an additional 50 area tresidents o extinguishers gnificant contribution to the training guishers for the fire training Public education account g cOmponent. Y providing use of their facility and 084 BACKGROUND R DISCUSSION (continued): Page 4 Current Capabilities The City of El Segundo has expanded its capabilities to provide public safety services and emergency operations support since 9/11 Public safety first responders have been re- defined under Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD #8), and the National Response Plan (NRP) "First Responder" is now defined as fire, police, emergency manager, emergency medical services (EMS), public works, and any other personnel that provide support to emergency operations, which includes debris management and shelter operations The Fire Department currently functions with 18 suppression members on duty at all times The Police Department functions with up to 25 officers on duty dependent on time of day and scheduling Both agencies have the ability to access mutual aid assistance from Area "G," region, state, and federal resources depending on the nature and extent of the emergency. No municipality would be able to manage a disaster incident alone It would require an integrated response from many agencies to coordinate a disaster incident The Fire Department has operational capability for fire suppression, emergency medical services, medium level urban search and rescue (USAR), hazardous materials (operational level), fire prevention, and administers the City's emergency management capabilities, recovery, and mitigation strategies The Police Department has operational capability for crowd control, investigation, patrol, traffic control, communications, and advanced tactical procedures Public Works has operational capability in managing potable drinking water systems, sewage and wastewater, debris clearance, clearing and blocking roads, and supporting essential service facilities The Administrative Services Department provides primary coordination of the City's functions as it relates to Finance and Administration, and tracks costs associated with a disaster Public information and warning systems are managed primarily by Fire, Police, and Emergency Management in coordination with the City Manager and City Council The City has the ability to make emergency notifications through use of the Community Alert Network (CAN), AM radio 1040, and public address systems on City vehicles The City also has a communications vehicle which is operated by the Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES) Secondary support is provided by the Community Cable and ISD personnel through cable TV and the Internet via an emergency web page The Planning and Building Safety Department has operational capability for safety and assessment of buildings damaged in an incident, authority to deny or limit entry into structures Planning also has the engineering approval and inspection authority for sites used and approved for shelters and operational support of the information collected and processed in the EOC The Recreation and Parks Department has the capability to support transportation needs in a limited capacity and supports Care and Shelter under the Emergency Operations Plan 085 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION (continued): Recommendations for Improvement Disaster Council Page 5 The City of El Segundo has an established Disaster Council under Ordinance (SSMC 2 -2 -4) that is empowered to review and establish emergency plans, policies, and procedures in coordination with community leaders and emergency management organizations The City should consider implementation of the Disaster Council or other committee to review the City's emergency readiness and capability Community Preparedness Recent events have reinforced that there is a need for the community to be prepared to sustain themselves and their families for a period of 72 hours or more The City should consider implementing a public education campaign to reiterate the community's responsibility for ensuring self - readiness and preparedness Additionally, the community should be encouraged to take steps to obtain training in emergency preparedness, Public Warning System Past use of the City's current public warning system components have demonstrated that the system may not provide adequate warning capability to the community in the event of a disaster The City should consider the use of other types of warning systems to be used in conjunction with systems already in place to ensure widespread warning and notification capabilities Shelters / Safe Refuge Areas The City does not own sites that meet public shelter standards The only shelters identified in the City's emergency plan are school sites within the El Segundo Unified School District The City should consider alternative methods of being able to provide emergency shelter The City currently has limited ability to provide areas of safe refuge for the public in City parks The City should consider alternative sites to serve as safe refuge areas Ordinance Protecting Against Excessive Price Increases Recent disasters in the United States have demonstrated the potential for abuse through excessive price increases The City should consider establishing an ordinance that would limit private entities from inflicting excessive price increases for fuel, water, groceries, ice, etc, that become essential needs in an emergency This issue has been referred to the City Attorney's office for research and review Backup Emergency Operations Center (EOC) The City of El Segundo does not have a backup EOC or facility that could support backup EOC designation The City should consider incorporation of a backup EOC into a new City facility constructed in the future One standard of backup EOC's is that they are placed far enough away from the existing facility should it be affected from environmental threats from hazardous materials il$6 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION (continued): Page 6 Current Action Items City staff will conduct an exercise to test the effectiveness of the City's public warning and notification systems. The exercise will be conducted by the end of the year 2005 Based on the analysis of the exercise, staff will identify alternatives and potential costs and impacts for Council consideration Staff will conduct a functional exercise of the EOC that will include Council participation in March of 2006 The exercise will be developed by an exercise design team made up of members of each City department and headed by the Emergency Services Coordinator The City's Emergency Operations Plan is currently under revision It was last revised in August 2003 The newly revised plan is scheduled to be released in August of 2006 The new plan will include lessons learned from City exercises as well as lessons learned from reports on the emergency services response to events such as Hurricane Katrina. The revised plan will also include hazard specific plans such as Tsunami response and other plans that are currently being developed through ongoing regional planning efforts The Emergency Services Coordinator will meet with residents of Park Vista on October 4th to present information on emergency readiness and preparedness The Fire Department will establish a schedule for CERT training for El Segundo residents for 2006 The Fire Department will also conduct CERT refresher training for existing CERT members in 2006 The Fire Department will conduct outreach activities to identify residents with special needs that have not been previously identified The outreach activities will include placing articles in local publications, posting notices on local cable channels, and coordination with local community service agencies (1 8 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE. October 4, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Committees, Boards and Commissions AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding a presentation by members of the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Committee (ASNAC) regarding comments submitted by the Committee on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the LAX South Airfield Improvement Project RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Receive and file report and comments from members of ASNAC, 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The members of ASNAC submitted two sets of comments responding to the Draft Environmental Impact Report issued by Los Angeles World Airports for the proposed South Airfield Improvement Project (SAIP) Representatives from ASNAC will make a brief presentation to the City Council regarding the comments Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the written comments submitted by ASNAC ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Comments submitted by members of ASNAC on the Draft EIR for the proposed South Airfield Improvement Project at LAX FISCAL IMPACT, N/A Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: _Yes _ No 088 Kessler, FAA and Hoo, LAWA Sept 14,'05 ES -ASNAC Page 1 DRAFT - DRAFT — Ell Segundo Aviation - Safety and Noise - Abatement Committee — DRAFT - DRAFT In conjunction with El Segundo Residents Association and El Segundo Senior Citizens Club Director of Airport- Neighbor Environmental Studies, 425 Lomita Street, El Segundo, CA 90245 -4054 Phone 310-640 -0891 FAX 310- 322 -3693 E -Mail dedeurwaerder(olmsn corn Mr David B Kessler, AICP U S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration P O Box 92007 Los Angeles, CA 90009 -2007 Subject: REVIEW OF SAIP DRAFT EIR and Los Angeles World Airports Long Range Planning Attention Karen Hoo 7301 World Way West, Room 308 Los Angeles, CA 90045 -5803 Review Committee- El Segundo Aviation Safety and Noise- Abatement Committee 14 September 2005 The El Segundo Aviation Safety and Noise- Abatement Committee (ES- ASNAC) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above - mentioned document The following comments and reactionsare meant as guidance for the City and Federal Lead Agencies to be incorporated in the Final Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report. Pursuant to Public Resources Code S21092 5, please provide the ES -ASNAC with written responses to all comments contained herein before the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report ES -ASNAC would be happy to work with the Lead Agency to address the issues raised and any other questions that may arise. Please contact Professor - Emeritus Charles DeDeurwaerder at 310 -640 -0891 if you have any questions regarding these comments Sincerely Liz Garnholz, Chairperson, ES -ASNAC Comments of the El Segundo Aviation Safety and Noise- Abatement Committee Re The Project Level Tiered Draft Environmental Impact Report for South Airfield Improvement Project, Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) • Key Points are bnfleted! Seventeen findings of Negative and Significant but Unavoidable Impacts (with mostly unsatisfying mitigations proposed), coupled with a controversial proposal to add a central taxiway between South An-field Runways, does not justify moving an outer - runway closer to off - airport residences, thus amplifying airport negative impacts If runway 25L is in poor repair, fix it in place as a qualitative not quantitative improvement Then, develop Palmdale's 17,750 -acres to accommodate new heavier aircraft with significantly less impact than at LAX The economic foundation of the Hahn Master Plan "D" was based on three fallacious assumptions: 1 "traffic routes will remain constant ", 2 "passenger- and -fleet mixes will remain constant ", 3. "technology of terrestrial transportation will remain constant" If LAWA, the LAX staff, and Airlines pilots operated totally in accord with adopted operations policies and recommendations, airfield incursions and off - airport neighbor-complaints would be minimized and the neighbors' quality-of -life could continue to improve • 17 Significant Unavoidable Impacts invalidate the Project proposal! • Fix/modify /improveladjust the airport qualitatively, not quantitatively. "More is not better!" • Operate entirely within adopted operations policies and recommendations! Expanding (shoulder - width) the southernmost runway (25L), and moving it 55' closer to El Segundo would threaten the quality-of -life of most El Segundo residents. The Master Plan says all four runways are currently suited to handle aircraft up to 900,000 lbs. (A loaded A380 weighs 1 -24 -million pounds) Redoing 25L (to 19" -depth concrete and broad shoulders) would make it the only runway specifically suited to handling the loaded A380. Figure F4.2 -28 for "D" in the LAX Master Plan Final EIR (using Year -2000 fleet -mix) shows fewer homes exposed to aircraft noise of 65 CNEL or greater in 2015. If modeling included the A380's in addition to the current mix, it should have shown a significant increase despite the gradual quieting of individual engines. Graphics used for Figures S4 2- 2,4,43,-16, and —17 indicate Alternative D data was essentially the same as for Alternatives C and NA/NP (i a no move of the runway) Why would noise generated in "C" or "NA/NP" indicate greater El Segundo residence impact than for "D "? In Figure S4.2 -17, the L5dB increase- contour should have influenced subsequent noise - contours 2015 Operations- numbers and runway locations were probably the same for all Alternatives FOUL!! The Master Plan suggests that if we move the runway closer to El Segundo, and add more heavy planes, we'll get less noise than if 0 8,c, Kessler, FAA and Hoo, LAWA Sept 14, '05 ES-ASNAC Page 2 we do nothing Of major impact- determination significance, fleet -mix used in calculations for Year 2015 is based on projections using current fleet -mix figures (Average Annual Day Operations and Fleet Mix Alternative D [Master Plan ElS /R Appendix C Table S7 et at]), and lists 44 planes, but no A340- 600'x. A350's or A380's After SAIP construction, the not - counted grant- planes would skew impact results heavily, i.e. anticipated 11 -12 A380 daily flights (22 -24 TOAL's] (each up to 8 times as much single -event noise as an average 8757) all using runway 25L makes the neighbors' plight intolerable Takeoff noise is of greatest concern to El Segundo, while Approach -noise maximally affects the communities east of the airport The B747 fleet lists TO dBA's from 80 to 100 5 dBA's, while the A300 fleet TO dBA's range in the upper 70's until reaching the A350 and A380 LAX A380 single -event nighttime awakenings and classroom disruptions would be horrendous Note Singapore [2 1day], Qantas [3 1day), Air France, Virgin, Korean, Malaysian, Lufthansa, and Federal Express .4380 Airbuses (35% larger with 49% more floor -space than the biggest 413 -seat 747) plan to use LAX UPS, currently using Ontario Airport, has also ordered A380's Does that mean that LAWA must soon upgrade Ontariofacilines to accommodate the A380? Airbus developers project a call for 1, 902 jumbo aircraft in the next 10 years The $235 - million A380 (240'vs 747s 232, 555 -800 passengers, range 9,200- miles. cost $53-billion to develop) Its wingspan is 261 feet (vs B747's 212 ) and tart- weight will reach 1 3 -mdhon pounds (vs B747's 875,000) It's dubbed the "world's first Flying- Hotel, a cruise -ship in the sky ", and may feature a dutyfree shop, sit -down restaurant, some enclosed staterooms (each with bed and shower), a bar (and perhaps a casino), and a gym in addition to its projected 555 passenger -seals and 55 crew -seals Tad - height u seven - stories Eighteen door - emergency slides havefriction material to slow the sliders Cathay - Pacific's 3- HongKong flights per week, currently use remote terminals or one of the two Bradley gates for an A340 -600 (15' longer than the biggest 747) but require new taxiway, gale, and Ietway construction which can accommodate them Virgin Atlantic, South African, and Iberia Airlines also use A340 -600's • Only modify /improve a runway if all runways are to be brought to the same standard! • Re- emphasize the guidelines for flying heaviest/loudest aircraft using inboard runways! • Avoid expanding negative impacts by avoiding relocating facilities closer to off-campus residences! • Recalculate/redraw 2015 noise contour projections using latest fleet- mix/TOAL projections /expectations! • Accept that Airbus A380 accommodations may belong at Palmdale Regional Airport — not LAX! The Plan justifies runway relocation by claiming "additional separation between 25L and 25R will enhance safety ", but it then proposes a center taxiway between the runways (to ni m uze potential incursions) There is no indication of previous incursions (without central taxiing) being of a "Class -A" near -miss description. A center - taxiway adds twenty -five new taxiway - centerline intersections (potential collision- points) to the current 48 runway /taxiway intersections layout. Safety is not enhanced by adding potential collision points The vast majority of incursions of the past decade have been caused by communications- breakdowns or pilot -or- controller error Adding new intersections will only increase potential for errors and breakdowns (None of the earlier Plan - Alternatives proposed center - taxiways Were they to be developed "unsafe " ?) The DEIR claims moving the runway is necessary "to meet the FAA required centerline spacing of the new taxiway . providing a runway- to-taxiway centerline- spacing of 400' to both 25L and 25R." With the 262' wingspan of the A380, we'll have a new "unsafe condition" if a plane is on taxiway when a big one comes in Given the introduction of the A380, it would be safer to leave the runways spaced 745' apart as at present, eliminate the proposed center taxiway, and reinforce the stopping points on the crossing - taxiways by installing above - ground laser stop -lines. Pilots who won't listen, or controllers who make bad calls, will not be corrected by adding additional confusion and more stop -points to the layout In fact, in the name of safety, some crossing - taxiways should be eliminated (even if it adds a mile or a minute to the taxiing plane route) Note In instructions to the NASA Team which studied and supported the proposal for center - taxiway, LAWA said "most common runway incursions occurred when an aircraft arriving on Runway 25L exits at one of the high -speed exus, and then fails to stop before overshooting the hold -short bars for Runway 25R The intent of the center taxiway concept is to force aircraft to turn onto a parallel center taxiway, thus eliminating the "straight shot " to Runway 25R that exists on the current high -speed exits " Instructions failed to note that high -speed might have made it difculi to stop in time But now, the length of the High -Speed Exits, runway- to-taxiway would be half the distance to former stop -bars Perhaps, inserting a new taxiway (another turn or intersection point) closer to the landing- runway would increase rather than decrease potential accidents Reviewing LA WA's several "taxiway studies", the studyprocess regularly goes from safety considerations to discussions of minimizing delays $ talks • Proposed center - taxiway adds collision- points and will not address /correct a problem of incursions! • Reinforcelinstall Stop -Bars (paved - lines) and R/W guard lights with above - ground lasers to reduce incursions. • No additional separation of 25L from 25R is necessary or desirable. • Direct "heavies" to use inboard runways whenever possible. A relocated/rebuilt runway would accommodate heavier planes not -now accepted at LAX, and - favored by southside- located cargo operations — add more noise (bigger, more - frequent planes in closer proximity to homes) and more - offensive -noise (cargo nighttime operations) LAVA says "LAX will be able to handle the A380 in late 2006, and then more A380 operations than any other facility in the world." (DB 5/18/04, I.AT 5/19/02& 1/17/05, Pop -Meth 3/01) Will LAWA seek waivers (which could further extend the airport into a "catastrophe waiting to happen" class?) Currently the A380 is too tall, heavy, or with too large a wingspan to use two of LAX's runways, almost all boarding gates, and many taxiways Short-term plans would V Cl �t Kessler, FAA and HOD, LAWA Sept 14,'05 ES -ASNAC Page 3 adapt six existing gates at Tom Bradley, Terminal 2, and remote west -end terminals, expand boarding- lounges, and widen taxiway and runway shoulders FAA has already granted conditional approval of those plans Eight airlines have announced plans to fly in and out of LAX The 380's certified capacity is 1,000 passengers Fire- Department Crash -Units claim "Airbus products have too much variation in hardware, which can hamper safe rescue operations" Current equipment cannot safely handle the 2nd level bubble of the 747's, and would most certainly threaten the full upper floor of the A380's (Airport firefighters will have to double the length of their ladders land hoses) to reach doors on the second deck) FAA regulations call for a 30% widening of most taxiways and runways to accommodate A380 engines can transport the weight of 37 -MTA buses (560- tons). The freighter version will have three decks and carry 152 tons of cargo as far as 6,445 miles SAIP does not show plans (or ezpenses) to reequip LAX crash units (or surrounchng community traits), nor to develop new methods to service the huge plane with fuel (with two pumps, the 81,890 - gallon tanks would take 45- minutes to fill) and food or unload trash and thousands of gallons of waste If two A380s parked side by side at existing LAX gates, their wings would touch Apron space is a problem, as it's handling twice the luggage, meals, and trash as the 747 The 380 cannot share taxiways with other planes. In 2002, Airbus said LAX's longest runway would be adequate in length Terminals must be modified to allow letways to connect to both decks. (Typically it takes 11- years, from design to construction, to create airport facilities ) The U.S General Accounting Office estimates it will cost $1.2- billion for LAX to accommodate the A380 Airbus says it shouldn't cost LAX more than perhaps $177- million. The (i9o- passenger) Boeing 757 requires 80,000 pounds of thrust The A380, despite requiring four engines at 75,000 pounds of thrust each, will bum 20% less fuel than the 747400 (lowering operating costs by 17% - or 30% for freight operators) based on in -flight (not taxi, takeoff, or landing) conditions (and require a minimum 3,000 -mile flight to be validated). Taxi, takeoff, and landing are the times of maximum impact. The four big engines will probably rival the now - defunct Concorde for noise and emissions In its era, Concorde was five -times more noisy, and more polluting, than any other plane at major airports Seventy-six percent of the noise generated on 25L is from the heaviest jets in the fleet. • Drop the race to be biggest! Redevelop quality not quantity! • Shift plans for LAX to accommodate A380 to allow a new draw to Palmdale Regional! • At least withhold A380 access until LAX can safely accommodate (re crash - units) using inboard runways! • Move major noise -maker operations to inboard runways! Funding for detailed planning should not proceed before conceptual plans and impact- mitigations are approved LAWA ordered detailed designs without waiting for approvals or mitigation analyses for current protects. Revamping Bradley Terminal @ $225 - million was funded by bonds repaid by airport revenues, and was another example of incremental expansion. The current South Airfield Project will modify facilities to accommodate (bigger and louder) A380's Major land - acquisitions like Manchester Square are not in the baselines, but don't belong in the accommodations- process • Avoid contract commitments before achieving plan approvals and adopting clear effective impact mitigations. In the SHIP DEIR Chapter 1, Section 1.4, we read "Safety is the primary consideration." Obviously, then, it behooves LAWA to avoid any possibility of expanded capacity — for "double the people and cargo" yields "double the risk and danger." Yet, Chapter 2, Section 2 1, states "it is crucial that LAX is capable of accommodating the A380 " Handling the A380 in a small airport goes against "safety" considerations "Double the passengers ..." Why not include the big bus in plans for Ontario instead? Or even better, to minimize risk and Impact, accommodate at Palmdale (where the airfield is 17,000 acres rather than 3,500). Primary constraint on the airport's practical capacity is the "limited curbside capacity of the CTA at peak hour " Then, encouraging access by GreenLine, or increasing outlying "flyaway" terminals, reduces constraints and yields increased - capacity. Similarly, "after SAID, the practical capacity will be the same" based on constraints "created by reducing the number of aircraft gates." Referring to the Tom Bradley (TBIT) to make its point, DEIR states (with new security systems installed) "TBIT will be able to accommodate 15 fewer passengers at its modified gates." Yet, gates will be modified to accommodate the double- decked larger- capacity A380. Doubletalk? Section 2.6 states "Airfield configurations were designed at a precise level of detail to satisfy FAA requirements related to airport layout plans." Well, how did a plan to move the runway south get by while there are "structures in the Runway Protection Zone" at the west end? (Altered FAA reg's just for this move? . or out- of- towners don't count ?) The DEIR Section 23.2 states "No impacts on wetlands would result from the SAID " Yet, Section 5 4 3.1 states 1,853 s.£ of degraded wetland habitat containing embedded cysts of the Riverside fairy shrimp will be permanently converted "for construction staging, airfield cps and maintenance activities or airfield unprovements" ... In addition, activities have potential to indirectly affect 126 acres of other degraded wetland habitat . with an additional 23 acres of ephemerally wetted areas threatened, and another 108 acres identified as "critical habitat" within the Airfield Operations Area The report concludes "Further consideration of critical habitat for the Riverside fairy shrimp at LAX is not required" because FWS now excludes the areas from "critical habitat" designation (based on "elements for shrimp to complete its life cycle are not met at LAX ") In April '05 (tAT 4/13/05), LAWA promised once again to move 468 tons of sod containing the shrimp by this month (September) Where's the action? 0 9 IL Kessler, FAA and Hoo, LAWA Sept 14, '05 ES -ASNAC Page • Avoid moves that lead to expanded airport capacity! Double handling = Double danger, double risk! • A380 belongs at Palmdale! Finish and activate the Palmdale Regional Airport Master Plan! • Easing airport access could lead to airport expansion. Incorporate some access -means distribution goals! • Respect FAA Design - Standards Guidelines (AC150 /5300 -13). Avoid runway moves into obstacle -free zones! • Follow- through on promises! Move the shrimp before any other activity in "critical habitats". DEIR Section 4.1, Hydrology /Water Quality, identifies construction - disturbance of 296 acres, generating nearly 816,000 cubic yards of material for export. 26.5 acres of new impervious cover will speed the runoff from the disturbance-area A 10% increase in impervious cover seems significant from a layman's perspective Proper drainage can certainly avoid flooding problems, but LAWA should reintroduce increased runoff back into the local groundwater table to avoid future subsidence Threshold of Sigmficance focused on flooding should be revised to recognize subsidence possibilities as well Regarding major export of material (rubble and soil and organic waste) from the site, consideration should be given to construction of a major perimeter -berm between southside buildings to serve as effective sound - barrier (i.e 100' across at the foot, reaching up as much as 40', to 10' across at the top, with sloped sides @ LI planted heavily with sound - attenuating groundcover and trees) like Miami -Dade County Airport or around El Segundo's Chevron Property. • Respect City /State Runoff guidelines! Increasing impervious cover endangers soil/water /geologic stability! • Policy suggestion: Relocate any project - spoils onsite — avoid exporting site materials! • Design/build effective perimeter sound - barriers! It has been three years since LAWA contracted to develop an Airport Master Plan for Palmdale Regional Airport (7/16/02) Since then Newhall Ranch (21,600 - homes), Los Lomos (5,800- bomes), Ritter Ranch (7,200 - homes), Anaverde (5,200 - homes), and Tejon Ranch's Centenmal (23,000 - homes) have proposed to join the 1,179,228 residents of northern Los Angeles County Investing now (before facing neighbor - complaints) in developing Palmdale Airport, instead of making -over at LAX, would only make good sense. If LAX becomes the sole option for airlines using A380's, the increased traffic from the north will totally gridlock the Impact -zone More is no longer better! SAY should be adding pressure to complete GreenLme service to LAX directly (in fact, through LAX to pick up Loyola University and Playa Vista) terminating at I -90 and Culver Blvd DEIR Section 4.2 3.3.4 indicates assumptions of growth and increased traffic A steady annual 2 percent increase is a flawed assumption in recognition of the variations connected with project completions (DEIR Table 4.2 -7) Money earmarked toward SAIP should be redirected to a high -speed rail connection between LAX, Palmdale, and Ontario Airports. Shanghai, Munich, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and Atlanta are all readying city -to- airport high -speed rail connections. Taipei- Kao-Hsiung, London - Glasgow, Tampa - Orlando, and Zurich- Geneva rail- connections are in development Tokyo/Osaka/Fukuoka, Boston/NewYork, and Paris/Brussels/London are operational. Newark connects to Penn Station. Vegas to Prim (where a new airport is being developed), and on to Anaheim is probable LAX/PMD by Maglev could be a 30 -mmute ride A true intermodal scheme would connect LAWA's three commercial airports by Maglev, while connecting both LAX and Ontario through Union Station by light -rail (with extensions of GreenLine and seamless connections to downtown and Long Beach). • Develop efficient air service for north L.A. County growing population (soon -to-be 2- million)! PMD. • Redirect LAX expenditure- budget to assist in LAWA airport rail connections! Mitigations must be fully spelled out (including assumptions for funding). Too often, a proposed mitigation is stated merely as a proposal to "study the problem" or "monitor the situation" (i.e Traffic operations Sect. 4 2.8 Proposed mitigations involving other government bodies are often not likely to be funded (i.e I-405 offramp at Lennox, local traffic - signal and intersection improvements, + 1 -90 R -O -W changes) GreenLine extensions are given little consideration despite being a South Airfield Improvement condition due to current station location LAWA proposes in "D" certain development subject to "daily vehicle trip - caps" (2- 117/8) The same developments were proposed in "A, B, and C" with higher traffic levels projected. "D" development has less impact than "No Project" That's wrong because elsewhere developments -in- question are identified as baseline for additional development in "D" and affect off - airport projects SAIP DEIR Table 3 -1. • Develop meaningful mitigations that mitigate impacts not just study further! • Respect changing off - airport conditions! Impact Analyses are inadequate in the following categories- Noise, Land -Use, Surface Transportation, Environmental Justice, Growth - Induction, Air Quality, Hydrology/Water Quality, Biotic Resources, Endangered and Threatened Species, Wetlands, Coastal Resources, Energy Supply, Solid Waste, Seismic Concerns, Hazardous Materials, and Public Utilities • Broaden Impact - Analysis team for wide - ranging perspectives! From DEIR Table 4.3 -1 & 4 3 -2 we find LAX 2005 Fleet Mix and LTO Cycles (estimated at 372,556). Much has been said in the Report about accommodating the A380. Shouldn't a hypothetical Fleet Mix and LTO Cycles estimate be/!tiade for 09`, A. Kessler, FAA and Hoo, LAWA Sept 14, '05 ES -ASNAC Page 5 2015 in order to estimate the impact of adding the new giant heavy Table 4 3-6 indicates an emissions inventory for On- Airport sources that includes aircraft only in stationary mode Isn't it true that emissions discharge from aircraft would be significantly higher on takeoff, acceleration, or landing modes9 When will we face up to the task of a real inventory to include the periods of aircraft movement? The drift of aircraft discharge above ground may be descending to measurement stations only miles from the actual source (the zone around the airport) The projections of emissions distribution are difficult to read (given only grid readings). Could a more -clear graphic like the noise- contours be developed foe each of the types of emission reported? Numbering/identifying the gridded air quality receptors would allow a much more thorough analysis of the off airport air quality. Where is the count high, where low? When? Air quality analysis regarding aircraft operations is woefully inadequate The Report indicates only (4.3.7 that the project will have significant impacts with respect to both PMio and PM2.5 particle concentrations. We're told "Mitigation measures are being formulated and will be approved prior to project implementation " Yeah! Trust me' Despite recommending the export of 816,000 cu yds of rubble, "no additional project - specific mitigation measures are recommended ". There's an assumption that a GSE conversion program is underway. However, a further statement indicates that such a program will be done by 2015. In other words "we're working on improving the engines to reduce emissions" Trust us' This is considered totally inadequate analysis, and an even worse score on mitigations • Develop a meaningful and thorough estimate of AQ conditions in 2015 (including operations of new heavies). • Show the public graphically where the air is more heavily polluted, and how much of the time. • Report the current means of mitigating airport generated air pollution. • Identify the 2015 anticipated reductions of air degradation, and a timetable for reaching maximum mitigation. DEIR indicates that there is an increased carcinogenic risk associated with LAX and its SAIP. As many as 19- in- a- million more cancers than normally expected (in adults) in the Los Angeles Air Basin may be traced back to LAX (6- m- a- million for children). [4.4 7.11 A potential for Non - Cancer Chrome Health Hazards also occurs in areas around LAX. Risk indices were developed for the hazard potential related to LAX - lengthy - exposure. A hazard index of I or greater indicates potential for adverse health effects Regarding Chronic Non -Cancer Hazards, adults read a #1 hazard index, while children read a #5 [4.4.7.2] The hazards relate to ingestion of acrolein, heavily present in jet engine exhaust. Acute but not chronic hazards ranged from #1 to 19 depending on how much acrolein which one might be exposed. # 1 is a hazard index threshold of significance for acute effects. [4.4.7.3] LAWA promises to mitigate emissions to the extent possible The Toxic Air Contaminants Inventory is based on the assumption that air quality mitigation measures would be in place [4 4 81 However, LAWA started a study of air quality strictly related to LAX which was interrupted by events of 9/11/01. LAWA promises to reinitiate the study to evaluate toxic air contaminant emissions from jet engine exhaust (and other sources) Risks in the LAX area were not estimated directly, because no permanent monitoring station for TACs was located at or near LAX when basin - wide AQMD studies were going on (Note EI Segundo attempted to establish such a station location during the MATES -11 study period, but after locations had been secured, the City Council unexpectedly withdrew participation without explanation ) • LAX is a source of increased risks of cancer, non - cancer chronic health problems, and acute health problems. • Follow through on LAWA's promise to study the area air quality and toxic contaminants related to jet engines. • With AQMD assistance, establish a fully- equipped permanent air -quality monitoring station on LAX property. Lingering questions. Several of the graphic representations of the Project area show a long extension of work area on the west end beyond the end of the proposed relocated runway. Is this a grading area to allow for future runway extension Will it be graded level enough to serve as a quick -stop deep - gravel crash zone like steep -hill truck runaway zones9 Or is it a way of avoiding need for a future EIR when time may come to extend all runways9 • What is the function of the included west -end runway - extension area in SAIP documents? In conclusion, seventeen findings of Negative and Significant but Unavoidable Impacts (with mostly unsatisfying mitigations proposed), coupled with a largely unjustified proposal to add a central taxiway, does not justify moving runway 25L $5.5' closer to off - airport residences If runway 25L is in poor repair, fix it in place, then, widen and strengthen one of the other runways to accommodate the new "Heavies ". Better yet, develop Palmdale's 17,750 -acres to accommodate them with less impact than at LAX LAWA willingly relocates a federally protected species to a new site, while simultaneously subjecting fellow humans to increased risks of cancer, noise and disruption; increased traffic stress; and a diminished quality of life It appears that if LAWA, the LAX staff, and Airlines pilots operated totally in accord with stated operations policies *, airfield incursions and off - airport neighbor - complaints would be minimized and neighbors' quality-of -life could continue to improve •Mninial thrust `hl 2 -rules out to sea Take -off low and quiet. Heavies use inboard runways exclusively Minimize operations to maximize safety. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on the South Airfield Improvement Project DEIR El Segundo Aviation- Safety and Noise - Abatement Committee 09 3 September 15, 2005 LAWA Long Range Planning Dept. Attn: Karen Hoo 7301 World Way West Rm 308 LA CA 90045 -5803 Re: Comments from the El Segundo Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Committee (ASNAC) on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the LAX South Airfield Improvement Project Dear Ms. Hoo: The Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Committee (ASNAC) is a local citizens committee that seeks to examine noise and safety related issues emanating from LAX. The purpose of this letter is to provide committee comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) issued recently by LAWA as a part of the South Airfield Improvement Project (SAIP). In general, I we believe that the DEIR includes multiple assumptions that fail to mitigate properly the environmental, noise and safety issues that would result as a by- product of the SAIP. Following is a list of specific concerns: TRAFFIC Los Angeles, of course, has been known as a crowded and smog - infested city. The population has only grown, and the streets have gotten more crowded - especially on the 405 Freeway on the "South Bay Curve" where traffic typically flows best at 3am and very poorly at best all other times of the day. In addition, The City of Los Angeles has seen fit to add 32,000 residences to the marshlands around LAX area without adding any new roads or widening the freeways Now they want to double the non - residential flow into the same area by having vacationers and businessmen flow into the trouble zone, again, without any new road or widening the freeways. The DEIR doesn't address this most basic concept other than to irresponsibly brush it under the rug. This alone should stop the proposed expansion of LAX, and its Master Plan 4 2.6 3 talks of traffic going up certain percentages as if they are inconsequential, but as you probably already know, that if 100 cars on the freeway can go 65+ MPH, 120 cars will only be able to do maybe 25 MPH ... 20% increase in cars is unacceptable and LA city has already added more than its share as stated above. Simestion LAWA should purchase land near the 605 and 105 (or further east by 20 miles) and build a large regional parking structure there, central for southern California, and build a magnetic rail that connects with the MTA Red, Blue, and Green Lines that will take passengers to Palmdale or somewhere where people won't be adversely affected in health and well -being. LAWA operates a suitable, but vastly underutilized airport in Palmdale. Residence of Lancaster/Palmdale welcome and sunnort Palmdale airport expansion. vs El Segundo For years, LAWA's argument for not appropriately developing that airport has been that airlines will not fly there. However, that assumption runs counter to the concept of supply and demand. Quite simply, if the demand is there, the airlines will supply it. Its like saying there is no demand for cars to cross the river, so the Golden Gate Badge in San Francisco should not have been built. The Antelope Valley is rapidly growing region. Some project that the ultimate build -out of Palmdale, Lancaster and surrounding communities will exceed one million people If the high -speed rail system is established between Los Angeles and Antelope Valley, that projection might prove to be conservative, Southern California is growing northward and the high desert of the Antelope Valley region is perfect, ready, and waiting for the inevitable to come. As such, it makes no sense that LAWA remains unceasing in its efforts to develop and expand an over - utilized facility like LAX 0911 when Palmdale represents nearly fallow ground in a vast untapped market. The members of ASNAC and hold strongly our belief that the best way to address the air travel needs of Southern California is to begin maximizing the potential of outlying facilities, such as Ontario and Palmdale Airports NOISE Historically, El Segundo was among the earliest developments in the region. El Segundo means "The Second "...refinery for Standard Oil in the very early 1900's And, it had a town setup here before Mines Field expanded and evolved into present day LAX. The occurrence of World War II established considerable national priorities and local residents, of course, accepted the increased aviation activity next door (and the inconveniences that accompanied such activities) with complaint. But, with the arrival of the Boeing 707 and the current jet age the noise simply became too much We gave them an inch, and they took a mile - and El Segundo has been forced to co-exist with an extraordinarily burdensome neighbor that does little to curb noise. Currently, the first 3 blocks of homes parallel to LAX have to contend with horribly load noise that stops conversation on the phone or with people in the same room till the aircraft pass Also the vibration will cause things to move and falloff the shelves We constantly have been awakened up in the middle of the night to investigate what crashed to investigate what fell off the shelf to the ground. I personally got into the habit of every evening I push all items on my shelves in the den, living room, and kitchen to the far back or middle so they don't vibrate off due to Fed - Express aircraft taking off in the middle of the night. One 'irony of this situation is that LAWA retains the ability to mitigate a good portion of the noise created from the airfield through the Residential Sound Insulation (RSI) Funds distributed by ... But this is assuming that people don't want their windows open for fresh air, or that being outdoor gardening isn't important to a good health and good community which the foundation of our ole town of El Segundo. Now LAX has the audacity to say the Airbus A380 is "vital" to LAX and they must be here and must be on the south outboard runway, nearest to the residence of El Segundo (Note- When real life studies come out about the A380, working noise versus stage 4 testing performance study, the runway on the inboard will turn out to be the better choice.) And they want to build an infrastructure that can allow the doubling of passenger handling.. Hence: twice the load (A380), twice as often, equals four tunes worst (2x2 =4) on an already unbearable situation. LAWA should not hold our valuable real - estate captive to their msatiable desire to expand Note Boeing has not gone further with its plans to compete with the A380 due to they believe as most in the industry believe, the A380 will go by way of the Concorde Instead of larger aircraft Boeing is focusing on its 7137 (small avoraft) and its new series of midsize aircraft, because the public is not in favor of larger aircraft due to the preference of direct flights vs connecting flights Nor do they wish to board a 500 to as much as 1000 passenger aircraft Supply and demand requires that Boeing end production of larger aircraft like the 747 Boeing has put on hold all plans for a decade to compete with Aubus on the outdated larger aircraft market Thereby it's not worth it to private industry to put money into A380 type runway projects, why is our Government (LA & FAA) putting money into Airbus, especially when they are the competition to American jobs at Boeing' Suggestion- It is unnecessary to expand the runway for the A380, but of the Airbus needs to come here for cargo for LAWA "survival", then put it further away from residence not closer Put the loudest aircraft on the inboard runways. Thereby build the inboard thicker and utilize the fact that it is already the longer runway designed for bigger cargo laden aircraft and have the smaller aircraft utilize the outboard. Also unless unavoidable have all takeoffs on the inboard runway and landing on the outboard runway In a real world setting that should be at least 95% of the time compliant. And have an enforceable agreement with your neighbor to the south that will include fines if deviation does occasionally occur. The fiscal impact to LAX adhering would be minunal, and you get what you want HEALTH There are ongoing concerns about cancer in the El Segundo community — with recent high profile cancer - related deaths fueling that concern The concern is for the 25% of the year the wind brings airport Jet A exhaust fumes to our residence. 1.3.4.2, 4 4.7 1 Talks about studying the problem, but nothing more of value to residence around the airport. �i95 SAFETY The center taxiway has to be eliminated from the Master Plan because it takes up too much valuable space. Of the experts and pilots I have talked with, not one has understood how the center runway would legitimately prevent the kind of incursions that LAX has a history of The Los Angeles Fire Department Crash Crew's main preference of having the center taxiway is it gives them more options to drive around if a crash occurs, and just short of that they don't see any reason for it either. Pilots and Crash 80's are the real life experts putting the theory to the test and find it comes up way short of any benefit to safety. The real issue is the over - crowded skies over and around LAX. They can't safely expand any more. This is a fact and the last crash at LAX proves it! (See Exhibit 1 Two aircraft given permission to use the same runway by the same tower, 34 killed) The center taxiway is a red herring! You need to increase RPZ (Runway Protection Zone AC 150/5300 -13) not decrease RPZ if you have more air traffic. (refer to note • ) Volume is the key to increasing the likelihood of another aircraft hitting another aircraft in a crowded airspace that LAX leads the world m. LAX is the busiest airport on the smallest acreage with the most civilian and general aviation in the world, and the EIR is trying to say if they build a nearly worthless taxiway, the skies will be safer. That just does not make sense. The EIR failed again, it wastes taxpayer money and leaves LAX significantly more unsafe. " Note Also, going back a few yearn, 5/11169, people died when a B -26 lost an engine and its trajectory flew As deadly path to 335 Eucalyptus where it crashed Most a rimers today find it cheaper for maintaining 2 engtoes ", 3 or 4, and if they do on takeoff than here they would come. Common ways to lose an engine, hods a mechanical, under stress of takeoff, and m one case they forgot to lock the engine m place and it just fell off the wmgl Suggestion: stion: Keep aircraft further away from residence Suggestion Take the center taxiway out 8c move the Southern /Outboard runway /25L further north not south. Suggestion: Expand aircraft volume and size somewhere else like the welcoming residence of Lancaster. Currently cargo takes off on the outboard runway especially at night, when it is safer for them to takeoff and certainly land on the inboard runway due to Its 1000' longer. (25R = 12,090'; 25L = 11,095') Suggestion. So when it comes time to reconfiguring LAX we suggest if it has to accommodate A380, do so on the inboard. The scuttlebutt around the crash crew is that Airbus is not as good an aircraft as Boeing, possibly due to too many countries building parts of the plane (See Exhibit #2 Steering Geometry) Now they want to land a super larger problematic aircraft here ... that is unsafe. (So why spend the valuable resources on a wasted project on a poorly designed plane) Also, neither LAX Crash 80's nor any crash crew in the world can handle the 2"" story of the 747 (For Emergency Evacuation). Fortunately it is only a small portion of the aircraft, but there is no firefighting equipment presently made to properly handle the A380. This is a reason not to allow it into American airspace until that issue is overcome Certainly not at LAX where it is so unwelcome by its neighbors. Unless anyone can explain why the A380 has to be on the south outboard runway, I say if you want it, waste your money on the inboard runway development. On behalf of the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to provide commentary on the DEIR for the South Airfield Improvement Project. Sincerely, Richard Hurst Member El Segundo Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Committee 0 9G Exhibit*1 Two aircraft given permission to use the same runway by the same tower, 34 killed) Thalydom passenger dead at the Las ArV bs Intoner —1 Airport when an mrommg USAir Boemg 737 collided with a smeller SkyWest Metro me: commuter pkm Tbt US Air let Laded on the smeller craft, Adtenrg it and &npeg d m t7emr mto the site of an eheedored fie stateon The Febmary 1, 1991 crosh cLmed all 12 people on the smeller pLne and 22 of the 89 aboard the larger US An pt Ftaaf NTSB Report NRSB Idedfeedm. DCABIBIMIiA Forddaulr, eedk b 14m ssmHela ewber4 *A Sche&dsd 14 CYR 121 ayerahmof USAIR Accede! oeamed FMI.91 d LOS ANGELES, CA Ascall BOENG 739.300, repfndan N38BUS hgoras 3a Fdal,13 Serge, l9 ddmoc 37 Umgwed SKWS%9, NSMV, HAD BEEN CLEARED TO RWY 24L, AT INTERSECTION 45, TO POSITION AND HOLD THE LOCAL GONTRO LER, BECAUSE OFHER PREOCCUPATION WITH ANO MER AIRPLANE, FORGOT SHE HAD PLACED SKWSS® ONTHE RUNWAY AND SUBSEQUENTLY CLEARED USA1493, N388US, FOR LANDING AFTER THE COLLISION, THE TKO AIRPLANES SLID OFFTHE RUNWAY INTO AN UNOCCUPIED FIRE STATION TIM TOWEROPERATING PROCEDURES DID NOT REQUIRE PLIGHT PROGRESS STRIPS TO BEPROCMSED THROUGH TIM LOCAL GROUND CONTROLPOSITIDN BECAUSE THIS STRIP WAS NOTPRESENT, THE L ACALCONMILER1ISIDENMMAN AIRPLANE AND TS MAL. A14DRGCLEARANCF THE TECHNICAL APPRAISAL PROGRAM FOR AIRTRAFIIC CONTROLLERS IS NOT BEING FULLY UTR.BED BECAUSE OFA LACKOFUNDIRti fANDBIG BY SUFUVISOF45 AND THE UNAVAILABILITY OF APPRAISAL HISTORRS 13,wh" Care THE FAILURE OFTHE LOS ANGELES AIR TRAFFIC FACILITY 11ANAMMNTTO WIXMI TPROCEDURES THAT PROVIDED REDUNDANCY COMPARABLE TOM REQUIRDIENTS CONTAINED IN THE NATIONAL OPERATIONAL POSITION STANDARDS AND THE FAILURE OFTHE FAA AIRTRAFITC SERVICE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE POLICY DIRECTION AND OVERSIGHTTO ITS AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACULTY MANAGERS THESE FAILURES CREATED AN ENVIRONKENT IN THE LOS ANGELES AIRTAAFIIC CONTROLTOWLRTHAT ULTDIATELY LED TO TIM FAILURE OF THE LOCAL OONTROIlE1t. 2(LC2)TO MAINTAIN AN AWARENESS OFTHE TRAFFIC SITUATION, CULIBNATINGIN THE INAPPROPRIATE CLEARANCES AND TIM SUBSEQUENT COLLISION OFTHE USAIR AND SKYWFST AIRCRAFT CONTRIBUTING 7U THE CAUSE OFTHE ACCIDENT WAS THE FAILURE OFTHE FAA 70 PROVIDE EFFECTIVE QUALITY ASSURANCE OFTHE A71C SYSTW (NTSB REPORT AAR -91A8) Exhibit #2 Steering Geometry 097 Z O� ❑ LL Z W (� N h� O LLw� 'O F U 3 �a 6 LL ❑ W F ❑ m NA d 01 A N112 A8r Op c mo m rvmpam$ O r z ❑ _ g oLL z = 3�3 zo=o dzOOnoLL �e GOG I F F rZ❑WLLUKKie=% LL UU ❑ O F U. �2uoKaMmn M w g � � 0 � N w ILLU W Zz ¢ W$?Z?WWpZ?pF o����tcpw¢❑on�wK 3 W W❑ W O O Q5W n y� Q mm6 Y 6 ZXX Z F 6 Z ❑ 0 Q =s_U J ULLO Or W= ¢ y U W J Q 0 Z W ❑ Y W_ U O O r, E V E a NW� yCO � p W II U C fi LL E w s a ¢ r c5 U sgg� a U z � F3 y g a i O U LL yl W m 2 ❑ ❑ 01) 8 a] CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER 9/9/2005 THROUGH 9/2212005 Date Payee Amount Description 9/12/05 West Basin 861,944 80 H2O payment 9/14/05 Lane Donovan Golf Ptr 18,872 07 Golf Course Payroll Trf 9/14/05 Health Comp 5,99063 Weekly claims 9/9 9115/05 Cal PERS 243,156 96 PERS Retirement 9/20/05 La Salle 43,725 00 ABAG monthly payment 9121/05 Health Comp 2,39881 Weekly claims 9/16 9/22/05 IRS 170,626 08 Federal Taxes 9/22/05 Employment Development 34,702 D5 State Taxes 9/23/05 Federal Reserve 15000 Employee EE Bonds 9/9- 9/20/05 Workers Comp Activity 40,843 03 SCRMA checks issued (weekending 16th reported next memo) DATE OF RATIFICATION: 10104105 TOTAL PAYMENTS BY WIRE: Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by 1,422,409 43 � /X� /os Date ° )b -0 Date 1' 27 to Information on actual expenditures is available in the City Treasurer's Office of the City of El Segundo 1,422,409.43 099 REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 — 5 00 P M 5 00 P M SESSION CALL TO ORDER — Mayor McDowell ROLL CALL Mayor McDowell - Present Mayor Pro Tern Gaines - Absent Council Member Boulgandes - Present Council Member Busch - Present Council Member Jacobson - Present 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 BS094279 Pulido v City of El Segundo, USDC No 03CV7563 Jeffers v City of El Segundo, WCAB No. MON0312479 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(b) -1- potential case (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) — 0 matter SPECIAL MATTERS — 0 matter MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 PAGE NO 1 �ktia REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 - 7 00 P M 7 00 P M SESSION CALL TO ORDER — Mayor McDowell INVOCATION — Pastor Jeannie Kuhn of the Community of Christ Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Council Member Eric Busch PRESENTATIONS — (a) Presentation by Dina Cramer, Public and Information Services Manager, announcing a community reading program during the month of October 2005 entitled El Segundo Reads "The Good Earth" by Pearl S Buck (b) Presentation by Tree Musketeers Youth Manager, Jessie Snudnowski, to the El Segundo Public Library of the newly published book "Marcie, the Marvelous Tree " (c) Mayor McDowell and Council Members presented Certificates of Appreciation to the Council- appointed Aquatic Master Plan Taskforce (d) Mayor McDowell presented a check for $3,000 to Father Alexis from the tee -shirt vending company that sold merchandise for the recent Extreme Make -over production filmed in El Segundo ROLL CALL Mayor McDowell - Present Mayor Pro Tern Gaines - Absent Council Member Boulgandes - 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 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 PAGE NO 2 i0i Chris Powell, El Segundo School District Board Member, urged Council support and waive fees in regards to the event to be held at the High School October 15, 2005 in celebration of the completion of the District wide school modernization Kelly Kemp, resident, spoke on the success of the Aquatics Task Force, and complemented the employees and members who supported and contributed to the Task Force A PROCEDURAL MOTIONS Consideration of a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions on the Agenda by title only MOTION by Council Member Jacobson, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgarides to read all ordinances and resolutions on the Agenda by title only MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 4/0. MAYOR PRO TEM GAINES ABSENT B SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS Consideration and possible action (continued Public Hearing) regarding the Fiscal Year 2005 -2006 Budget and Five -Year Capital Improvements Plan and Adoption of Resolutions approving Appropriation Limit, Preliminary Budget as amended, and Capital Improvement Plan as amended (Copies of the 2005 -2006 Preliminary Budget can be found in the Library, City Clerk's office, and on the City's website) (Fiscal Impact. $109,410,800 in total appropriations, $78,206,850 In total estimated revenues and prior year designations of $31,203,950). Mayor McDowell stated this is the time and place hereto fixed for a continued public hearing regarding the Fiscal Year 2005 -2006 Budget and Five -Year Capital Improvements Plan and Adoption of Resolutions approving Appropriation Limit, Preliminary Budget as amended, and Capital Improvement Plan as amended. Clerk Mortesen stated that proper notice was completed and no written communications had been received in the City Clerk's Office Bret Plumlee, Administrative Services Director, gave a report Liz Garnholz, resident, questioned street sweeping on alternate sides of the street and asked if this was Included in the budget Council stated it was included in the budget but alternate sides were not included MOTION by Council Member Jacobson, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgarides to close the public hearing MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 4/0 MAYOR PRO TEM GAINES ABSENT Mark Hensley, City Attorney, read by title only. RESOLUTION NO 4436 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN OPERATING BUDGET AND FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005/2006 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 PAGE NO 3 102 MOTION by Council Member Boulgandes, SECONDED by Council Member Busch to adopt Resolution No. 4436 adopting an Operating Budget and Five Year Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2005/2006 and Incorporate "Exhibit A, Fiscal Year 2005 -2006 Change List of Budget Revisions in all Funds" into the Adopted Budget and deposit any Fiscal Year 2004 -2005 General Fund savings into the Economic Uncertainty Fund in Fiscal Year 2005 -2006 once the Fiscal Year 2004 -2005 audit is complete MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 4/0 MAYOR PRO TEM GAINES ABSENT Mark Hensley, City Attorney, read by title only RESOLUTION NO. 4437 A RESOLUTION SETTING ITS APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005/2006 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE XIIIB OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION MOTION by Council Member Boulgandes SECONDED by Council Member Busch to adopt Resolution No 4437 setting Its Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2005/2006 in accordance with Article XIIIB of the California Constitution. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 4/0 MAYOR PRO TEM GAINES ABSENT 2. Consideration and possible action (Public Hearing) regarding a request 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 Mayor McDowell stated this is the time and place hereto fixed for a public hearing regarding a request 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 Clerk Mortesen stated that proper notice was completed and no written communications had been received in the City Clerk's Office Seimone Jurps, Planning and Building Safety Director, gave a report Frank Glynn, architect representing the applicants, explained the process and the desire to be included in the Downtown Specific Plan MOTION by Council Member Jacobson, SECONDED by Council Member Busch to close the public hearing MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 4/0 MAYOR PRO TEM GAINES ABSENT Mayor McDowell suggested the FAR on the south side of the street be reduced from the recommended 1 0 to a compromise of 0.7 FAR MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 PAGE NO 4 103 MOTION by Mayor McDowell, to adopt the Resolution adopting a Negative Declaration approving Environmental Assessment 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 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, amending the FAR In the proposed area, on the south side of the street to be reduced from the recommended 1 0 to a compromise of 0 7 FAR and restrict the number of amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan to one every two years MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND MOTION by Mayor McDowell, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgandes to direct staff to prepare a Resolution and Ordinance adopting a Negative Declaration approving Environmental Assessment 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 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; amend the recommendation in the proposed area on the south side of the street from the recommended 1 0 to a FAR of 0 7, restrict the number of amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan to one every two years, amend the height limitation of 45 feet on the north side to 30 feet and two stories on both the north and south side of the street MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES. MAYOR MCDOWELL, COUNCIL MEMBERS BOULGARIDES AND BUSCH, NOES NONE, ABSENT MAYOR PRO TEM GAINES, ABSTAIN COUNCIL MEMBER JACOBSON 3101111 C UNFINISHED BUSINESS 3 Consideration and possible action regarding adopting an Aquatic Master Plan for the City of El Segundo as recommended by the Aquatic Taskforce and the Recreation and Parks Commission (Fiscal Impact Unknown) Stacia Mancini, Recreation and Parks Director, gave a report MOTION by Council Member Busch, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgandes to receive and file the City of El Segundo Aquatic Master Plan MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 4/0 MAYOR PRO TEM GAINES ABSENT Council Member Boulgandes requested to agendize a Task Force to implement the Aquatic Master Plan D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 4. Consideration and possible action regarding the Annual Report of the Investment Advisory Committee. Presentation to be made by Investment Advisory Chair (Fiscal Impact None) Ralph Lanphere, City Treasurer, gave a report Council consensus to receive and file the annual report of the Investment Advisory Committee MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 PAGE NO 5 104 E CONSENT AGENDA All Items listed are to be adopted by one motion without discussion and passed unanimously If a call for discussion of an Item is made, the Item(s) will be considered Individually under the next heading of business 5 Approved Warrant Numbers 2549201 to 2549407 on Register No. 23 in the total amount of $1,913,043 64 and Wire Transfers from 8/26/2005 through 9/8/2005 in the total amount of $1,055,206 61 Authorized staff to release Ratified Payroll and Employee Benefit checks, checks released early due to contracts or agreement; emergency disbursements and /or adjustments, and wire transfers 6 Approved City Council Meeting Minutes of September 6, 2005 7 Received and filed Fiscal Year 2004 -2005 Third Quarter Financial Report 8 Consideration and possible action regarding approval of annual professional services agreements, amendments and issuance of blanket purchase orders for FY 2005 -2006 in excess of $10,000 for the Administrative Services Department (Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year 2005 -2006 - $319,000, Fiscal Year 2006 -2007 - $33,650 = $352,650) (1) Authorized the City Manager to amend /extend Contract #3378A, for professional services, as approved to form by the City Attorney for Geographic Information System /Global Positioning System (GIS /GPS) consulting with Michael McDaniel (sole proprietor) and Issuance of blanket purchase order, not to exceed $15,000; (2) Authorized the City Manager to amend /extend Contract #3478B, for professional services, as approved to form by the City Attorney with Prosum, Inc for Information Systems consulting services and issuance of blanket purchase order, not to exceed $80,000, (3) Authorized the City Manager to amend /extend Contract #32438 for professional services, as approved to form by the City Attorney with Vertex Communications, Inc for telephone system services and Issuance of blanket purchase order, not to exceed $11,000, (4) Authorized the City Manager to amend /extend Contract #2774C for professional services, as approved to form by the City Attorney with Progressive Solutions for Business License System maintenance /updates and issuance of blanket purchase order, not to exceed $15,100, (5) Authorized the City Manager to amend /extend Contract #3416A for professional services, as approved to form by the City Attorney with Maureen Sassoon for providing Occupational and Environmental Health & Safety Consulting Services and issuance of blanket purchase order, not to exceed $15,000; (6) Authorized the City Manager to amend /extend Contract #3451 B for professional services, as approved to form by the City Attorney with CBIZ and issuance of purchase order, for an amount not to exceed $35,000, (7) Authorized the City Manager to amend /extend Contract #2717C for a two -year period, for professional services, as approved to form by the City Attorney for auditing services with Lance, Soil & Lunghard through 2006 -2007 and issuance of purchase orders, for an amount not to exceed $66,350, (8) Authorized the issuance of a purchase order to Granicus for providing streaming video services for Council meetings, for an amount not to exceed $16,500; (9) Authorized the issuance of a purchase order to Active com (formerly Class Software Solutions, Ltd) for software licensing, maintenance /updates, and training, not to exceed $13,500; (10) MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 PAGE NO 6 105 Authorized the City Manager to enter Into Contract No. 3516, for professional services, as approved to form by the City Attorney with Tyler Technologies, Inc — EDEN Division for computer software upgrades, training and maintenance, and Issuance of purchase order, not to exceed $85,200 9 Approved the annual renewal of the Library and Cable Services Department's blanket purchase orders over $10,000 Those Include four vendors. Baker & Taylor Information Services, OCLC Inc , EBSCO Subscription Services, and Innovative Interfaces, Inc (Fiscal Impact. $129,600) (1) Authorized the City Manager to extend professional services for Baker & Taylor Information Services, for supplying books and other library materials and issuance of blanket purchase order, not to exceed $77,600, (2) Authorized the City Manager to extend professional services for OCLC Inc, for online cataloging services and issuance of blanket purchase order not to exceed $15,000, (3) Authorized the City Manager to extend professional services to EBSCO Subscription Services, for supplying periodical materials and issuance of blanket purchase order not to exceed $14,000, (4) Authorized the City Manager to amend /extend Contract #2235G to Innovative Interfaces, Inc for library computer system maintenance and issuance of blanket purchase order not to exceed $23,000 10 Approved the annual professional services agreements, individual contractor instructor agreements and issuance of blanket purchase orders for FY 2005 -2006 in excess of $10,000 for the Recreation and Parks Department (Fiscal Impact. $387,550) (1) Authorized the City Manager to execute standard Individual Contract Instructor Agreements and issuance of blanket purchase orders to Instructors, (2) Authorized the issuance of a blanket purchase order to Southern California Municipal Athletic Federation (SCMAF) for providing insurance coverage to contract instructors and program participants, for an amount not to exceed $15,000, (3) Authorized the City Manager to enter into 5 -year Contract No 3517, for professional services, as approved to form by the City Attorney, with Studio Printing for publication of the quarterly "Inside El Segundo /Recreation and Parks Brochure ", and issuance of purchase order, not to exceed $39,000 for FY 2005 -2006 (subsequent years are subject to negotiation with regards to material /paper costs only); (4) Authorized the issuance of a blanket purchase order to Lane Donovan Partners, LLC (Contract #3399) for management services of The Lakes at El Segundo municipal golf course, for an amount not to exceed $108,000, (5) Authorized the City Manager to enter into Contract No 3518 for professional services, as approved to form by the City Attorney with South Bay Youth Project for on -site counseling services at El Segundo High School, and issuance of purchase order, not to exceed $27,498. 11 Approved issuance of blanket purchase orders for FY 2005 -2006 in excess of $10,000 for the Fire Department (Fiscal Impact $45,500) (1) Authorized the El Segundo Fire Department to piggyback on Orange County Fire Authority's 2005 Tri -Anim Health Services, Inc. Bid #MP1137 and authorized issuance of a blanket purchase order to Tri -Anim Health Services, Inc for FY 2005 -2006 for medical MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 PAGE NO 7 106 supplies, (2) Authorized the issuance of a blanket purchase order for FY 2005 -2006 to UCLA Center for Prehospital Care for continuing education, defibrillation training and AED program oversight. 12 Approved annual professional services agreement and issuance of blanket purchase orders for FY 2005 -2006 in excess of $10,000 for the Police Department (1) Authorized the City Manager to execute one -year Contract No 3510 for professional services for copier /printer services with Oce Copy Machine not to exceed $14,004, (2) Authorized the City Manager to execute one -year Contract No 3511 for Computer Aided Dispatching /Records Management System, Mobile Data Computer maintenance and operations with the West Covina Services Group, not to exceed $70,000, (3) Authorized the City Manager to extend the existing standard Professional Services Agreement with Reach Out Against Drugs (R.O A D ) to help fund the R O A D. program, not to exceed $10,000, (4) Authorized the City Manager to execute one -year Contract No 3512 with Motorola for two - way radio repair and maintenance of the Communication Center's radio assets and infrastructure, not to exceed $75,000, (5) Authorized the City Manager to execute one -year Contract No 3513 for maintenance for the systems used by the Communications Center to record all telephone and public safety radio transmission with Dictaphone, not to exceed $11,000, (6) Authorized the City Manager to execute one -year Contract No. 3501 for animal sheltering services with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Los Angeles, not to exceed $27,000, (7) Authorized the City Manager to execute one -year Contract No 3514 for auto processing of parking citations /collections with Enforcement Technology Inc., not to exceed $55,000 13 Authorized the City Manager to extend Contract No 2999C, for professional services as approved to form by the City Attorney, for Gary V Bufkin Consulting (GVBCC) for development of a web -based permit system for the Planning and Building Safety Department. (No Fiscal Impact) 14 Approved annual professional services agreements and issuance of blanket purchase orders for FY 2005 -2006 in excess of $10,000 for the Public Works Department (Fiscal Impact $131,100) (1) Authorized the City Manager to execute a standard Professional Services Agreement No 3515 for technical support and custom programming for the City's utility billing system with American Business Software and issuance of a blanket purchase order not to exceed $13,600, (2) Authorized the City Manager to execute a standard Professional Services Agreement No 3227 for printing and mailing services for City utility bills with Dataprose and issuance of a blanket purchase order not to exceed $17,500; (3) Authorized the Public Works Department to piggyback on the State of California Western States Contracting Alliance Master Agreement #641, and issuance of a blanket purchase order to W W Grainger, Inc. for purchase of industrial supplies, materials and equipment needed for routine, unscheduled maintenance and repair of City facilities such as plumbing supplies, electrical materials and paint not to exceed $25,000, (4) Authorized the Public Works Department to piggyback on the City of Los Angeles contact, Department of Water and Power contract No 00381 B -01 -3 and issuance of a blanket purchase to Napa Auto Parts for MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 PAGE NO 8 1 ()rf r purchase of automotive, after - market parts for vehicle and equipment maintenance not to exceed $25,000; (5) Authorized the Issuance of a blanket purchase order for lead -free bronze single het water meters with Metron Farmer in an amount not to exceed $50,000 15 PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBER JACOBSON MOTION by Council Member Jacobson SECONDED by Council Member Busch to approve Consent Agenda Items 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 4/0 MAYOR PRO TEM GAINES ABSENT CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA 15 Consideration and possible action regarding a Special Event Use Permit from the El Segundo Unified School District Board to conduct a High School Modernization Celebration on Richmond Street, between Mariposa Avenue and Palm Avenue and at Library Park in the Arbor Area. Fiscallmpact $100 Council Member Jacobson objected to the use of alcohol on City property MOTION by Council Member Busch, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgandes to approve Special Event Use Permit to provide use of city equipment and services and to waive all fees associated with use of said services and equipment for the El Segundo School Districts High School's Modernization Celebration on Richmond Street, between Mariposa Avenue and Palm Avenue and at Library Parkin the Arbor Area Fiscal Impact $100 MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE 4/0 MAYOR PRO TEM GAINES ABSENT F NEW BUSINESS G REPORTS — CITY MANAGER — NONE H REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY — NONE REPORTS — CITY CLERK — NONE REPORTS — CITY TREASURER - NONE K REPORTS — CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Boulgarides — 16 Consideration and possible action regarding a City Council Committee to discuss and make recommendations on the City's emergency services plans, including emergency preparation, notification and response Council Member Boulgarides requested to carry this item over and discuss at the next meeting Council Member Busch — Requested that the CERT training be re- addressed MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 PAGE NO 9 1 LI 8 Council Member Jacobson — NONE Mayor McDowell — Requested Staff to fold Council Member Boulgandes' and Mayor Pro Tern Gaines' Items together and address both at the same time He also requested to set up a Council Meeting formatted after the Strategic Planning Session to address Emergency Preparedness 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 George Hoops, resident, spoke regarding his request from 3 years ago to remove dead trees on his block, He stated that the City has not removed the trees. He also spoke regarding the sewer taxes MEMORIALS — NONE CLOSED SESSION - NONE ADJOURNMENT at 9 10 p m Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 20, 2005 PAGE NO 10 109 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO EXHIBIT A CHANGE LIST OF BUDGET REVISIONS - APPROPRIATIONS ALL FUNDS FISCAL YEAR 2005 -2006 ADOPTED BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2005 -2006 BUDGET Account Inc (Dec) Balance Preliminary Budget Appropriations inclusive of Transfers Out $ 109,327,050 ADJUSTMENTS: General Fund. City Manager's Reduce Professional Technical funds budgeted in Non Department and CM 2101 -6214 (35,000) Reduce Dues and Subscriptions 2101 -6208 (750) Increase Economic Development Professional and Technical Services account 2401 -6214 50,000 Non Department Reduce funding for Sister City 2901 -6403 (7,500) Add $1,000 to Citywide mileage to reflect increase in IRS rates to $ 405 per Rule 2901 -6244 1,000 Fire Department Increase overtime to reflect backfill of 3 new firefighters beginning Feb 1, 2006 3202, 3203 -4103 102,600 Police Department Reflect $350 per month rental increase Pacific Corporate Towers 3107 -6202 4,200 Library Move $3,000 from 6102 -5204 to 6101 -6253 6101 -6253 - Total General Fund Adjustments 114,5°^ Reduce funding for Five Year Reconstruction to bring fund balance to 0 8203 -8451 (162,700) (162,700) Add CTIP program to the budget 31,900 Total Adjustments to Proposition A Fund 31,900 Add program approved by Council at 7/25/05 Strategic Planning Session 100,000 Total Adjustments to COPS Fund 100,000 Total Revised City Appropriations - All Funds inclusive of Transfers Out $ 109,410,500 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO EXHIBIT A CHANGE LIST OF REVENUE BUDGET REVISIONS - ALL FUNDS FISCAL YEAR 2005 -2006 ADOPTED BUDGET Preliminary Estimated Revenues inclusive of Transfers In ADJUSTMENTS General Fund Increase to Transient Occupancy Tax based on continued increase to occupancy Increase paramedic fees to reflect the overall LA County additonal increase Decrease Rec and Park fees to reflect changes in id cards and softball fees MIA Faitd Adjust OS -06 Estimated Revenues not included in total Water Fund Adjust Water Revenues to total estimated $11,100,000 Total Revenue Estimate Adjustments - all funds Print Year Designated Fund Reserves Total Revised Estimated Revenues inclusive of Transfer In FISCAL YEAR 2005 -06 BUDGET Account Inc (Dec) Balance 0000 -3203 100,000 0000 -3843 7,350 0000 -3831 (11,300) 0000 -3979 1,200,000 0000 - 3851 -3859 (378,000) 77,288,800 918,0.50 31,203,950 $ 109,410,800 I I I EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE October 4, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to approve agreements with Cassidy & Associates and The MWW Group for work related to the City's efforts regarding Los Angeles International Airport, lobbying efforts in Washington, D C and obtaining federal funds (Fiscal Impact $184,000) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Authorize Mayor to execute consultant agreements with Cassidy &Associates and The MWW Group effective October 1, 2005, 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: During the course of the City's intervention efforts related to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), The MWW Group has been retained to articulate the City's position on a wide spectrum of airport related issues During the past year, those efforts have been focused on the City's negotiations with former Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn, and more recently, current Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa The City of El Segundo has remained firm in its stance that any agreement with the City of Los Angeles and Los Angeles World Airports regarding the development of LAX would be premised on an enforceable constraint that would limit the ultimate capacity of the airfield at 78 9 MAP Mayor Villaraigosa's term in office is quickly approaching the 100 -day mark, and the general consensus is that an agreement between El Segundo and Los Angeles regarding LAX will occur in the near future, if it occurs at all The MWW Group has played a key role in those negotiations to date The MWW Group has developed relationships with the new Los Angeles Mayor's staff and has proven to be an effective advocate for the City of El Segundo's position on Issues regarding LAX Accordingly, staff recommends that the City Council approve an agreement with The MWW Group effective (Please see attached page marked "Background and Discussion ") ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS- Consultant agreements with Cassidy and Associates and The MWW Group FISCAL IMPACT: $184,000 Operating Budget: $208,000 Amount Requested: $184,000 Account Number: 01 -400- 2901 -6406 ($24,000) and 01 -400- 2901 -6407 ($160,000) Appropriation Required _Yes X No ORIGIN DATE: September , Je art, City Mana er 6 '112 Background and Discussion (con't): October 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005, with an option to extend that agreement for an additional 90 -day period The amount of compensation to The MW W Group would not exceed $8,000 per month The City has maintained a contractual relationship with Cassidy and Associates for several years During that time, the firm has been successful in obtaining significant amounts of funding for necessary public improvements and has assisted significantly the City's lobbying efforts in Washington, D C During the latter portion of the current fiscal year, Cassidy was instrumental in securing and protecting the City's $3 2 million earmark in the often delayed TEA -21 process Those funds represent a significant portion of the funds currently budgeted for completion of the Douglas Street Gap Closure In addition, Cassidy assisted the City in obtaining nearly $592,000 in EPA grant funding for the needed rehabilitation of the City's sanitary sewer mains Of equal significance, Cassidy assisted the City immensely during the recent successfully push to retain the Los Angeles Air Force Base in El Segundo Cassidy proved to be an effective agent on behalf of the City during the complex Base Realignment and Closure Committee (BRAG) process During the current fiscal year, Cassidy will continue its efforts to find needed infrastructure funding for improvements in Smoky Hollow, funding for needed road improvements in the City and funding for improvements in the City's sewer and wastewater facilities Staff recommends approval of an agreement with Cassidy & Associates effective October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006 The amount of compensation to Cassidy & Associates would not exceed $13,333 per month Staff recommends funding for the MWW Group come from budget line -item 001 - 400 - 2901 -6406 Funding for the agreement with Cassidy Associates is recommended to come from 001 -400- 2901 -6407 113 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 15t day of October, 2005, between the CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and Cassidy & Associates hereinafter referred to as "Consultant" This Agreement shall be in full force and effect through September 30, 2006, unless extended by mutual agreement of City and Consultant In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. Consultant agrees to perform the services set forth in Exhibit "A" "SCOPE OF SERVICES" and made a part hereof Consultant represents and warrants that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities to properly perform said services in a thorough, competent and professional manner and shall, at all times during the term of this Agreement, have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law, including, but not limited to, a valid El Segundo Business License Consultants shall begin its services under this Agreement on October 1, 2005 Consultant shall complete each of the services set forth in Exhibit A to the City's satisfaction If the City is not satisfied with any such services, the Consultant shall work on such matter until the City approves of the service Further, Consultant shall complete the services set forth in Exhibit A strictly according to the schedule provided therein Additionally, Consultant shall provide the services specified in Exhibit A in compliance with the following conditions All work performed by Consultant shall be directed through the City Manager or designee, all work requested of Consultant by the City shall be directed by the City Manager or designee, consultant shall submit periodic reports of work product and progress on stated goals outlined in Exhibit A to the City Manager not less frequently than once each month 2 STATUS OF CONSULTANT. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control Neither City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner Consultant shall not disseminate any information or reports gathered or 1!`i created pursuant to this Agreement without the prior written approval of City except information or reports required by government agencies to enable Consultant to perform its duties under this Agreement. 3. CONSULTANT'S KNOWLEDGE OF APPLICABLE LAWS. Consultant shall keep itself informed of applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations which may affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement Consultant shall observe and comply with all such laws and regulations affecting its employees City and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity as a result of any failure of Consultant to comply with this section Without limiting the foregoing, Consultant shall not expend any funds in violation of California Constitution, Article 16, Section 6, Government Code, Section 81000 et seq ( "Political Reform Act "), or any other federal or state law governing the expenditure of public funds Consultant shall be solely responsible for submittal of all documents, forms and other information that may be required by all applicable agencies as a result Contractor's performing the services specified in this Agreement 4 PERSONNEL. Consultant shall make every reasonable effort to maintain the stability and continuity of Consultant's staff assigned to perform the services hereunder and shall obtain the approval of the City Manager of all proposed staff members performing services under this Agreement prior to any such performance 5 COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT. Compensation to the Consultant shall be paid as a fixed monthly retainer not to exceed thirteen thousand three hundred and thirty -three dollars ($13,333) per month Payments shall be made in approximately thirty (30) days after receipt of each invoice as to all non - disputed fees If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant in 30 days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice 6 ADDITIONAL SERVICES OF CONSULTANT. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein or listed in Exhibit "A ", unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services 7. ASSIGNMENT. All services required hereunder shall be performed by Consultant, its employees or personnel under direct contract with ilk Consultant Consultant shall not assign to any subcontractor the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without the prior written consent of City Manager 8. FACILITIES AND RECORDS. City agrees to provide suitably equipped and furnished office space, public counter, telephone, and use of copying equipment and necessary office supplies for Consultant's on- site staff, if any Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment 9. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall expire on September 30, 2006, unless extended by mutual agreement of City and Consultant The City upon 30 days written notice or 120 days by contractor written notice may terminate with or without cause this Agreement In the event of such termination, Consultant shall be compensated for non - disputed fees under the terms of this Agreement up to the date of termination. 10. COOPERATION BY CITY. All public information, data, reports, records, and maps as are existing and available to City as public records, and which are necessary for carrying out the work as outlined in the Scope of Services, shall be furnished to Consultant in every reasonable way to facilitate, without undue delay, the work to be performed under this Agreement 11. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of termination, suspension or abandonment of, this Agreement, all original maps, models, designs, drawings, photographs, studies, surveys, reports, data, notes, computer files, files and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall, become the sole property of City With respect to computer files, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary 116 computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files 12. RELEASE OF INFORMATION /CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. A. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization excepting that information which is a public record and subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act, Government Code 6250, et sea Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena If Consultant or any of its officers, employees, consultants or subcontractors does voluntarily provide information in violation of this Agreement, City has the right to reimbursement and indemnity from Consultant for any damages caused by Consultant's conduct, including the City's attorney's fees Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and /or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant However, City's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response B. Consultant covenants that neither they nor any officer or principal of their firm has any interest in, or shall they acquire any interest, directly or indirectly which will conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of their services hereunder Consultant further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement, no person having such interest shall be employed by them as an officer, employee, agent, or subcontractor without the express written consent of the City Manager II7 13 DEFAULT. In the event that Consultant is in default of any provision of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. 14 INDEMNIFICATION. Consultant agrees to the following A. Indemnification for Professional Services. Consultant will save harmless and indemnify, including, without limitation, City's defense costs (including reasonable attorney's fees), from and against any and all suits, actions, or claims, of any character whatever, brought for, or on account of, any injuries or damages sustained by any person or property resulting or arising from any negligent or wrongful act, error or omission by Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, agents, employees, or representatives, in the performance of this Agreement B. Indemnification for other Damages. Consultant indemnifies and holds City harmless from and against any claim, action, damages, costs (including, without limitation, attorney's fees), injuries, or liability, arising out of this Agreement, or its performance Should City be named in any suit, or should any claim be brought against it by suit or otherwise, whether the same be groundless or not, arising out of this Agreement, or its performance, Consultant will defend City (at City's request and with counsel satisfactory to City) and will indemnify CITY for any judgment rendered against it or any sums paid out in settlement or otherwise C. For purposes of this section "City" includes City's officers, officials, employees, agents, representatives, and certified volunteers D. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions will survive termination of this Agreement E. The requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by Consultant as required by this Agreement, and any approval of said insurance by City, are not intended to and will not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, including, without limitation, to the provisions concerning indemnification F. Consultant represents it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the services and duties agreed to hereunder by Consultant, and City relies upon the skills and knowledge of Consultant. Consultant shall perform such services and duties consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals performing similar service in the State of California if� G Consultant is an independent contractor and shall have no authority to bind City nor to create or incur any obligation on behalf of or liability against City, whether by contract or otherwise, unless such authority is expressly conferred under this agreement or is otherwise expressly conferred in writing by City CONSULTANT HAS READ THIS SECTION 14 IN ITS ENTIRETY AND KNOWINGLY AND WILLINGLY ACCEPTS THE OBLIGATIONS CONTAINED HEREIN 15 INSURANCE. A. Insurance Requirements. Consultant shall provide and maintain insurance acceptable to the City Attorney in full force and effect throughout the term of this Agreement, against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by Consultant, its agents, representatives or employees Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A M Best's rating of no less than A VII Consultant shall provide the following scope and limits of insurance (a) Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as (1) Insurance Services Office form Commercial General Liability coverage (Occurrence Form CG 0001) (ii) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, including code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025, or equivalent forms subject to the written approval of the City. (iii) Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the Labor Code of State of California and Employer's Liability insurance and covering all persons providing services on behalf of the Consultant and all risks to such persons under this Agreement (Not needed if Self - employed with no employees ) (iv) Errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to the Consultant's profession (b) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits of insurance no less than (i) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the iTti general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the activities related to this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit (ii) Automobile Liabilitv: Including owned, non - owned and hired vehicles for bodily injury and property damage with (See cover letter (page 1) for actual dollar level Requirements) At least $1,000,000 per occurrence $100,000 - $300,000 per occurrence As required by State Statutes A copy of your current policy must be submitted naming yourself and or your company (iii) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liabilitv Workers' Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident (iv) Errors and Omissions or Malpractice or Professional Liabilitv: At least $1,000,000 per occurrence B. Other Provisions. Insurance policies required by this Agreement shall contain the following provisions (a) All Policies. Each insurance policy required by this paragraph 15 shall be endorsed and state the coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by the insurer or either party to this Agreement, reduced in coverage or in limits except after 30 days' prior written notice by Certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City (b) General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages. (1) City, its officers, officials, and employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects liability arising out of activities Consultant performs, products and completed operations of Consultant, premises owned, occupied or used by Consultant, or automobiles owned, leased or hired or borrowed by Consultant The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City, its officers, officials, or employees q a! 4'. (ii) Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respect to City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers Any insurance or self insurance maintained by City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, Consultant's insurance (iii) Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability (v) Any failure to comply with the reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers (c) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability Coverage. Unless the City Manager otherwise agrees in writing, the insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its officers, officials, employees and agents for losses arising from work performed by Consultant for City C. Other Requirements. Consultant agrees to deposit with City, at or before the effective date of this contract, certificates of insurance necessary to satisfy City that the insurance provisions of this contract have been complied with The City Attorney may require that Consultant furnish City with copies of original endorsements effecting coverage required by this Section The certificates and endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf City reserves the right to inspect complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time (a) Consultant shall furnish certificates and endorsements from each subcontractor identical to those Consultant provides (b) Any deductibles or self - insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self- insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers, or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, defense expenses and claims 121 (c) The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance shall not be construed to limit Consultant's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions and requirements of this Agreement 16. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement is the complete, final, entire and exclusive expression of the Agreement between the parties hereto and supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter herein Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations by any party which are not embodied herein and that no other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid and binding. 17. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the Los Angeles County Superior Court 18. ASSIGNMENT OR SUBSTITUTION. City has an interest in the qualifications of and capability of the persons and entities who will fulfill the duties and obligations imposed upon Consultant by this Agreement In recognition of that interest, neither any complete nor partial assignment of this Agreement may be made by Consultant nor changed, substituted for, deleted, or added to without the prior written consent of City Any attempted assignment or substitution shall be ineffective, null, and void, and constitute a material breach of this Agreement entitling City to any and all remedies at law or in equity, including summary termination of this Agreement 18. MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT. The terms of this Agreement can only be modified in writing approved by the City Council and the Consultant The parties agree that this requirement for written modifications cannot be waived and any attempted waiver shall be void 20. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he /she /they has /have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his /her /their corporation and warrants and represents that he /she /they has /have the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder 21. NOTICES. Notices shall be given pursuant to this Agreement by personal service on the party to be notified, or by written notice upon such party deposited in the custody of the United States Postal Service addressed as follows Cam. Jeff Stewart City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, California 90245 -3895 Telephone (310) 524 -2301 Facsimile (310) 322 -7137 Consultant Gerry Warburg Cassidy & Associates 700 Thirteenth Street N.W , Suite 400 Washington D C 20005 -5917 The notices shall be deemed to have been given as of the date of personal service, or three (3) days after the date of deposit of the same in the custody of the United States Postal Service 22. SEVERABILITY. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of the other provisions of this Agreement IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written Company Name Cassidy & Associates z Title CITY OF EL SEGUNDO Mayor ATTEST Cindy Mortesen City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mark D Hensley City Attorney 123 CASSIDy & ASSOCIATES 700 Thirteenth Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 TO: THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL JEFF STEWART, CITY MANAGER FROM GERALD FELIX WARBURG EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT CASSIDY & ASSOCIATES RE: SCOPE OF WORK FOR 2006 We are pleased to have the opportunity to work with the City of El Segundo as we meet the challenges in the next fiscal year We look forward to continued success in the year ahead Together, we achieved two important successes this year, we had one disappointment, and there remains one opportunity we wish to pursue Our successes were clear and fully embraced by the community First, we persevered in a Byzantine legislative process to secure significant funding of at least $2,000,000 for highway improvements in the 2005 transportation measure This was an intensively competitive drawn -out process and the fact that Rep Harman chose to use one half of her entire allocation on our request is encouraging Second, through the leadership of the Mayor and other members of the Los Angeles Air Force Base Coalition, we made LA AFB and El Segundo the most widely covered base closure issues in the state We secured visits by all key federal and state legislators, which resulted in strong statements from Chairman Jerry Lewis of the House Appropriations Committee, and attracted widespread media attention In what many consider a `come from behind" victory, we were not on the final list of bases scheduled for closure Because another round of base closures is not likely for several years, this was a great success for the El Segundo community Our only disappointment was that we did not secure a third consecutive year of modest funding for Smoky Hollow via the EPA bill We attribute this to the fact that so many of our political efforts were necessarily focused on LA AFB and highway bill funding that our champions had to push other priorities ahead of ours Also, that measure was moved to a new subcommittee of Congress this year and saw far fewer earmarks The principal challenge ahead is to work as a team to expand our continuing dialogue on new federal funding opportunities We have explored with City leadership and staff several ideas for securing new funds in the year ahead We propose a site visit in late October to advance these discussions and to package our requests for submission to the congressional delegation early in the new calendar year We continue to be confident that we can return substantial benefits to the City and your taxpayers from your investment in our representing you with an aggressive, focused and candid staff on the ground in Washington DC It is our pleasure to work with you and other public servants in the community of El Segundo Thanks for the chance to be part of your team L25 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1st day of October, 2005, between the CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and The MWW Group hereinafter referred to as "Consultant" This Agreement shall be in full force and effect through December 31, 2005, unless extended by mutual agreement of City and Consultant In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. Consultant agrees to perform the services set forth in Exhibit "A" "SCOPE OF SERVICES" and made a part hereof Consultant represents and warrants that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities to properly perform said services in a thorough, competent and professional manner and shall, at all times during the term of this Agreement, have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law, including, but not limited to, a valid El Segundo Business License Consultants shall begin its services under this Agreement on June 1, 2004 Consultant shall complete each of the services set forth in Exhibit A to the City's satisfaction If the City is not satisfied with any such services, the Consultant shall work on such matter until the City approves of the service Further, Consultant shall complete the services set forth in Exhibit A strictly according to the schedule provided therein Additionally, Consultant shall provide the services specified in Exhibit A in compliance with the following conditions All work performed by Consultant shall be directed through the City Manager or designee, all work requested of Consultant by the City shall be directed by the City Manager or designee, consultant shall submit periodic reports of work product and progress on stated goals outlined in Exhibit A to the City Manager not less frequently than once each month 2 STATUS OF CONSULTANT. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control Neither City nor any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner Consultant shall not disseminate any information or reports gathered or 12'1, created pursuant to this Agreement without the prior written approval of City except information or reports required by government agencies to enable Consultant to perform its duties under this Agreement 3. CONSULTANT'S KNOWLEDGE OF APPLICABLE LAWS. Consultant shall keep itself informed of applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations which may affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement Consultant shall observe and comply with all such laws and regulations affecting its employees City and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity as a result of any failure of Consultant to comply with this section Without limiting the foregoing, Consultant shall not expend any funds in violation of California Constitution, Article 16, Section 6, Government Code, Section 81000 et seq ( "Political Reform Act "), or any other federal or state law governing the expenditure of public funds Consultant shall be solely responsible for submittal of all documents, forms and other information that may be required by all applicable agencies as a result Contractor's performing the services specified in this Agreement 4 PERSONNEL. Consultant shall make every reasonable effort to maintain the stability and continuity of Consultant's staff assigned to perform the services hereunder and shall obtain the approval of the City Manager of all proposed staff members performing services under this Agreement prior to any such performance 5 COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT. Compensation to the Consultant shall be paid as a fixed monthly retainer not to exceed eight thousand ($8,000) dollars per month. Payments shall be made in approximately thirty (30) days after receipt of each invoice as to all non - disputed fees If the City disputes any of consultant's fees it shall give written notice to Consultant in 30 days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice 6. EXPENSES. It is understood that consultant may incur expenses during the performance of work specified in "Exhibit A" that are not included in the retainer paid to Consultant by City (e g , printing costs for materials distributed by Consultant, postage for public meeting announcements, meeting room fees, and other related expenses). Upon approval of City Manger, Consultant may submit such expenses to City for reimbursement All requests for reimbursement must be accompanied by valid original invoice or receipt from vendor providing service on behalf of Consultant No expense shall be reimbursed by City in the event Consultant has not obtained prior approval from City Manager In no event shall such requests for reimbursement exceed one - thousand dollars ($1,000 00) per month 4 . 14 -, 4 7 ADDITIONAL SERVICES OF CONSULTANT. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to those set forth herein or listed in Exhibit "A ", unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. Consultant shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and Consultant at the time City's written authorization is given to Consultant for the performance of said services 8. ASSIGNMENT. All services required hereunder shall be performed by Consultant, its employees or personnel under direct contract with Consultant Consultant shall not assign to any subcontractor the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without the prior written consent of City Manager 9. FACILITIES AND RECORDS. City agrees to provide suitably equipped and furnished office space, public counter, telephone, and use of copying equipment and necessary office supplies for Consultant's on -site staff, if any Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of services under this Agreement Consultant shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible Consultant shall provide free access to the representatives of City or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records, shall give City the right to examine and audit said books and records, shall permit City to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment 10. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall expire on December 31, 2005 The City upon 30 days written notice written notice may terminate with or without cause this Agreement In the event of such termination, Consultant shall be compensated for non - disputed fees under the terms of this Agreement up to the date of termination 11. COOPERATION BY CITY. All public information, data, reports, records, and maps as are existing and available to City as public records, and which are necessary for carrying out the work as outlined in the i�2� Scope of Services, shall be furnished to Consultant in every reasonable way to facilitate, without undue delay, the work to be performed under this Agreement 12. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. Upon satisfactory completion or in the event of termination, suspension or abandonment of, this Agreement, all original maps, models, designs, drawings, photographs, studies, surveys, reports, data, notes, computer files, files and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall, become the sole property of City With respect to computer files, Consultant shall make available to the City, upon reasonable written request by the City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring and printing computer files 13. RELEASE OF INFORMATION /CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. A. All information gained by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by Consultant without City's prior written authorization excepting that information which is a public record and subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act, Government Code 6250, et sea Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena If Consultant or any of its officers, employees, consultants or subcontractors does voluntarily provide information in violation of this Agreement, City has the right to reimbursement and indemnity from Consultant for any damages caused by Consultant's conduct, including the City's attorney's fees. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant and /or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City's right to review any such 1;'J response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response (B) Consultant covenants that neither they nor any officer or principal of their firm has any interest in, or shall they acquire any interest, directly or indirectly which will conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of their services hereunder Specifically, in this connection, Consultant shall not provide any services to any other person, organization, public entity, or business that relates to airports in the Southern California region without the express written consent of the City. Consultant further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement, no person having such interest shall be employed by them as an officer, employee, agent or subcontractor with the express written consent of the City 14. DEFAULT. In the event that Consultant is in default of any provision of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the Consultant. 15. INDEMNIFICATION. Consultant agrees to the following; A. Indemnification by Consultant. Consultant will save harmless and indemnify, including, without limitation, City's defense costs (including reasonable attorney's fees), from and against any and all suits, actions, or claims, of any character whatever, brought for, or on account of, any injuries or damages sustained by any person or property resulting or arising from any negligent or wrongful act, error or omission by Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, agents, employees, or representatives, in the performance of this Agreement B. Indemnification by City City will save harmless and indemnify, including, without limitation Consultant's defense costs (including reasonable attorney's fees), from and against any and all suits, actions, or claims, of any character whatever, brought for, or on account of, any injuries or damages sustained by any person or property resulting or arising from any negligent or wrongful act, error or omission by City or any of City's officers, agents employees, or representatives, in the performance of this Agreement C. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions will survive termination of this Agreement D. The requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by Consultant as required by this Agreement, and any approval of said insurance by City, are not intended to and will not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, including, without limitation, to the provisions concerning indemnification E. Consultant represents it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the services and duties agreed to hereunder by Consultant, and City relies upon the skills and knowledge of Consultant Consultant shall perform such services and duties consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals performing similar service in the State of California F Consultant is an independent contractor and shall have no authority to bind City nor to create or incur any obligation on behalf of or liability against City, whether by contract or otherwise, unless such authority is expressly conferred under this agreement or is otherwise expressly conferred in writing by City CONSULTANT HAS READ THIS SECTION 14 IN ITS ENTIRETY AND KNOWINGLY AND WILLINGLY ACCEPTS THE OBLIGATIONS CONTAINED HEREIN 16 INSURANCE. A. Insurance Requirements. Consultant shall provide and maintain insurance acceptable to the City Attorney in full force and effect throughout the term of this Agreement, against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by Consultant, its agents, representatives or employees Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A VII Consultant shall provide the following scope and limits of insurance. (a) Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as (1) Insurance Services Office form Commercial General Liability coverage (Occurrence Form CG 0001) (ii) Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, including code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025, or equivalent forms subject to the written approval of the City (iii) Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the Labor Code of State of California and Employer's Liability insurance and covering all persons providing services on behalf of the Consultant and all risks to such persons under 13 this Agreement. (Not needed if Self- employed with no employees ) (iv) Errors and omissions liability insurance appropriate to the Consultant's profession (b) Minimum Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits of insurance no less than (i) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the activities related to this Agreement or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit (ii) Automobile Liability: Including owned, non - owned and hired vehicles for bodily injury and property damage with (See cover letter (page 1) for actual dollar level Requirements): At least $1,000,000 per occurrence. $100,000 - $300,000 per occurrence. As required by State Statutes A copy of your current policy must be submitted naming yourself and or your company (iii) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liabilit Workers' Compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident (iv) Errors and Omissions or Malpractice or Professional Liability: At least $1,000,000 per occurrence B. Other Provisions. Insurance policies required by this Agreement shall contain the following provisions (a) All Policies. Each insurance policy required by this paragraph 15 shall be endorsed and state the coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by the insurer or either party to this Agreement, reduced in coverage or in limits except after 30 days' prior written notice by Certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City (c) (b) General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages. (1) City, its officers, officials, and employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects. liability arising out of activities Consultant performs, products and completed operations of Consultant, premises owned, occupied or used by Consultant, or automobiles owned, leased or hired or borrowed by Consultant The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City, its officers, officials, or employees (ii) Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respect to City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers Any insurance or self insurance maintained by City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, Consultant's insurance (iii) Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability (v) Any failure to comply with the reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers Coverage. Unless the City Manager otherwise agrees in writing, the insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its officers, officials, employees and agents for losses arising from work performed by Consultant for City B. Other Requirements. Consultant agrees to deposit with City, at or before the effective date of this contract, certificates of insurance necessary to satisfy City that the insurance provisions of this contract have been complied with The City Attorney may require that Consultant furnish City with copies of original endorsements effecting coverage required by this Section The certificates and endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf City reserves the right to inspect complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time 133 (a) Consultant shall furnish certificates and endorsements from each subcontractor identical to those Consultant provides. (b) Any deductibles or self - insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self - insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers, or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, defense expenses and claims (c) The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance shall not be construed to limit Consultants liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions and requirements of this Agreement 17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement is the complete, final, entire and exclusive expression of the Agreement between the parties hereto and supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter herein. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations by any party which are not embodied herein and that no other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid and binding 18. GOVERNING LAW. The City and Consultant understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement Any litigation concerning this Agreement shall take place in the Los Angeles County Superior Court 19. ASSIGNMENT OR SUBSTITUTION. City has an interest in the qualifications of and capability of the persons and entities who will fulfill the duties and obligations imposed upon Consultant by this Agreement In recognition of that interest, neither any complete nor partial assignment of this Agreement may be made by Consultant nor changed, substituted for, deleted, or added to without the prior written consent of City. Any attempted assignment or substitution shall be ineffective, null, and void, and constitute a material breach of this Agreement entitling City to any and all remedies at law or in equity, including summary termination of this Agreement 20. MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT. The terms of this Agreement can only be modified in writing approved by the City Council and the Consultant The parties agree that this requirement for written modifications cannot be waived and any attempted waiver shall be void i.�4 21. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Consultant warrants and represents that he /she /they has /have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of his /her /their corporation and warrants and represents that he /she /they has /have the authority to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 22. NOTICES. Notices shall be given pursuant to this Agreement by personal service on the party to be notified, or by written notice upon such party deposited in the custody of the United States Postal Service addressed as follows CA. Jeff Stewart City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, California 90245 -3895 Telephone (310) 524 -2301 Facsimile (310) 322 -7137 Consultant: David A Herbst The MWW Group 660 South Figueroa Street, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone (213) 486 -6560 Facsimile (213) 486 -6501 The notices shall be deemed to have been given as of the date of personal service, or three (3) days after the date of deposit of the same in the custody of the United States Postal Service 23. SEVERABILITY. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of the other provisions of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written Company Name The MWW Group By Title 135 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO Mayor ATTEST Cindy Mortesen City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mark D Hensley City Attorney 1,iii MEMORANDUM September 28, 2005 TO: Jeff Stewart/City Manager FM: David A Herbst Senior Vice President & General Manager RE: Continued Public Affairs Work On LAX Issues The future of the LAX Master Plan (Alternative D) has reached Its most critical juncture — El Segundo's litigation against the Master Plan is about to be heard In court as Intensive negotiations continue with the new City of Los Angeles administration, Currently, on behalf of the City of El Segundo, MWW is engaged In critical negotiations with representatives of the City of Los Angeles to secure an enforceable agreement to constrain the growth of LAX as well as other points of importance to El Segundo These negotiations, matched with the timing of the litigation necessitate continuing an aggressive public relations /public affairs effort As part of our ongoing work, MWW Group will • Guide and advise on discussions with City of LA officials critical to the future of LAX; • Manage negotiations with the Mayor, City Council and key city departments in LA, Including LAWA, • Continue to outreach to appropriate coalition partners as well as key civic and elected leaders In support of El Segundo's legal and public positions, • Continue to engage the media in support of El Segundo's efforts At this critical puncture we appreciate the opportunity to continue to work for the City of El Segundo Thank you 660 South Figueroa Street Suite 1400 I Los Angeles, CA 90017 I tel 213 486 6560 I fax 213 486 6501 ' www mww com Chicago Los Angeles New Jersey New York Seattle Washington, D C EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 4, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING. Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION' Consideration and possible action for final acceptance of the Clubhouse HVAC Refurbishment (located at 300 E Pine Avenue) — Project No PW 05 -04 (Final Contract Cost = $25,000 00), and for the Clubhouse Roof Refurbishment and Maintenance Project — Project No PW 05 -05 al Contract Cost = $16,921 ACTION- Recommendation — (1) Accept the work as complete, (2) Authorize the City Clerk to file Notices of Completion in the County Recorder's Office and /or, (3) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION. On April 5, 2005 the City Council awarded contracts to Cal -Air, Inc for the Clubhouse HVAC Refurbishment in the amount of $25,000 00 and to Best Roofing and Waterproofing, Inc for the Clubhouse Roof Refurbishment and Maintenance in the amount of $16,921 00 Both of these contracts have now been completed to the satisfaction of the City Staff recommends acceptance of these projects as complete ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS- Notices of Completion FISCAL IMPACT' Operating Budget. Amount Requested, Account Number Project Phase. Appropriation Required. $41,92100 $41,921.00 301 -400- 8202 -8490 ($19,121 00) 405 - 400 - 0000 -6215 ($20,000.00) 001 -400- 2601 -6206 1$ 2,800 00) Total = $41,921.00 Accept the Work as Complete No ORIGIN D DATE' St ewe Fint n, Director of Public Works 7 138 Recording Requested by and When Recorded Mad To. City Clerk, City Hall 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECT Project Name CLUBHOUSE ROOF REFURBISHMENT Project No PW — 05 -05 Notice is hereby given pursuant to State of California Civil Code Section 3093 et seq that 1 The undersigned is an officer of the owner of the interest stated below in the property hereinafter described 2 The full name of the owner is City of El Segundo 3 The full address of the owner is City Hall, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, CA, 90245 4 The nature of the interest of the owner is Public street right -of -way 5 A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was field reviewed by the City Engineer on August 18, 2005 The work done was Clubhouse Roof Refurbishment 6 On October 4, 2005, the City Council of the City of El Segundo accepted the work of this contract as being complete and directed the recording of this Notice of Completion in the Office of the County Recorder 7 The name of the Contractor for such work of improvement was Best Roofing and Waterproofing 8 The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of El Segundo, County of Los Angeles, State of California, and is described as follows Roof Refurbishment 9 The street address of said property is 300 East Pine Avenue Dated Steve Finton City Engineer VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, say I am the City Engineer of the City El Segundo, the declarant of the foregoing Notice of Completion, I have read said Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof, the same is true of my own knowledge I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing is true and correct Executed on , 2005 at El Segundo, California Steve Finton City Engineer Notice of Completions\ X39 Recording Requested by and When Recorded Mail To City Clerk, City Hall 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECT Project Name CLUBHOUSE HVAC REFURBISHMENT Project No PW — 05 -04 Notice is hereby given pursuant to State of California Civil Code Section 3093 at seq that 1 The undersigned is an officer of the owner of the interest stated below in the property hereinafter described 2 The full name of the owner is City of El Segundo 3 The full address of the owner is City Hall, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, CA, 90245 4 The nature of the interest of the owner is Public street right -of -way 5 A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was field reviewed by the City Engineer on August 18, 2005 The work done was Clubhouse HVAC Refurbishment 6 On October 4, 2005, the City Council of the City of El Segundo accepted the work of this contract as being complete and directed the recording of this Notice of Completion in the Office of the County Recorder 7 The name of the Contractor for such work of improvement was Cal -Air, Inc 8 The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of El Segundo, County of Los Angeles, State of California, and is described as follows HVAC Refurbishment 9 The street address of said property is 300 East Pine Avenue Dated Steve Finton City Engineer VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, say I am the City Engineer of the City El Segundo, the declarant of the foregoing Notice of Completion, I have read said Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof, the same is true of my own knowledge I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing is true and correct Executed on , 2005 at El Segundo, California Steve Finton City Engineer Notice of Completions\ i9►,) EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE- October 4, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Counalmember Boulgandes AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to create an ad hoc committee to consider and make recommendations to the City Council regarding the implementation of the Aquatics Master Plan. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Authorize the creation of an ad hoc committee to consider the implementation of the Aquatics Master Plan, 2) Approve the appointment of members to that committee, 3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION- The City Council adopted an Aquatics Master Plan on September 20, 2005 The plan represented the efforts of an ad hoc committee working in concert with a consultant to generate a realistic assessment of the competitive and recreational aquatics needs of the residents of El Segundo The plan, as the Council is aware, indicated a need for an additional 1.69 pools in the City and discussed potential methods of addressing that need. However, the details of plan implementation and potential funding for the additional facilities are issues that have not been addressed I am proposing the creation of an ad hoc committee comprised of myself, another member of the Council and members of the community to discuss and make recommendations regarding the implementation of the Aquatics Master Plan In addition, I am requesting the authority to serve as Chair of the Committee with the power to alter the membership of Committee, as needed The Committee would report its findings and recommendations to the City Council and then discontinue all activities upon completion of that report ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None FISCAL IMPACT: NIA Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase- Appropriation Required: Yes _ No ZB-10_Ll � 'des, Councilmember REVIEWED Y DATE: Je rt, City Manager 1 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 4, 2005 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Councllmember Boulgarides AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding a City Council Committee to discuss and make recommendations on the City's emergency services plans, Including emergency preparation, notification and response RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION. 1) Discuss and decide upon appropriate composition of a Council Committee regarding the implementation of City's emergency services plan, 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: I requested this item to be brought back during the September 20 City Council meeting During the September 6, 2005 City Council meeting, members of the Council expressed an interest to place an item on a future agenda to discuss the most appropriate implementation of the City's emergency preparedness plans Specifically, I expressed concerns that focused on public notification and properly handling those in the community who are notable and /or willing to evacuate their homes, if necessary. Accordingly, I requested that this item be placed on future Council agenda for the purpose of forming a City Council Committee to discuss such issues as emergency preparation, communication, notification and response Many of the issues are noted and discussed in the City's SEMS Multihazard Functional Plan But, it is appropriate to revisit the manner and method our staff utilizes when implementing the plan (Please see attached page marked "Background and Discussion ") ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Copy of Section 2 -2 -4 of the El Segundo Municipal Code FISCAL IMPACT: N/A Operating Budget, Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase* Appropriation Required: _Yes _ No O GINATED: DATE: September 22-, 2UUb ncilmember Jim Boul andes DATE: L 7 T: os J wart, City Manager 9 i42 Background and Discussion (con't): Subsequent to the September 4th City Council meeting, I found that Section 2 -2 -4 of the City's Municipal Code establishes a City Disaster Council The Council is composed of the Mayor, City Manager and other appointments with the advice and consent of the City Council It would be appropriate to examine the most effective utilization of the Disaster Council regardless of whether or not the Council moves forward with the creation of an ad hoc committee to examine the issues stated above 143 2 -2 -4 DISASTER COUNCIL Page I of 1 2- 2- 4'52 -2-4: DISASTER COUNCIL: A The City Disaster Council is hereby created B Composition The City Disaster Council created under the provisions of the preceding subsection shall consist of the following 1 The Mayor, who shall be chairman, 2 The City Manager, who shall be Director of Emergency Services and vice chairman, 3 The assistant director, appointed by the City Manager with the advice and consent of the City Council who, under the supervision of the Director, shall develop emergency plans and organize the emergency services program of the City, and shall have such other duties as may be assigned by the Director, 4 Such deputy directors and chiefs of emergency services as are provided for in the current emergency plan of the City, adopted pursuant to this Chapter, 5 Such representatives of civic, business, labor, veterans, professional or other organizations having an official emergency responsibility, as may be appointed by the Director with the advice and consent of the City Council C Meetings The Disaster Council shall meet upon the call of the chairman, or in his absence from the City or inability to call the meeting, upon the call of the vice chairman D Powers And Duties. It shall be the duty of the City Disaster Council and it is hereby empowered to review and recommend for adoption by the City Council, emergency and mutual aid plans and agreements and such ordinances and resolutions and rules and regulations as are necessary to implement the plans and agreements (Ord. 917, 1-4 -1977) 14 ll http //66 113 195 234 /CA/EI %20Segundo /04002000000004000 htm 9/14/2005