The URL can be used to link to this page

2007 JUL 17 - CC PACKETJ 1AER!T Nk-1000'r 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 portions of the Meeting. Additionally, the Public can comment on any Public Hearing item on the Agenda during the Public Hearing portion of such item. The time limit for comments is five (5) minutes per person. Before speaking to the City Council, please come to the podium and state: Your name and residence and the organization you represent, if desired. Please respect the time limits. Members of the Public may place items on the Agenda by submitting a Written Request to the City Clerk or City Manager's Office at least six days prior to the City Council Meeting (by 2:00 p.m. the prior Tuesday). The request must include a brief general description of the business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting. Playing of video tapes or use of visual aids may be permitted during meetings if they are submitted to the City Clerk two (2) working days prior to the meeting and they do not exceed five (5) minutes in length. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact City Clerk, 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, JULY 17, 2007 - 5:00 P.M. Next Resolution # 4513 Next Ordinance # 1406 5:00 P.M. SESSION CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATION — (Related to City Business Only — 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council. Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250. 00i SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 1. Consideration and possible action to appoint the City Manager as labor negotiator for terms and conditions of employment of City Employees Association (CEA) and Police Support Services Employees Association (PSSEA). CLOSED SESSION: The City Council may move into a closed session pursuant to applicable law, including the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54960, et sue.) for the purposes of conferring with the City's Real Property Negotiator; 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)) — 2 matters 1. City of El Segundo vs. City of Los Angeles, et. al. LASC No. BS094279 2. Solomon vs. City of El Segundo LASC No. BC372401 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(b): -0- potential case (no further public statement is required at this time); Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(c): -1- matter. DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS — EVALUATION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEE (Gov't Code §54957): -0- matter CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54957.6): -2- matter 1. Labor Negotiator: Jeff Stewart, City Manager Represented Employees: City Employees Association (CEA) 2. Labor Negotiator: Jeff Stewart, City Manager Represented Employees: Police Support Services Employees Association (PSSEA) CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8): -0- matter SPECIAL MATTERS: -1- matter Interview of candidates and potential appointments to the Recreation and Parks Commission, Library Board of Trustees, and Senior Citizen Housing Corporation Board. (Note: the interviews will commence at approximately 5:40 p.m. and take place in the West Conference Room.] 002 2 HF.RIT %_ 20 L 'J• 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 portions of the Meeting. Additionally, the Public can comment on any Public Hearing item on the Agenda during the Public Hearing portion of such item. The time limit for comments is five (5) minutes per person. Before speaking to the City Council, please come to the podium and state: Your name and residence and the organization you represent, if desired. Please respect the time limits. Members of the Public may place items on the Agenda by submitting a Written Request to the City Clerk or City Manager's Office at least six days prior to the City Council Meeting (by 2:00 p.m. the prior Tuesday). The request must include a brief general description of the business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting. Playing of video tapes or use of visual aids may be permitted during meetings if they are submitted to the City Clerk two (2) working days prior to the meeting and they do not exceed five (5) minutes in length. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact City Clerk, 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, JULY 17, 2007 - 7:00 P.M. Next Resolution # 4513 Next Ordinance # 1406 7:00 P.M. SESSION CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION — Bishop Craig Layne, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Councilmember Bill Fisher 003 PRESENTATIONS - (a) Proclamation commending the Space and Missile Systems Center team on their attainment of 50 consecutive launch milestone. (b) Proclamation commemorating July 22, 2007 as National Parents Day in El Segundo. (c) Presentation to the Council by the South Bay Cities Council of Governments. ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS - (Related to City Business Only - 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council. Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250. While all comments are welcome, the Brown Act does not allow Council to take action on any item not on the agenda. The Council will respond to comments after Public Communications is closed. A. PROCEDURAL MOTIONS Consideration of a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions on the Agenda by title only. Recommendation - Approval. B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS 1. Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing regarding (1) introducing and waiving first reading of an Ordinance, adopting a First Amendment to Development Agreement No. 03 -01 with Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners, 2, LLC and Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners, 3, LLC to (a) readopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations and (b) allow for one health club or fitness center that does not exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable area for the property located at 710 -850 South Sepulveda Boulevard, 700 -740 Allied Way, and 2005 -2015 East Park Place; (2) schedule second reading and adoption for August 7, 2007; and (3) take such additional, related, action that may be desirable. (Fiscal Impact: None) Recommendation - (1) Open Public Hearing; (2) Discussion; (3) Introduce and waive first reading of an ordinance amending Development Agreement No. 03 -01 for Plaza El Segundo to allow one health club or fitness center that does not exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable area; (4) Schedule second reading and adoption of the Ordinance for August 7, 2007; and (5) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 004 C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 2. Consideration and possible action to amend El Segundo Municipal Code Section 7 -1 in its entirety to regulate public nuisances, including graffiti. (Net Fiscal Impact to City: None) Recommendation — (1) Introduction of ordinance and reading by title only; (2) Schedule second reading and adoption of ordinance for the August 7, 2007 Council Meeting; (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 3. Consideration and possible action to receive and file report on Recreation Vehicle (RV) parking within the city and survey of other cities regarding RV parking. (Fiscal Impact: None) Recommendation — (1) Receive and file report; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS 4. Consideration and possible action regarding the announcement of the appointment of candidates to the Recreation and Parks Commission, Library Board of Trustees and Senior Citizen Housing Corporation Board. Recommendation — (1) Announce the appointees to the Recreation and Parks Commission, Library Board of Trustees and Senior Citizen Housing Corporation Board, if any; (2) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. 5. Consideration and possible action to receive and file the Annual Report of the Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee ( CIPAC). Oral presentation will be made by CIPAC Chairman Mr. Jason Aro. (Fiscal Impact: None) Recommendation — (1) Receive and file the Annual Report of CIPAC; (2) Receive the oral presentation; and (3) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. 6. Consideration and possible action regarding Downtown Subcommittee status report and recommendations for Downtown El Segundo gateway signage design and signage locations. (Fiscal Impact: None) Recommendation — (1) Receive a progress report from the Downtown Subcommittee; (2) Approve gateway signage design and sign locations; (3) Request staff prepare cost detail for signage fabrication and installation; (4) Report back to Council with a funding plan; (5) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 005 5 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. 7. Warrant Numbers 2560189 to 2560448 on Register No. 18 in the total amount of $910,832.43 and Wire Transfers from 6/8/07 through 6121/07 in the total amount of $1,483,440.98 and Warrant Numbers 2560449 to 2560664 on Register No. 19 in the total amount of $1,883,119.75 and Wire Transfers from 6/22/07 through 7/5/07 in the total amount of $1,165,440.97 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. 8. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of June 19, 2007. Recommendation — Approval. 9. Consideration and possible action to waive the formal bidding process per the El Segundo Municipal Code Sec. 1 -7 -10 and authorize the Fire Department to purchase WebEOC Crisis Information Management Software to implement in the City Emergency Operations Center. (Fiscal Impact: $55,050) Recommendation — (1) The City Council waive the formal bidding process per the El Segundo Municipal Code Sec. 1 -7 -10, and authorize the Fire Department to purchase WebEOC Crisis Information Management Software; and (2) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. 10. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of a resolution authorizing the annual destruction of identified records in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 34090 of the Government Code of the State of California. (Fiscal Impact: Not to exceed $1,000) Recommendation — (1) Adopt Resolution authorizing the destruction of certain records; (2) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. 6 ()06 I 1. Consideration and possible action regarding a Resolution providing for salary and benefit changes to Chapter 1A2 (Management - Confidential Series) of the El Segundo Administrative Code and a Resolution updating the Nationwide Retirement Solutions Governmental Deferred Compensation Matching Plan and Trust Plan. (Fiscal Impact: $185,895) Recommendation — (1) Adopt the attached Resolutions; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 12. Consideration and possible action regarding amending the City Manager's contract and authorize payment of the bonus provided for in the City Manager's current contract. (Potential Fiscal Impact Approximately $18,000) Recommendation — (1) Approve Amendment No. 2 to the City Manager's Contract; (2) Authorize payment of the $17,500 bonus provided for in the City Manager's current contract: (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 13. Consideration and possible action regarding a license agreement for the installation of an overhead canopy in the airspace above the public right -of -way at 347 Main Street. (Fiscal Impact: None) Recommendation — (1) Authorize the City Manager to execute a license agreement with Kirk Lebowe and James Savela for installation of an overhead canopy and facade in the airspace above the right -of -way at 347 Main Street; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 14. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of plans and specifications for Replacement of Water Mains, located at 600 -700 block of Lomita and Sierra Streets, 800 block of Bungalow Drive, 800 block of Maryland Street and 900 -1000 block of Walnut Avenue. Approved Capital Improvement Project — Project No. PW 07 -10. (Estimated Cost: $832,000) Recommendation — (1) Approve Plans and Specifications; (2) Authorize staff to advertise the project for the receipt of construction bids; and (3) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. 15. Consideration and possible action regarding the award of a contract to Shaw Industries Inc. for the installation of new carpeting at Joslyn Center. (Fiscal Impact: $11,418.03) Recommendation — (1) Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract in a form as approved by the City Attorney with Shaw Industries Inc. in the amount of $11,418.03 by piggybacking onto a State of California Contract No. 4- 97- 72 -0008A for replacement of carpeting at Joslyn Center; (2) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. 7 007 16. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of plans and specifications for the slurry sealing of Sycamore Avenue from Penn Street to Sheldon Street and streets in the area bounded by Sheldon Street, Mariposa Avenue, El Segundo Boulevard and the west City Limits. Project No. PW 07 -11. (Fiscal Impact: $226,000) Recommendation — (1) Adopt plans and specifications; (2) Authorize staff to advertise the project for receipt of construction bids; (3) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. 17. Consideration and possible action to award a Standard Public Works Contract to All American Asphalt Inc. for Rehabilitation on the westbound lanes of Rosecrans Avenue from Douglas Street to Sepulveda Boulevard in the amount of $226,863. Approved Capital Improvement Project — Project No. PW 07 -08. (Contract Amount = $226,863) Recommendation — (1) Authorize the City Manager to execute a Standard Public Works Contract in a form as approved by the City Attorney with All American Asphalt Inc. in the amount of $226,863; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 18. Consideration and possible action regarding the award of a contract to C.C. Layne and Sons Inc. for the construction and installation of new custom cabinets at Camp Eucalyptus. (Fiscal Impact: $17,882) Recommendation -- (1) Award the contract to C. C. Layne and Sons Inc. and authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement for services; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 19. Consideration and possible action regarding approval to waive rental fees per Municipal Code Section 8 -8 -7 D 1 for the use of Recreation Park facilities for the United States Coast Guard's 217th Birthday Celebration Picnic. (Fiscal Impact: $2,670) Recommendation — (1) Approve fee waiver per Municipal Code Section 8 -8 -7 D 1 for use of Recreation Park facilities by the United States Coast Guard to host it's 217th Birthday Celebration on August 3, 2007; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. IN* 20. Consideration and possible action to waive the formal bidding process and approve the purchase of 40 TASER International Model X26 Tasers with digital cameras and holsters from Pro Force Law Enforcement in an amount not to exceed $56,832 from the asset forfeiture fund. (Fiscal Impact: None) Recommendation — (1) Pursuant to El Segundo Municipal Code Sec. 1 -7 -10, waive the formal bid process based on a sole source vendor for the purchase of 40 TASER International Model X26 Tasers with digital cameras and holsters from Pro Force Law Enforcement; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 21. Consideration and possible action regarding award of contracts to: S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. for construction related to Group 21 (42 residences) and Group 22 (17 residences) of the Residential Sound Insulation (RSI) Program. (Estimated construction cost and retention: $1,840,740) Recommendation — (1) Award contract to S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. for Group 21; (2) Reject bid from WE Construction, Inc. for Groups 21 and 22; (3) Accept the withdrawal of bid from Ardalan Construction Company for Group 22; (4) Award contract to S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. for Group 22; (5) Authorize the City Manager to execute construction contracts in a form approved by the City Attorney; and (6) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 22. Consideration and possible action regarding an extension of the Funding Agreement extending financial assistance to the El Segundo Unified School District ( ESUSD) for the purpose of school facilities and programs. (Fiscal Impact: $250,000) Recommendation — (1) Approve a one -year extension to the Funding Agreement with the ESUSD in a form approved by the City Attorney; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA F. NEW BUSINESS G. REPORTS — CITY MANAGER H. REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS — CITY CLERK 9 009 J. REPORTS — CITY TREASURER K. REPORTS — CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Fisher - Council Member Jacobson — Council Member Boulgarides — Mayor Pro Tern Busch - Mayor McDowell — 23. Consideration of possible action regarding the City's position on U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement. (Fiscal Impact: None) Recommendation — (1) Approve resolution endorsing the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. 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 sea.) for the purposes of conferring with the City's Real Property Negotiator, and /or conferring with the City Attorney on potential and /or existing litigation; and /or discussing matters covered under Government Code Section §54957 (Personnel); and /or conferring with the City's Labor Negotiators. REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION (if required) 10 010 ADJOURNMENT POSTED: DATE: TIME: NAME: I►il rortamatt"On 4Citp of Cl *tguubo, Calif oruia WHEREAS, The El Segundo City Council supports the military, civilian, and contractor personnel of the Space and Missile Systems Center, who develop, acquire, field and sustain the world's premier space and missile capabilities for protecting and defending the security of our nation; and WHEREAS, The Space and Missile Systems Center attained on March 8`11, the 50" successful consecutive Department of Defense launch; thereby establishing a remarkable and unprecedented record of achievement in support of their mission; and WHEREAS, The City of El Segundo and the Los Angeles Air Force Base, home to the Space and Missile System Center, have enjoyed a mutually beneficial partnership in support of our community's well -being and our nation's security; and WHEREAS, El Segundo's citizens are proud to have as neighbors the fine men and women of the Space and Missile Systems Center, and desire to acknowledge the noble cause and commitment of the Space and Missile Systems Center team in their quest to preserve the peace and win conflicts in the service of our nation. NOW, THEREFORE, the Mayor and Members of the City Council of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby congratulate and commend the entire Space and Missile Systems Center team on their attainment of this unprecedented 50 consecutive launch milestone, and give thanks to one and all for their dedicated and self -less service to our community and nation. a:. 012 rortamatt"On 4Citp of el 6egunbo, Ca(ifornta WHEREAS, In every culture and time period, the family has stood as the most fundamental human institution, the starting point of life, the sustainer of well - being, and the school of love. WHEREAS, Commitment to family has always been a core value, however, what was often held as common value, recognized as common sense, even understood as self - evident in the past, is sometimes not so today. WHEREAS, As our nation struggles with effects of family breakdown, youth violence and a host of other critical problems, more and more voices are calling for a re- examination of our priorities and fundamental values. WHEREAS, In 1994, President Bill Clinton signed into law the resolution adopted by the U.S. Congress establishing the fourth Sunday of every July as Parents' Day, a perennial day of commemoration similar to Mother's Day and Father's Day in order to recognize, uplift and support the role of parents in the rearing of children. WHEREAS, The establishment of Parents' Day was the result of a bipartisan, multiracial and interfaith coalition of religious civic and elected leaders who recognized the need to promote responsible parenting in our society and to uplift ideal parental role models. NOW, THEREFORE, the Mayor and Members of the City Council of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby proclaim July 22, 2007 as Parents' Day in E%Seaundo, and encourage our citizens to recognize the importance of responsible parenting in creating a healthy society. 013 Carson, El Segundo, Gardena, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Estates, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Torrance, and the Harbor City/San Pedro communities of City of Los Angeles. 014 V) The South Bay Cites Council Of Govemments (SBCCOG ) is a joint powers authority of is cities that share the goal of maximizing the quality of life and productivity of our area. Within this structure, cities maintain the qualities and characteristics that make them unique and independent, while coming together collectively to address issues of common interest for a greater good. This collective vision of what the SBCCOG can do for our communities is what motivates our city members and can best be described three ways — Pa&wship, Peisuasion, and PerAwmance. tt Overseen by a Board of Directors, the SBCCOG conducts business through committees and W > working groups made up of city elected officials, city staff, government partners, and members of Oinformation the community. These groups focus on transportation, livable communities, geographic systems (GIS ), legislation, energy, homeland security, transit, regional planning, J M'� VThe and city infrastructure. SBCCOG is proud of our accomplishments. They include: O'4� • Receiving over $600,000 for transportation studies which lead to roadway improvements — ^ v, O • Securing federal funds for $1.6 million for South Bay transportation projects in the South Bay Coastal Corridor Initiative sponsored by the SBCCOG •� • Working with transit providers to coordinate South Bay transportation services V• Operating the South Bay Energy Savings Center in partnership with Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Company, West Basin Municipal Water District and the Torrance Water Department to provide energy efficiency and water conservation resources to cities, business, and residents O• Initiating joint procurement for cities and other South Bay govemment agencies to 1 purchase energy efficiency equipment which saves them energy and money • Working with Planning Departments to adopt energy efficient policies • Sponsoring legislation to expand the SCAQMD Board to give the South Bay cities and other cities on the Westside of Los Angeles County equitable representation for making decisions on air quality improvements for our region • Monitoring legislation and coordinating South Bay responses and positions on legislation that affect the South Bay • Promoting South Bay interest in livable community concepts by providing resources to cities and the general public as well as facilitating studies that answer the question, How does mixed -use work in the South Bay? • Coordinating the efforts of South Bay business and government to address issues that arise affecting the South Bay. • Facilitating city membership in a salary and benefits information consortium resulting in saving both city staff time and resources • Acting as liaison with other governmental agencies Carson, El Segundo, Gardena, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Estates, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Torrance, and the Harbor City/San Pedro communities of City of Los Angeles. 014 c C Q n> n a E .5 E? 00 E � z S , �w g E ji FU 7211 c �. c 3 g 0 .. �o -3 m ° Fin a to E E m o `4 Y. k Cil 3 �a E _ I go 4a c E Y z $ E�? t 015 1 r] www sbesc.com South Bay Energy Savings Center South Bay Cities Council of Governments PUBLIC FACILITIES ENERGY EFFICIENCY INITIATIVE (EE +) EE+ PROGRAM ■ Delivers joint procurement initiatives targeting various energy efficiency products and services. • Available to SBCCOG member agencies and other South Bay public agencies (ie. school districts) • Provides technical resources, including assessments /audits and recommendations to improve energy efficiency and reduce costs. • To date, initiative has identified potential projects that could save South Bay public agencies over 4 million kWh of electricity savings and over $3.3 M in electricity and gas cost savings over 5 years ($663,000 per year). • Expansion of this effort to include all agencies and facilities in South Bay (including all schools) could produce an estimated 10 million kWh, 450,000 therms and $8.6 M in electricity and gas cost savings over 5 years ($17M per year). ■ All cities have been engaged. At this time, the school districts of El Segundo, Lawndale, Lennox, Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach and Torrance are exploring energy efficiency opportunities with EE+ program staff. The remaining South Bay school districts have yet to be engaged (initial meetings with staff to determine needs and potential): Centinela Valley Union High School District; Hawthorne Elementary School District; Inglewood Unified School District; Los Angeles Unified School District; Manhattan Beach Unified School District (doing Computer Network Energy Management, but not yet facilities); Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District; Wiseburn School District. Various Purchasing Initiatives Vending Machine Energy Controllers — Extremely successful first initiative with expected 100% participation from member cities by end of 2007. — Large potential remains in school districts. (Only El Segundo School District has participated to date). — Actual annual energy savings to date of 212,853 kilowatt-hours (160 units installed), estimated annual energy cost savings of $34,056 (est. 5 -year savings of $170,282). — If all school districts participate, could reach 665,000 kWh savings, $100,000 annual cost savings (500 units). — Units pay for themselves in 3 to 4 months. SBE$C is funded by California utility customers and administered by Southern California Gas Companysm and Southern California Edison, in collaboration with South Bay Cities Council of Governments, under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission through a contract awarded to SBE$C. California customers who choose to participate in this program are not obligated to purchase any additional services offered by the contractor. The trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. Additional funding provided by West Basin Municipal Water District and Torrance Municipal Water Department. 016 PUBLIC FACILITIES ENERGY EFFICIENCY INITIATIVE (EE +) page 2 Lighting Upgrades to More Efficient Technologies - Indications that between 10 and 15 cities /school districts will participate. - Request for Qualifications (RFQ) circulated in August 2006. - Request for Bids (RFB) released in November 2006. - Four qualified contractors selected in January 2007. - Site walks in process, Spring 2007. - Requires facility energy efficiency assessment arranged through SBESC. - Approximately 1.4 million kWh potential savings identified. Pool Pumping - Evaluating potential for installation of variable speed drives (VSDs) to reduce energy consumed by pumps. - Typical savings for a public pool are 50,000 kWh or $8,000 per year. - At least 15 pools could use technology resulting in over 750,000 kWh savings (per year), $120,000 in annual cost savings. - Projects usually pay for themselves in one year or less. • Computer Network Energy Management - Software to control energy use of networked machines. - Installation of system completed at Manhattan Beach School District for evaluation. - Costs to implement favor large networks of 1,500+ computer workstations. • Recreation Field Lighting - Evaluating potential. • Gas Savings Initiatives - Working with SoCalGas to evaluate potential projects, including how to collaborate with South Coast Air Quality Management District to leverage RECLAIM air credits in combination with gas EE incentives to spur early replacement of boilers that fall below 1 million Btu regulatory threshold. • Heating, Ventilation and Air - conditioning (HVAC) - Installation of adjustable -speed drives (ASD) and other upgrades. • Self- Generation - Expected in 2007. - Interest from several agencies to date, particularly with solar photovoltaics For more information, please contact Michele Swanson, (310) 543 -3022, by email: michele@sbesc.com, or Kurt Kammerer, (619) 546 -6175, by email: kjk @kjkammerer.com Oil SBESC is funded by California utility customers and administered by Southern California Gas Companysm and Southern California Edison, in collaboration with South Bay Cities Council of Governments, under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission through a contract awarded to SBESC. California customers who choose to participate in this program are not obligated to purchase any additional services offered by the contractor. The trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. Additional funding provided by West Basin Municipal Water District and Torrance Municipal Water Department. South Bay Energy $avings Center South Bay Cities Council of Governments lank 17 .. • • •Carson • El Segundo •Gardena • Hawthorne • Hermosa Beach • Inglewood • Lowndale • Lomita • Manhattan Beach • Palos Verdes Estates swrw sbesc corn • Rancho Palos Verdes • Redondo Beach • Rolling Hills • Roiling Hills Estates • Torrance • SCE Customers in San Pedro / HarborCBy South Bay Cities Council a The Gas a Southern California . West Basin Municipal a Torrance Municipal of Governments sM Company Edison Water District Water Department EE+ PROGRAM WORKSHOPS WEBSITE Incentives to bring measurable Provide training to residents, Energy saving and water dollar savings to South Bay public businesses, and public agencies conservation information j agencies and businesses through - - - - - -! on energy efficiency and water " - - - - -; resource center, plus calendar energy efficiency. conservation ! L of events VENDOR DATABASE E NEWSLETTER WWW.SBESC.COM One central location for local Publish quarterly E- Newsletter Register online for free energy vendors to register their products I - - - - -- `: highlighting energy efficiency efficiency and water and services online at and water conservation conservation workshops www.sbesc.com SUPPORT OTHER PROGRAMS COMMUNITY OUTREACH REFERRALS Encourage review of energy efficient Attend community events to build awareness - Provide a hotline referral EnergyStare qualified products as r _ distribute free energy efficient light bulbs and service for residents, well as programs offered by our ! other items as incentives to begin saving water businesses, and public partners and saving energy agencies in the South Bay i SEASONAL GIVE -AWAYS i.e. Holiday Light Exchange, Decorative Lamp Exchange F We al-so-work-w- —ith-: Economic Development Orgs Workforce Investment Boards Non - profit Organizations j Chambers of Commerce Service Clubs, HOAs Local Government Religious Facilities School Districts Local Business Developers Architects EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS - - - - -- Provide South Bay cities with brochures and other forms of jenergy efficiency and water conservation information EXHIBIT AREA Maintain an exhibit area at the Center with equipment displays, demonstration items, and rebate — -- information — J LIBRARY Maintain a library of books and tools available for check -out Para preguntas en espanol comunicate con Martha al (310) 543 -3022. South Bay Energy Savings Center 3868 Carson St., Suite 110 Torrance, CA 90503 (310) 543 -3022 www.sbesc.com VA 010 The South Bay Energy Savings Center is funded by California utility customers and administered by The Gas Companysm and Southern California Edison, in collaboration with South Bay Cities Council of Governments, under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission through a contract awarded to SBESC. California customers who choose to participate in this program are not obligated to purchase any additional services offered by the contractor. The trodemarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. Additional funding provided by West Basin Municipal Water District and Torrance Municipal Water Department. Coco's Restaurant Carson St 3868 Carson 17:1` het Amo Stagxlg Suite 110 Center Mervyn's Parking Lot (no direct access) "Hawthorne Blvd 010 The South Bay Energy Savings Center is funded by California utility customers and administered by The Gas Companysm and Southern California Edison, in collaboration with South Bay Cities Council of Governments, under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission through a contract awarded to SBESC. California customers who choose to participate in this program are not obligated to purchase any additional services offered by the contractor. The trodemarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. Additional funding provided by West Basin Municipal Water District and Torrance Municipal Water Department. South Bay Energy $avings Center South Bay Cities Council of Governments Rebates & Incentives - 2007 This is a partial list - call (310) 543 -3022 for more details Residential Electric Appliances Heating and Cooling Gas High Efficiency Clothes Washers Natural Gas Storage Water Heaters Central Natural Gas Furnaces Water High Efficiency Toilets High Efficiency Clothes Washers Commercial / Business Electric Lighting Retrofits Air Conditioning Food Service Gas Express Efficiency Rebate Program Commercial /Industrial Incentives Food Service Rebates Water Laundromat Incentive Program High Efficiency Toilets Ultra Low Flush Urinals Lighting Pool Pumps Attic Insulation Wall Insulation High Efficiency Qualified Dishwashers Ultra- Low -Flush Toilet Smart Controllers - Landscaping Vending Misers Refrigeration Motors Business Energy Efficiency Program (BEEP) Self Generation Gas Engines Restroom Retrofits Smart Irrigation Controllers Pressurized Waterbrooms Cities, School Districts and Public Agencies Electric Lighting Retrofits Vending Misers Air Conditioning Refrigeration Food Service Motors Gas Express Efficiency Rebate Program Commercial /Industrial Incentives Food Service Rebates Water Laundromat Incentive Program High Efficiency Toilets Ultra Low Flush Urinals Business Energy Efficiency Program (BEEP) Self Generation Gas Engines Restroom Retrofits Smart Irrigation Controllers Pressurized Waterbrooms 019 The South Bay Energy Savings Center (SBESC) Is funded by California utility customers and administered by The Gas Company and Southern California Edison, in partnership with South Bay Cities Council of Governments, under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission. Additional funding provided by West Basin Municipal Water District and Torrance Municipal Water Department. N ti Z <W 1T�u.. m O w O N N' P> 0 i0 L x 9 < p M J W =Z w W �Q N C C y us N 3 V o a C Z Nz �; ° 7 tE0 �0 Ldp T W u TM � f `O E C'E U d L o +�+ q O - 0 a - 0 0 c �T MW Cl- EN $E LA =03 £-vn W ^Ii 0. = Nm E E w E� ' :g 3 rn T& } N d w w E 1- 7 m. C N o Z n c ° °NE Eo € 3ti O C N u N> = " 10 > �■y ono pO uV N N O�ny� mo Z ku v o 4= yr? E Tc a4 N �m gam« ou _os ofioo � yob �� °� O�i > v 0o o E._p n� D vfcm > pL a OU7 a2'E > CA ti > n O OAK a "oov u> o N ti Z <W IA N' P> 0 c UJ x 9 < p M J W =Z w O �Q �a� 0 �u Cd�N C y ao 3 n 0 0 N d c 3 i 0 O U U m N 020 IA C y � O io v E O C y = Z' V o a C Ex v O � fsa U d L o C C V � v o� v v - 0 a - 0 0 Z - MW LA j 8 3 W E V In a,2 2 O 2 C E E w y u T rn T& } v w IA 0 u y a o E E v W g c m Q Z c n 0 0 N d c 3 i 0 O U U m N 020 D v y io v E �n ti n p W O IA E o ° d o� v v E - in o� j O 2 S6 E L } u G u -6 O W Q Z c IOU v IL E n °�4z €o an W =N� o° o °S ° "gg� com n 0 0 N d c 3 i 0 O U U m N 020 CA k 4) � � 0 0 0 0 m cn 021 )\ < m ) ` ) \7= / \ ■ 9KE U9 , ° & )/ / 7> $ Cl � 5 ( \\ k� \k 9 E S { \ k J �kk \k\ // $ coL e \ 2 @ b � = \ \ ( } n © \ \k- $fk)k, k# § k .92% U)(AU § ■e n GS ■ $ \ \ E � ) » w 0� \ CL / \ / 7 \7 E \ 2 2 )& \ /o m u § pa. CA k 4) � � 0 0 0 0 m cn 021 i ƒ m ) ` ) \7= / \ { / 9KE U9 , ° & )/ / 7> $ or 000 � 5 ( \\ k� \k 9 )\ \) E \�k\ 2 \ k J �kk \k\ // $ coL �fmf e 9 2 @ 2} §§J72«2Ee LLI & cƒ0 =22 E®.Ek n � \ \k- $fk)k, k# § k .92% U)(AU § n ■ § . . .. .. . . � CA k 4) � � 0 0 0 0 m cn 021 i ƒ k � / \ { / E @ ■f $ or 000 b )§) � )\ \) 2 q§$ @ J �kk \k\ Rte ° c $ coL �fmf e 9 2 @ k / C, g & )E)3 FT- ■ � � . .... § k .92% n CA k 4) � � 0 0 0 0 m cn 021 i ƒ / \ { / ]\ )\ \) )k E 2 @ « to k�2J §2wik § k .92% CA k 4) � � 0 0 0 0 m cn 021 rn k � k � 0 0 U Q m m 0 2� � \ ƒ { ) \ � \ ) a { E _ E /m\ ) E $ ■ 2�o f E / \ 2 r © �k/ § °%\ ){ƒ 2 E \ /x$2- C � � � � § f u g kk �c \i§# c�$ �§- § £ \§ b ))/ eee z k) {\ : . rn k � k � 0 0 U Q m m 0 2� § ƒ ) c ) _ E 2 2 _ 2�o f E { \\� e § \ \{ E k C � ®!$ kk / c�$ �§- . ��& \k% b ))/ eee z k) {\ k/« 2 ° =03» ■ u�f c ■ ƒ � (7 ■ f k q �u U \ \k& ) \ �� ! � °` k I � �k� & a ■ #3 e53EE N 3 2 ��/ LU. . . rn k � k � 0 0 U Q m m 0 2� ƒ � 00 _ E 2�o §\ { \\� e E 0 \ \{ E } / \% ®!$ kk / g 'a �0 b jk 2 k) {\ k/« a /f\ ■ tf - {\§ � (7 {a7) �(_) � U fam ) \ �� ! E3 I i/k & §\ J� N ��/ LU. . . �£E lu rn k � k � 0 0 U Q m m 0 2� ƒ 2�o §t { e E } / \% kk / g _0 2 k) {\ k/« a Z k � c {a7) �(_) � U §2]2 ) \ �� ! I § & §\ J� N ��/ � Q §m �£E \ # 7 Y£ +5 � �� ( SIL o�Kg \ \,\ Z / c rn k � k � 0 0 U Q m m 0 2� b rn 0 a Z LU J m I.L 023 ti 0 0 N d C i V O U U m !n w E m c o rn c L , E a v m 01 O c aci c � N 41 c a 0 f0 1_CO N i0 0 OI b$ u �° z R o¢ 4 t ;v8 V £ o nn w Et 'v Q� lL 3 =$ n'o v o E � o z O w� E rnt CM �co LLLLLL C f0 E r1 2 •� N M O C C O Q 0 j U _ Q N 7 is W IL u� o I �o ° y E c v m z ►y , F L'3 °u w L�f a d nrn`o m ►'+ c o c C W °' ' 3 c _ O b rn 0 a Z LU J m I.L 023 ti 0 0 N d C i V O U U m c E m c o rn c L , E a v 01 g o c aci c a2i �v c a 3 , Fwi a c° 0 =° b$ u �° z Id r „ c aEf'' � nn o v Q� lL c ai E n'o v o E � o O Q� d �rn �.�y c °:\c m To ry ivy i �� 2 O V a`i i� ° w Q 10 LioS 33,w an CL L �Q W z ►y E G C w R 3 nrn`o m b rn 0 a Z LU J m I.L 023 ti 0 0 N d C i V O U U m L L C u v i% v pl �O O N d y W O o 10 41 CL L �Q W z ►y E G C w IM nrn`o m ►'+ m o c C .0 °' ' 3 c _ O V u O h- v e 3 Ip m = D m CL U f% b rn 0 a Z LU J m I.L 023 ti 0 0 N d C i V O U U m r- 40 0 N d C 7 i I 0 0 U U m N 02 4 V) v i o n. o Y J N ` o N c L a W u n CL = L o 0 � N N N z 0 m v o u J N Z W J ° p °' a E E bS ° (D Z N w u E Y a ` O v = �E Z J v r u p dS ' d L E E E w $ w = c N m Q L um a a � p = C I p Z Z ~ U V) O c �"� qooLEYn -T' o u �!qq� ou�j2�3$�m �m vim= c O L N o�Z tiUtut9i °a ~ti< WiL 0ptSi3x °a H Q ao uCi w ti(31 . .-; li r- 40 0 N d C 7 i I 0 0 U U m N 02 4 V) C`' n• i o n. � w J � ` o N c tU c W N cc m o y L E t3 z tz - to > btu E J C c C ` p W W o L ° o o�v (C'.', v > 6 (> :E ii tC O wE_c0,amcu � J v r � u `f I o c N -C 67: L d L E `� N L = E E C io E 1- Z :3>' -moo{/� u n N cm Z Z ~ ��3 : ap c- as o Co N= N ap n W U V) O c C> n O u . . . . . . . . . . O L N E H to W N W La -Z Q L at N w g � CO L o v o Y I n o v �i _ rn c as � E & to ((( r a Ln c r- 40 0 N d C 7 i I 0 0 U U m N 02 4 V) �o � w J Lnn c m tU c W N cc m o y L E t3 O - to > btu E J C c C ` p W Er E �$3 *-= o ov I W o o�v (C'.', v > 6 (> :E ii tC C7 wE_c0,amcu � J v r � u `f I o c N -C 67: L d L E `� N L = E E C io E 1- Z :3>' -moo{/� u n N cm Z Q n• ��3 : ap c- as o Co N= N ap n W C► C> c t0 O toil L L 10 r: 3tiSZLoU<wu3fo_n. u . . . . . . . . . . = O. H to r- 40 0 N d C 7 i I 0 0 U U m N 02 4 V) to CT C L O u !^ 1-4 rij o ° u`, v v r d L E 3 - o E N C °� M L u o u = 3 0 to B to E -Z w o n o CT o Y I n v �i _ = LLI E & to ((( $2 a c a p 7 ucj 0 v w w U. r� LL o o O W tn°' >� a� c n u > ° $ = a, LL tR f u R u1 ID n 000 r- 40 0 N d C 7 i I 0 0 U U m N 02 4 V) 0 7 0 E � tp a CL O yy 3 Im 3 ti 0 0 N d C 3 I 0 O U U m N M EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA DESCRIPTION: MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA HEADING: Special Orders of Business Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing regarding (1) introducing and waiving first reading of an Ordinance, adopting a First Amendment to Development Agreement No. 03 -01 with Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners, 2, LLC and Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners, 3, LLC to (a) readopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations and (b) allow for one health club or fitness center that does not exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable area for the property located at 710 -850 South Sepulveda Boulevard, 700 -740 Allied Way, and 2005 -2015 East Park Place; (2) schedule second reading and adoption for August 7, 2007; and (3) take such additional, related action that may be desirable. (Fiscal Impact: None) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1. Open Public Hearing; 2. Discussion; 3. Introduce and waive first reading of an ordinance amending Development Agreement No. 03 -01 for Plaza El Segundo to allow one health club or fitness center that does not exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable area; 4. Schedule second reading and adoption of the Ordinance for August 7, 2007; and /or; 5. Alternatively, discuss and take other actions related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: (See next page... ) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1. Development Agreement No. 03-01, adopted on March 15, 2005 2. Proposed Ordinance including First Amendment to Development Agreement No. 0301 And Statement of Overriding Considerations 3. Applicant Letter of Request Regarding Proposed First Amendment to Plaza El Segundo Development Agreement 4. Planning Commission Staff Report dated June 28, 2007 5. Draft Planning Commission June 28, 2007 Meeting Minutes 6. Property Location Map FISCAL IMPACT: None Operating Budget: N/A Amount Requested: NIA Account Number: N/A Project Phase: N/A Appropriation Required: _ Yes X No ORIGINATED BY: / DATE: 7 /0 -A;7 Gary Chicots, Direct f Plan g and Building Safety REVIEWED BY* DATE: -� ( � U� Jeff Ste ' Manager ■J STAFF REPORT: July 17, 2007 Page 2 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: (cont.) On March 15, 2005, the City Council approved the Plaza El Segundo Development Project. The Plaza El Segundo Development Project is regulated by the development standards in the C-4 Zone (ESMC Chapter 15 -5G), conditions of approval, mitigation measures, and the requirements adopted in Development Agreement No. 03 -01. As construction, marketing and leasing of the Plaza El Segundo Development Project proceeds, an issue arose that generated the proposed request by the developer, Rosecrans- Sepulveda Partners, 2, LLC and Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners, 3, LLC, to amend Section 4.1.6 of the Agreement. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve the Plaza El Segundo Development Agreement. Section 4.1.6 of the Agreement ( "Health Clubs and Fitness Centers") states that "no health club or fitness center shall be permitted." The developer is requesting the following amendment to Section 4.1.6: "Section 4.1.6 Health Clubs and Fitness Centers. No health club or fitness center shall be permitted; provided, however, one (1) health club or fitness center shall be permitted, provided such use does not exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable floor area." The request for the amendment to § 4.1.6 of the Plaza El Segundo Development Agreement is intended to provide a greater mix of uses that are designed to both help obtain and retain other complimentary retail uses in a less visible portion of the shopping center site. The change also creates flexibility in leasing to a diverse and high -end tenant mix that will accommodate both consumer demand and the protection of high sales tax revenues within the range of uses permitted in the C-4 Zone. Health clubs and fitness centers were originally prohibited because a large, full service, health club facility of approximately 40,000 to 50,000 square feet was proposed that would provide little retail sales tax generation and would require a large number of parking spaces with high traffic generation. The proposed fitness center would be a small facility limited to yoga and pilates with a retail sales component (20% of the floor area) that would generate retail sales tax and that would have minimal impact to parking usage and traffic generation. The use would be compatible with other retail uses in the shopping center and would help attract patrons for neighboring retail stores. The existing Development Agreement and the proposed amendment applies to the portion of the property labeled as the "Plaza El Segundo Site" in the attached location map (excerpt taken from the Final EIR). General Plan Consistency The El Segundo General Plan land use designation for the proposed Site is currently Commercial Center. The proposed project and its consistency with relevant Element Goals, Objectives and Policies of the City of El Segundo General Plan are discussed below. 027 STAFF REPORT: July 17, 2007 Page 3 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: (cont.) Land Use The General Plan contains relevant Goals, Objectives and Policies in the Land Use Element. Goal LU4 is to "provide a stable tax base for the City through development of new commercial uses, primarily within a mixed -use environment, without adversely affecting the viability of Downtown." Objective LU4 -1 is to "promote the development of high quality retail facilities in proximity to major employment centers." The proposed health club or fitness center within the Plaza El Segundo Development project would be located in close proximity to major employment centers and contributes to the employment opportunities in the City. Objective LU4 -4 is to "provide areas where development has the flexibility to mix uses, in an effort to provide synergistic relationships which have the potential to maximize economic benefit, reduce traffic impacts, and encourage pedestrian environments." The proposed health club or fitness center within the Plaza El Segundo Development project would help to provide synergistic relationships with the other retail businesses in the shopping center which would have the potential to maximize economic benefits; reduce traffic impacts because of reduced number of vehicle trips to multiple commercial uses within the shopping center; and to encourage greater pedestrian activities within the shopping center. Its addition would not result in a greater environmental impact than anticipated in the Plaza El Segundo FEIR and Statement of Overriding Considerations certified March 15, 2005. Economic Development The General Plan contains relevant Goals, Objectives, and Policies in the Economic Development Element. The goal of Objective ED1 -1 is building "support and cooperation among the City of El Segundo and its businesses and residential communities for the mutual benefits derived from the maintenance and expansion of El Segundo's economic base." The proposed amendment to allow one health club or fitness center not to exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable floor area would increase and further stabilize the City' tax base through development of new commercial businesses, specifically by generating additional business license and sales tax revenue for the City's General Fund. According to Policy ED1 -1.2, long -run efforts for economic development should focus on "diversification of El Segundo's economic base in order to meet quality of life goals." and Policy ED1 -2.2 "maintains and promotes land uses that improve the City's tax base, balancing economic development and quality of life goals." The proposed amendment to allow one health club or fitness center not to exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable floor area would further diversify El Segundo's economic base and meet quality of life goals by providing a new use (yoga and pilates facility) that does not currently exist in the City. 02 8 STAFF REPORT: July 17, 2007 Page 4 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: (cont.) Environmental Review The proposed amendment to the Development Agreement is consistent with the FEIR, entitled Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2003121037), certified by the City Council on March 15, 2005 and the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit "A" to Resolution No. 4415) adopted in Section 5 of City Council Resolution No. 4415. None of the elements set forth in Public Resources Code § 21166 or CEQA Guidelines § 15162 exists. Accordingly, no subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report, Mitigated Negative Declaration or Addendum is required to be prepared before adopting the draft Ordinance approving the proposed amendment. Planning Commission Hearing The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment to the Development Agreement and adopted Resolution No. 2625 recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance to amend Development Agreement No. 03 -01 to allow one health club or fitness center not to exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable floor area within the Plaza El Segundo development project site. Conclusion The Planning and Building Safety Department recommends that the City Council (1) introduce and waive first reading of the attached draft Ordinance, adopting a First Amendment to Development Agreement No. 03 -01 with Rosecrans- Sepulveda Partners, 2, LLC and Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners, 3, LLC to (a) readopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations and (b) allow for one health club or fitness center that does not exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable area for the property located at 710 -850 South Sepulveda Boulevard, 700 -740 Allied Way, and 2005 -2015 East Park Place; and (2) schedule second reading and adoption for August 7, 2007. PAPlanning & Building SafeWrojects \751 - 775 \EA - 763 \Council Reports\ PlazaESDAFirstAmend .2007.07.17.CC Repo rt.doc 029 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF EL SEGUNDO 350 Main Street El Segundo, California 90245 EXEMPT FROM RECORDER'S FEES Pursuant to Government Code § 6103 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO AND ROSECRANS- SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, LLC (AREA A) THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE RECORDED WITHIN TEN DAYS OF EXECUTION BY ALL PARTIES HERETO PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF GOVERNMENT CODE §65868.5 05 0797975 4438611060366v20 1`J TABLE OF CONTENTS Pa e 1. Recitals ......................................................................................................... ..............................1 2. Property Subject to this Agreement ............................................................. ..............................3 3. Binding Effect .............................................................................................. ..............................3 3.1 Constructive Notice and Acceptance .................................................. ..............................3 3.2 Rights to Assign .................................................................................. ..............................3 3.3 Liabilities Upon Transfer .................................................................... ..............................3 4. Development of the Property ....................................................................... ..............................4 4.1 Permitted Uses, Density ...................................................................... ..............................4 4.1.1 Food To Go Restaurant ........................................................... ..............................4 4.1.2 Grocery Store ........................................... ............................... 4.1.3 Fast Food Restaurants ............................................................. ..............................4 4.1.4 Banks and Day Spas ................................................................ ..............................4 4.1.5 Restaurants .............................................................................. ..............................4 4.1.6 Health Clubs and Fitness Centers ........:................................... ..............................4 4.2 Development Standards ...................................................................... ..............................5 4.2.1 Tenant/Owner Use Space ........................................................ ..............................5 4.2.2 Limitations on Minimum Square Footage of Buildings and Space ......................5 4.2.3 Transfer of Development Rights ............................................. ..............................5 4.3 Building Standards .............................................................................. ..............................5 4.4 Fees, Exactions, Mitigation Measures, Conditions, Reservations and Dedications......................................................................................... ..............................5 4.5 Use of Easements ................................................................................ ..............................6 5. Vesting of Development Rights ................................................................... ..............................6 5.1 Applicable Rul es ................................................................................. ..............................6 5.2 Entitlement to Develop ....................................................................... ..............................6 5.3 Subsequent Enactments ...................................................................... ..............................6 5.4 Future Approvals ................................................................................ ..............................6 5.4.1 Minor Modifications to Project ............................................... ..............................6 5.4.2 Modification of Project Approvals .......................................... ..............................7 5.4.3 Modifications Requiring Amendment to this Agreement ....... ..............................7 5.5 Plan Review ....................................................................................... ............................... 8 5.6 Timing of Development ...................................................................... ..............................8 5.7 Term .................................................................................................... ..............................8 5.8 Issuance of Building Permits .............................................................. ..............................9 5.9 Satisfaction of Mitigation Measures and Conditions ......................... ..............................9 5.10 Moratorium ......................................................................................... ..............................9 5.11 Performance of City Planning and Building Safety Director Duties .. ..............................9 6. Developer Agreements ................................................................................ ..............................9 6.1 General ............................................................. ............................... ........9 6.2 Development Fees .............................................................................. ..............................9 6.3 Maintenance Obligations ................................................................... .............................10 6.4 Term of Map(s) and Other Project Approvals ................................... .............................10 6.5 Sales and Use Tax ................................................... ............................... ........I0 ................. 44386 \1060366v20 1 05 0797875 031 00 00 Oo J Q� cn A W N ►� O � /b 7-. /" C2'i G CrS � �--. .-.. r-r � ►-+ �.+ i--. � � .... .--. r-. r+ r-+ i-. .-+ �• r-+ d � �O l0 �D �O �Q �p � `�' J J J ('� O� O\ O\ O1 o (y p c'p N p �g .. • Q� Q\ CL ? A N N N N N N 0 �- ►• N >! $ O CD < ('' a N j j lD CD W N O O� V� W " �' W N "' ao P:; ro C o d a.t7OY dGd(�7dw 0 CD co O N (D O + O 0 vb t�7 d►R•�, O f4 CD E3 CD ( D CD cu (D L. O CD p c b —11 0 0 cP o p 1.. 0 O .d �=• cm do 0 ..� r* :° O ZS. 0 w 0�� Ybd c °,� ,BCD � w o ° o `9 c �' °�: o'er '�, 'moo °,p �oov�o a`+ �.o �> lD ") O. c y "t OZ OM z O- G (� (� -*, ,� d b Y � b °� '-dC, I >cu p �o -C) tz o.o o ° Gay o 00� c cv CD g cu oa cuc� CD �cuo w odo ��• �aa.,�•(D 00 co p r i o o N �r °� cD o Cs W '� tp- aw � o w p' co c� 0 = c o CD ' � O �' o r. 9 o c (aka. C. �.�-w CD v o 0 a ��o ° cv °csCD m w cu� w o c o a co ad o p w 'd a w 1 am a cn o 0 r n CD Ca oro � c� p co m ... O ro O O cn O OO J J J J ON ON Ol� a\ D\ o*1 LA V, CA LA (-A t-A A P P W W W W W W N N O li 26. Cooperation Between City and Developer 27. Rules of Construction ............................... 28. Joint Preparation ........ ............................... 29. Governing Law and Venue ....................... 30. Attorneys' Fees .......... ............................... 31. Counterparts ............... ............................... 32. Weekend/Holiday Dates ........................... 33. Not a Public Dedication ............................ ............................................... .............................19 ............................................... .............................20 ............................................... .............................20 ............................................... .............................20 ............................................... .............................20 ............................................... .............................20 ............................................... .............................20 ............................................... .............................20 EXHIBIT A — PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ............................................. ............................... A -1 EXHIBIT B — ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT ..... ............................... B -1 EXHIBITC — LIST OF TENANTS ............................................................ ............................... C -1 DEFINITIONS............................................................................................. ............................... D -1 05 0797875 10 44396 \1060366v20 iii 033 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This Development Agreement (the "Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF EL SEGLJNDO, a municipal corporation (referred to hereinafter as "City") and ROSECRANS- SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, LLC, a California limited liability company (referred to hereinafter as "Developer ") as of this _ day of March, 2005. City and Developer are referred to hereinafter individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties." In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement, City and Developer agree as follows: 1. Recitals. This Agreement is made with respect to the following facts and for the following purposes, each of which is acknowledged as true and correct by the Parties: 1.1 Pursuant to Government Code Section 65865 et seq., City is authorized to enter into a binding contractual agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of such property. 1.2 Developer has an option to acquire from the property owner and has been authorized to execute this Agreement by the property owner with respect to approximately 42 acres of real property located in the City, as more specifically described by the legal description set forth in Exhibit "A ", which exhibit is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property" or "Area A "). 1.3 Developer desires to develop the Property as a retail complex comprised of approximately four - hundred twenty -five thousand (425,000) square feet that is projected to include large retail stores, specialty retail stores, sit -down restaurants and other uses (the "Project "). 1.4 City has certified a Final Environmental Impact Report for Environmental Assessment No. 631 (SCH No. 2003121037) (the "EIR "), and has approved the Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the EIR; General Plan Amendment No. 03 -4, Zone Change No. 03 -2, Zone Text Amendment No. 04 -1, Subdivision No. 03 -7 (Vesting Tentative Tract No. 061630), and this Development Agreement No. 03 -1 (the foregoing are collectively referred to as the "Project Approvals "). Developer's application for the Project Approvals was deemed complete by the City on November 10, 2004. Concurrently with the City's approval of the Project Approvals, City has also, as part of General Plan Amendment No. 03 -5, Zone Change No. 03 -3 and Zone Text Amendment No. 04 -1, re- designated and rezoned other property in the vicinity of the Property with a "Commercial Center (C -4)" land use and zoning designation (the "Other C -4 Property") a portion of which (approximately 13 acres) Developer has an option to acquire from property owner and the balance of which (approximately 42 acres) is owned by third parties. 1.5 By this Agreement, City desires to obtain the binding agreement of Developer to develop the Property in accordance with the Project Approvals, Applicable Rules and this Agreement. In consideration thereof, City agrees to limit the future exercise of certain of its governmental and proprietary powers to the extent specified in this Agreement. 1.6 By this Agreement, Developer desires to obtain the binding agreement of City to permit the development of the Property in accordance with the Project Approvals, the 05 0797875 (� 44386 \1060366v20 1 V 3 4 Applicable Rules (as hereinafter defined) and this Agreement. In consideration thereof, Developer agrees to waive its rights, if any, to challenge legally the limitations on density and use imposed upon development of the Property and other restrictions and obligations set forth in this Agreement and the Project Approvals. 1.7 City and Developer have acknowledged and agreed that the consideration that is to be exchanged pursuant to this Agreement is fair, just and reasonable and that this Agreement is consistent with the General Plan of City. 1.8 This Agreement is intended to provide flexible entitlements, within the parameters set forth herein and subject to the terms and conditions hereof, to meet the changing market demands that are likely to occur throughout the buildout of the Project. 1.9 The proposed Project uses are consistent with the City's General Plan, as amended, (the "General Plan "). 1.10 Development of the Project will further the comprehensive planning objectives contained within the General Plan, and will result in public benefits, including, among others, the following: 1.10.1 Fulfilling long -term economic and social goals for City and the community; 1. 10.2 Providing fiscal benefits to City's general fund in terms of increased employment and utility, business license, property and other tax revenues, which are anticipated to exceed $1,000,000 annually; 1.10.3 Providing both short -term construction employment (estimated to be approximately 250 persons) and long -term permanent employment (estimated to be approximately 952 persons) within City; 1. 10.4 Phasing the construction of public infrastructure improvements with private development; 1.10.5 Eliminating blighted areas and providing an attractive urban destination; 1. 10.6 Facilitating environmental remediation on and around the Property; 1. 10.7 Funding planned circulation element improvements at no cost to the City; and 1.10.8 Creating significant offsite public improvements, including streets, signals, medians and landscaping. 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 2 035 1.11 On November 15, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City commenced a duly noticed public hearing on this Agreement, continued the public hearing to December 15, 2004 and at the conclusion of the hearing recommended approval of the Agreement. 1.12 On February 15, 2005, the City Council of the City ( "City Council") commenced a duly noticed public hearing on this Agreement, and continued the public hearing to March 1, 2005 and at the conclusion of the hearing certified the EIR by Resolution No. 4415 and approved this Agreement by Ordinance No. 1382 (the "Enabling Ordinance "). 2. Property ubiect to this Agreement. All of the Property shall be subject to this Agreement. 3. Binding Effect. The burdens of this Agreement are binding upon, and the benefits of the Agreement inure to the City and the Developer to the extent the Developer ultimately exercises its option to purchase the Property and each successive successor in interest thereto and constitute covenants that run with the Property. Any and all rights and obligations that are attributed to the Developer under this Agreement shall run with the land irrespective of whether the Developer exercises its option to purchase the Property. In addition, if Developer does not exercise such option, it shall still be obligated to fulfill the conditions set forth in Section 6.8 of this Agreement. 3.1 Constructive Notice and Acceptance. Every person who acquires any right, title or interest in or to any portion of the Property in which the Developer has a legal interest is, and shall be, conclusively deemed to have consented and agreed to be bound by this Agreement, whether or not any reference to this Agreement is contained in the instrument by which such person acquired such right, title or interest. 3.2 Rights to Assign. Developer may assign or transfer its rights and obligations under this Agreement with respect to the Property, or any portion thereof, to any person at any time during the term of this Agreement without approval of the City. 3.3 Liabilities Upon Transfer. Upon the delegation of the duties and obligations under this Agreement and the sale, transfer or assignment of all or any portion of the Property, Developer will be released from its obligations under this Agreement with respect to the Property, or portion thereof, so transferred arising subsequent to the effective date of such transfer, if (i) Developer has provided to the City prior or subsequent written notice of such transfer and (ii) the transferee has agreed in writing to be subject to all of the provisions hereof applicable to the portion of the Property so transferred by executing an Assignment and Assumption Agreement in the form of Exhibit "B" attached hereto. Upon any transfer of any portion of the Property and the express assumption of Developer's obligations under this Agreement by such transferee, the City agrees to look solely to the transferee for compliance by such transferee with the provisions of this Agreement as such provisions relate to the portion of the Property acquired by such transferee. Any such transferee shall be entitled to the benefits of this Agreement as "Developer" hereunder and shall be subject to the obligations of this Agreement applicable to the parcel(s) transferred. A default by any transferee shall only affect that portion of the Property owned by such transferee and shall not cancel or diminish in any way Developer's rights hereunder with respect to any portion of the Property not owned by such 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 3 tran sferee. The transferee shall be responsible for satisfying the good faith compliance 1CI requirements set forth in Section 9 below relating to the portion of the Property owned by such transferee, and any amendment to this Agreement between the City and a transferee shall only affect the portion of the Property owned by such transferee. 4. Development of the Property. The following provisions shall govern the subdivision, development and use of the Property. 4.1 Permitted Uses, Density. The permitted and conditionally permitted uses of the Property are those set forth in the City's Municipal Code which are applicable to the Property/Project, except: 4. 1.1 Food To Go Restaurant. "Food to go" restaurants (defined in Section 15 -1 -6 of the El Segundo Municipal Code) are not permitted or conditionally permitted uses. 4.1.2 Grocery Store. For a period of one (1) year following the date that the permitted 425,000 of developable floor area of the Project is ninety percent (90 %) occupied (the "Whole Foods Period "), a grocery store will only be a permitted use to the extent it is a "Whole Foods" grocery store. During the Whole Foods Period, the Developer shall have the right to request that the City Council approve of a grocery store other than "Whole Foods" and the City Council may approve or deny such request in its sole discretion. 4.1.3 Fast Food Restaurants. Unless such use is incidental to the primary business of an occupant of a building, "Fast food" restaurants shall not be allowed within 150 feet of Sepulveda Boulevard, or south of the current locations of the Union Pacific Railroad or the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad lines. "Fast food" restaurant is defined as "A restaurant where customers purchase food and beverages and either consume the food and beverages on the premises within a short period of time or take the food and beverages off the premises. Typical characteristics of a fast food restaurant include but are not limited to, the purchase of food and beverages at a walk -up window or counter, no table service by a server, payment for food and beverages prior to consumption, and the packaging of food and beverages in disposable containers. A restaurant shall not be considered a fast food or take -out restaurant solely on the basis of incidental or occasional take -out sales." 4.1.4 Banks and Day Spas. One Bank shall be permitted. One day spa with a minimum floor area of 5,000 square feet shall be permitted. 4.1.5 Restaurants. A minimum of two (2) full service, sit down restaurants that serve both lunch and dinner, which have at least 6,000 square feet of floor area (including outdoor dining facilities) ( "Full Service Restaurant ") shall be constructed; provided, however, if Developer is not able to lease space to a second Full Service Restaurant within two (2) years following the date the Project is ninety percent (90 %) occupied, the requirements of this Section 4.1.5 shall be reduced from two (2) to one (1) Full Service Restaurant. 4.1.6 Health Clubs and Fitness Centers. No health club or fitness center shall be permitted. 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 J 1 1 .-y 4.2 Develo ment Standards. All design and development standards that shall P � P be applicable to the Property ( "Development Standards ") are set forth in the El Segundo General Plan, the El Segundo Municipal Code, the Applicable Rules, the Project Approvals, and this Agreement. Additionally, the following restrictions apply: 4.2.1 Tenant/Owner Use Space. No uses within the Project shall exceed 125,000 square feet of floor area in size. 4.2.2 Limitations on Minimum Square Footage of Buildings and Space. Except with respect to the two restaurants identified in Section 4.1.5 above, a maximum of 75,000 square feet of the allowable building area allowed on the Property can be developed and/or utilized for uses that occupy less than 10,000 square feet of building space. With respect to such 75,000 square feet, a maximum of 8 building pads (exclusive of the "Full Service Restaurants" referred to in Section 4.1.5 above) may be less than 10,000 square feet each. Moreover, no building pads on the Property may be less than 5,000 square feet in size. Additionally, with respect to the 75,000 square feet, only those uses identified on Exhibit "C" shall be allowed to occupy less than 1,500 square feet of building space or uses which are the reasonable equivalents of the specific businesses listed in Exhibit "C" as determined by the Planning and Building Safety Director in his or her sole discretion. In addition, the Developer shall have the right to request that the City Council approve of deviations from the restrictions set forth in this Section 4.2.2 and the City Council may approve or deny such requests in its sole discretion. As used in this Agreement, the term "building pad" shall be defined to mean the total ground floor area of any individual building constructed on the Property. 4.2.3 Transfer of Development Rights. The Developer shall have the right to transfer floor area between parcels that are created within Area A as a part of the Project Approvals so long as no parcel exceeds a floor area ratio of 0.6:1. Such transfers of floor area shall be recorded against the properties involved in the transfer of floor area in accordance with the requirements of the C -4 Zoning. The Planning and Building Safety Director or designee must review the application for transfer of floor area to ensure conformity with the requirements of this Section 4.2.3. This review shall not be subject to a public hearing process. Transfer of floor area from properties located outside of Area A to any parcel within Area A is strictly prohibited. 4.3 Building Standards. All construction on the Property shall adhere to the California Building Code, the California Electrical Code, the California Mechanical Code, the Uniform Sign Code, the Uniform Code for Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, and Uniform Administrative Code in effect at the time the plan check or permit is approved and to any federal or state building requirements that are then in effect (collectively the "Building Codes "). 4.4 Fees, Exactions, Mitigation Measures, Conditions, Reservations and Dedications. All fees, exactions, mitigation measures, conditions, reservations and dedications of land for public purposes that are applicable to the Project or the Property are set forth in the Applicable Rules, the Project Approvals and this Agreement. Additionally, Developer shall pay all applicable fees that are in effect at the time that fees are required to be paid pursuant to Section 6.2 of this Agreement. This Section shall not be construed to limit the authority of City to charge normal and customary application, processing, and permit fees for land use approvals, 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 5 Oi8 building permits and other similar permits, which fees are designed to reimburse City's actual l� expenses attributable to such application, processing and permitting and are in force and effect on a City-wide basis at such time as said approvals and permits are granted by City. 4.5 Use of Easements. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Applicable Rules, easements dedicated for vehicular and pedestrian use shall be permitted to include easements for underground drainage, water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, cable, environmental remediation and other utilities and facilities so long as they do not unreasonably interfere with pedestrian and/or vehicular use. 5. Vesting of Development Rights. 5.1 Applicable Rules. The Applicable Rules shall consist of the following: 5. 1.1 The General Plan, as it exists on the Effective Date; 5.1.2 The City's Municipal Code, including the Zoning Code, as the Municipal Code exists on the Effective Date; 5.1.3 Such other laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, and official policies governing permitted uses of the Property, density, design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications applicable to the development of the Property in force at the time of the Effective Date, which are not in conflict with this Agreement. 5.2 Entitlement to Develop. The Developer is hereby granted the vested right to develop the Project on the Property subject to the Applicable Rules, the Project Approvals and any future approvals applied for by the Developer and granted by the City for the Project or the Property (the "Future Approvals "). 5.3 Subsequent Enactments. Any change in the Applicable Rules, including, without limitation, any change in any applicable general plan or specific plan, zoning, or subdivision regulation, adopted or becoming effective after the Effective Date, including, without limitation, any such change by means of an ordinance, initiative, resolution, policy, order or moratorium, initiated or instituted for any reason whatsoever and adopted by the City Council, the Planning Commission or any other board, agency, commission or department of the City, or any officer or employee thereof, or by the electorate, as the case may be (collectively the "Subsequent Rules "), which would, absent this Agreement, otherwise be applicable to the Property, shall not be applied by the City to any part of the Property. 5.4 Future Approvals. 5.4.1 Minor Modifications to Project. Developer may make minor changes to the Project and Project Approvals ( "Minor Modifications ") without amending this Agreement upon the administrative approval of the City of El Segundo Director of Planning and Building Safety (the "City Planning and Building Safety Director ") or designee, provided that such modifications are consistent with the Development Standards, Applicable Rules and Project Approvals. The City shall not unreasonably withhold or delay approval of any Minor Modification. The City shall have the right to impose reasonable conditions in connection with 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 6 039 Minor Modifications, provided, however, such conditions shall not (a) be inconsistent with the 1 Applicable Rules, the Project Approvals or with the development of the Project as contemplated by this Agreement; (b) directly or indirectly, unreasonably hinder, delay, impede, obstruct, interfere with, or place unreasonably burdensome or restrictive measures or requirements upon development of the Project or the Property or any portion thereof; or (c) impose additional dedications, infrastructure or public improvement obligations, fees, or exactions in excess of those identified in the Applicable Rules, the Project Approvals, or this Agreement. 5.4.2 Modification of Project Approvals. It is contemplated by City and Developer that Developer may, from time to time, pursuant to Section 5.4.1 seek amendments to one or more of the Project Approvals. Any such amendments are contemplated by City and Developer as being within the scope of this Agreement as long as they are authorized pursuant to this Section 5.4.2 and shall, upon approval by City, continue to constitute the Project Approvals as referenced herein. The parties agree that any such amendments shall not constitute an amendment to this Agreement nor require an amendment to this Agreement. 5.4.3 Modifications Requiring Amendment to this Agreement. Any proposed modification to the Project which results in any of the following shall not constitute a Minor Modification but rather shall constitute a Major Modification and shall instead require an amendment to this Agreement pursuant to Section 15 below: (a) Any decrease in the required building setbacks as set forth in the C -4 Zone; (b) Any increase in the total developable square footage of the entire Property in excess of the maximum FAR allowed under the C -4 Zone; (c) Any increase in height of buildings or structures on the Property above 65 feet; (d) Any decrease in the minimum required lot area as set forth in the C -4 Zone; (e) Any decrease in the minimum required lot frontage as set forth in the C -4 Zone; (f) Except as set forth in Section 4.2.3 above, any change to the requirements of the transfer of development rights as set forth in the C -4 Zone; (g) Any increase in the maximum number of A.M. and P.M. peak hour vehicle trips for the Project as specified in the conditions of approval and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), unless a subsequent traffic report has been prepared to the reasonable satisfaction of the City's Planning and Building Safety Director that identifies potential impacts and proposes feasible mitigation measures to mitigate such impacts and otherwise complies with CEQA; this Agreement; (h) Any change in use to a use which is not permitted under 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 7 0 0 �Vt (i) Any deviation from the uses and development standards or ` limitations set forth in Section 4.1 and Section 4.2 of this Agreement, except to the extent these Sections specifically provide for the Council to approve of alternative uses or square footage requirements; and, 0) Any material modification to Developer's obligation to dedicate the public roadways to the City as provided in. the conditions of approval and the MMRP. Other than the Major Modifications listed above, all other modifications to the Project shall be considered "Minor Modifications." 5.5 Plan Review. Plans for each building on the Property, including plans for signage, trash enclosures and screening and landscaping, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planning and Building Safety Director prior to issuance of a building permit; provided, however, that, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Applicable Rules, the sole purpose of such review shall be to verify consistency with the Development Standards, Applicable Rules and Project Approvals. The City Planning and Building Safety Director shall approve all features which are consistent with the Development Standards, Applicable Rules or Project Approvals or are otherwise specifically approved by this Agreement and shall have no authority to disapprove or conditionally approve any features or matters which are consistent with or otherwise which have been specifically approved by this Agreement. 5.6 Timing of Development. In Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (Pardee), 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), the California Supreme Court held that the failure of the parties therein to provide for the timing or rate of development resulted in a later - adopted initiative restricting the rate of development to prevail against the parties' agreement. City and Developer intend to avoid the result in Pardee by acknowledging and providing that Developer shall have the right, without obligation, to develop the Property in such order and at such rate and times as Developer deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment subject to the term of this Agreement. In furtherance of the Parties' intent, as set forth in this Section, no future amendment of any existing City ordinance or resolution, or future adoption of any ordinance, resolution or other action, that purports to limit the rate or timing of development over time or alter the sequencing of development phases, whether adopted or imposed by the City Council or through the initiative or referendum process, shall apply to the Property. However, nothing in this Section shall be construed to limit City's right to enforce Developer's obligation pursuant to this Agreement to provide all infrastructure required by the Project Approvals and this Agreement. 5.7 Term. This Agreement shall be in effect for a period of eight (8) years from the effective date of the Enabling Ordinance. However, Developer or City shall be entitled to, by written notice to the other Party prior to the Agreement's expiration, one (1) five (5) -year extension, provided that the requesting Party is not in material default of its obligations hereunder at such time. 41 05 0797875 0 44386 \]060366v20 8 5.8 Issuance of Building Permits. No building permit, final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy will be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed from the Developer if all infrastructure required to serve the portion of the Property covered by the building permit, final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy is in place or is suitably guaranteed to be completed (by covenant, bond, letter of credit or otherwise) to the reasonable satisfaction of the City prior to completion of construction and all of the other relevant provisions of the Project Approvals, Future Approvals and this Agreement have been satisfied. 5.9 Satisfaction of Mitigation Measures and Conditions. In the event that any of the mitigation measures or conditions required of Developer hereunder have been implemented by others, Developer shall be conclusively deemed to have satisfied such mitigation measures or conditions, consistent with CEQA. If any such mitigation measures or conditions are rejected by a governmental agency with jurisdiction, the Developer may implement reasonably equivalent substitute mitigation, consistent with CEQA, to the City's satisfaction, in lieu of the rejected mitigation measures or conditions. Such substitution shall be deemed to be a Minor Modification pursuant to Section 5.4.1 above. 5.10 Moratorium. The City shall not impose a moratorium on the Property unless such is necessary to protect a significant threat to the health, safety and welfare of the City. 5.11 Performance of City Planning and Building Safety Director Duties. If the City determines at any time during the term of this Agreement that the duties to be performed by the City Planning and Building Safety Director under this Agreement will be performed by one or more staff members other than the Planning and Building Safety Director, the City shall endeavor to notify the Developer of such change. The City shall ensure that a person or persons are designated at all times to carry out the duties of the Planning and Building Safety Director set forth in this Agreement. 6. Developer Agreements. 6.1 General. The Developer shall comply with (i) this Agreement, (ii) the Project Approvals, including without limitation all mitigation measures required by the determination made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, and (iii) all Future Approvals for which it is the applicant or a successor in interest to the applicant. 6.2 Development Fees. Subject to the provisions of Section 4.4 above, Developer shall pay the development fees in effect at such time that building permits are issued for the Project. The Developer shall be entitled to credits against the City's traffic mitigation fees to the extent off -site traffic improvements that are required by the Project Approvals are included in any subsequent traffic fee mitigation program adopted by the City pursuant to Government Code Section 66000 et seq. Such credits shall be based upon the actual audited costs and shall only be granted to the extent such improvements are constructed in accordance with all applicable state and local laws. The Developer waives any and all rights it may have to challenge development fees that are currently applicable to development within the City and the City's right to amend its current development fees and/or impose additional development fees. However, the Developer retains the legal right to challenge the amount of any such amended or 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 9 01 4 ; ` increased development fees to the extent such are not in compliance with the requirements of 1 ' Government Code Section 66000 et seq. as well as it right to receive credits against such V amended or increased fees. 6.3 Maintenance Obligations. The Developer shall maintain all portions of the Property in its possession or control, and any improvements thereon, in a first class clean, neat and orderly manner. The Parties' respective maintenance obligations shall survive any termination or expiration of this Agreement. 6.4 Term of MgR(s) and Other Project Approvals. Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 66452.6(a) and 65863.9, the term of any subdivision or parcel map that has been or in the future may be processed on all or any portion of the Property and the term of each of the Project Approvals shall be extended for a period of time through the scheduled termination date of this Agreement as set forth in Section 5.7 above. 6.5 Sales and Use Tax. (a) In the event the contract price for any work on the Project is valued at five million dollars ($5,000,000) or more, Developer agrees to report, on a State Board of Equalization Tax Return, any purchases of tangible personal property made in connection with the finishing of and/or installation of materials, or fixtures for the Project, when such purchases were made without sales or use tax due. Developer shall indicate the City as a registered job site location on the State Board of Equalization Tax Return. In such event, Developer shall also obtain a permit or a sub - permit from the State Board of Equalization indicating the City as the registered job site location, in accordance with State Board of Equalization Operations Memorandum No. 1023. (b) Developer further agrees that if Developer retains contractors or subcontractors to perform a portion of work in the Project, and said contracts or subcontracts are valued at five million dollars ($5,000,000) or more, said contracts or subcontracts shall contain the provisions set forth in Subsection (a) above. (c) The Director of Administrative Services of the City is authorized to relieve Developer, and Developer's contractors and subcontractors, from the requirements set forth in this Section 6.5 upon proof to the reasonable satisfaction of the Director of Administrative Services that Developer and/or its contractors or subcontractors have made good faith efforts to obtain said permit or sub - permits, but were denied the same by the State Board of Equalization. 6.6 Aquatic Payment. Developer upon issuance of the first building permit for the Project shall pay the City $1.5 million for purposes of the City using the funds to repair, improve, and/or construct aquatic facilities within the City. 6.7 Future Construction Activities. The development of the C -4 Zone, which Zone was established concurrently with this Agreement, will likely involve the construction of significant public infrastructure improvements in the future (for example, public roadways and utilities). The Developer, owners and occupants of the Property are hereby on notice that such construction activities may result in a reduced but not a lack of access to the Property and other 44386 \1060366v20 10 05 0797875 0 41 V temporary physical and financial negative impacts to the Property and the uses thereon due to noise, dust, vibration and other normal and temporary construction related impacts. Developer, owners and occupants of the Property agree not to file any claims or legal or equitable actions against the City or the developers of the C -4 Zone relating to, or arising from, such temporary negative impacts associated with such public improvement construction activities that seek to enjoin the construction activities or seek damages based upon or arising out of alleged or actual temporary business interruption to or temporary business financial losses incurred by the Developer, owners or occupants of the Property. This provision shall survive the termination of this Agreement and shall remain in effect for a period of 30 years from the effective date of this Agreement. 6.8 Contribution to Downtown. Developer agrees to pay the City $125,000 upon the earlier of. (1) the expiration of the statute of limitation for challenging the Project Approvals with no challenge having been filed, or (2) upon a final court judgment or settlement of litigation which results in the Developer being allowed to proceed with development of the Property., , Thereafter, Developer shall pay the City an additional $125,000 within one year of the date upon which the Developer was obligated to make the first $125,000 payment to the City. These funds paid to the City shall be used for purposes of enhancing, promoting, or maintaining the public right of ways adjacent to the business and properties within the Downtown Specific Plan area. The City shall form a subcommittee with representatives from the City and business community for purposes of forming recommendations to the City Council with respect to the expenditure of such funds. 6.9 Third -Party Agreements Restricting Uses on Property. Developer warrants and represents that it has not and will not enter into any agreements with third- parties, or record any restrictions against the Property, which directly or indirectly limit the potential uses for the Property that are currently permitted pursuant to this Agreement or in the C -4 Zone in any respect, including but not limited to the particular retailers, types and/or sizes of structures or businesses, types of uses, or the owners of any businesses allowed on the Property. The Developer may request that the City Council consent to any such restriction which consent may be withheld in the City Council's sole discretion. Without acknowledging that any of the uses identified in (5) and (7) below are permitted pursuant to this Agreement or the C -4 Zone, the provisions of this Section 6.9 shall not apply to, or affect or restrict the terms of (1) any lease between the Developer and a bona fide tenant of the Property for purposes of restricting competition relating to the tenant's business; (2) any purchase and sale agreement between the Developer and a bona fide retail business /purchaser of one or more parcels of the Property for purposes of restricting competition relating to the retailer's business; (3) any. agreement or permit between the Developer and any federal, state or regional regulatory agency (not including the County of Los Angeles (except to the extent County permits may be required to drill any wells on the Property and/or to discharge into the sanitary sewer system) or cities), such as, but not limited to the Army Corps of Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Department of Toxic Substances Control, the Public Utilities Commission, the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the California Department of Fish and Game;(4) normal and customary covenants, conditions and restrictions for retail centers (commonly referred to as "CC &R's ") so long as such do not restrict the uses that are currently permitted on the Property pursuant to this Agreement or the C -4 Zone; (5) any restrictions on residential, health care, child care, schools, or other similar uses imposed by the 44386 \1060366v20 11 05 0797875 044' current owner of the Property, Honeywell International Inc.; (6) any restrictions on using groundwater underneath the Property for human consumption, irrigation, or other purposes that might bring groundwater into contact with humans; or (7) restrictions prohibiting bowling alleys, arcades, skating rinks, billiard rooms, carnivals or circuses, the sale of used goods or materials, dance halls, bars (not including bars that are an ancillary use to another permitted use); funeral parlors, the sale of paraphernalia for use with illegal drugs, automobile services (including but not limited to service stations), automobile sales, liquidation sales (not including court ordered sales), veterinary services (except as ancillary use to a pet store), tattoo parlors and pawn shops. 7. City /Developer Agreements. 7.1 Expedited Processing. The City shall process, at Developer's expense, in an expedited manner all plan checking, excavation, grading, building, encroachment and street improvement permits, Certificates of Occupancy, utility connection authorizations, and other ministerial permits or approvals necessary, convenient or appropriate for the grading, excavation, construction, development, improvement, use and occupancy of the Project in accordance with the City's accelerated plan check process under the Applicable Rules. Without limiting the foregoing, if requested by Developer, the City agrees to utilize private planners and plan checkers (upon Developer's request and at Developer's cost) and any other available means to expedite the processing of Project applications, including concurrent processing of such applications by various City departments. 7.2 Processing Cooperation and Assistance. To the extent permitted by law, the City shall reasonably cooperate with the Developer in securing any and all entitlements, authorizations, permits or approvals which may be required by any -other governmental or quasi - governmental entity in connection with the development of the Project or the Property. Without limiting the foregoing, the City shall reasonably cooperate with the Developer in any dealings with federal, state and other local governmental and quasi - governmental entities concerning issues affecting the Property. The City shall endeavor to keep the Developer fully informed with respect to its communications with such agencies which could impact the development of the Property. 7.3 Processing During Third Party Litigation. The filing of any third party lawsuit(s) against the City or the Developer relating to this Agreement, the Project Approvals, any Future Approvals or to other development issues affecting any portion of the Property or the Project shall not hinder, delay or stop the development, processing or construction of the Project, approval of the Future Approvals, or issuance of ministerial permits or approvals, unless the third party obtains a court order preventing the activity. 8. Modification/Suspension. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65869.5, in the event that any state or federal law or regulation, enacted after the Effective Date (as defined in Section 18), precludes compliance with any provision of this Agreement, such provision shall be deemed modified or suspended to the extent practicable to comply with such state or federal law or regulation, as reasonably determined necessary by City. Upon repeal of said law or regulation or the occurrence of any other event removing the effect thereof upon the Agreement, the provisions hereof shall be restored to their full original effect. 44386 \1060366v20 12 05 0797875 \i V't.J 9. Demonstration of Good Faith Compliance. 9.1 Review of Compliance. In accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1, this Section 9 and the Applicable Rules, once each year, on or before each anniversary of the Effective Date ( "Periodic Review'), the City Planning and Building Safety Director shall review the extent of the Developer's good faith substantial compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement as well as the performance by the City of its obligations under this Agreement. 9.2 Good Faith Compliance. During each Periodic Review, the Developer shall demonstrate by written status report that, during the preceding twelve (12) month period, that it has been in good faith compliance with this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, the phrase "good faith compliance" shall mean that the Developer has demonstrated that it has acted in a commercially reasonable manner (taking into account the circumstances which then exist) and in good faith in and has substantially complied with the Developer's material obligations under this Agreement. 9.3 Information to be Provided to Developer. The City shall deliver to the Developer a copy of all staff reports prepared in connection with a Periodic Review, any prior staff reports generated during the review period, written comments from the public and, to the extent practical, all related exhibits concerning such Periodic Review, but in no event later than six (6) business days prior to the City Planning and Building Safety Director's submittal of a report setting forth his or her determination as to the results of the Periodic Review. Subject to the provisions of Section 14.1 below, upon the Developer's request, the Developer shall be given a full and adequate opportunity to be heard orally and in writing regarding its performance and, at its option, the City's performance under the Agreement prior to the completion of the City Planning and Building Safety Director's Periodic Review. 9.4 Notice Of Non- Compliance; Cure Rights. Subject to the provisions of Section 14.1 below, if at the completion of any Periodic Review, the City Planning and Building Safety Director reasonably concludes on the basis of substantial evidence that as to any parcel or parcels comprising the Property (i) the Developer has not demonstrated that it is in good faith compliance with this Agreement, and (ii) that the Developer is out of compliance with a specific substantive term or provision of this Agreement, then the City Planning and Building Safety Director may issue and deliver to the Developer a written Notice of Violation as set forth in Section 11.1 below. 9.5 Determination of Developer's Compliance. If the City Planning and Building Safety Director determines that the Developer has demonstrated that it is in good faith compliance with this Agreement, the City Planning and Building Safety Director's determination shall be deemed final and non - appealable. If the Developer appeals to the Planning Commission a determination by the City Planning and Building Safety Director that the Developer is not in compliance with this Agreement and the Planning Commission determines that the Developer has demonstrated that it is in good faith compliance with this Agreement, the Planning Commission's determination shall be deemed final and non - appealable. If the Developer appeals to the City Council a determination by the Planning Commission that the Developer is not in compliance with this Agreement and the City Council determines that the Developer has k� 44386 \1060366v20 1 3 05 0 7 9'7 8 7 5 O �i t `/ demonstrated that it is in good faith compliance with this Agreement, the City Council's determination shall be deemed final and non - appealable. 9.6 Failure of Periodic Review. The City's failure to review, at least annually, compliance by the Developer with the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall not constitute or be asserted by any Party as a breach by any other Party of this Agreement. 10. Excusable Delays. Performance by any Party of its obligations hereunder shall be excused during any period of "Excusable Delay," as hereinafter defined, provided that the Party claiming the delay gives notice of the delay to the other Party as soon as reasonably possible after the same has been ascertained. For purposes hereof, Excusable Delay shall mean delay that directly affects, and is beyond the reasonable control of, the Party claiming the delay, including without limitation: (a) act of God; (b) civil commotion; (c) riot; (d) strike, picketing or other labor dispute; (e) shortage of materials or supplies; (f) damage to work in progress by reason of fire, flood, earthquake or other casualty; (g) reasonably unforeseeable delay caused by a reasonably unforeseeable restriction imposed or mandated by a governmental entity other than City; (h) litigation brought by a third party attacking the validity of this Agreement, a Project Approval, a Future Approval or any other action necessary for development of the Property, (i) delays caused by any default by City or the Developer hereunder, or 0) delays due to the presence or remediation of hazardous materials. The term of this Agreement shall be extended by any period of Excusable Delay. 11. Default Provisions. 11.1 Default. Either Party to this Agreement shall be deemed to have breached this Agreement if it materially breaches any of the provisions of this Agreement and the same is not cured within the time set forth in a written notice of violation (the "Notice of Violation ") from the non - breaching Party to the breaching Party, which period of time shall not be less than ten (10) days for monetary defaults, and not less than sixty (60) days for non - monetary defaults from the date that the notice is deemed received, provided if the breaching Party cannot reasonably cure a non - monetary default within the time set forth in the notice, then the breaching Party shall not be in default if it commences to cure the default within such time limit and diligently effects such cure thereafter. If the City determines that a default may have occurred, the City shall give written notice to the Developer of its intention to terminate this Agreement and comply with the notice and public hearing requirements of Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868. At the time and place set for the hearing on termination, the Developer shall be given an opportunity to be heard. If the City Council finds based upon the evidence that the Developer is in breach of this Agreement, the City Council may modify or terminate this Agreement 11.2 Content of Notice of Violation. Every Notice of Violation shall state with specificity that it is given pursuant to this Section of the Agreement, the nature of the alleged breach, (including references to the pertinent provisions of this Agreement), the portion of the Property involved, and the manner in which the breach may be satisfactorily cured. The notice shall be deemed given in accordance with Section 19 hereof. 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 14 047 11.3 Remedies for Breach. The Parties agree that the remedies for breach of 1 this Agreement shall be limited to the remedies expressly set forth in this subsection. The remedies for breach of this Agreement by City or Developer shall be limited to injunctive relief and/or specific performance. 12. Mortgagee Protection. This Agreement shall not prevent or limit the Developer, in any manner, at Developer's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvements thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device. The City acknowledges that the lender(s) providing such financing ( "Mortgagee ") may require certain Agreement interpretations and agrees, upon request, from time to time, to meet with the Developer and representatives of such lender(s) to provide within a reasonable time period the City's response to such requested interpretations. The City will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation, provided that such interpretation is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee of a mortgage or a beneficiary of a deed of trust or any successor or assign thereof, including without limitation the purchaser at a judicial or non judicial foreclosure sale or a person or entity who obtains title by deed -in -lieu of foreclosure on the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: 12.1 Mortgage Not Rendered Invalid. Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the priority of the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust on the Property made in good faith and for value. No Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform the Developer's obligations, or to guarantee such performance, prior to taking title to all or a portion of the Property. 12.2 Request for Notice to Mortgagee. The Mortgagee of any mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the Property, or any part thereof, who has submitted a request in writing to the City in the manner specified herein for giving notices, shall be entitled to receive a copy of any Notice of Violation delivered to the Developer. 12.3 Mortgagee's Time to Cure. The City shall provide a copy of any Notice of Violation to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the Notice of Violation to the Developer. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default for a period of thirty (30) days after receipt of such Notice of Violation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such default shall be a default which can only be remedied by such Mortgagee obtaining possession of a Property, or any portion thereof, and such Mortgagee seeks to obtain possession, such Mortgagee shall have until thirty (30) days after the date of obtaining such possession to cure or, if such default cannot reasonably be cured within such period, to commence to cure such default, provided that such default is cured no later than one (1) year after Mortgagee obtains such possession. 12.4 Cure Rights. Any Mortgagee who takes title to all of the Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, shall succeed to the rights and obligations of the Developer under this Agreement as to the Property or portion thereof so acquired; provided, however, in no event shall such Mortgagee be liable for any defaults or monetary obligations of the Developer arising prior to acquisition of title to the Property by such Mortgagee, except that any such Mortgagee shall not 44386 \1060366v20 15 05 07978754 0118 be entitled to a building permit or occupancy certificate until all delinquent and current fees and other monetary or non - monetary obligations due under this Agreement for the Property, or portion thereof acquired by such Mortgagee, have been satisfied. 12.5 Bankruptcy. If any Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings in the nature of foreclosure by any process or injunction issued by any court or by reason of any action by any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings involving the Developer, the times specified in Section 12.3 above shall be extended for the period of the prohibition, except that any such extension shall not extend the term of this Agreement. 12.6 Disaffirmation. If this Agreement is terminated as to any portion of the Property by reason of (i) any default or (ii) as a result of a bankruptcy proceeding, this Agreement is disaffirmed by a receiver, liquidator, or trustee for the Developer or its property, the City, if requested by any Mortgagee, shall negotiate in good faith with such Mortgagee for a new development agreement for the Project as to such portion of the Property with the most senior Mortgagee requesting such new agreement. This Agreement does not require any Mortgagee or the City to enter into a new development agreement pursuant to this Section. 13. Estoppel Certificate. At any time and from time to time, the Developer may deliver written notice to City and City may deliver written notice to the Developer requesting that such Party certify in writing that, to the knowledge of the certifying Party (i) this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties, (ii) this Agreement has not been amended, or if amended, the identity of each amendment, and (iii) the requesting Party is not in breach of this Agreement, or if in breach, a description of each such breach. The Party receiving such a request shall execute and return the certificate within thirty (30) days following receipt of the notice. The failure of the City to deliver such a written notice within such time shall constitute a conclusive presumption against the City that, except as may be represented by the Developer, this Agreement is in full force and effect without modification, and that there are no uncured defaults in the performance of the Developer. The City Planning and Building Safety Director shall be authorized to execute, on behalf of the City, any Estoppel Certificate requested by the Developer. City acknowledges that a certificate may be relied upon by successors in interest to the Developer who requested the certificate and by holders of record of deeds of trust on the portion of the Property in which that Developer has a legal interest. 14. Administration of Agreement. 14.1 Appeal of Staff Determinations. Any decision by City staff concerning the interpretation or administration of this Agreement or development of the Property in accordance herewith may be appealed by the Developer to the Planning Commission, and thereafter, if necessary, to the City Council pursuant to the El Segundo Municipal Code. The Developer shall not seek judicial review of any staff decision without first having exhausted its remedies pursuant to this Section. Final determinations by the City Council are subject to judicial review subject to the restrictions and limitations of California law. 14.2 Operating Memoranda. The provisions of this Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between City and Developer. During the Term of this Agreement, 44386U 060366v20 16 05 0797875 045 clarifications to this Agreement and the Applicable Rules may be appropriate with respect to the R1., details of performance of City and Developer. If and when, from time to time, during the term of this Agreement, City and Developer agree that such clarifications are necessary or appropriate, they shall effectuate such clarification through operating memoranda approved in writing by City and Developer, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto and become part of this Agreement and the same may be further clarified from time to time as necessary with future written approval by City and the Developer. Operating memoranda are not intended to and shall not constitute an amendment to this Agreement but are mere ministerial clarifications, therefore public notices and hearings shall not be required. The City Attorney shall be authorized, upon consultation with, and approval of, the Developer, to determine whether a requested clarification may be effectuated pursuant to this Section or whether the requested clarification is of such character to constitute an amendment hereof which requires compliance with the provisions of Section 15 below. The authority to enter into such operating memoranda is hereby delegated to the City Planning and Building Safety Director, and the City Planning and Building Safety Director is hereby authorized to execute any operating memoranda hereunder without further City Council action. 14.3 Certificate of Performance. Upon the completion of the Project, or the completion of development of any parcel within the Project, or upon completion of performance of this Agreement or its earlier revocation and termination, the City shall provide the Developer, upon the Developer's request, with a statement ( "Certificate of Performance ") evidencing said completion or revocation and the release of the Developer from further obligations hereunder, except for any ongoing obligations hereunder. The Certificate of Performance shall be signed by the appropriate agents of the Developer and the City and shall be recorded in the official records of Los Angeles County, California. Such Certificate of Performance is not a notice of completion as referred to in California Civil Code Section 3093. 15. Amendment or Termination by Mutual Consent. Except as otherwise set forth herein, this Agreement may only be amended or terminated, in whole or in part, by mutual consent of City and the Developer, and upon compliance with the provisions of Government Code Section 65867. 16. Indemnification/Defense. 16.1 Indemnification. The Developer shall indemnify, defend with counsel reasonably acceptable to the City, and hold harmless the City and its officers, employees and agents from and against any and all losses, liabilities, fines, penalties, costs, claims, demands, damages, injuries or judgments arising out of, or resulting in any way from, the Developer's performance pursuant to this Agreement except to the extent such is a result of the City's negligence or intentional misconduct. Developer shall indemnify, defend with counsel reasonably acceptable to the City, and hold harmless the City and its officers, employees and agents from and against any action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul this Agreement or the Project Approvals or any provisions thereof, including without limitation the CEQA determination and rezoning relating to the Other C -4 Property which is not otherwise the subject of this Agreement. 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v10 17 �J11 16.2 Defense of Ageern . If the City accepts Developer's indemnification and defense as provided in Section 16.1 above, the City agrees to and shall timely take all actions which are necessary or required to uphold the validity and enforceability of this Agreement and the Applicable Rules. This Section 16 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 17. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each provision of this Agreement of which time is an element. 18. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become operative on the date the Enabling Ordinance becomes effective (the "Effective Date ") pursuant to Government Code Section 36937. 19. Notices. Any notice shall be in writing and given by delivering the same in person or by sending the same by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, with postage prepaid, by overnight delivery, or by facsimile to the respective mailing addresses, as follows: If to City: City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 Attention: City Clerk With a Copy to: Jenkins & Hogin. LLP Manhattan Towers 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 110 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Attention: Mark D. Hensley, Esq. If to Developer: Rosecrans- Sepulveda Partners, LLC c/o Mar Ventures, Inc. 2050 West 190th Street, Suite 201 Torrance, CA 90504 Attention: Allan W. Mackenzie With a Copy to: Continental Development Corporation 2041 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 265 El Segundo, CA 90245 Attention: Leonard E. Blakesley, Jr. Comstock Crosser & Associates 321 12th Street, Suite 200 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Attention: Daniel D. Crosser Law Offices of Daniel Romano 11661 San Vicente Blvd., Suite 802 Los Angeles, CA 90049 Attention: Daniel Romano, Esq. 44386 \1060366v20 18 05 0797875 051 Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP 2049 Century Park East, Suite 2800 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Attention: Ronald I. Silverman, Esq. �5 Either City or Developer may change its mailing address at any time by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner provided herein at least ten days prior to the date such change is effected. All notices under this Agreement shall be deemed given, received, made or communicated on the earlier of the date personal delivery is effected or on the delivery date or attempted delivery date shown on the return receipt, air bill or facsimile. 20. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Parties regarding the subject matter hereof, and all prior agreements or understandings, oral or written, are hereby merged herein. This Agreement shall not be amended, except as expressly provided herein. 21. Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of any other provision, whether or not similar; nor shall any such waiver constitute a continuing or subsequent waiver of the same provision. No waiver shall be binding, unless it is executed in writing by a duly authorized representative of the Party against whom enforcement of the waiver is sought. 22. Severabihty. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall be effective to the extent the remaining provisions are not rendered impractical to perform, taking into consideration the purposes of this Agreement. 23. Relationship of the Parties. Each Party acknowledges that, in entering into and performing under this Agreement, it is acting as an independent entity and not as an agent of any other Party in any respect. Nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as creating the relationship of partners, joint ventures or any other association of any kind or nature between City and Developer, jointly or severally. 24. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole benefit of the Parties and their successors in interest. No other person or party shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 25. Recordation of Agreement and Amendments. This Agreement and any amendment thereof shall be recorded with the County Recorder of the County of Los Angeles by the City Clerk of City. 26. Cooperation Between City and Developer. City and Developer shall execute and deliver to the other all such other and further instruments and documents as may be reasonably necessary to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. Upon satisfactory performance by Developer, and subject to the continuing cooperation of the Developer, City will commence and in a timely manner proceed to complete all steps necessary for the implementation of this Agreement and development of the Project or Property in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 19 UJ 27. Rules of Construction. The captions and headings of the various sections and subsections of this Agreement are for convenience of reference only, and they shall not constitute a part of this Agreement for any other purpose or affect interpretation of the Agreement. Should any ((// provision of this Agreement be found to be in conflict with any provision of the Applicable Rules or the Project Approvals or the Future Approvals, the provisions of this Agreement shall control. 28. Joint Preparation. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been prepared jointly and equally by the Parties, and it shall not be construed against any Party on the ground that the Party prepared the Agreement or caused it to be prepared. 29. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement is made, entered into, and executed in the County of Los Angeles, California, and the laws of the State of California shall govern its interpretation and enforcement. Any action, suit or proceeding related to, or arising from, this Agreement shall be filed in the appropriate court having jurisdiction in the County of Los Angeles. 30. Attorneys' Fees. In the event any action, suit or proceeding is brought for the enforcement or declaration of any right or obligation pursuant to, or as a result of any alleged breach of, this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees and litigation expenses and costs, and any judgment, order or decree rendered in such action, suit or proceeding shall include an award thereof. Attorneys' fees under this Section shall include attorneys' fees on any appeal and any post judgment proceedings to collect or enforce the judgment. This provision is separate and several and shall survive the merger of this Agreement into any judgment on this Agreement. 31. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which constitute one and the same instrument. 32. Weekend/Holiday Dates. Whenever any determination is to be made or action to be taken on a date specified in this Agreement, if such date shall fall upon a Saturday, Sunday or holiday observed by federal savings banks in the State of California, the date for such determination or action shall be extended to the first business day immediately thereafter. 33. Not a Public Dedication. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, nothing herein contained shall be deemed to be a gift or dedication of the Property, or of the Project, or any portion thereof, to the general public, for the general public, or for any public use or purpose whatsoever, it being the intention and understanding of the Parties that this Agreement be strictly limited to and for the purposes herein expressed for the development of the Project as private property. The Developer shall have the right to prevent or prohibit the use of the Property, or the Project, or any portion thereof, including common areas and buildings and improvements located thereon, by any person for any purpose which is not consistent with the development of the Project. Any portion of the Property conveyed to the City by the Developer as provided herein shall be held and used by the City only for the purposes contemplated herein or otherwise provided in such conveyance, and the City shall not take or permit to be taken (if within the power or authority of the City) any action or activity with respect to such portion of the Property 44386 \1060366v20 20 05 0797875 0 5 3 that would deprive the Developer of the material benefits of this Agreement, or would in any manner interfere with the development of the Project as contemplated by this Agreement. 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 21 0 5 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Developer and City of El Segundo have executed this Development Agreement on the date first above written. Lb CITY: CITY OFXE e`SEGUND)D,Xm rte' 'pal corporation By: U,' ATTEST Kelly Cindy Mortisen City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney DEVELOPER: ROSECRANS- SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, LLC, a California limited liability company By: Mar Torrance Partners, LP, a Delaware limited partnership Its: Managing Member By: Mar Ventures, Inc., a California corporation Its: Gene Partn r By: Allan W. Mackenzie Its: President 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 22 055 March 21, 2005 G STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) On March 17, 2005, before Cathy Domann, Deputy City Clerk, personally appeared Kelly McDowell, Mayor of the City of El Segundo, personally known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to on the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or entity upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and Official Seal a 11�w alAh- Cathy Domann, Deputy City Clerk C:forms \certsig 05 0797875056 The Owner, Honeywell International Inc., hereby consents to the recording of this Agreement with respect to the Property and agrees to take all steps necessary to cause the Agreement to be recorded and acknowledges that this Agreement and the Project Approvals represent burdens and benefits that will run with the land. OWNER: HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC., a Delaware corporation By< STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS: COUNTY OF r�c�aNCyE ) Its: Its: On r-eki2 (49-x( i-- , 2005, before me, _Pme,,,r acac gz-L -+ , a Notary Public, personally appeared PNrLZP 4amit4at -- , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she executed the same in his/her authorized capacity, and that by his/her signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (Seal) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) BRENT ROBERTSON ,- COMM. M87531 SS: co -'s Not arYPuWle- Caufomla ch ORANGE couwy COUNTY OFLon Pymle5 My Comm. Up. Nov 26 2006 On t�6ryoxy as , 2005, before me, S iii R. MG�enoe)4i, , a Notary Public, personally appeared me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /sly executed the same in his/H�t authorized 44386 \1060366v20 23 05 0797875 0Y capacity, and that by his/* signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of \ which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signatur (Seal) JULIE A MG OONOUGN L as Caam. X 1453928 N NOTARY PUBLIC- CAUFOW N 44386 \1060366v20 24 05 0797875 0 5 6 EXHIBIT A PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 29.2 ACRE PROPERTY: THOSE PORTIONS OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18 TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH RANGE 14 WEST IN THE RANCHO SAUSAL REDONDO, IN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF SEPULVEDA BOULEVARD, AS DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED IN BOOK 13174 AT PAGE 92, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING 1040 FEET NORTHERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE, FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID EASTERLY LINE WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 4 OF TRACT NO. 1314, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 20, PAGE 161 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE AS FOLLOWS: SOUTH 0 °O1' EAST A DISTANCE OF 70.16 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 3050.00 FEET; SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 292.78 FEET; SOUTH 5 °29' WEST A DISTANCE OF 389.98 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE EAST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2950.00 FEET; SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 283.18 FEET; AND SOUTH 0 °01' EAST A DISTANCE OF 3.90 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF AFORESAID LOT 4 OF TRACT NO. 1314; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4, SOUTH 60 °41' EAST A DISTANCE OF 5.74 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC LAND COMPANY, RECORDED IN BOOK 5839, PAGE 185 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LAND SO DESCRIBED A PORTION OF WHICH IS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED FOR RECORD WITH THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 6708 PAGE 304 OF SAID DEED RECORDS, SOUTH 70 °41' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 219.75 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 458.59 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE IN SAID NORTHERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 475.29 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LAND SO DESCRIBED, NORTH 49 056'05" EAST A DISTANCE OF 1601.41 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND PASSES THROUGH THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89 °59'30" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1820.11 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND DESCRIBED AND GRANTED IN THE DEED FROM ALLIED CORPORATION, A NEW YORK CORPORATION TO CHEVRON U.S.A., INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 1984, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 84- 1233577, OFFICIAL RECORDS ATTACHED THERETO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO NO. 2030 DATED FEBRUARY 11, 1983, APPROVING SAID LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT. 8.1 ACRE PROPERTY: THOSE PORTIONS OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18 TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH RANGE 14 WEST IN THE RANCHO SAUSAL REDONDO, IN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC LAND COMPANY RECORDED IN BOOK 5839, PAGE 185 OF DEEDS, WITH A LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18, WHICH PASSES THROUGH A POINT IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF SEPULVEDA BOULEVARD, AS DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED IN BOOK 13174, PAGE 92, OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT BEING 1040 FEET NORTHERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID EASTERLY LINE WITH THE 3� 05(� 44386 \1060366v20 A -1 05 0797875 NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 4 OF TRACT NO. 1314, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 20, PAGE 161 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE ABOVE MENTIONED NORTHWESTERLY LINE SOUTH 49 056'05" WEST A DISTANCE OF 1601.41 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE IN SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 458.59 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 347.79 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 6706, PAGE 304, OF DEEDS; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LAST MENTIONED LAND THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES; SOUTH 68 °48'25" EAST 98.98 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 421.07 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 390.17 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE AT ITS POINT OF ENDING NORTH 58 006'05" EAST 172.86 FEET; THENCE NORTH 49 °56'05" EAST A DISTANCE OF 1388.71 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 40 003'55" EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE, NORTH 40 °03'55" WEST 200 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 4.7 ACRE PROPERTY PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, OF PARCEL MAP NO. 17911, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 269 PAGES 82 THROUGH 84, INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. 44386 \1060366v20 A -2 �o V�U 05 0797875 EXHIBIT B Recording Requested By and When Recorded Mail To: Cox, Castle & Nicholson, LLP 2049 Century Park East, Suite 2800 Los Angeles, California 90067 Attn: Ronald I. Silverman, Esq. ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT This ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT ( "Agreement ") is made and entered into by and between ROSECRANS- SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, LLC, a California limited liability company ( "Assignor"), and , a ( "Assignee "). RECITALS A. The City of El Segundo ( "City") and Assignor entered into that certain Development Agreement dated , 2005 (the "Development Agreement"), with respect to the real property located in the City of El Segundo, State of California more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto (the "Project Site "), and B. Assignor has obtained from the City certain development approvals and permits with respect to the development of the Project Site, including without limitation, approval of for the Project Site (collectively, the "Project Approvals "). C. Assignor intends to sell, and Assignee intends to purchase that portion, of the Project Site more particularly described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto (the "Transferred Property"). D. In connection with such purchase and sale, Assignor desires to transfer all of the Assignor's right, title, and interest in and to the Development Agreement and the Project Approvals with respect to the Transferred Property. Assignee desires to accept such assignment from Assignor and assume the obligations of Assignor under the Development Agreement and the Project Approvals with respect to the Transferred Property. THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. Assi anent. Assignor hereby assigns and transfers to Assignee all of Assignor's right, title, and interest in and to the Development Agreement and the Project Approvals with respect to the Transferred Property. Assignee hereby accepts such assignment from Assignor. 2. Assumption. Assignee expressly assumes and agrees to keep, perform, and fulfill all the terms, conditions, covenants, and obligations required to be kept, performed, and fulfilled by Assignor under the Development Agreement and the Project Approvals with respect to the 44386\1060366v.10 $ -1 05 0797875 bbi Transferred Property, including but not limited to those obligations specifically allocated to the Transferred Parcel as set forth on Exhibit "C" attached hereto. 3. Effective Date. The execution by City of the attached receipt for this Agreement shall be considered as conclusive proof of delivery of this Agreement and of the assignment and assumption contained herein. This Agreement shall be effective upon its recordation in the Official Records of Los Angeles County, California, provided that Assignee has closed the purchase and sale transaction and acquired legal title to the Transferred Property. 4. Remainder of Project. Any and all rights or obligations pertaining to such portion of the Project Site other than the Transferred Property are expressly excluded from the assignment and assumption provided in Sections 1 and 2 above. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the dates set forth next to their signatures below. "ASSIGNOR" ROSECRANS- SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, LLC, a California limited liability company Date: By: Its: By: Its: "ASSIGNEE" a Date: By: Its: 44386 \1060366v20 B -2 05 0797875 V V � RECEIPT BY CITY The attached ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT is received by the City of El Segundo on this ____ day of , STATE OF CALIFORNIA )SS-. COUNTY OF CITY OF EL SEGUNDO Planning and Building Safety Director or Designee On , 2005, before me, , a Notary Public, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she executed the same in his/her authorized capacity, and that by his/her signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS: COUNTY OF ) Signature 2005, before me, (Seal) a Notary Public, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she executed the same in his/her authorized capacity, and that by his/her signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (Seal) 05 0797875 44386 \1060366v20 B_3 V b 3 EXHIBIT C LIST OF TENANTS ALLOWED WITH LESS THAN THE MINIMUM 1,500 SQUARE -FOOT TENANT SPACE Type Company Accessories Kate Spade Collection Accessories Fuda Apparel/Family Apparel/Family Speedo Authentic Fitness- Fitness- Apparel/Family Beyond the Beach Apparel/Famity Cashmere House AppareVFamily Lacoste Apparel/Women Geor iou Retail Stores Apparel/Women Maternity Works Appliances/Electronics Casio Appliances/Electronics Bang & Olufsen Arts /Crafts Color Me Mine Bakery Mrs. Beasle 's Bakery Cinnabon Bakery Mrs. Field's Cookies Beauty Supply L'Occitane Beauty Supply Aveda Beauty Supply Aida Grey Books Upstart Crow Books & caf6 Candy/Nuts Ethel M Chocolates Candy/Nuts Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory Candy/Nuts See's Candies Inc. Candy/Nuts Godiva Chocolatier Cards/Stationery Montblanc Cards/Stabonery Papvrus Cards/Stationery Card Fever Coffee /Juices Gloria Jean's Gourmet Coffees Coffee /Juices Tull 's Coffee Coffee /Juices Robeks Juice Coffee /Juices Kelly's Coffee & Fudge Factory Coffee /Juices Market City Caffe Coffee /Juices Torrefazione Italia Coffee /Juices Jamba Juice Coffee /Juices Seattle's Best Coffee Coffee/Juices Urth Caffe Coffee /Juices jPeet's Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf Coffee /Juices Coffee & Tea Coffee /Juices Diedrich Coffee Coffee /Juices Starbucks Coffee Computers Apple Computer Computers Expetec Biz Computers EB Games - Electronics Bouti ue Eye Care (R;tpriinn O tical Eye Care Sun lass Hut International Eye Care Oakley Inc Health Food GNC Nutrition Centers Ice Cream/Yogurt Haa en -Daz Ice Cream/Yogurt Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream 064 44386 \1060366v20 C -1 05 0797875 Type Company Ice CreamNo urt Gelato Classico Ice CreamNo urt Cold Stone Creamery Jewelry Landau Jewelers Jewelry Watch World Intemational Jewelry Murata Pearl Company of Califomia Jewelry Swatch Jewelry Kay Jewelers Jewelry Crescent Jewelers Jewelry Zales Jewelers Jewelry Helzberq Diamonds, Inc Luggage LaS ortsac Music/Video Hear Music Office Furniture Dansk Design Photo Bel Air Camera Inc. Photo Ritz Camera Postal Service Mail Boxes Etc. Postal Service UPS Store Postal Service DHL Worldwide Express Shoes Johnston & Murphy Shoes Adidas Shoes Nine West Shoes Tod's Shoes Shoes Bostonian Shoes Shoes Naturalizer Retail Shoes Easy Spirit Shoe Shoes Enzo An iolini Shoes Aerosoles Sporting Goods Hank Lloyd's Orange County Tennis Sporting Goods Two Wheels One Planet Sporting Goods No Fear Sporting Goods Surefoot Sporting Goods Jack's Surf Shop Sporting Goods O'Neill Surf Shop Telephone Store Star Cellular Telephone Store Mobile Systems Wireless Tele hone Store Air Call Wireless Telephone Store Cin ular Wireless Toys Puzzle Zoo G6 %5 44386 \1060366v20 C_2 05 0797875 r' EXHIBIT D DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO AND ROSECRANS- SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, LLC (AREA A) DEFINITIONS Section Agreement.................................................................. ............................... ....................Introduction ApprovedPlans ......................................................................................... ............................... 5.4.3 AreaA ........................................................................................................... ............................... 1.2 BuildingPad .............................................................................................. ............................... 4.2.2 Certificate of Performance .......................................................................... ............................... 14.3 City.................................................................................................. ............................... Introduction City Planning and Building Safety Director .............................................. ............................... 5.4.1 CityCouncil ................................................................................................ ............................... 1.12 Developer........................................................................................ ............................... Introduction DevelopmentStandards ................................................................................ ............................... 4.2 EffectiveDate ................................................................................................ ............................... 18 EIR................................................................................................................ ............................... 1.4 EnablingOrdinance .................................................................................... ............................... 1.12 ExcusableDelay ............................................................................................ ............................... 10 FastFood Restaurant ................................................................................. ............................... 4.1.3 FoodTo Go Restaurant .............................................................................. ............................... 4.1.1 FullService Restaurant .............................................................................. ............................... 4.1.5 FutureApprovals .......................................................................................... ............................... 5.2 GeneralPlan .................................................................................................. ............................... 1.9 GoodFaith Compliance ................................................................................ ............................... 9.2 Honeywell.................................................................... ............................... ...................Introduction MinorModifications .................................................................................. ............................... 5.4.1 Mortgagee ..................... ......... 12 Noticeof Violation ..................................................................................... ............................... 11.1 OtherC-4 Property ........................................................................................ ............................... 1.4 Party/Parties ................................................................. ............................... ...................Introduction PeriodicReview ............................................................................................ ............................... 9.1 Project .............................................................. 1.3 ProjectApprovals ......................................................................................... ............................... 1.4 ProjectSite ................................................. ............................... ........................Exhibit B, Recital A Property......................................................................................................... ............................... 1.2 SubsequentRules .......................................................................................... ............................... 5.3 Transferred Property .................................. ............................... ........................Exhibit B, Recital C WholeFoods Period ................................................................................... ............................... 4.1.2 05 0797875b�� 44386 \1060366v20 D -1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 03 -01 BETWEEN ROSECRANS- SEPULVEDA 2, LLC, AND ROSECRANS- SEPULVEDA 3, LLC, AND THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO AFFECTING THE PLAZA EL SEGUNDO DEVELOPMENT. The City Council of the City of El Segundo does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares that: A. On March 15, 2005, the City Council of the City of El Segundo approved Environmental Assessment No. 631, General Plan Amendment (GPA No. 03 -4), Zone Change (ZC No. 03 -2) and Subdivision (SUB 03 -7, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 061630), and Development Agreement No. 03- 01, to re- designate and re -zone an approximately 54.9 -acre property at the northeast corner of Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue. The applicant is developing a 425,000 square foot shopping center, known as Plaza El Segundo; B. On June 21, 2007, the applicant filed an application for an amendment to Development Agreement No. 03 -01; C. The application from Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners 2, LLC and Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners 3, LLC was reviewed by the City's Planning and Building Safety Department for, in part, consistency with the General Plan and 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. The Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the application on June 28, 2007. Thereafter, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2625, recommending that the City Council amend Development Agreement No. 03 -01; F. On July 17, 2007, the Council held a public hearing and considered the information provided by the Planning Commission, City Staff, public testimony, and representatives of the applicant Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners 2, LLC and Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners 3, LLC; and 0b1 44386\1289346v2 vs. 1289346v1 -1- G. This Ordinance and its findings are made based upon the testimony and evidence presented to the Council at its July 17, 2007, public hearing including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Planning and Building Safety Department. SECTION 2: Environmental Assessment. Because of the findings set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2625, adopted June 28, 2007, and the facts set forth in the administrative record including, without limitation, the staff report presented to the City Council, the proposed amendment to Development Agreement No. 03 -01 is consistent with the FEIR, entitled Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2003121037), certified by the City Council on March 15, 2005 and the Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted in Section 5 of City Council Resolution No. 4415 on March 1, 2005. None of the elements set forth in Public Resources Code § 21166 or CEQA Guidelines § 15162 exist. Accordingly, the City need not prepare a subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Addendum before the City Council adopts this Ordinance approving the First Amendment to Development Agreement No. 03 -01. Nevertheless, the City Council reaffirms and readopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth in Exhibit "A" to Resolution No. 4415 adopted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing on March 15, 2005, which is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth in this Ordinance. SECTION 3: Amendments to the Development Agreement. Development Agreement No. 03 -01 is amended as set forth in attached Exhibit 'A" which is incorporated into this Ordinance by reference. SECTION 4: 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 5: This Ordinance will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent ordinance. SECTION 6: The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City of El Segundo's book of original ordinances; make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law. SECTION 7: This Ordinance will become effective on the thirty -first (31st) day following its passage and adoption. �1V8 44386 \1289346v2 vs. 1289346v1 -2- PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of August 2007. Kelly McDowell, Mayor ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing Ordinance No. was duly introduced by said City Council at a regular meeting held on the 17th day of July 2007, 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 7th day of August, 2007, 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 PAPlanning &Building Safety\Projects \EA - 763 \P1aza ES OrdAmend.2007.07.17.doc 44386 \1289346v2 vs. 12893460 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: CITY CLERK CITY OF EL SEGUNDO 350 Main Street El Segundo, California 90245 EXEMPT FROM RECORDER'S FEES Pursuant to Government Code § 6103 FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND AMONG THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO AND ROSECRANS - SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, 2, LLC AND ROSECRANS - SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, 3, LLC (AREA A) THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE RECORDED WITHIN TEN DAYS OF EXECUTION BY ALL PARTIES HERETO PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF GOVERNMENT CODE §65868.5 T 44386 \1285096v1 7110/2007 LJ I 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. Recitals ......................................................................................................... ..............................1 2. Revision to Section 4.1.6 ............................................................................. ..............................2 3. Remainder of Development Agreement to Remain in Full Force and Effect ............................2 DEFINITIONS............................................................................................. ............................... A -1 44386 \1285096v1 i 7/10/2007 0 7 1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This First Amendment to Development Agreement ( "First Amendment ") is made and entered into by and among the CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, a municipal corporation ( "City ") and ROSECRANS - SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, 2, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ( "RSP 2 ") and ROSECRANS - SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, 3, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ( "RSP 3 ") as of this _ day of , 2007. RSP 2 and RSP 3 are hereinafter referred to collectively as "Developer." City and Developer are referred to hereinafter individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties." In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained in this First Amendment, City and Developer agree as follows: 1. Recitals. This First Amendment is made with respect to the following facts and for the following purposes, each of which is acknowledged as true and correct by the Parties: 1.1 RSP 2's and RSP 3's predecessor -in- interest, Rosecrans- Sepulveda Partners, LLC ( "RSP "), and the City are parties to a Development Agreement dated March, 2005 (the "Development Agreement "), which Development Agreement was recorded on April 6, 2005 in the Official Records of Los Angeles County as Instrument No. 05 0797875. 1.2 Unless otherwise stated in this First Amendment, all capitalized terms used in this First Amendment will carry the same definitions as those set forth in the Development Agreement. 1.3 On November 10, 2005, RSP and RSP 2 executed an Assignment and Assumption Agreement (the "RSP 2 Assignment ") whereby RSP conveyed to RSP 2, in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Development Agreement, approximately 4.7 acres of the Property. The RSP 2 Assignment was recorded on January 19, 2006 in the Official Records of Los Angeles County as Instrument No. 06 0128517. 1.4 On November 10, 2005, RSP and RSP 3 executed an Assignment and Assumption Agreement (the "RSP 3 Assignment ") whereby RSP conveyed to RSP 3, in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Development Agreement, approximately 37.3 acres of the Property. The RSP 3 Assignment was recorded on January 19, 2006 in the Official Records of Los Angeles County as Instrument No. 06 0128518. 1.5 As of June 19, 2007, City and Developer executed Operating Memorandum No. 1 to the Development Agreement ( "Operating Memorandum No. I"), which Operating Memorandum No. 1 was recorded on , 2007 in the Official Records of Los Angeles County as Instrument No. 07 . For purposes of this First Amendment, the term "Development Agreement" shall include Operating Memorandum No. 1. 1.6 The Development Agreement continues to cover the Property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 1.7 Section 4.1.6 of the Development Agreement currently prohibits health clubs and fitness centers within the Project. Based on Developer's leasing experience since the Project opened in November, 2006, one or more prospective tenants whose operations feature 072 44386 \1285096v1 1 7/10/2007 yoga exercise and whose space demands are less than 6,500 square feet, have expressed an interest in leasing space in the Project. After careful consideration, Developer and City have agreed that a use of that nature would not be inconsistent with the overall operation and quality of the Project. City and Developer have therefore agreed to amend the Development Agreement to permit one health club or fitness center to operate in the Project provided such use does not exceed 6,500 square feet of floor area. 1.8 The City Council has determined that none of the elements set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21166 or Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines ( "CEQA Guidelines ") exists and therefore has determined, in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, that no subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report, Mitigated Negative Declaration or Addendum is required to be prepared prior to adopting the Ordinance approving this First Amendment. 1.9 Section 15 of the Development Agreement provides for amendment of the Development Agreement upon mutual consent of the parties and in accordance with the procedures established by the Development Agreement Act. The City Council has found that this First Amendment has been adopted in conformance with the procedures of the Development Agreement Statute set forth in Government Code Section 65865, et seq. 1.10 On , 2007, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on this First Amendment and, at the conclusion thereof, adopted Resolution No. , recommending to the City Council approval of this First Amendment. 1.11 On , 2007, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this First Amendment and, at the conclusion thereof, introduced Ordinance No. and on , 2007, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. approving this First Amendment. Ordinance No. became effective on , 2007. 2. Revision to Section 4.1.6. Section 4.1.6 of the Development Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: "4.1.6 Health Clubs and Fitness Centers. No health club or fitness center shall be permitted; provided, however, one (1) health club or fitness center shall be permitted, provided such use does not exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable floor area." 3. Remainder of Development Agreement to Remain in Full Force and Effect. Except as set forth in this First Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. V 7 3 44386 \1285096v1 2 7/10/2007 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Developer and City Segundo have executed this First Amendment on the date first above written. ATTEST Cindy Mortesen City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: .0 Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney CITY: CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, a municipal corporation Kelly McDowell, Mayor DEVELOPER: ROSECRANS- SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, 2, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: CCA Sepulveda, LLC, a California limited liability company Its: Managing Member By: Name: Its: By: Name: Its: [SIGNATURES CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE] 074 44386 \1285096v1 3 7/10/2007 ROSECRANS- SEPULVEDA PARTNERS, 3, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: CCA Sepulveda, LLC, a California limited liability company Its: Managing Member By:_ Name: Its: By:_ Name: Its: 07 44386 \1285096v1 4 7/10/2007 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES On 2007 before me, ss: (here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) On , 2007 before me, (here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose names) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public 01101-1 44386 \1285096v1 5 7/10/2007 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) On , 2007 before me, (here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public 077 44386 \1285096v1 6 7/10/2007 EXHIBIT "A" PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 29.2 ACRE PROPERTY: THOSE PORTIONS OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18 TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH RANGE 14 WEST IN THE RANCHO SAUSAL REDONDO, IN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF SEPULVEDA BOULEVARD, AS DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED IN BOOK 13174 AT PAGE 92, OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING 1040 FEET NORTHERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE, FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID EASTERLY LINE WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 4 OF TRACT NO. 1314, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 20, PAGE 161 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE AS FOLLOWS: SOUTH 0 °01' EAST A DISTANCE OF 70.16 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 3050.00 FEET; SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 292.78 FEET; SOUTH 5 °29' WEST A DISTANCE OF 389.98 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE EAST AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2950.00 FEET; SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE A DISTANCE OF 283.18 FEET; AND SOUTH 0 °01' EAST A DISTANCE OF 3.90 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF AFORESAID LOT 4 OF TRACT NO. 1314; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4, SOUTH 60 °41' EAST A DISTANCE OF 5.74 FEET TO THE MOST WESTERLY CORNER OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC LAND COMPANY, RECORDED IN BOOK 5839, PAGE 185 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LAND SO DESCRIBED A PORTION OF WHICH IS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED FOR RECORD WITH THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 6708 PAGE 304 OF SAID DEED RECORDS, SOUTH 70 °41' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 219.75 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 458.59 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE IN SAID NORTHERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 475.29 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LAND SO DESCRIBED, NORTH 49 056'05" EAST A DISTANCE OF 1601.41 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE WHICH IS PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND PASSES THROUGH THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89 °59'30" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1820.11 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND DESCRIBED AND GRANTED IN THE DEED FROM ALLIED CORPORATION, A NEW YORK CORPORATION TO CHEVRON U.S.A., INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 1984, AS INSTRUMENT NO. 84- 1233577, OFFICIAL RECORDS ATTACHED THERETO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO NO. 2030 DATED FEBRUARY 11, 1983, APPROVING SAID LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT. 8.1 ACRE PROPERTY: THOSE PORTIONS OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18 TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH RANGE 14 WEST IN THE RANCHO SAUSAL REDONDO, IN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC LAND COMPANY RECORDED IN BOOK 5839, PAGE 185 OF DEEDS, WITH A LINE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18, WHICH PASSES THROUGH A POINT IN THE EASTERLY LINE OF SEPULVEDA BOULEVARD, AS DESCRIBED IN THE FINAL DECREE OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED IN BOOK 13174, PAGE 92, OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT BEING 1040 FEET NORTHERLY, MEASURED ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID EASTERLY LINE WITH THE 078 44386 \1285096v1 Exhibit A 7/10/2007 Page 1 NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT 4 OF TRACT NO. 1314, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 20, PAGE 161 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE ABOVE MENTIONED NORTHWESTERLY LINE SOUTH 49 056'05" WEST A DISTANCE OF 1601.41 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE IN SAID NORTHWESTERLY LINE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 458.59 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, A DISTANCE OF 347.79 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 6706, PAGE 304, OF DEEDS; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LAST MENTIONED LAND THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES; SOUTH 68 °48'25" EAST 98.98 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 421.07 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 390.17 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE AT ITS POINT OF ENDING NORTH 58 006'05" EAST 172.86 FEET; THENCE NORTH 49 °56'05" EAST A DISTANCE OF 1388.71 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 40 003'55" EAST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE, NORTH 40 003'55" WEST 200 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 4.7 ACRE PROPERTY PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, OF PARCEL MAP NO. 17911, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 269 PAGES 82 THROUGH 84, INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. 44386 \1285096vl Exhibit A 7/10/2007 Page 2 07 DEFINITIONS Section CEQAGuidelines ......................................................................................... ............................... 1.7 City............................................................................... ............................... ...................Introduction Developer ..................................................................... ............................... ...................Introduction Development Agreement .............................................................................. ............................... 1.1 First Amendment ......................................................... ............................... ...................Introduction Operating Memorandum No. 1 ..................................................................... ............................... 1.5 RSP............................................................................................................... ............................... 1.1 RSP2 ........................................................................... ............................... ...................Introduction RSP2 Assignment ........................................................................................ ............................... 1.3 RSP3 ........................................................................... ............................... ...................Introduction RSP3 Assignment ........................................................................................ ............................... 1.4 Party /Parties ................................................................ ............................... ....................Introduction 44386 \1285096v1 Definitions 7/10/2007 0 V 0 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 4415 Exhibit A After receiving, reviewing, and considering all the information in the administrative record for Environmental Assessment No. 631, Development Agreement No. 03 -1, General Plan Amendment No. 03-4 & 03 -5, Zone Change No. 03 -2 & 03 -3, Zone Text Amendment No. 04 -1, and Subdivision No. 03 -7 (Vesting Tentative Tract No. 061630), including, without limitation, the factual information and conclusions set forth in this Resolution and its attachment, the City Council finds, determines, and declares for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative as follows: I. FINDINGS REQUIRED BY CEQA. Public Resources Code § 21081 and CEQA Guidelines § 15091 require the City, before approving a project, to identify significant impacts of the project and, if significant impacts are identified, make one or more of three allowable findings based upon substantial evidence in the record for each significant impact: A. The first allowable finding is that "changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR" (CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1)). B. The second allowable finding is that "such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency" (CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(2)). C. The third allowable finding is that "specific economic, social, or other considerations make unfeasible the mitigation measures or Project alternatives identified in the Final El R" (CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3)). II. FINDINGS REGARDING THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT. A. Potential Impacts Found to be Insisanificant by the Initial Study. The Initial Study identified the following environmental effects as not potentially significant. Accordingly, the City Council finds that the Initial Study, the FEIR, and the record of proceedings for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative and Plaza El Segundo Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative Development project with respect to the areas listed below. 1. Agricultural Resources. 2. Mineral Resources. 08i B. Impacts Identified as Potentially Sianificant in the Initial Study But Which Did Not Exceed Sionificance Thresholds in the DEIR. Although the Initial Study identified the following environmental effects as potentially significant, the City Council finds that the Initial Study, the FEIR, and the record of proceedings in this matter do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to the areas listed below for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative. Aesthetics. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Scenic Vista. The Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site was previously developed with a variety of industrial and chemical manufacturing uses, which are currently in various stages of demolition and site remediation. Two industrial uses (Air Products and Learned Lumber) are currently active within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. An industrial gas production facility and RV storage area would be permitted under the proposed C -4 zoning, as would continuation of the existing lumber distribution facility use in its current location. (2) Scenic Vista. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is located in an urbanized area, with no prominent natural visual features or other attributes that would qualify the site or project vicinity as scenic. Buildings in the vicinity of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site range in height from one story to approximately ten stories. In addition, there are no scenic highways or corridors in the project area. Therefore, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza Del Segundo Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. (3) Scenic Resources. While the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site does contain areas of vegetation, it does not contain any scenic resources such as trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings that could be affected by the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza Del Segundo Project. Additionally, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located within a State or County designated scenic highway. The closest highways to the project site are California Highway No. 1 (Sepulveda Boulevard), the Century Freeway (1 -105), and the San Diego Freeway (1 -405), none of which are designated as scenic highways in the vicinity of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Therefore, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza Del Segundo Project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. (4) Shade /Shadow. There are no sensitive uses (e.g., residences) immediately adjacent to the project site. Therefore, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza Del 2 .W Segundo Project would not result in any significant shade /shadow impacts. b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning or Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Findincr (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project with respect to Aesthetics. 2. Air Quality. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Objectionable Odors. Construction and operation activities associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development are not likely to produce objectionable odors. Most objectionable odors are typically associated with industrial projects involving the use of chemicals, solvents, petroleum products, and other strong smelling elements used in manufacturing processes, as well as sewage treatment facilities and landfills. These types of uses would not be allowed under the new Commercial (C -4) zoning and the proposed Plaza Eel Segundo does not include any of these types of uses. (2) Objectionable Odors. An industrial gas production facility would be permitted within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site under the proposed C-4 zoning, as would continuation of the existing lumber distribution facility use in its current location. However, these uses do not generate objectionable odors. While the previous uses on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site included chemical manufacturing processes, remediation of conditions resulting from these processes would not generate odors. (3) Objectionable Odors. The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would include a variety of fast food and sit -down type restaurants which may produce odors as a result of cooking processes. However, these odors would be minimized through the various permitting processes required for restaurants. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Project 083 3 b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project with respect to Air Quality. 3. Biological Resources. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Tree Preservation. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site does not contain any trees or vegetation that are considered by any local policies or ordinances to be protected. Additionally, there are no local tree preservation policies or ordinances within the City of El Segundo. Therefore, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. No impact is anticipated. (2) Habitat Conservation Plans. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is located in a highly urbanized area and was previously developed with industrial and chemical manufacturing uses. There are no known locally designated natural communities on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site or in the immediate vicinity. There are no conservation plans in the City of El Segundo. Therefore, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Project is not subject to, and therefore would not conflict with, the provisions of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. There are no such conservation plans in the City of El Segundo. No impact is anticipated. b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Findin : (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence 4 0811, identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to Biological Resources. 4. Cultural Resources. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Historic Resources. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site was previously developed with industrial and chemical manufacturing uses. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site has been disturbed and the existing structures have either been demolished or are in the process of being demolished. There are no known historic resources located on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Implementation of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. No impact is anticipated. (2) Human Remains. There are no known human remains within the boundaries of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Development of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Project is not anticipated to disturb any human remains including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. No significant impacts are anticipated. b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. c) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to Cultural Resources — Human Remains. 5. Geology and Soil. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Earthquake Faults. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is located within the seismically active Southern California region and is subject to similar risks as other developments of comparable size and type located in the region. Active faults known to exist in the vicinity of the City of El Segundo include the San Andreas, Newport- Inglewood, Elysian, San Fernando, Sierra Madre, and Verdugo Faults. The Newport- Inglewood Fault is located approximately 3 miles from the project site. Alquist - Priolo zones are fault surface rupture zones. According to the City of El 5 085 Segundo General Plan Draft EIR, no active faults or Alquist - Priolo zones are located within the City of El Segundo. Therefore, the risk of surface rupture due to faulting is minimal. No impacts to the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development are anticipated. (2) Landslides. The Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site and the surrounding areas are predominantly flat, with no large hills or slopes. No landslides exist on the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site or in the project vicinity. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans and Plaza El Segundo Project is not at risk of impacts from landslides. No impact is anticipated (3) Septic Tanks. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is located in an urbanized area and would be connected to the existing sewer infrastructure. No septic tanks or alternative waste water systems would be utilized on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. No impact associated with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Project is anticipated. b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to Geology and Soils. 6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. a) Facts /Effects. (1) School Proximity. The Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Proposed development under the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not emit hazardous emissions and would use and store only limited quantities of packaged hazardous substances. No acutely hazardous materials would be handled on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. During cleanup /remediation of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, contaminated soil will be handled in accordance with all applicable federal and state laws and regulations. Therefore, no impact associated with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development is anticipated. 6 U8U (2) Airport Land Use Plan. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located within the boundaries of the Los Angeles International Airport's (LAX) land use plan. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located within 2 miles of any other airport. Therefore, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No impacts are anticipated. (3) Private Airstrip. The Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and therefore, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not result in a safety hazard for people in the project area. No impact is anticipated. (4) Emergency Response Plan. Development of the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be required to conform to all applicable City of El Segundo emergency response and /or emergency evacuation plans. With full development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site under the proposed Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be accessible from Sepulveda Boulevard, Rosecrans Avenue, Park Place, and Allied Way. The Plaza El Segundo Development would be accessible to emergency vehicles from Sepulveda Boulevard, Rosecrans Avenue and Allied Way. The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would be required to comply with all applicable Fire Department and Public Works Department regulations pertaining to emergency access and evacuation. With adherence to City regulations, impacts associated with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would be less than significant. (5) Wildland Fires. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is located in an urbanized area and is not situated near any wildlands. No impact related to wildfires would occur as a result of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Findin : (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to Hazards and Hazardous Materials. 7 {i 8 1 Hydrology and Water Quality. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Flooding (Housing). The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located within a 100- or 500 -year floodplain and the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development does not involve the construction of housing. No flood impacts on housing are anticipated. (2) Flood Flows. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located within a 100- or 500 -year floodplain. The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not place structures within a 100 -year flood hazard area which would impede or redirect flood flows. No flood impact is anticipated. (3) Levee or Dam Failure. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located in a 100 or 500 year floodplain. Additionally, there are no waterways or major dams located near the City of El Segundo' or the project site. Therefore, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not 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 or dam. (4) Seiche, Tsunami, Mudflows. The relatively fiat Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is located approximately 1.5 miles east of the Pacific Ocean. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site does not contain any enclosed bodies of water and is not located near any other large bodies of water. Therefore, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not be subject to inundation by seiches, tsunami, or mudflows. b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to Hydrology and Water Quality. 8. Land Use. a) Facts /Effects. I El Segundo General Plan — 1992, Public Safety Element. 3 1. 7 (1) Divide Established Community. The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not disrupt the physical arrangement of any established community. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site was previously developed with a variety of chemical and industrial uses. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is divided by two railroad spurs belonging to the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad, which run through the middle of the site. These railroad spurs would remain with implementation of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is located adjacent to other commercial and industrial land uses. Therefore, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not physically divide an established community. (2) Habitat Conservation Plans. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is located within an urbanized area containing a variety of commercial and industrial uses. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not included within and therefore would not conflict with any established habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Therefore, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan. No impacts would occur. b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to land use. 9. Noise. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Airport Noise. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located within the boundaries of the Los Angeles International Airport's land use plan. Therefore, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. No impacts are anticipated. 9 089 (2) Private Airstrip Noise. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not expose persons to excessive noise levels associated with a private airstrip. No impact is anticipated. b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to noise. 10. Population, Housing, and Employment. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Replacement Housing. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site does not contain any residential land uses. As such, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not result in the displacement of persons or homes. No impact is anticipated. (2) Replacement Housing. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site does not contain any residential land uses. As such, implementation of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not result in the displacement of persons or homes. Therefore, construction of replacement housing is not required. No impact is anticipated. b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to population and housing. 10 050 11. Public Services a) Facts /Effects. (1) Public Schools. The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development do not include any residential uses that could directly increase the population within the City of El Segundo and increase existing demands for public schools. However, the potential indirect population increase from the new jobs created by the project may increase existing demands for public schools. The project site is located in the Wiseburn Elementary School District and the Centinela Valley School District. It is anticipated that full development (850,000 square feet) of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site under the proposed Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning would generate approximately 25 students (see Table 1). The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would account for 12 of the 25 students. As seen in Table 1 of the Revised Initial Study, very few students would be generated by the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. The number of students generated would constitute a less than significant impact on the schools. Payment of required school impact fees to the Wiseburn and Centinela Valley School Districts would ensure that there are no impacts to public schools from the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. (2) Libraries. The City of El Segundo has one main library located at 111 W. Mariposa Avenue. No residential uses are proposed as part of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. Therefore, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza Ell Segundo Development would not result in a direct increase in library use as a result of new city residents. A slight increase in use may occur as a result of new jobs, but the increase is anticipated to be less than significant and no new or expanded library facilities would be required. Additionally, developers within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be required to pay a City library service mitigation fee of $0.03 per square foot of development. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Mitigation: (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the 091 11 Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to public services. 12. Recreation a) Facts /Effects. (1) Parks. No residential uses would be permitted under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. Therefore, no increase in the City's permanent population would be anticipated and no direct impacts to parks and recreation facilities would occur. The proposed new General Plan designation and rezoning of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would result in increased employment of approximately 1,904 persons. This increase in employment could result in an indirect increase in demand for recreation and parks services. A potential indirect impact to parks and recreation may occur as a result of employees of the project utilizing existing facilities. However, employees typically do not enjoy long periods of time during work hours to make use of park or recreational facilities. (1) Parks. Many of the employees from the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site and Plaza El Segundo Development are likely to be residents of El Segundo, Manhattan Beach, and other nearby communities that currently make use of the area parks and recreational facilities. Therefore, the increase in employment as a result of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not generate sufficient demand to result in the need for new or physically altered facilities or cause substantial physical deterioration of existing facilities to occur or be accelerated. Impacts to recreation facilities associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would be less than significant. b) Mitigation. (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to recreation. 13. Transportation and Circulation. a) Facts /Effects. 12 092 (1) Air Traffic Patterns. Due to the nature and scope of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development, implementation of the project would not have the potential to result in a change in air traffic patterns at LAX or any other airport in the area. No impact is anticipated. (2) Emergency Access. With full development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be accessible from Sepulveda Boulevard, Rosecrans Avenue, Park Place, and Allied Way. The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would be accessible to emergency vehicles from Sepulveda Boulevard, Rosecrans Avenue and Allied Way. This would provide emergency access to the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site from all directions. The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would be required to comply with all applicable Fire Department and Public Works Department regulations regarding emergency access and evacuation. With adherence to City regulations, impacts would be less than significant. b) Mitigation. (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FOR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to transportation and circulation. 14. Utilities and Service Systems. a) Facts /Effects. (1) Wastewater Treatment. Wastewater generated by the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would be of similar quality to that generated by other commercial projects, for which wastewater is treated by standard (primary, secondary, and tertiary) treatment processes. Improvements associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would comply with all applicable wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not dispose of industrial wastes into the wastewater system. u 9 '' 13 (2) Solid Waste Regulations. Disposal of solid waste generated by the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development construction and operation phases will be subject to the requirements of applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations as enforced by the City of El Segundo Building Safety Division. Impacts related to solid waste disposal would be less than significant. b) Mitigation. (1) No mitigation measures are required to reduce impacts below a level of significance for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to utilities and service systems. C. Impacts Identified as Potentially Significant But Which Can Be Reduced to Less - Than- Sionificant Levels or Which Can Be Avoided. The City Council finds that although the following environmental effects were identified as potentially significant in the FEIR, changes or alterations within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and not the City have been adopted by such other agencies or can and should be adopted by such other agency to avoid or lessen the potential significant environmental effects listed below to a level of insignificance. Aesthetics. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) As a result of new construction at the previous low density, and now largely vacant, Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would be visible from multiple locations. Views of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would likely be available from more off -site locations than at present as existing fencing and landscaping would be removed. Existing off -site trees and vegetation would screen some public views of the project from these locations. The increased visibility of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site from these locations would not be a significant impact because the surrounding area is already urbanized, and future development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would comply with the development standards of the City of El Segundo to provide a consistent design and landscaping that would present a pleasing visual appearance. 14 094 (2) The height and mass of any commercial development proposed on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be consistent with surrounding commercial, industrial and office uses. The appearance of retail development would represent a noticeable improvement over existing remnant industrial facilities. Impacts associated with the change in visual character that could be associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be less than significant. (3) A greater number of view lines through the site would be opened up as a result of removing fencing and landscaping along the boundary of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, although some of these view lines could be blocked by future buildings. This effect would be less than significant because no views of scenic resources would be affected. (4) The Proposed Circulation Element Update Draft EIR requires analysis of potential impacts related to increased night lighting for later projects that would implement the proposed Circulation Element Update. Improvements to the Sepulveda Boulevard /Rosecrans Avenue intersection that would be required in order to address potential traffic impacts of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning would constitute a project that implements the Circulation Element Update policies. Based upon the analysis below, construction of this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update would not result in new effects related to night lighting that were not examined in the Program EIR for the proposed Circulation Element Update. (5) Increased on -site lighting associated with the permitted uses would increase on -site lighting levels substantially from the currently low levels of light emitted from the project area. Additionally, enhanced street lighting could be provided in conjunction with potential improvements to the Sepulveda /Rosecrans intersection. The resulting lighting levels would be consistent with existing ambient light levels on Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard and would be less than significant. In addition, the impacts of increased street lighting at the Sepulveda /Rosecrans intersection would be minimal compared to the effects of increased lighting of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. The closest sensitive receptors are separated from the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site by Sepulveda Boulevard, Rosecrans Avenue, and commercial developments along Rosecrans Avenue. These intervening uses would block light generated by development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site and therefore, impacts to sensitive receptors from lighting would be less than significant. (6) Development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site to the levels allowed under the new Commercial Center (C-4) zoning would substantially increase the amount of reflective materials located on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site from the current levels. However, the resulting levels of glare 15 095 would be consistent with the existing levels currently found on Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard. In addition, use of non - reflective materials in the construction of any proposed developments would ensure that these glare impacts would be less than significant. Potential glare impacts to sensitive receptors would be less than significant for the same reasons identified above. Plaza El Segundo Development (7) The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would be visible from multiple locations. The increased visibility of the Plaza El Segundo Development would not be a significant impact because the surrounding area is already urbanized, and proposed development would consist of an attractive shopping center with a consistent design and landscaping that would present a pleasing visual appearance. The height and mass of proposed development would be consistent with surrounding commercial, industrial and office uses. The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would be visually compatible with the office and retail buildings located along Hughes Way and Rosecrans Avenue. The appearance of the proposed shopping center development would represent a noticeable improvement over existing remnant industrial facilities. Impacts associated with the change in visual character of the area as a result of development of Plaza El Segundo would be less than significant. (8) The development of the low intensity Plaza El Segundo Site has the potential to substantially alter the nighttime lighting characteristics of the Plaza El Segundo site and vicinity. Due to the high ambient level of night lighting that presently exists in the areas surrounding the Plaza El Segundo site, and the distance of the sensitive receptors from the Plaza El Segundo site, night - lighting impacts of the proposed Plaza EI Segundo Development would be less than significant. (9) Development of the Plaza El Segundo Development would substantially increase the amount of reflective materials located on the Plaza El Segundo Site from the current levels. However, the resulting levels of glare would be consistent with the existing levels currently found on Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard and would be less than significant with the use of non - reflective materials in the construction of the Plaza El Segundo Development. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation: Sepulveda / Rosecrans Site Rezoning 16 (1) Expansive areas of highly reflective materials, such as mirrored glass, must not be permitted. Non - reflective building materials must be used to the maximum extent possible to reduce potential glare impacts (B -1). (2) Lighting must be designed to minimize off -site glare (B -2). Plaza El Segundo (3) Expansive areas of highly reflective materials, such as mirrored glass, must not be permitted. Non - reflective building materials must be used to the maximum extent possible to reduce potential glare impacts (B -3). (4) Lighting must be designed to minimize off -site glare (B-4) d) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to Aesthetics. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. 2. Air Quality. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) Maximum daily emissions from a typical construction project associated with the Proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning will not exceed SCAQMD's daily thresholds for Sox. (2) Between 2007 and 2012, emissions from construction activity may occur simultaneously with operational emissions associated with the proposed Plaza El Segundo. Combined emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD's thresholds for SOx. Impacts associated with SOx emissions would be below the significance threshold and less than significant. (3) State and federal 1 -hour and 8 -hour CO standards would not be exceeded under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and CO levels would be well below the more stringent state standards. Thus, impacts with respect to CO concentrations would be less than significant. (4) The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be consistent with the 2003 AQMP. 17 097 Plaza El Segundo (5) Maximum daily emissions associated with the construction of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development will not exceed SCAQMD's daily thresholds for CO, NOx, and PM10. Therefore, emissions of these pollutants would fall below the significance thresholds. (6) Impacts associated with CO concentrations in 2012 under the full build out of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be less than significant. The number of vehicles at the analyzed intersections in 2007 would be less than those occurring during 2012. Therefore, the State and federal 1 -hour and 8 -hour CO standards would not be exceeded as a result of traffic generated by the proposed Plaza El Segundo. Thus, impacts with respect to CO hotspots would be less than significant. (7) The proposed Plaza El Segundo would also be consistent with the 2003 AQMP. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Prior to implementation of specific development projects, impacts associated with construction emissions must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. This examination must provide quantified estimates of construction emissions based upon the specific site, schedule, and construction equipment utilization characteristics of the proposed development and compare the estimated emissions to the SCAQMD thresholds for construction emissions. The analysis must incorporate the mitigation measures identified below as appropriate, along with any other mitigation measures identified by the project - specific analysis (C- 1). C) Mitigation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Construction Emissions The following is a list of feasible control measures that the SCAQMD recommends for construction emissions of PM10. These mitigation measures must be implemented for all areas where construction activities associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would occur. Fugitive Dust, PM10 Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, including but not limited to the following: 18 098 (1) Prior to implementation of specific development projects, impacts associated with construction emissions must be examined. This examination must provide quantified estimates of construction emissions based upon the specific site, schedule, and construction equipment utilization characteristics of the proposed development and compare the estimated emissions to the SCAQMD thresholds for construction emissions. The analysis must incorporate the mitigation measures identified below as appropriate, along with any other mitigation measures identified by the project - specific analysis (C -1). (2) The construction area and vicinity (500 -foot radius) must be swept (preferably with water sweepers) and watered at least twice daily. Site wetting must occur often enough to maintain a 10 percent surface soil moisture content throughout all earth moving activities (C -2). (3) All unpaved roads, parking and staging areas must be watered at least once every two hours of active operations (C -3). (4) Site access points must be swept/washed within thirty minutes of visible dirt deposition (C-4). (5) On -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or rusty material must be covered or watered at least twice daily (C -5). (6) All haul trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials must either be covered or maintain two feet of freeboard (C -6). (7) All haul trucks must have a capacity of no less than twelve and three - quarter (12.75) cubic yards (C -7). (8) At least 80 percent of all inactive disturbed surface areas must be watered on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind drive fugitive dust (C -8). (9) Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended when winds exceed 25 mph (C -9). (10) Traffic speeds on unpaved roads must be limited to 15 miles per hour (C -10). (11) Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended during first and second stage smog alerts (C -11). (12) For all construction emissions, the following measure must apply: The applicant must develop and implement a construction management plan, as approved by the City of El Segundo, which includes the following measures recommended by the SCAQMD, or equivalently effective measures approved by the SCAQMD: 010 19 a. Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference. b. Provide temporary traffic controls during all phases of construction activities to maintain traffic flow (e.g., flag person). c. Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system to off -peak hours to the degree practicable. d. Re -route construction trucks away from congested streets. e. Consolidate truck deliveries when possible. f. Provide dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment on- and off -site. g. Maintain equipment and vehicle engines in good condition and in proper tune as per manufacturer's specifications and per SCAQMD rules, to minimize exhaust emissions. h. Suspend use of all construction equipment operations during second stage smog alerts. Contact the SCAQMD at (800) 242 -4022 for daily forecasts. i. Use electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel- or gasoline - powered generators. j. Use methanol- or natural gas - powered mobile equipment and pile drivers instead of diesel if readily available at competitive prices. k. Use propane- or equipment instead of competitive prices. (C -12) Plaza El Segundo Construction Emissions butane - powered on -site mobile gasoline if readily available at The following is a list of feasible control measures that the SCAQMD recommends for construction emissions of PM10. These mitigation measures must be implemented during construction activities associated with the proposed Plaza El Segundo. Fugitive Dust, PM10 (13) The construction area and vicinity (500 -foot radius) must be swept (preferably with water sweepers) and watered at least twice daily. Site wetting must occur often enough to maintain a 10 percent surface soil moisture content throughout all earth moving activities (C -13). 1 20 �� (14) All unpaved roads, parking and staging areas must be watered at least once every two hours of active operations (C -14). (15) Site access points must be swept/washed within thirty minutes of visible dirt deposition (C -15). (16) On -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or rusty material must be covered or watered at least twice daily (C -16). (17) All haul trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials must either be covered or maintain two feet of freeboard (C -17). (18) All haul trucks must have a capacity of no less than twelve and three - quarter (12.75) cubic yards. (19) At least 80 percent of all inactive disturbed surface areas must be watered on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind drive fugitive dust (C -19). (20) Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended when winds exceed 25 mph (C -20). (21) Traffic speeds on unpaved roads must be limited to 15 miles per hour (C -21). (22) Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended during first and second stage smog alerts (C -22). (23) The applicant must develop and implement a construction management plan, as approved by the City of El Segundo, which includes the following measures recommended by the SCAQMD, or equivalently effective measures approved by the SCAQMD: a. Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference. b. Provide temporary traffic controls during all phases of construction activities to maintain traffic flow (e.g., flag person). c. Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system to off -peak hours to the degree practicable. d. Re -route construction trucks away from congested streets. e. Consolidate truck deliveries when possible. f. Provide dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment on- and off -site. g. Maintain equipment and vehicle engines in good condition and in proper tune as per manufacturer's specifications and per SCAQMD rules, to minimize exhaust emissions. 21 101 C3 h. Suspend use of all construction equipment operations during second stage smog alerts. Contact the SCAQMD at (800) 242 -4022 for daily forecasts. i. Use electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel- or gasoline - powered generators. j. Use methanol- or natural gas - powered mobile equipment and pile drivers instead of diesel if readily available at competitive prices. k. Use propane- or equipment instead of competitive prices (C -23). d) Findincy butane - powered on -site mobile gasoline if readily available at (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to Air Quality. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. (3) With Respect to Mitigation Measures C -2, C -3, C-4, C -5, C -6, C -7, C -8, C -9, C -10, C -11, C -12, C -13, C -14, C -15, C -16, C- 17, C -18, C -19, C -20, C -21, C -22, and C -23, changes or alteration are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (4) If mitigation is not adopted by the other jurisdiction(s), the impact would remain significant and unavoidable and the City Council this includes the impact within the ambit of the Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC). Biological Resources. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) A small, human - induced marsh was identified at the northwest corner of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Subsequent investigation indicated that 0.30 acres of wetlands falling under the jurisdiction of the LARWQCB may be present in this area. Construction activities occurring within a wetland habitat, or loss of wetland habitat could represent a substantial 22 iU� adverse effect on a riparian habitat or sensitive natural community. Thus, impacts on wetlands resulting from development of the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be potentially significant, subject to the findings of project - specific subsequent environmental analysis described under Subsequent Environmental Documentation and Mitigation Measures. (2) Field surveys identified a number of native and non - native wildlife species that were either observed directly or inferred to utilize the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Most of these species are common in urban areas and with the exception of the loggerhead shrike would not be considered sensitive species. Impacts to other wildlife species that could result from development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not represent a substantial adverse effect 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 and would therefore be less than significant. (3) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site was assessed as unlikely to play any significant biogeographic role in the movement of animals through the region. Thus activity associated with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning would not have the potential to interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. No impacts related to wildlife corridors and habitat linkages would result from potential development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. (4) No sensitive plant species were identified on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site during field surveys. Therefore, development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not impact sensitive plant species. No endangered mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, fish or invertebrate species were detected on the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Therefore, development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not impact endangered animal species. (5) One threatened bird species, two bird species of special concern, and one bird species covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act were either detected on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site or could potentially use the site, based on known distributions of species: white - tailed kite; loggerhead shrike, Belding's savannah sparrow, and burrowing owl. The Belding's savannah sparrow is listed as a State Threatened species. The white - tailed kite and loggerhead shrike are both listed as California Species of Special Concern. The burrowing owl has no formal protected status at this time, as both the state and federal governments have declined to list the species as threatened or endangered, but burrowing owl nests are covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Development activities associated with the 23 103 Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would have the potential to result in the impacts to these species from: Grading activities on -site will generate noise, which is considered detrimental to wildlife utilization of remnant habitat areas over the construction life of the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning. The impact, however, is temporal in nature and would be less than significant as long as no endangered or threatened organisms are present on -site during the construction activity. Construction personnel have the potential to be destructive to all forms of plant and animal life. Small mammals and reptiles are particularly subject to disturbance from harassment, capture, or destruction. Such activities that affect the four sensitive species listed above could have a substantial adverse effect on a species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species and would be significant. Grading and construction activities within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site could negatively affect increasingly rare organisms, including those identified above. These activities could have a substantial adverse effect on a species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species and would be significant. (6) Although the general biological assessment of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site identified the potential for vernal pools to occur within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, a follow -on investigation ruled out this possibility. Development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would therefore not affect this sensitive natural community and no impacts related to vernal pools would occur. Plaza El Segundo (7) The analysis provided regarding potential jurisdictional wetlands and sensitive species within the Plaza El Segundo Development site is in accordance with the mitigation measures for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning that require site - specific evaluation of potential wetlands impacts. (8) Based upon the assessment of potential jurisdictional wetlands within the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site, approximately 0.30 acres of wetlands under the jurisdiction of the LARWQCB may exist within the site. No waters of the U.S. or waters of the State are present on the proposed Plaza El Segundo site. Therefore, construction of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would not impact any ACOE or CFDG jurisdictional wetland areas, but could potentially affect approximately 0.30 acres of LARWQCB jurisdictional wetlands. Construction activities occurring within a wetland habitat, or loss of wetland habitat could represent a substantial adverse effect on a riparian 24 i �1 habitat or sensitive natural community. Thus, impacts on wetlands resulting from potential future development of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would be significant. (9) The four sensitive bird species detected on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site or that could potentially use the site could also occur on the proposed Plaza El Segundo site. Development activities associated with the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would have the potential to result in the following impacts to these species: Grading activities on -site will generate noise, which is considered detrimental to wildlife utilization of remnant habitat areas over the construction life of the Plaza El Segundo. The impact, however, is temporal in nature and would be less than significant as long as no endangered or threatened organisms are present on -site. Construction personnel have the potential to be destructive to all forms of plant and animal life. Such activities that affect the three sensitive species listed above could have a substantial adverse effect on a species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species and would be significant. Grading and construction activities within the proposed Plaza El Segundo site could negatively affect increasingly rare organisms, including white tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, Belding's savannah sparrow, and burrowing owl. These activities could have a substantial adverse effect on a species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species and would be significant. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed development project that includes the northwest corner of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site that has been identified as potentially containing 0.30 acres of jurisdictional wetlands area under the jurisdiction of LARWQCB. Impacts to any jurisdictional wetlands that may exist in this area must be examined, at the time the development project is proposed, in light of the Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: (1) A site specific analysis must be conducted to determine whether the design of the proposed development project would impact any of the 0.30 acres identified as potential jurisdictional wetlands. This analysis must be completed prior to the start of construction activities for any proposed development within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. If jurisdictional wetlands 25 would be affected by the development project, measures must be identified to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. (D -1) Subsequent environmental documentation must also be prepared for any proposed development project within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site to determine the presence /absence of sensitive species. This information must be examined, at the time the development project is proposed, in light of the Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: (2) Site specific analysis of potential effects to four sensitive bird species (white tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, burrowing owl and Belding's savannah sparrow) must be conducted prior to the start of construction activities for any proposed development within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. If any of these sensitive species would be affected by the proposed development, measures must be identified to reduce impacts to these species to less than significant levels, including, but not limited to, on -site monitoring by a qualified biologist during grading and /or construction activities (D -2). C) Mitigation: (1) A site specific analysis must be conducted to determine whether the design of any proposed development project within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning site would impact any of the 0.30 acres identified as potential jurisdictional wetlands. This analysis must be completed prior to the start of construction activities for any proposed development within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. If jurisdictional wetlands would be affected by the development project, measures must be identified to reduce impacts to less than significant levels (D -1). (2) Site specific analysis of potential effects to four sensitive bird species (white tailed kite, loggerhead shrike, burrowing owl and Belding's savannah sparrow) must be conducted prior to the start of construction activities for any proposed development within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. If any of these sensitive species would be affected by the proposed development, measures must be identified to reduce impacts to these species to less than significant levels, including, but not limited to, on -site monitoring by a qualified biologist during grading and /or construction activities (D -2). (3) All construction personnel must receive copies of all pertinent mitigation measures to reduce impacts to general biological resources and must be instructed on avoiding adverse impacts to birds encountered on -site (D -3). 26 U O (4) Prior to site remediation or construction grading on parts of the Site where burrowing owls may occur, a qualified biologist must be retained to conduct surveys for burrowing owl to determine if it is resident on -site. Surveys must be conducted no more than 30 days prior to commencement of such activities. If burrowing owls are determined to be resident, a qualified biologist must oversee site remediation and demolition activities in and around any semi - natural areas which could be occupied by burrowing owls. Proposed mitigation measures must be presented to the California Department of Fish and Game and /or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for approval to avoid directly harming the owl if it is present on -site during these activities (D -4). Plaza El Segundo The following mitigation measures must be required for the Plaza El Segundo Development. (5) All construction personnel must receive copies of all pertinent mitigation measures to reduce impacts to general biological resources and must be instructed on avoiding adverse impacts to birds encountered on -site (D -5). (6) Prior to site remediation or construction grading on parts of the Site where burrowing owls may occur, a qualified biologist must be retained to conduct surveys for burrowing owl to determine if it is resident on -site. Surveys must be conducted no more than 30 days prior to commencement of such activities. If burrowing owls are determined to be resident, a qualified biologist must oversee site remediation and demolition activities in and around any semi - natural areas which could be occupied by burrowing owls. Proposed mitigation measures must be presented to the California Department of Fish and Game and /or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for approval to avoid directly harming the owl if it is present on -site during these activities (D -6). (7) Prior to issuance of building permits, evidence must be provided to the City of El Segundo that all necessary approvals for any wetland dredge /fill contemplated by such permit have been obtained from the Regional Water Quality Control Board — Los Angeles Region, or equivalent documentation, or a waiver stating that no permit is presently required pursuant to the regulations of that agency. If required, conditions for permit approvals by RWQCB must include, but may not be limited to the following: Mitigation of any unavoidable impacts to wetland values and functions to the satisfaction of the permitting agency Incorporation of buffers to the wetland areas On -site treatment of runoff to improve water quality 27 Compliance with best management practices during construction (D -7). d) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to Biological Resources. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. (3) With Respect to Mitigation Measures D -1, D -2, D-4, D -6, and D -7, changes or alteration are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (4) If mitigation is not adopted by the other jurisdiction(s), the impact would remain significant and unavoidable and the City Council this includes the impact within the ambit of the Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC). 4. Geology and Soils. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) No evidence of faulting was observed during the field investigation and no active faults cross the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site or are located in the immediate site vicinity. The City of El Segundo does not contain any Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones. Based on the available geologic data, active or potentially active faults with the potential for surface fault rupture are not known to be located directly beneath or projecting toward the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Therefore, development of Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not expose people to significant impacts related to surface fault rupture. (2) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is located within the Southern California region that is known for its seismic activity. Additionally, the location of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site relative to known active or potentially active faults indicates that it could be subjected to significant ground shaking. Compliance with the State of California Building Code, with its local amendments, would ensure that potential seismic and ground shaking impacts would be less than significant. 28 iU$ (3) According to the State of California Seismic Hazards Map, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located in an area at risk for liquefaction. Therefore, development of the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not expose people to significant liquefaction impacts. (4) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not within an area identified as having a potential for slope instability. Additionally, the site is not located within an area identified as having a potential for seismic slope instability. There are no known landslides near the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, nor is the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site located in the path of any known or potential landslides. Therefore, the development of Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not result in or expose people to significant impacts related to slope stability. (5) No subsidence associated with fluid withdrawal, peat oxidation, or hydrocompaction has occurred in the City of El Segundo. Therefore, development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not result in or expose people to significant impacts related to subsidence. (6) The City of El Segundo is not within an area of known expansive soils. Therefore, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not result in or expose people to significant impacts related to expansive soils. (7) The Proposed Circulation Element Update Draft EIR requires analysis of potential impacts related to expansive soils for later projects that would implement the proposed Circulation Element Update. The proposed connection of Park Place between Sepulveda Boulevard and Nash Street and connection of Park Place to Hughes Way via Allied Way through the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would constitute a project that implements the Circulation Element Update policies. Based upon the analysis above, construction of this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update would not result in new effects related to expansive soils that were not examined in the Program EIR for the proposed Circulation Element Update. (8) The City of El Segundo is within an oil field and there are documented producing wells located near the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Due to the presence of oil and natural gas wells near the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site, there is a potential for methane to be present in the soil. Impacts associated with methane levels on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be potentially significant, subject to the findings of project - specific environmental analysis described under Subsequent Environmental Documentation and Mitigation Measures. (9) Removal of contaminated soils that may occur on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be separate activity 29 which will be accomplished prior to grading activities. For a discussion of soil contamination on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site and its removal, see Section IV.G of this EIR. (10) Earth movement activities in and around the unlined depressions could result in an increase of impervious surfaces at the site and expose soils to potential wind -borne erosion. Therefore, the potential for erosion as a result of the development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be significant. Plaza El Segundo (11) The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site would not expose people or structures to potentially adverse effects or otherwise result in significant impacts with respect to: surface fault rupture; seismicity and ground shaking; liquefaction and seismic settlement; slope stability; subsidence; expansive soils; landform alteration; building foundations; or grading. Impacts of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would be less than significant with respect to these issues. (12) The City of El Segundo is within an oil field and there are documented producing wells located near Plaza El Segundo. A methane study was conducted to determine the presence or absence of methane on the Plaza El Segundo site. This study meets the requirement for subsequent environmental documentation for development on the proposed Plaza El Segundo Site. Seventeen methane samples and one duplicate sample were collected from nine locations on the Plaza El Segundo site on January 5, 2004. Methane was detected during the sampling; however, it was not detected at levels that require further analysis or sampling. Therefore, impacts associated with methane would be less than significant on the Plaza El Segundo site. (13) Unlined natural depressions could result in an increase of impervious surfaces at the site and expose soils to the effects of wind -borne erosion. Therefore, the potential for erosion at the site as a result of the development of Plaza El Segundo would be significant. There is also potential for erosion to occur during the grading process during periods of heavy precipitation. The development of Plaza El Segundo would result in potentially significant impacts related to erosion. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site to determine the presence or absence of methane. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: 30 V A methane study must be conducted to determine the levels at which methane is or is not present in the area of any proposed development. If methane is determined to be present at or above the levels which require action, then the report shall include recommendations and mitigation measures which shall be followed (E -1). C) Mitigation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezonin (1) A methane study must be conducted to determine the levels at which methane is or is not present in the area of any proposed development. If methane is determined to be present at or above the levels which require action, then the report must include recommendations and mitigation measures which must be followed (E -1). (2) All soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces must be suspended if winds exceed 25 miles per hour (E -2). Plaza El Segundo (3) All soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces must be suspended if winds exceed 25 miles per hour (E -3). d) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Project with respect to geology and soils. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. (3) With Respect to Mitigation Measures E -2 and E -3, changes or alteration are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (4) If mitigation is not adopted by the other jurisdiction(s), the impact would remain significant and unavoidable and the City Council this includes the impact within the ambit of the Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC). 5. Hydrology and Water Quality. a) Facts /Effects. 31 X11 Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The Proposed Circulation Element Update Draft EIR requires analysis of potential impacts related to drainage and storm drain systems for later projects that would implement the proposed Circulation Element Update. The proposed connection of Park Place between Sepulveda Boulevard and Nash Street and connection of Park Place to Hughes Way via Allied Way through the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would constitute a project that implements the Circulation Element Update policies. The analysis provided below includes the master drainage plan and storm drain and detainment system designed required by the Proposed Circulation Element Update Draft EIR. Based upon the analysis provided below, construction of this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update would not result in new effects related to drainage that were not examined in the Program EIR for the proposed Circulation Element Update. (2) The hydrology calculations demonstrate that the entire Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site can be protected from flooding through the use of on -site storm drains in conjunction with an on -site retention basin without increasing discharge rates from the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. At full buildout the total 50 -year flow discharging into the retention basin is 117 cubic feet per second (cfs) with a total retention volume of 4 acre -feet or 175,000 cubic feet. With the construction of the retention basin and the mitigation measures below, the development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site at full buildout would not result in significant impacts related to hydrology. (3) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is not located in a 100 or 500 year floodplain. Therefore, the future development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not result in or expose people or property to significant impacts related to flooding. (4) The development of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site does not involve deep excavations that have the potential to intercept existing Aquifers, nor would it involve additions (with the exception of normal water percolation from rainfall /landscape irrigation) or withdrawals of groundwater. Therefore, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would not result in significant impacts related to groundwater. (5) Since the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning involves clearing, grading, and the excavation of 5 or more acres, a General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit must be obtained from the SWRCB prior to the start of construction. The NPDES requires that a NOI be filed with the SWRCB. By filing an NOI, the developer agrees to the conditions outlined in the General Permit. One of the conditions of the General Permit is the development and the implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP identifies which structural and nonstructural BMPs will be 32 1 implemented, such as sandbag barriers, temporary desilting basins near inlets, gravel driveways, dust controls, employee training, and general good housekeeping practices. With the implementation of the required BMPs and the mitigation measures listed below, short-term impacts on water quality from construction materials, site grading, and equipment maintenance would be less than significant. (6) If not properly designed and constructed, the proposed development could increase the rate of urban pollutant introduction into storm water system. As required by the SUSMP, detailed plans for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site's compliance with the SUSMP will be submitted to the City as part of the development plan approval process prior to issuance of building and grading permits. With compliance with the SUSMP requirements, the project's operational impacts on storm water quality will be less than significant. Plaza El Segundo (7) Runoff from the Plaza El Segundo site would drain across the Plaza El Segundo Site to the proposed retention basin located in the eastern portion of the Plaza El Segundo site. The total 50- year flow discharging into the retention basin from the portion of the Plaza El Segundo site located north of the railroad tracks is anticipated to be 57 cfs. The total volume of the retention basin is 8.09 acre -feet or 352,000 cubic feet for the Plaza El Segundo site. The total 50 -year flow discharging from the portion of the Plaza El Segundo site located south of the railroad tracks is 11 cfs. Since this does not represent an increase in runoff from the existing condition, no detention is required for this area. With the construction of the retention basin and the mitigation measures below, development of Plaza El Segundo would not result in significant impacts related to hydrology. (8) Plaza El Segundo is not located in a 100 or 500 year floodplain. Therefore, the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would not result in or expose people or property to significant impacts related to flooding. (9) The development of the Plaza El Segundo site does not involve deep excavations that have the potential to intercept existing Aquifers, nor would it involve direct additions or withdrawals of groundwater. Therefore, the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would not result in significant impacts related to groundwater. With the implementation of the required BMPs, and the mitigation measures listed below short-term impacts on water quality from construction materials, site grading, and equipment maintenance would be less than significant. (10) If not properly designed and constructed, the proposed development on Plaza El Segundo could increase the rate of urban pollutant introduction into storm water system. In 33 i 1 .) compliance with the SUSMP requirements, the proposed development on Plaza El Segundo will provide for the treatment/filtration of on -site storm water runoff before it enters the public storm water conveyance system. Applicable BMPs will also be selected from those approved sources identified in the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan for Los Angeles County and Cities in Los Angeles County. Additionally, a preventive maintenance program, including regular street and parking lot sweeping with equipment designed for removal of such compounds, should be provided to reduce the potential water quality impact to a less- than - significant level. As noted above, the Plaza El Segundo site will provide structural or treatment control BMPs designed to mitigate storm water runoff. With compliance with the SUSMP requirements, the project's operational impacts on storm water quality will be less than significant. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The applicant must prepare hydrology studies for each specific development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Such studies shall be reviewed and approved by the City of El Segundo and any other applicable agency (F -1). (2) The applicant must prepare runoff studies for each specific development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site so that the runoff from one specific project area would not flow onto another specific project area without the owners consent. Such studies must be reviewed and approved by the City of El Segundo and any other applicable agency (F -2). (3) The applicant must prepare a master drainage plan for each specific development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. This plan must include detailed hydrology /hydraulic calculations and drainage improvements, showing quantitatively how the project will eliminate the potential for downstream flooding due to increased storm water runoff. These plans will also identify the proposed BMPs to be implemented in compliance with the requirements of the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan and the ESMC. Such plans must be reviewed and approved by the City of El Segundo and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (F -3). (4) The applicant must design, for each specific development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, a conveyance and detainment system to meet the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works limits on the storm drains that would convey the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site's discharge (F-4). 34 i 14 (5) The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development must comply with City of El Segundo Ordinance No. 1347 and No. 1348, which establishes storm water and urban pollution controls (F -5). (6) The project owner /developer of a specific development (e.g., Plaza El Segundo) on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site must maintain all structural or treatment control BMPs for the life of the project (F -6). Plaza EI Segundo The following mitigation measures have been identified as pertaining specifically to the Plaza El Segundo Development: (7) The applicant must prepare a hydrology study for the Plaza El Segundo Site. The study must be reviewed and approved by the City of El Segundo and any other applicable agencies (F -7). (8) The applicant must prepare a runoff study for the Plaza El Segundo Site so that the runoff does not flow onto another area without the owners consent. The study must be reviewed and approved by the City of El Segundo and the any other applicable agencies (F -8). (9) The applicant must prepare a master drainage plan for the Plaza El Segundo Site. This plan must include detailed hydrology /hydraulic calculations and drainage improvements, showing quantitatively how the project will eliminate the potential for downstream flooding due to increased storm water runoff. These plans will also identify the proposed BMPs to be implemented in compliance with the requirements of the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan and the ESMC. Such plans must be reviewed and approved by the City of El Segundo and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (F -9). (10) The applicant must design a conveyance and detainment system to meet the City of El Segundo's and Los Angeles County Department of Public Works limits on the storm drains that would convey the Plaza El Segundo Site's discharge (F -10). (11) The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development must comply with City of El Segundo Ordinance No. 1347 and No. 1348, which establishes storm water and urban pollution controls (F -11). (12) The project owner /developer must maintain all structural or treatment control BMPs for the life of the Plaza El Segundo Development (F -12). d) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence 35 11J identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to hydrology and water quality. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. (3) If mitigation is not adopted by the other jurisdiction(s), the impact would remain significant and unavoidable and the City Council this includes the impact within the ambit of the Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC). 6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The parcels that comprise the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site are known to contain soil and groundwater contamination due to past activities. However, at this time, the extent and type of contamination for all the parcels is not known. Without this information, based upon previous activities that have taken place on the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, conditions of site contamination would have the potential to expose workers and visitors to the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site to soil and groundwater contamination levels that are above established remediation thresholds and expose workers and visitors to the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site to cancer and /or non cancer risks that exceed health risk thresholds. Thus impacts of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning related to soil and groundwater contamination would be significant. (2) Asbestos and lead surveys have not been conducted for any of the structures that exist on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site with the exception of the Honeywell International Inc. parcels. However, it is assumed that these structures contain asbestos containing material and lead due to the age of the facilities. Thus demolition and development activities on the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would have the potential to expose workers to hazards associated with asbestos and lead. Impacts of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be significant with respect to asbestos and lead. Plaza El Segundo (3) Upon completion of interim remediation of the project site, potential health risk impacts to individuals from site contamination 36 Flu would be less than significant with respect to the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. Implementation of additional measures to address soil gas and groundwater contamination would not affect the risks associated with construction and operation of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development since the workers, employees and patrons of the proposed Plaza El Segundo would not be exposed to chemicals that would be remediated through these processes. (4) After removal of the asbestos containing materials from the various facilities, the facilities on the Plaza El Segundo site were demolished. There are no structures or asbestos containing materials presently located on proposed Plaza El Segundo site. Therefore, impacts to individuals or the environment from asbestos fibers would be less than significant. Lead -based paint surveys revealed no significant results. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezonin Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for any proposed development project within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site. Conditions related to soil and groundwater contamination must be examined for the proposed development site, at the time the development project is proposed, in light of the Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: (1) A full characterization of all the parcels that comprise that project site must be undertaken. The City must require that this process be initiated by requiring the project applicant to conduct a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) or equivalent investigation and analysis for the specific project site that would be occupied by the proposed development. The Phase I ESA or equivalent document must be prepared by a licensed professional (Registered Environmental Assessor or equivalent) and submitted to the City for review (G -1). (2) If indicated by the initial investigation, the City must require the preparation of subsequent Phase II investigation(s) and submission to the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board and /or other appropriate agency. The project applicant must provide to the City copies of all materials submitted to the LARWQC13 or any other regulatory agency (G -2). (3) Remediation of any environmental conditions identified in the Phase I and Phase II site assessments or investigations must be accomplished to the standards established and agreed upon by the appropriate regulatory agency(ies) for the contemplated development, prior to the issuance of grading or building permits X17 37 for the project. The project applicant must provide to the City copies of any materials received from the LARWQCB or any other regulatory agency (G -3) (4) If the future development project would include any part of Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site that currently contains structures, an asbestos and lead survey must be conducted to determine the presence or absence of these substances. Removal of these substances shall be conducted in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations (G-4). C) Mitigation: Further mitigation measures for site specific projects would be identified by the Mitigation Measures described below. Before development is allowed on any part of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, the part of the site proposed for development would need to be remediated to the standards required for commercial development by LARWQCB. (1) A full characterization of all the parcels that comprise a specific project site must be undertaken. The City must require that this process be initiated by requiring the project applicant to conduct a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) or equivalent investigation and analysis for the specific project site that would be occupied by the proposed development. The Phase I ESA or equivalent document must be prepared by a licensed professional (Registered Environmental Assessor or equivalent) and submitted to the City for review (G -1). (2) If indicated by the initial investigation, the City must require the preparation of subsequent Phase II investigation(s) and submission to the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board and /or other appropriate agency. The project applicant must provide to the City copies of all materials submitted to the LARWQCB or any other regulatory agency (G -2). (3) Remediation of any environmental conditions identified in the Phase I and Phase II site assessments or investigations must be accomplished to the standards established and agreed upon by of the appropriate regulatory agency(ies) for the contemplated development, prior to the issuance of grading or building permits for the project. The project applicant must provide to the City copies of any materials received from the LARWQCB or any other regulatory agency (G -3). (4) If the future development project would include any part of Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site that currently contains structures, an asbestos and lead survey must be conducted to determine the presence or absence of these substances. Removal of these substances must be conducted in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations (G-4). '118 38 Plaza El Segundo (5) Remedial investigations, health risk assessments for the contemplated development and final soils remedial action plans for the Plaza El Segundo portion of the project site must be completed and approved to the standards established and agreed upon by the LARWQCB prior to the start of any project activities. The project applicant must provide to the City copies of any materials received from the LARWQCB or any other regulatory agency (G -5). (6) Remediation of shallow soil of the Plaza El Segundo Development portion of the project site must be accomplished to the standards for commercial development established and agreed upon in conjunction with the LARWQCB and a shallow soil closure letter must be issued by the LARWQCB prior to issuance of grading permits for construction of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. The project applicant must provide to the City copies of any materials received from the LARWQCB or any other regulatory agency (G -6). d) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to hazards and hazardous materials. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. (3) If mitigation is not adopted by the other jurisdiction(s), the impact would remain significant and unavoidable and the City Council this includes the impact within the ambit of the Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC). 7. Land Use. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The rezoning of a 70.8 net acre portion of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site from Heavy and Light Industrial to Commercial Center would allow for the development of commercial and retail uses. Any future development on the site would be required to meet the zoning and development standards associated with the C -4 designation. Compatibility with the surrounding land uses would be ensured through compliance with these development standards. The existing uses (e.g., 39 lumberyard, Air products facility, and RV storage) would continue to operate and would be consistent with the M -1 and M -2 zones. Therefore, no land use compatibility issues are anticipated as a result of future development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. (2) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be consistent with the applicable adopted plans and policies, including the El Segundo General Plan and SCAG's RCPG. Future development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be consistent with both the General Plan and the RCPG. Therefore, no land use impacts are associated with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. (3) Public comments on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning contend that the proposed project would provide retail sales and services that could compete with downtown El Segundo business and that the impacts of increased competition could result in urban blight and decay in the downtown commercial area of El Segundo. (4) As discussed in Response to Comment No. 10 -2 in the FEIR, due to the size of stores that would be included in the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development, a different range of products would be provided, compared to the smaller stores in Downtown, which are more focused on the local residential market. As such, proposed development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not be anticipated to adversely affect businesses presently located in downtown El Segundo such that any potentially significant blight or decay, or other significant physical environmental impacts would ensue as a result of the project. Plaza El Segundo (5) The Plaza El Segundo Development would include a mix of large retail stores, specialty retail and other uses including a fitness center /spa, and fast food and sit -down restaurants. The shopping center would replace the former chemical manufacturing and industrial uses that had previously occupied the Plaza El Segundo site and would be compatible with the surrounding commercial, industrial, public facilities, and open space uses. The proposed development would conform to the development standards of the new Commercial Center (C -4) Zone. (6) None of the adjacent uses are considered sensitive and the placement of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development adjacent to them would not interfere with the daily operation of these uses. The closest residential use, located in the City of Manhattan Beach approximately a quarter mile southwest of the intersection of Sepulveda Boulevard and Rosecrans Avenue. In addition, the proposed development would be landscaped in accordance with the development standards established for the 40 1t'l� Commercial Center, C-4, Zone, which would work to create a buffer between the proposed development and the adjacent land uses. Impacts related to land use compatibility resulting from the development of Plaza El Segundo would be less than significant. (7) Additional information regarding noise impacts to the surrounding area during construction and operation (vehicular) can be found in Section IV.I. Traffic impacts associated with the operation of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development are discussed in Section IV.L. These analyses show that with implementation of the identified mitigation measures, the project would not result in significant, short-term or long -term, land use compatibility impacts. (8) The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would not conflict with any of the applicable policies of the El Segundo General Plan and would work to implement a number of those policies. A General Plan Amendment is proposed to change the land use designation from Heavy Industrial to Commercial Center. The explanations provided under the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning discussion (see Table IV.H -1 of the Draft EIR) are applicable to the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development with the following exceptions. • Policy 3.03: The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development is anticipated to provide approximately 952 jobs to the local economy. (9) Overall, the proposed development of the Plaza El Segundo Development would be consistent with applicable City and regional planning policies. (10) Public comments on the Plaza El Segundo Development contend that the Plaza El Segundo Development would provide retail sales and services that could compete with downtown El Segundo business and that the impacts of increased competition could result in urban blight and decay in the downtown commercial area of El Segundo. (11) As indicated in Response to Comment No. 10 -3 in the FEIR, the Draft Development Agreement for the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development establishes restrictions on the size and types of uses allowed on the project site. Since the types of uses proposed for the project site would not be available in downtown El Segundo and vice versa, it is not anticipated that the stores on the project site would adversely affect businesses located in downtown El Segundo. Additionally, the goods and services to be provided by the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not compete with the stores and business of Downtown El Segundo due to the size and nature of the businesses. Consequently, the A. 41 development of the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would not lead to a downward spiral of vacancies, deterioration, or blight in the downtown El Segundo commercial district. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoninq (1) Because no significant impacts related to land use have been identified, no mitigation measures are required. Plaza El Segundo (2) Because no significant impacts related to land use have been identified, no mitigation measures are required. d) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to land use. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. 8. Noise. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Operational Noise (1) The incremental increase in noise from traffic is expected to be less than 1 dB(A) at both sensitive receptor locations. Thus, traffic- related operational noise impacts for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning are anticipated to be less than significant. All other sensitive receptors in the area would experience lower increases in noise levels as a result of vehicular traffic because the analyzed roadways represent the highest levels of project - related traffic. The potential increase in noise levels would not be audible at these locations and thus the impact would be less than significant. 42 i 4. (2) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would have the potential to generate noise from day -to -day activities. During project operation, it is anticipated that the primary sources of noise occurring with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be loading dock and parking lot activity. All these activities will be similar and consistent with activities occurring at the immediately adjacent non - residential uses. These activities would be within ambient noise levels and thus would not change the existing noise environment. As such, impacts related to parking lot and loading dock noise would be less than significant. Plaza El Segundo Operational Noise (3) Noise increases associated with the Plaza El Segundo Development traffic generation would not be perceptible along any of the modeled roadways in the vicinity of the project, where sensitive receptors are located. Therefore, impacts from traffic associated with the Plaza El Segundo Development would be less than significant. (4) During project operation, it is anticipated that the primary sources of noise occurring with the Plaza El Segundo site would be loading dock and parking lot activity. All these activities will be similar and consistent with activities occurring at the immediately adjacent non - residential uses. These activities would be within ambient noise levels and thus would not change the existing noise environment. As such, impacts related to parking lot and loading dock noise would be less than significant. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for development projects proposed to be constructed on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: (1) A project - specific construction noise analysis must be prepared that calculates, based on project - specific parameters and identification of the site - specific sensitive receptors that could be affected by construction activities, the noise levels that would be experienced at sensitive receptors located adjacent to that site. If noise levels resulting from construction activity would result in temporary construction noise levels that exceed 65 dBA at a sensitive receptor, or cause an incremental increase of 5 dBA over the existing ambient sound level, if the existing ambient sound level at the sensitive receptor location is 65 dBA or more, then the study must identify feasible mitigation measures to be applied to that project from the list of mitigation measures provided below (1 -1). 43 C) Mitigation: SeDUIveda /Rosecrans Site Rezonin The following mitigation measures are required to minimize construction related noise impacts associated with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning: (1) A project - specific construction noise analysis must be prepared that calculates, based on project - specific parameters and identification of the site - specific sensitive receptors that could be affected by construction activities, the noise levels that would be experienced at sensitive receptors located adjacent to that site. If noise levels resulting from construction activity would result in temporary construction noise levels that exceed 65 dBA at a sensitive receptor, or cause an incremental increase of 5 dBA over the existing ambient sound level, if the existing ambient sound level at the sensitive receptor location is 65 dBA or more, then the study must identify feasible mitigation measures to be applied to that project from the list of mitigation measures provided below. • Construction contracts must specify that all construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and other applicable noise attenuation devices. • During construction phases, the contractor must store and maintain equipment as far as possible from the adjacent receptor property locations to the southwest, north and east of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. • As stated in the City of El Segundo Municipal Code, construction must be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at anytime on Sunday or a Federal holiday. • Temporary plywood noise barriers must be constructed along the northern and eastern property lines of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site during construction, which must be high enough to block the line -of -sight between the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site and receptor property locations to the southwest, north and east (1 -1). Plaza El Segundo The follow mitigation measures are required to minimize construction related noise impacts associated with the Plaza El Segundo Development: (2) Construction contracts must specify that all construction equipment must be equipped with mufflers and other applicable noise attenuation devices (1 -2). i24 44 (3) During construction phases, the contractor must store and maintain equipment as far as possible from the adjacent receptor property locations to the north and east of the Plaza El Segundo site (1 -3). (4) As stated in the City of El Segundo Municipal Code, construction must be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at anytime on Sunday or a Federal holiday (1-4). (5) Temporary plywood noise barriers must be constructed along the 4.5 acre portion of the Plaza El Segundo site south of the UPRR tracks during construction, which must be high enough to block the line -of -sight (a minimum of 8 feet above existing grade) between the Plaza El Segundo site and receptor property locations to the southwest, north and east (1 -5). d) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to noise. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. 9. Population, Housing, and Employment. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) Construction of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development would result in increased employment opportunities in the construction field, which could potentially result in increased permanent population and demand for housing in the vicinity of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. However, the employment patterns of construction workers in Southern California are such that it is not likely that they would relocate their households as a consequence of the construction employment associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. (2) Operation of the development permitted under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would provide employment for approximately 1,904 persons by project completion in the year 2012. Employment resulting from the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be i J 45 consistent with SCAG projections for the City of El Segundo and the South Bay Cities Subregion through 2015. Therefore, impacts associated the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning related to employment would be less than significant. (3) The City of El Segundo is a jobs rich city, with far more employment opportunities than the available housing stock can accommodate. From the SCAG data presented in Section IV.J it can be seen that the vast majority of employees in the City of El Segundo commute to work from other communities, and will continue to do so in the future. While the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning is expected to generate approximately 1,904 new jobs, for several reasons, it is not expected to generate a demand for 1,904 housing units. It is reasonable to expect, therefore, that many of the new employees will be drawn from the local labor force in the City of El Segundo and surrounding communities. (4) It is expected that the maximum housing demand generated by the project could be accommodated by the existing housing stock within the average 9.7 -mile commute distance from the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, without generating demand for new housing construction. Therefore, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would result in less than significant impacts related to housing. Plaza El Segundo (5) Operation of the proposed Plaza El Segundo would provide employment for approximately 952 persons. The Plaza El Segundo's estimated employee generation would account for approximately 6.8 percent of SCAG's forecasted total employment growth for the City of El Segundo during this period. Employment resulting from the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would be consistent with SCAG projections for the City of El Segundo and the South Bay Cities Subregion through 2010. Therefore, the Plaza El Segundo would result in a less than significant impact regarding employment. (6) The additional housing demand associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be accommodated by existing housing supply in the South Bay Cities Subregion and surrounding cities to the north and northeast of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. The proposed Plaza El Segundo would implement the proposed C-4 zoning on a portion of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Thus the proposed Plaza El Segundo would not pose additional issues related to increased employment and housing demand. The proposed Plaza El Segundo would result in less than significant impacts related to housing. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. 46 i�� C) Mitigation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) As no significant impacts on population, housing and employment associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo would occur, no mitigation measures are required. There are no available mitigation measures to address the incremental contribution of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo to the significant cumulative impact related to population growth and housing demand. Plaza El Segundo (2) As no significant impacts on population, housing and employment associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo would occur, no mitigation measures are required. There are no available mitigation measures to address the incremental contribution of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo to the significant cumulative impact related to population growth and housing demand. d) Finding: (1) No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures were required. No impact is anticipated to employment or population growth as a result of implementing the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development . (2) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to population, housing, and employment. (3) Changes or incorporated into the Plaza El Segundo substantially lessen identified in the FEIR. 10. Public Services — Fire Protection. a) Facts /Effects. alterations have been required in, or Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Development project which avoid or the significant environmental effect as Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning 47 (1) Emergency access to the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be provided at several driveways along Sepulveda Boulevard, Rosecrans Avenue and from Allied Way. Internal fire access roadways would be provided throughout the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Emergency response times are not anticipated to be significantly impacted by project traffic, as the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site is located less than one mile southwest of ESFD Station No. 2 and within two miles of the proposed relocation site for Station No. 2. Additional City streets and public fire hydrants would be provided on the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site. The provision of street continuation through the site is proposed as part of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Project, which would improve access to the southern edge of the City. Water flow and fire hydrants would be provided in accordance with ESFD Regulations, and installation of automatic fire sprinklers and a complete life- safety alarm system within each building shall be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code to further preclude the need for additional fire protection. The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning would not require new or physically altered fire protection facilities in order to maintain acceptable fire service ratios, response times, or other performance standards and would have a less than significant impact on fire protection services. (2) A Fire Service Mitigation Fee of $0.14 per gross square foot is required and would be provided by future development within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site in order to address fire service impacts. The Fire Service Mitigation Fee is set by the City at a level which adequately reflects the impacts on fire services caused by new development. Plaza El Segundo (3) Because the full development permitted under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning would not significantly impact fire protections services, the proposed Plaza El Segundo would also result in less than significant impacts on fire protection services. (4) The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would be responsible for paying the Fire Service Mitigation Fee of $0.14 per gross square foot set forth in the El Segundo Municipal Code. The Fire Service Mitigation Fee is set by the City at a level which adequately reflects the impacts on fire services caused by new development. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation. (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. A. 48 C) Mitigation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Although impacts of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be less than significant with respect to fire protection facilities, the City of El Segundo imposes the following standard conditions of project approval to offset project impacts: (1) The applicant must pay the City of El Segundo a Fire Service Mitigation Fee of $0.14 per gross square foot of building area prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy (K -1.1) (2) A fire life safety plan, which must include definitive plans and specifications, must be submitted to the El Segundo Fire Department (ESFD) for review and approval prior to commencement of construction of any portion of the proposed development (K -1.2). (3) The applicant must provide fire access roadways to and throughout the property and submit a layout plan to the ESFD for approval (K -1.3). (4) The applicant must provide water flow and on -site fire hydrants as required by the ESFD (K -1.4). (5) The following installations require separate Fire Department approval. The applicant must submit separate plans for Fire Department review: • Automatic fire sprinklers; • Fire alarm system; • Underground fire service mains; • Fire Pumps; Emergency generators; and • Any aboveground including elevator (K -1.5). Plaza El Segundo or underground storage tank sumps and condensation tanks Although impacts of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would be less than significant with respect to fire protection facilities, the City of El Segundo imposes the following standard conditions of project approval to offset project impacts: 49 L (6) The applicant must pay the City of El Segundo a Fire Service Mitigation Fee of $0.14 per gross square foot of building area prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy (K -1.6). (7) A fire life safety plan, which must include definitive plans and specifications, must be submitted to the El Segundo Fire Department (ESFD) for review and approval prior to commencement of construction of any portion of the proposed development (K -1.7). (8) The applicant must provide fire access roadways to and throughout the property and submit a layout plan to the ESFD for approval (K -1.8). (9) The applicant must provide water flow and on -site fire hydrants as required by the ESFD (K -1.9) (10) The following installations require separate Fire Department approval. The applicant must submit separate plans for Fire Department review: • Automatic fire sprinklers; • Fire alarm system; • Underground fire service mains; • Fire Pumps; • Emergency generators; and • Any aboveground or underground storage tank including elevator sumps and condensation tanks (K- 1.10). d) Findings. (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to fire services. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. 11. Public Services — Police Protection. a) Facts /Effects. 50 �U Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The additional commercial uses on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site that would be permitted under the proposed C-4 zone could potentially generate an increase in the number of service calls. Responses to thefts, vehicle burglaries, damage to vehicles, traffic- related incidents, and crimes against persons are anticipated to result from an increase in traffic on adjacent streets and an increase in transient occupancy. (2) ESPD has not identified any need for new or altered facilities that would be required to serve development permitted under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. Therefore, impacts to police services associated with development of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be less than significant. In addition, development permitted under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be required to pay the required Police Service Mitigation Fee, which has been set by the City at a level which reflects the impacts on police services caused by new development. Plaza El Segundo (3) Because the full development permitted under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning would not significantly impact police services, the proposed Plaza El Segundo would also result in less than significant impacts on police services. The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would incorporate a security plan into the project design, to include visible building addresses, limited entrances and exits, low profile landscaping, adequate lighting, and provisions for security personnel. The security plan would work to reduce crime and thus reduce police service calls and need for new or physically altered police facilities. Additionally, as stated above, payment of the Police Service Mitigation Fee, which has been set by the City at a level which reflects the impacts on police services caused by new development, would also be required. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation. (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Although impacts of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be less than significant with respect to police facilities, the City of El Segundo imposes the following standard conditions of project approval to offset project impacts. X31 51 (1) The applicant must pay the City of El Segundo a Police Service Mitigation Fee of $0.11 per gross square foot of building area prior to the occupancy of each building (K.2 -1). (2) A strategic security plan, which must include definitive plans and specifications, must be submitted to the El Segundo Police Department (ESPD) for review and approval prior to commencement of construction of any portion of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. The strategic security plan must include, but not be limited to, the following items: • Depending on the size of the structure and its location in relation to the streets, the size of the displayed address may vary from a minimum of 4" to as much as 24 ". • Building entrances and exits must be limited in number and located in a manner to increase security and visibility of the building. • All landscaping must be low profile especially around perimeter fencing, windows, doors and entryways taking special care not to limit visibility and provide climbing access. • Adequate street, walkway, building and parking lot lighting shall be provided to enhance security. • Provisions for on -site security personnel (K.2 -2). Plaza El Segundo Although impacts of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would be less than significant with respect to police facilities, the City of El Segundo imposes the following standard conditions of project approval to offset project impacts. (3) The applicant must pay the City of El Segundo a Police Service Mitigation Fee of $0.11 per gross square foot of building area prior to the occupancy of each building (K.2 -3). (4) A strategic security plan, which must include definitive plans and specifications, must be submitted to the El Segundo Police Department (ESPD) for review and approval prior to commencement of construction of any portion of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development. The strategic security plan must include, but not be limited to, the following items: Depending on the size of the structure and its location in relation to the streets, the size of the displayed address may vary from a minimum of 4" to as much as 24 ". 1 ,2 52 • Building entrances and exits must be limited to keep control and visibility of the building. • All landscaping must be low profile especially around perimeter fencing, windows, doors and entryways taking special care not to limit visibility and provide climbing access. • Adequate street, walkway, building and parking lot lighting must be provided to enhance security. • Provisions for on -site security personnel (K.2 -4). d) Findings. (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to police protection. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. 12. Transportation and Traffic. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezonin (1) The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would significantly impact 13 intersections during the a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour or Saturday mid -day peak hour (or combinations of the above). (2) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning is estimated to contribute approximately 240 trips in the southbound direction on the San Diego Freeway between the 1 -105 interchange and El Segundo Boulevard. During the afternoon peak hour, this number of trips would cause the D/C ratio to increase by 0.02, with a resulting LOS of F(0), which would constitute a significant impact at this location. The remaining freeway segments would not be significantly impacted by the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. Plaza El Segundo (3) The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would significantly impact a total of seven intersections during the a.m. i33 53 peak hour, p.m. peak hour or Saturday mid -day peak hour (or combinations of the above). (4) The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development is estimated to contribute approximately 162 trips in the southbound direction on the San Diego Freeway between the 1 -105 interchange and El Segundo Boulevard. During the afternoon peak hour, this number of trips would cause the D/C ratio to increase by 0.01, with a resulting LOS of F(0), which would be a less than significant impact at this location. The remaining freeway segments would not be significantly impacted by the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation. (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning The following mitigation measures are required to reduce traffic impacts from the full implementation of the proposed C-4 zone under the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. Physical Roadway Improvements (1) El Segundo Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard. Convert the existing eastbound right -turn only lane to a shared through /right -turn lane. There exists three receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection. In addition, modify the raised center median to convert the westbound shared through left -turn lane to a dedicated second left turn lane and additional through lane (L- 1). (2) El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard. Not required for Plaza El Segundo Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative. (3) Park Place and Nash Street. Provide a new traffic signal at this location. Widen and restripe the eastbound and westbound directions to provide one left -turn lane, one through lane, and one right -turn only lane (L -3). (4) Park Place and Douglas Street. Provide a new traffic signal at this location (L-4). (5) Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard. On the westbound approach of Rosecrans Avenue dedicate additional right -of -way on the north side of Rosecrans Avenue to provide a free flow right -turn lane and third left -turn lane. Sepulveda Boulevard south of Rosecrans Avenue may need to be widened to accommodate the third left -turn lane, depending on the specific design of this lane. This widening could take place within the 54 A. J �t existing Sepulveda Boulevard right -of -way. Widen the east side of Sepulveda Boulevard along the project frontage to provide the acceptance lane for the free westbound right -turn lane. This additional lane on Sepulveda should be improved to the new Park Place connection where a right turn lane will be provided. This intersection's jurisdiction is shared with Manhattan Beach and Caltrans. Coordination and concurrence of these agencies for implementation of these improvements would be required (L -5). (6) Rosecrans Avenue and Continental Way. Not required for Plaza El Segundo Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative. (7) Rosecrans Avenue and Douglas Street. On the westbound approach, widen the north side of Rosecrans Avenue to provide a dedicated westbound right -turn lane. This intersection's jurisdiction is shared with Manhattan Beach. Coordination and concurrence of this agency for implementation of this improvement would be required. This improvement is included as part of the current Rosecrans /Aviation Widening (discussed under "Future Highway System Improvements ") but will be guaranteed by the project (L -7). Site Trip Reductions (8) Project applicants must promote rideshare programs (bikes, rideshare matching and transit options) as required by the City of El Segundo Transportation Demand Management Program (TDM). In addition to the traditional TDM program, project applicants must promote access to the Commute View System which is being implemented by the City to provide information on congested routes to provide additional trip reduction measures. The Commute View System is an advanced traveler information system which provides real time travel time information, incident information, and general traffic conditions through a variety of devices such as the cable, internet, cell phone and wireless PDA. This will provide commuters the ability to make informed decisions regarding the route, time of travel and mode of transportation. Project applicants must include or share in a transit connection system to promote use of the existing Metro Green Line service, remote employee lot during seasonal peaks and local circulator service. Based upon estimate usage patterns and trial studies, an approximately three percent reduction in trips to and from the site during peak periods is anticipated with these enhancements (L -8). Intelligent Transportation Systems Connections/Upgrades (9) The South Bay area will be enhanced with an area -wide signal system upgrade prior to project completion in 2012. This system is already funded and will be implemented with or without the proposed project. The improvement will provide for intelligent transportation systems (ITS) which provide real time adjustment to signal timing based upon current conditions thereby increasing capacity along major corridors. ITS system enhancements are 55 �JJ currently being tested and evaluated which provide further enhanced capacity. These enhancements provide advanced communication upgrades to the users of the roadway systems. Items include Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS) and Advanced Traffic Management Systems (ATMS). ATIS provides commuters with information to make route and time of day decisions. The enhanced ATIS system that would be included within the South Bay ITS system will enable private sector partners to disseminate freeway and arterial traffic information to the public via paid subscription services. ATMS manages the traffic system on surrounding streets. Applicants for development projects within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site must provide for connectivity to the systems described above. Project applicants must provide access to information disseminated by the ATIS system to patrons and employees by including at least one television monitor or equivalent equipment that is compatible with and connected to the ATIS system and that displays current commuter information from the ATIS system during all hours that the development is open for business. The monitor or equivalent equipment shall be placed in a centralized location within the development, shall be specifically identified on directory maps of the facility, shall be specifically and clearly identified as the location for obtaining current travel information and shall be identified elsewhere throughout the development with signage that directs patrons to the location. Project applicants must also facilitate dissemination of information provided by the ATIS system to project employees by working with project tenants to offer fully or partially subsidized monthly subscriptions to employees (currently estimated at full cost of $5.00 per month per user). Project applicants (or successors in interest) must provide any new project tenant with information regarding subscription programs available to employees and costs thereof and shall encourage tenants to provide subsidized monthly subscriptions to their employees. However, because there is no guarantee that subscription subsidies will be provided by future tenants of developments within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, no additional credit for these subscriptions can be taken except for the enhancements provided by the South Bay ITS system as presently designed (7 %, see discussion under "Future Highway System Improvements" above) (L -9). Local Street- Freeway Inter -Ties (10) This mitigation measure is applicable to buildout of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site beyond the Plaza El Segundo Project Development. Applicants for development projects within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site (excluding the Plaza El Segundo Project) shall fund or construct upgrades and enhancements to the El Segundo and /or South Bay ITS systems, and /or the Caltrans ITS system that singly or in combination cause an increase of 3% in the capacity of the street 56 system served by these ITS systems. The 3% increase shall be measured from the calculated capacity of the system based upon existing lane configurations, plus a 10% increase on street in the City of El Segundo, and 7% increase on streets outside the City of El Segundo to reflect the El Segundo and South Bay ITS systems, respectively. The upgrades /enhancements shall be selected from the following menu and approved by the relevant jurisdictional agency: expansion of the fiber optic communication system, expansion of wireless communication components, provision of software components, supplemental advance system detectors, changeable message signs, closed circuit television cameras, or any other reasonably feasible upgrade or enhancement approved by the relevant jurisdictional agency. The applicant shall participate in any applicable fair share fee mitigation program that will otherwise fund the foregoing upgrades /enhancements and shall receive credit for all fair share payments (L -10). Project parking/egress information system for key access/egress corridors. (11) Project applicants must provide parking /egress information systems in the manner of Changeable Message Signs (CMS) along key access /egress corridors of Sepulveda Boulevard, Rosecrans Avenue, and Park Place. Currently, Los Angeles County is installing CMS on major streets in the South Bay area and locations for additional CMS would be identified in coordination with Los Angeles County. A centrally located kiosk system must be included in project design that can disseminate roadway conditions along the major routes. This information would be utilized by the employee or patron to determine the least congested access /egress route to /from the project, thereby minimizing delay on. the roadway systems. Based upon recent studies in the South Bay area under trial conditions, implementation of this measure is anticipated to improve capacity at the site adjacent intersections by three percent, along major corridors of Rosecrans Avenue, Sepulveda Boulevard, and El Segundo Boulevard by two percent, and the balance of the study intersections by one percent (L -11). Plaza El Segundo From the list of mitigation measures required to address the complete implementation of the C -4 zone on the proposed Sepulveda / Rosecrans Rezoning Site, the following specific mitigation measures must be required to address the traffic impacts of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. Physical Roadway improvements (12) El Segundo Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard — Convert the existing eastbound right -turn only lane to a shared through /right -turn lane. There exists three receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection. In addition, modify the raised center 57 J 7 median to convert the westbound shared through left -turn lane to a dedicated second left turn lane and additional through lane (L- 13). (13) El Segundo Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard — Not required for Plaza El Segundo Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative. (14) Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard — On the westbound approach of Rosecrans Avenue dedicate additional right -of -way on the north side of Rosecrans Avenue to provide a free flow right -turn lane. Widen the east side of Sepulveda Boulevard along the project frontage to provide the acceptance lane for the free westbound right -turn lane. This additional lane on Sepulveda should be improved to the new Park Place connection where a right turn lane will be provided. This intersection's jurisdiction is shared with Manhattan Beach and Caltrans. Coordination and concurrence of these agencies for implementation of these improvements would be required (L -15). (15) Rosecrans Avenue and Continental Way — Not required for Plaza El Segundo Reduced Traffic Generation. Site Trip Reductions (16) The project applicant must promote rideshare programs (bikes, rideshare matching, and transit options) as required by the City of El Segundo Transportation Demand Management Program (TDM). In addition to the traditional TDM program and to provide additional trip reduction measures, the project applicant must promote access to the Commuter View System which is being implemented by the City to provide information on congested routes. The project applicant must provide a transit connection system that may be shared with other nearby retail projects to promote use of the existing Metro Green Line service, remote employee lot during seasonal peaks and local circulator service. Based upon typical usage patterns, an approximately three percent reduction in trips to and from the site during peak periods is anticipated with these enhancements (L -17). Intelligent Transportation System Connections/Upgrades (17) The South Bay area will be enhanced with an area -wide signal system upgrade prior to project completion in 2012. This system is already funded and will be implemented with or without the proposed project. The improvement will provide for intelligent transportation systems (ITS) which provide real time adjustment to signal timing based upon current conditions thereby increasing capacity along major corridors. ITS system enhancements are currently being tested and evaluated which provide further enhanced capacity. These enhancements provide advanced communication upgrades to the users of the roadway systems. Items include Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS) and 58 "J 8 Advanced Traffic Management Systems (ATMS). ATIS provides commuters with information to make route and time of day decisions. The enhanced ATIS system that would be included within the South Bay ITS system will enable private sector partners to disseminate freeway and arterial traffic information to the public via paid subscription services. ATMS manages the traffic system on surrounding streets. Applicants for development projects within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site must provide for connectivity to the systems described above. Project applicants must provide access to information disseminated by the ATIS system to patrons and employees by including at least one television monitor or equivalent equipment that is compatible with and connected to the ATIS system and that displays current commuter information from the ATIS system during all hours that the development is open for business. The monitor or equivalent equipment shall be placed in a centralized location within the development, shall be specifically identified on directory maps of the facility, shall be specifically and clearly identified as the location for obtaining current travel information and shall be identified elsewhere throughout the development with signage that directs patrons to the location. Project applicants must also facilitate dissemination of information provided by the ATIS system to project employees by working with project tenants to offer fully or partially subsidized monthly subscriptions to employees (currently estimated at full cost of $5.00 per month per user). Project applicants (or successors in interest) must provide any new project tenant with information regarding subscription programs available to employees and costs thereof and shall encourage tenants to provide subsidized monthly subscriptions to their employees. However, because there is no guarantee that subscription subsidies will be provided by future tenants of developments within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, no additional credit for these subscriptions can be taken except for the enhancements provided by the South Bay ITS system as presently designed (7 %, see discussion under "Future Highway System Improvements" above) (L -18). d) Findings. (1) Implementation of the mitigation measures would reduce traffic- related impacts from Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning to less than significant levels with the exception of El Segundo Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard during the p.m. peak hour and Rosecrans Avenue and Aviation Boulevard for the Saturday mid -day peak hour. (2) In addition, improvements at three intersections require coordination and concurrence of Caltrans and /or other agencies for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. In the event that the concurrence of other jurisdictions cannot be obtained, impacts at these intersections would be significant and unavoidable. 59 433 (3) Implementation of the mitigation measures would reduce traffic- related impacts from the Plaza El Segundo Development to less than significant levels with the exception of the intersection of El Segundo Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard. (4) In addition, improvements at two intersections require coordination and concurrence of Caltrans and /or other agencies for the Plaza El Segundo Development. In the event that the concurrence of other jurisdictions cannot be obtained, impacts at these intersections would be significant and unavoidable. (5) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to transportation and traffic. (6) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. (7) If mitigation is not adopted by the other jurisdiction(s), the impact would remain significant and unavoidable and the City Council this includes the impact within the ambit of the Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC). 13. Utilities - Sewer. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The estimated sewage generation associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be 242,750 gpd. Sewage generation would be associated with the proposed Plaza El Segundo uses and additional development up to the levels permitted under the proposed C -4 zone. Continuation of the existing lumber yard in its current location would not result in any net change in sewage generation from this use. The production process associated with the industrial gas production facility permitted under the proposed C-4 zone does not generate sewage. Expansion of the existing RV storage facility onto the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not involve generation of sewage. As such, these facilities would not require additional infrastructure or generate demand for sewage conveyance and treatment. (2) As there is no sewer infrastructure directly serving the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, a significant impact to sewage service would be created unless it is mitigated by the 60 addition of sewer infrastructure directly serving the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. (3) Additionally, a large portion of the site is not located within County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County jurisdiction, and would therefore need to be annexed into County Sanitation District 5 prior to project approval. Upon annexation, local sewer infrastructure would carry sewage to County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County infrastructure and ultimately to the JWPCP. According to the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, sewer service will be provided up to the levels legally permitted. Because JWPCP has sufficient treatment capacity to accommodate the sewage flows associated with the existing development, there would be no impacts associated with sewage treatment. Once the necessary infrastructure is established in conjunction with development that occurs within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site in accordance with the proposed C -4 zone, there would be a less than significant impact on sewer capacity and treatment services. Plaza El Segundo (4) The analysis regarding sewer service and infrastructure within the Plaza El Segundo Development site is in accordance with the mitigation measure for the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning that requires project specific evaluation of potential sewer impacts and no further analysis beyond that set forth in the following mitigation measures is required. The analysis demonstrates that this component of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would not result in new effects related to sewer service and infrastructure that were not examined in the Program EIR for the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. (5) The proposed Plaza El Segundo would generate an estimated 104,625 gpd of sewage. As there is no sewer infrastructure directly serving the Plaza El Segundo site, the proposed Plaza El Segundo would include the construction of sewer infrastructure providing sufficient capacity to handle sewage flows that would be generated by the proposed Plaza El Segundo. According to the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, sewer service will be provided up to the levels legally permitted. Because JWPCP has sufficient treatment capacity to accommodate the sewage flows associated with the existing development, there would be no impacts associated with sewage capacity or treatment. Once the necessary infrastructure is constructed, there would be a less than significant impact on sewer capacity and treatment services. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning 61 1 4 1 C) Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for development projects proposed to be constructed on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. This information must be examined, at the time the development project is proposed, in light of the Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation must include the following: (1) An analysis of sewer service to the proposed development must be prepared which examines the capacity of existing sewer lines to serve the development, the projected peak sewage generation and must identify new sewer infrastructure required to serve the development (M -1.1). Mitigation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning The following mitigation measures are required for the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning to ensure compliance with all code and ordinance requirements: (1) An analysis of sewer service to the proposed development must be prepared which examines the capacity of existing sewer lines to serve the development, the projected peak sewage generation, and must identify new sewer infrastructure required to serve the development (M.1 -1). (2) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site must be annexed to Los Angeles County Sanitation District No. 5 (M.1 -2). (3) Project applicants must be required to obtain a sewer connection permit from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (District 5) to obtain sanitary sewer service (M.1 -3). (4) Additional local sewer infrastructure must be provided by the applicant as necessary to connect the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site with existing sewer infrastructure. This provision must be coordinated with the project applicant and may be the partial responsibility of the applicant, as determined by the City (M -1.4). (5) The applicant must be required to replace or upgrade the sewer infrastructure on or adjacent to the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, as needed (M -1.5). (6) Project applicants must comply with the City's Sewer Ordinance No. 1093, of the City of El Segundo Municipal Code, Title 12, Chapter I General Provisions, Policies and Procedures (M -1.6). (7) Prior to a building permit being issued the project applicant must submit the Final Working Drawings to the City of El Segundo Ajo i42 Planning and Building Safety Development Services Department and the Public Works Department for review and approval (M -1.7). (8) Closed circuit television (CCTV) inspection of existing on- site and adjacent off -site sewer mains must be conducted to determine the present condition of the infrastructure which the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project will connect to (M- 1.8). (9) All future developments must be discharged to the existing twelve -inch sanitary sewer main in Rosecrans Avenue (M -1.9). (10) New businesses that that generate Fats, Oils, or Greases (e.g., restaurants and grocery stores) must be required to install grease interceptors with a minimum 30 minute retention period to ensure these contaminants do not block the sewerage system (M- 1.10). Plaza El Segundo The following mitigation measures are required for the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development to ensure compliance with all code and ordinance requirements: (11) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site must be annexed to Los Angeles County Sanitation District No. 5 (M- 1.11). (12) The project applicant must be required to obtain a sewer connection permit from the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (District 5) to obtain sanitary sewer service (M- 1.12). (13) Additional local sewer infrastructure must be provided by the applicant as necessary to connect the Plaza El Segundo Site with existing sewer infrastructure. This provision must be coordinated with the project applicant and may be the partial responsibility of the applicant, as determined by the City (M- 1.13). (14) The existing 15 -inch sanitary sewer line must be removed and replaced with an 18 -inch line. Plans must identify point of connection for the proposed ten -inch sanitary sewer to the existing sanitary sewer main on Allied Way (M- 1.14). (15) Project applicants must comply with the City's Sewer Ordinance No. 1093, of the City of El Segundo Municipal Code, Title 12, Chapter I General Provisions, Policies and Procedures (M- 1.15). (16) Prior to a building permit being issued the project applicant must submit the Final Working Drawings to the City of El Segundo Planning and Building Safety Department and the Public Works Department for review and approval (M- 1.16). (17) Closed circuit television (CCTV) inspection of existing on- site and adjacent off -site sewer mains must be conducted to 63 143 14 determine the present condition of the infrastructure which the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project will connect to (M- 1.17). (18) New businesses that that generate Fats, Oils, or Greases (e.g., restaurants and grocery stores) must be required to install grease interceptors with a minimum 30 minute retention period to ensure these contaminants do not block the sewerage system (M- 1.18) d) Findings. (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to sewer facilities. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. (3) If mitigation is not adopted by the other jurisdiction(s), the impact would remain significant and unavoidable and the City Council this includes the impact within the ambit of the Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC). Utilities - Water. a) Facts /effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. (1) The estimated water consumption associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be 291,300 gpd. Continuation of the existing lumber yard in its current location would not result in any net change in water consumption from this use. The production process associated with the industrial gas production facility permitted under the proposed C-4 zone does not use water. Expansion of the existing RV storage facility onto the proposed Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not involve additional water consumption. As such, these facilities would not require additional infrastructure or generate demand for water supply or infrastructure. Given the anticipated land uses at the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning and Site, and the water consumption rate of 291,300 gpd, impacts to water supply would be less than significant. (2) As minimal water distribution infrastructure exists on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, provision of water supply infrastructure would be included in development permitted under the proposed C-4 zone. Additional water infrastructure would be 64 required to serve future development within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Additionally, because new infrastructure is required to adequately serve the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, temporary disruptions may occur, lasting up to four hours at a time, during construction of new infrastructure and subsequent connection. As the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development requires the expansion of existing water infrastructure, a significant impact to water service would occur. (3) A water needs assessment determined that the City of El Segundo has sufficient water supplies to supply to proposed project. Plaza El Segundo (4) The analysis provided below regarding water service and infrastructure within the Plaza El Segundo Development site is in accordance with the measures for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning that require project specific evaluation of potential water service impacts and no further analysis of this issue is required beyond that set forth in the following paragraphs, would be required for the Plaza El Segundo Development. The analysis demonstrates that this component of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would not result in new effects related to water service and infrastructure that were not examined in the Program EIR for the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. (5) The proposed Plaza El Segundo would consume an estimated 125,550 gpd of water. The Department of Public Works has sufficient water to supply the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development's estimated demands at the site. Impacts to water supply would therefore be less than significant. (6) As minimal water distribution infrastructure exists on the Plaza El Segundo site, provision of required infrastructure would be included as part of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. Additionally, because new infrastructure is required to adequately serve the Plaza El Segundo site, temporary disruptions may occur, lasting up to four hours at a time, during construction of new infrastructure and subsequent connection. As the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development requires the expansion of existing water infrastructure, a significant impact to water service would occur. (7) Development of the proposed Plaza El Segundo would implement the proposed C-4 zoning on a portion of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site and would be within the parameters used to develop the water supply assessment for the proposed Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning. 65 14 ;) b) C) Subsequent Environmental Documentation. Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning Subsequent environmental documentation shall be prepared for development projects proposed to be constructed on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. This information shall be examined, at the time the development project is proposed, in light of the Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. The subsequent environmental documentation shall include the following: (1) An analysis of water service to the proposed development must be prepared which examines the capacity of existing water lines to serve the development and the projected water demand and must identify new water infrastructure required to serve the development (M.2 -1). Mitigation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoninq The following mitigation measures must be implemented to address significant impacts related to water distribution infrastructure. (1) An analysis of water service to the proposed development must be prepared which examines the capacity of existing water lines to serve the development and the projected water demand and must identify new water infrastructure required to serve the development (M.2 -1). (2) New streets must be connected through the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site to adjacent existing streets, with no gaps or disconnects, so as to allow connections to existing infrastructure contained in the existing streets (M.2 -2). (3) Water distribution mains must be installed in the through streets in order to complete the existing water grid and provide water distribution to the interior of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Connecting pipes should be a minimum of ten inches (M.2 -3). (4) New water lines must be connected to the existing water line located in Allied Way to provide a continuous public water line beginning from Sepulveda Boulevard to an existing line in Allied Way (M.2 -4). (5) Development on the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site must include dual water connections to allow for landscaping to be irrigated by reclaimed water (M.2 -5). .- i��t) (6) Reclaimed water must be used as the water source to irrigate landscaped areas on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site (M.2 -6). (7) Efficient irrigation systems must be installed which minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize the water which will reach plant roots (e.g. drip irrigation, automatic sprinklers equipped with moisture sensors) (M.2 -7). (8) Automatic sprinkler systems must be set to irrigate landscaping during early morning hours or during the evening to reduce water losses from evaporation. Sprinklers must also be reset to water less often in cooler months and during the rainfall season so that water is not wasted by excessive landscape irrigation (M.2 -8). (9) Selection of drought - tolerant, low water consuming plant varieties must be used to reduce irrigation water consumption (M.2 -9). (10) Project applicants must comply with the City's Conservation Program, Ordinance No. 1194, of the City of El Segundo Municipal Code, Title 10 -Parks and Recreation, Chapter 2 Water Conservation in Landscaping and Resolution No. 3806 (M.2 -10). • Prior to a building permit being issued the project applicant must submit the Final Working Drawings to the City of El Segundo Planning and Building Safety Department for review and approval relative to compliance with the City's Water Conservation Ordinance and Guidelines for Water Conservation in Landscaping. Plaza El Segundo The following mitigation measures shall be implemented to address significant impacts related to water distribution infrastructure. (11) Water distribution mains must be installed in the eastward extension of Park Place and the extension of Allied Way to Park Place in order to complete the existing water grid and provide water distribution to the interior of the Plaza El Segundo site. Connecting pipes must be a minimum of ten inches (M.2 -11). (12) Development on the proposed Plaza El Segundo Site must include dual water connections to allow for landscaping to be irrigated by reclaimed water (M.2 -12). (13) Reclaimed water must be used as the water source to irrigate landscaped areas on the Plaza El Segundo Development (M.2 -13). 67 i li (14) Efficient irrigation systems must be installed which minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize the water which will reach plant roots (e.g. drip irrigation, automatic sprinklers equipped with moisture sensors) (M.2 -14). (15) Automatic sprinkler systems must be set to irrigate landscaping during early morning hours or during the evening to reduce water losses from evaporation. Sprinklers must also be reset to water less often in cooler months and during the rainfall season so that water is not wasted by excessive landscape irrigation (M.2 -15). (16) Selection of drought - tolerant, low water consuming plant varieties must be used to reduce irrigation water consumption (M.2 -16). (17) The project applicant must comply with the City's Conservation Program, Ordinance No. 1194, of the City of El Segundo Municipal Code, Title 10 -Parks and Recreation, Chapter 2 Water Conservation in Landscaping and Resolution No. 3806. Prior to a building permit being issued the project applicant must submit the Final Working Drawings to the City of El Segundo Planning and Building Safety Department for review and approval relative to compliance with the City's Water Conservation Ordinance and Guidelines for Water Conservation in Landscaping (M.2 -17). d) Findings. (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to water service. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. 15. Utilities — Solid Waste. a) Facts /effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The existing structures on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site have been or are in the process of being demolished. Approximately 75 percent of the solid waste generated during construction as a result of the Rezoning has been recycled and salvaged. Through the remainder of construction such solid waste would continue to be recycled and 68 L salvaged at this rate. Materials not recycled would be disposed of at local landfills. The amount of solid waste generated by the construction of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project would not be significant as it would not create a need for new facilities, systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to local or regional solid waste disposal facilities. (2) The estimated solid waste generation associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be approximately 4,250 pounds per day. Continuation of the existing lumber yard in its current location would not result in any net change in solid waste generation. The production process associated with the industrial gas production facility permitted under the proposed C-4 zone does not generate solid waste. Expansion of the existing RV storage facility onto the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not involve additional solid waste generation. As such, these facilities would not generate demand for solid waste disposal facilities. (3) Although existing landfills in Los Angeles County are near capacity, potential landfill expansion could accommodate the projected growth for the region. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be required to comply with the City's SSRP, which the City has implemented as a means of achieving the goals and requirements of AB 939. Therefore, long term operational impacts to landfills and solid waste service would be less than significant. Plaza El Segundo (4) With the recycling of most of the solid waste generated by the construction phase of the Plaza El Segundo, short-term construction impacts to landfills and solid waste service would be less than significant. (5) The development at Plaza El Segundo would generate approximately 2,125 pounds of solid waste per day. Solid waste generated on -site would be disposed in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local regulations related to solid waste. The Plaza El Segundo site would be required to comply with the City's SSRP, which the City has implemented as a means of achieving the goals and requirements of AB 939. Therefore, long term operational impacts to landfills and solid waste service would be less than significant. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation. (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning 69 ` 3 Development of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project must comply with all applicable City, County, and State requirements regulating solid waste disposal. Cumulative impact is the responsibility of local, regional, and state agencies and therefore no project level mitigation measures are available. The City of El Segundo imposes the following standard conditions of project approval to offset project impacts: (1) Where economically feasible, the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project must incorporate the use of recycled materials in building materials, furnishing operations and building maintenance (M.3 -1). (2) The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project must recycle all construction debris in a practical, available, and accessible manner, to the maximum extent feasible, during the demolition and construction phases (M.3 -2). (3) The design of the proposed Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning project must allocate space for a recycling collection area for use by both on -site employees and visitors, the design of which will adhere to siting requirements in the City's recycling ordinance. The design of the collection area will facilitate source separation and collection of additional materials that may be designated as recyclable by the City in the future (M.3 -3). Plaza El Segundo (4) Where economically feasible, the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development must incorporate the use of recycled materials in building materials, furnishing operations and building maintenance (M.3 -4). (5) The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development must recycle all construction debris in a practical, available, and accessible manner, to the maximum extent feasible, during the demolition and construction phases (M.3 -5). (6) The design of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development must allocate space for a recycling collection area for use by both on -site employees and visitors, the design of which will adhere to siting requirements in the City's recycling ordinance. The design of the collection area will facilitate source separation and collection of additional materials that may be designated as recyclable by the City in the future (M.3 -6). d) Findings. (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to solid waste. 70 (2) Changes or incorporated into the Plaza El Segundo substantially lessen identified in the FEIR. 16. Utilities — Natural Gas. a) Facts /effects. alterations have been required in, or Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Development project which avoid or the significant environmental effect as Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The estimated natural gas consumption associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be approximately 82,166 cf per day. Continuation of the existing lumber yard in its current location would not result in any net change in natural gas consumption. The production process associated with the industrial gas production facility would utilize less natural gas than the existing Air Products facility located within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Expansion of the existing RV storage facility onto the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not involve additional natural gas consumption. As such, these facilities would not generate additional demand on natural gas supplies and infrastructure. According to the Southern California Gas Company, the demand for natural gas of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning can be accommodated by the existing natural gas supply available and infrastructure in the project area. Therefore, natural gas impacts from the development of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be less than significant. Plaza El Segundo (2) The estimated natural gas consumption by the Plaza El Segundo is approximately 41,083 cf per day. According to the Southern California Gas Company, the demand for natural gas at the Plaza El Segundo can be accommodated by the existing natural gas supply available and infrastructure in the project area. Therefore, natural gas impacts from the development of the proposed Plaza El Segundo would be less than significant. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation. (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) As no significant natural gas service impacts have been identified, no mitigation measures are required. Plaza El Segundo 71 iii (2) As no significant natural gas service impacts have been identified, no mitigation measures are required d) Findings. (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to natural gas service /supply. 17. Utilities — Electricity. a) Facts /effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The estimated electricity consumption associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would be approximately 39,321 kilowatt hours (kwh) per day. Continuation of the existing lumber yard in its current location would not result in any net change in electricity consumption. The production process associated with the industrial gas production facility would utilize less electricity than the existing Air Products facility located within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Expansion of the existing RV storage facility onto the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would not involve additional electricity consumption. As such, these facilities would not generate additional demand on electricity supplies and infrastructure. SCE has indicated that they can accommodate the electricity demands of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo project. Therefore, impacts related to electricity would be less than significant. Plaza El Segundo (2) The estimated electricity consumption by the Plaza El Segundo is approximately 23,544 kwh per day. SCE has indicated that they can accommodate the electricity demands of the proposed Plaza El Segundo. Therefore, impacts related to electricity would be less than significant. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation. (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Although the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project would not result in any significant electricity impacts, the City of El Segundo imposes the following standard conditions of project approval to offset project impacts: 72 i J (1) The applicant must consult with SCE during the design process of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project regarding potential energy conservation measures for the project. Examples of such energy conservation measures include: • Design windows (i.e., tinting, double pane glass, etc.) to reduce thermal gain and loss and thus cooling loads during warm weather, and heating loads during cool weather. • Install thermal insulation in walls and ceilings that exceed requirements established by the State of California Energy Conservation Standards. • Install high - efficiency lamps for all internal streetlights and outdoor security lighting. • Time control interior and exterior lighting. These systems must be programmed to account for variations in seasonal daylight times. • Finish exterior walls with light- colored materials and high - emissivity characteristics to reduce cooling loads. Finish interior walls with light- colored materials to reflect more light and thus increase lighting efficiency (M.5 -1). (2) All on -site electrical lines must be placed underground, except for high voltage transmission lines located along Rosecrans Avenue (M.5 -2). (3) Electrical transformers must be screened from view from the public right -of -way (M.5 -3). Plaza El Segundo Although the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would not result in any significant electricity impacts, the City of El Segundo imposes the following standard conditions of project approval to offset project impacts: (4) The applicant must consult with SCE during the design process of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development regarding potential energy conservation measures for the project. Examples of such energy conservation measures include: • Design windows (e.g., tinting, double pane glass, etc.) to reduce thermal gain and loss and thus cooling loads during warm weather, and heating loads during cool weather. • Install thermal insulation in walls and ceilings that exceed requirements established by the State of California Energy Conservation Standards. 73 i�J Install high- efficiency lamps for all internal streetlights and outdoor security lighting. Time control interior and exterior lighting. These systems must be programmed to account for variations in seasonal daylight times. Finish exterior walls with light- colored materials and high emissivity characteristics to reduce cooling loads. Finish interior walls with light- colored materials to reflect more light and thus increase lighting efficiency (M.5 -4). (5) All on -site electrical lines must be placed underground, except for high voltage transmission lines along Rosecrans Avenue (M.5 -5). (6) Electrical transformers must be screened from view from the public right -of -way (M.5 -6). d) Findings. (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to electricity. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. 18. Cultural Resources. a) Facts /effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The Proposed Circulation Element Update Draft EIR requires analysis of potential impacts related to cultural resources for later projects that would implement the proposed Circulation Element Update. The proposed connection of Park Place between Sepulveda Boulevard and Nash Street and connection of Park Place to Hughes Way via Allied Way through the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would constitute a project that implements the Circulation Element Update policies. The analysis provided below meets the requirement for a records search to be conducted prior to development of Circulation Element facilities within the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site. Based upon the analysis, construction of this component of the proposed Circulation Element Update would not result in new effects related 74 1 t to cultural resources that were not examined in the Program EIR for the proposed Circulation Element Update. (2) As no known archaeological resources are known to exist on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, no impacts to archaeological resources are anticipated as a result of future developments. It is not anticipated that any developments on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would encounter archaeological resources during construction activities. (3) No paleontological resources are known to exist on the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Therefore, no impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated as a result of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project. (4) One historic resource has been identified on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. This resource has been identified as the brass foundry foundation located on the H. Kramer portion of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. Future development on the H. Kramer portion of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site could significantly impact this resource. Further evaluation is necessary to determine whether this resource is eligible for listing on the California or National Registers. Plaza El Segundo (5) The records search provided above is in accordance with the mitigation measures for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning that requires site specific evaluation of potential cultural resources issues and no further analysis of this is beyond that set forth in the preceding section would be required for the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. The analysis demonstrates that construction of this component of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would not result in new effects related to cultural resources that were not examined in the Program EIR for the proposed Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning. (6) As no known archaeological resources are known to exist on the Plaza El Segundo Site, no impacts to archaeological resources are anticipated. Therefore, it is not anticipated that any archaeological resources would be encountered during construction activities associated with the Plaza El Segundo. (7) No paleontological resources are known to exist on the Plaza El Segundo Site. Therefore, no impacts to paleontological resources are anticipated as a result of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. (8) No historic resources have been identified on the Plaza El Segundo Site. All structures associated with the former industrial uses have been demolished and the Plaza El Segundo site is 75 1JJ b) C) currently undergoing soil characterization. Therefore, the Plaza El Segundo Development would not impact any historic resources and no mitigation measures are required. Subsequent Environmental Documentation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for development projects proposed to be constructed on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. The subsequent environmental documentation must include the following: (1) A records search and /or Phase I Archaeological Survey must be conducted by a qualified archaeologist prior to the start of construction activities (including grading) for any development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. If the survey identifies resources within the construction area, follow on studies shall be conducted in accordance with the recommendations of the records search prior to commencement of construction (N -1). (2) Further analysis of Cultural Resource 19- 186856 is required, that meets the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(2), to determine potential eligibility for the California or National Register of Historic Places prior to any construction activities occurring on the H. Kramer portion of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. If further analysis identifies that the resource is eligible, then the recommendations identified in that analysis must be followed (N -2). Mitigation. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning The following mitigation measure must be required for any future development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. (1) A records search and /or Phase I Archaeological Survey must be conducted by a qualified archaeologist prior to the start of construction activities (including grading) for any development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. If the survey identifies resources within the construction area, follow on studies must be conducted in accordance with the recommendations of the records search prior to commencement of construction (N -1). (2) Further analysis of Cultural Resource 19- 186856, that meets the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a)(2), is required to determine potential eligibility for the California or National Historic Register of Historic Places prior to any construction activities occurring on the H. Kramer portion of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. If further analysis identifies that the resource is eligible, then the recommendations identified in that analysis must be followed and measures identified to reduce impacts to less than significant levels (N -2). 76 �JU (3) In the event that archaeological or paleontological resources are encountered during the course of grading or construction, all development must temporarily cease in these areas until the resources are properly assessed and subsequent recommendations are determined by a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist (N -3). Plaza El Segundo (4) In the event that archaeological or paleontological resources are encountered during the course of grading or construction, all development must temporarily cease in these areas until the resources are properly assessed and subsequent recommendations are determined by a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist (N-4). d) Findings. (1) The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to cultural resources. (2) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the FEIR. D. Significant Unavoidable Effects that Cannot Be Mitiaated to a Level of Insignificance. The City Council finds that in response to each adverse impact identified below, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated in the Project, which lessen the significant adverse environmental impact. However, these impacts cannot be totally avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance if the Project is implemented. Air Quality. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Construction Emissions (1) Maximum daily emissions from a typical construction project associated with the Proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning will exceed SCAQMD's daily thresholds for CO, ROG, NOx, and PM10. Therefore, emissions of these pollutants would result in significant short-term impacts. (2) Between 2007 and 2012, emissions from construction activity may occur simultaneously with operational emissions 77 i 5 associated with the proposed Plaza El Segundo. Combined emissions would exceed the SCAQMD's thresholds for CO, ROG, NOx and PM10, which would constitute a significant impact. Operational Emissions (3) Operation of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning in the buildout year of 2012 is anticipated to result in emissions that exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for four of the five criteria pollutants: CO, PM10, ROG, and NOx. Thus, a significant impact related to these four criteria pollutants would occur. Plaza El Segundo Construction Emissions (4) Maximum daily emissions associated with the construction of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development will exceed SCAQMD's daily thresholds for ROG and NOx. Therefore, emissions of these pollutants would result in significant short-term impacts. Operational Emissions (5) Operation of the proposed Plaza El Segundo is anticipated to result in emissions that exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds for four of the five criteria pollutants: CO, PM10, ROG, and NOx. Thus, a significant impact related to these four criteria pollutants is anticipated. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) Prior to implementation of specific development projects, impacts associated with construction emissions must be examined in light of this Program EIR to determine whether a new Initial Study would be required to be prepared leading to either an EIR or Negative Declaration. This examination must provide quantified estimates of construction emissions based upon the specific site, schedule, and construction equipment utilization characteristics of the proposed development and compare the estimated emissions to the SCAQMD thresholds for construction emissions. The analysis must incorporate the mitigation measures identified below as appropriate, along with any other mitigation measures identified by the project - specific analysis (C- 1). C) Mitigation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Construction Emissions JCS 78 The following is a list of feasible control measures that the SCAQMD recommends for construction emissions of PM10. These mitigation measures must be implemented for all areas where construction activities associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would occur. Fugitive Dust, PM10 Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, including but not limited to the following: (1) Prior to implementation of specific development projects, impacts associated with construction emissions must be examined. This examination must provide quantified estimates of construction emissions based upon the specific site, schedule, and construction equipment utilization characteristics of the proposed development and compare the estimated emissions to the SCAQMD thresholds for construction emissions. The analysis must incorporate the mitigation measures identified below as appropriate, along with any other mitigation measures identified by the project - specific analysis (C -1). (2) The construction area and vicinity (500 -foot radius) must be swept (preferably with water sweepers) and watered at least twice daily. Site wetting must occur often enough to maintain a 10 percent surface soil moisture content throughout all earth moving activities (C -2). (3) All unpaved roads, parking and staging areas must be watered at least once every two hours of active operations (C -3). (4) Site access points must be swept/washed within thirty minutes of visible dirt deposition (C -4). (5) On -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or rusty material must be covered or watered at least twice daily (C -5). (6) All haul trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials must either be covered or maintain two feet of freeboard (C -6). (7) All haul trucks must have a capacity of no less than twelve and three - quarter (12.75) cubic yards (C -7). (8) At least 80 percent of all inactive disturbed surface areas must be watered on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind drive fugitive dust (C -8). (9) Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended when winds exceed 25 mph (C -9). (10) Traffic speeds on unpaved roads must be limited to 15 miles per hour (C -10). 79 i ,� (11) Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended during first and second stage smog alerts (C -11). (12) For all construction emissions, the following measure must apply: The applicant must develop and implement a construction management plan, as approved by the City of El Segundo, which includes the following measures recommended by the SCAQMD, or equivalently effective measures approved by the SCAQMD: a. Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference. b. Provide temporary traffic controls during all phases of construction activities to maintain traffic flow (e.g., flag person). c. Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system to off -peak hours to the degree practicable. d. Re -route construction trucks away from congested streets. e. Consolidate truck deliveries when possible. f. Provide dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment on- and off -site. g. Maintain equipment and vehicle engines in good condition and in proper tune as per manufacturer's specifications and per SCAQMD rules, to minimize exhaust emissions. h. Suspend use of all construction equipment operations during second stage smog alerts. Contact the SCAQMD at (800) 242 -4022 for daily forecasts. i. Use electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel- or gasoline - powered generators. j. Use methanol- or natural gas - powered mobile equipment and pile drivers instead of diesel if readily available at competitive prices. k. Use propane- or butane - powered on -site mobile equipment instead of gasoline if readily available at competitive prices (C -12). Operational Emissions Regional emissions of CO, ROG, PM10, and NOx are associated with vehicular traffic. No feasible mitigation measures are 80 available to reduce vehicle travel and related tail pipe exhaust emissions associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. Plaza El Segundo Construction Emissions The following is a list of feasible control measures that the SCAQMD recommends for construction emissions of PM10. These mitigation measures must be implemented during construction activities associated with the proposed Plaza El Segundo. Fugitive Dust, PM 10 (13) The construction area and vicinity (500 -foot radius) must be swept (preferably with water sweepers) and watered at least twice daily. Site wetting must occur often enough to maintain a 10 percent surface soil moisture content throughout all earth moving activities (C -13). (14) All unpaved roads, parking and staging areas must be watered at least once every two hours of active operations (C -14). (15) Site access points must be swept/washed within thirty minutes of visible dirt deposition (C -15). (16) On -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or rusty material must be covered or watered at least twice daily (C -16). (17) All haul trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials must either be covered or maintain two feet of freeboard (C -17). (18) All haul trucks must have a capacity of no less than twelve and three - quarter (12.75) cubic yards (C -18). (19) At least 80 percent of all inactive disturbed surface areas must be watered on a daily basis when there is evidence of wind drive fugitive dust (C -19). (20) Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended when winds exceed 25 mph (C -20). (21) Traffic speeds on unpaved roads must be limited to 15 miles per hour (C -21). (22) Operations on any unpaved surfaces must be suspended during first and second stage smog alerts (C -22). (23) The applicant must develop and implement a construction management plan, as approved by the City of El Segundo, which includes the following measures recommended by the SCAQMD, or equivalently effective measures approved by the SCAQMD: 81 L 6 1 d) a. Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference. b. Provide temporary traffic controls during all phases of construction activities to maintain traffic flow (e.g., flag person). C. Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system to off -peak hours to the degree practicable. d. Re -route construction trucks away from congested streets. e. Consolidate truck deliveries when possible. f. Provide dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment on- and off -site. g. Maintain equipment and vehicle engines in good condition and in proper tune as per manufacturer's specifications and per SCAQMD rules, to minimize exhaust emissions. h. Suspend use of all construction equipment operations during second stage smog alerts. Contact the SCAQMD at (800) 242 -4022 for daily forecasts. i. Use electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel- or gasoline - powered generators. j. Use methanol- or natural gas - powered mobile equipment and pile drivers instead of diesel if readily available at competitive prices. k. Use propane- or equipment instead of competitive prices (C -23). Operational Emissions butane - powered on -site mobile gasoline if readily available at Regional emissions of CO, ROG, PM10, and NOx are associated with vehicular traffic. No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce vehicle travel and related tail pipe exhaust emissions associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. Finding: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The City finds that incorporation of such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City. The City finds that although the temporary construction related air 82 i quality CO, ROG, NOx, and PM10 impact will remain significant and unavoidable, no feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen the impact below a level of significance. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact. (2) The City finds that incorporation of such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City. The City finds that although the operational related air quality CO, PM10, ROG, and NOx impact will remain significant and unavoidable, no feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen the impact below a level of significance. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact. Plaza El Segundo (3) The City finds that incorporation of such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City. The City finds that although the temporary construction related air quality ROG and NOx impact will remain significant and unavoidable, no feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen the impact below a level of significance. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact. (4) The City finds that incorporation of such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City. The City finds that although the operational related air quality CO, PM10, ROG, and NOx impact will remain significant and unavoidable, no feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen the impact below a level of significance. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact. 2. Noise. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Construction Noise (1) The non - residential receptor property locations located at the closest northern (FedEx facility) and eastern (Pacific Theatre) edges of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be significantly impacted due to an increase in ambient noise levels at these locations of 26.0 and 14.0 decibels, respectively. (2) In addition, construction activity on the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would cause the ambient noise levels at the Oak Avenue residential locations to exceed 65 dBA. As such, construction noise impacts associated with the 83 16J proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be significant. Plaza El Segundo Construction Noise (3) Ambient noise levels will not increase at the Oak Avenue location as a result of construction noise sources from the Plaza El Segundo site. This analysis reflects the greater distance between the Oak Avenue residential and the main part of the Plaza El Segundo Development site. However, when construction activities are taking place on the 4.7 acre portion of the Plaza El Segundo Development site located immediately northeast of the Sepulveda/Rosecrans intersection, the effects would be the same as for construction activities occurring under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and a significant impact related to construction noise would occur. (4) Construction activities on the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site would impact the receptor locations located to the north and east of the Plaza El Segundo site, due to their proximity. Specifically, ambient noise levels at these locations will experience temporary and occasional increases of 13 to 19 decibels (13 decibels at the Pacific Theatre and 19 decibels at the FedEx facility). Impacts to these receptor locations would be significant. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Subsequent environmental documentation must be prepared for development projects proposed to be constructed on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans site. The subsequent environmental documentation must address the following: (1) A project - specific construction noise analysis must be prepared that calculates, based on project - specific parameters and identification of the site - specific sensitive receptors that could be affected by construction activities, the noise levels that would be experienced at sensitive receptors located adjacent to that site. If noise levels resulting from construction activity would result in temporary construction noise levels that exceed 65 dBA at a sensitive receptor, or cause an incremental increase of 5 dBA over the existing ambient sound level, if the existing ambient sound level at the sensitive receptor location is 65 dBA or more, then the study must identify feasible mitigation measures to be applied to that project from the list of mitigation measures provided below (1 -1). C) Mitigation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning 84 1 `Y The following mitigation measures are required to minimize construction related noise impacts associated with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning: (1) A project - specific construction noise analysis must be prepared that calculates, based on project - specific parameters and identification of the site - specific sensitive receptors that could be affected by construction activities, the noise levels that would be experienced at sensitive receptors located adjacent to that site. If noise levels resulting from construction activity would result in temporary 'construction noise levels that exceed 65 dBA at a sensitive receptor, or cause an incremental increase of 5 dBA over the existing ambient sound level, if the existing ambient sound level at the sensitive receptor location is 65 dBA or more, then the study must identify feasible mitigation measures to be applied to that project from the list of mitigation measures provided below. • Construction contracts must specify that all construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and other applicable noise attenuation devices. • During construction phases, the contractor must store and maintain equipment as far as possible from the adjacent receptor property locations to the southwest, north and east of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. • As stated in the City of El Segundo Municipal Code, construction must be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at anytime on Sunday or a Federal holiday. • Temporary plywood noise barriers must be constructed along the northern and eastern property lines of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site during construction, which must be high enough to block the line -of -sight between the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site and receptor property locations to the southwest, north and east (1 -1). Plaza El Segundo The follow mitigation measures are required to minimize construction related noise impacts associated with the Plaza El Segundo Development: (2) Construction contracts must specify that all construction equipment must be equipped with mufflers and other applicable noise attenuation devices (1 -2). (3) During construction phases, the contractor must store and maintain equipment as far as possible from the adjacent receptor 85 A.6J property locations to the north and east of the Plaza El Segundo site (1 -3). (4) As stated in the City of El Segundo Municipal Code, construction must be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at anytime on Sunday or a Federal holiday (1 -4). (5) Temporary plywood noise barriers must be constructed along the 4.5 acre portion of the Plaza El Segundo site south of the UPRR tracks during construction, which must be high enough to block the line -of -sight (a minimum of 8 feet above existing grade) between the Plaza El Segundo site and receptor property locations to the southwest, north and east (1 -5). d) Finding: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) Temporary construction noise impacts at the FedEx and Pacific Theatres locations would be significant and unavoidable even with the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures. Plaza El Segundo (2) Temporary construction noise impacts at the FedEx facility would be significant and unavoidable even with the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures. (3) The City finds that incorporation of such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City. The City finds that although the temporary construction related noise impacts will remain significant and unavoidable, no feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen the impact below a level of significance. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact. 3. Transportation and Circulation. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would significantly impact two intersections during the p.m. peak hour or Saturday mid -day peak hour. These intersections are Sepulveda Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard in the p.m. peak hour and Rosecrans Avenue /Aviation Boulevard in the Saturday mid -day peak period. (2) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning is estimated to contribute approximately 240 trips in the southbound direction on the San Diego Freeway between the 1 -105 interchange and El 86 L Segundo Boulevard. During the afternoon peak hour, this number of trips would cause the D/C ratio to increase by 0.02, with a resulting LOS of F(0), which would constitute a significant impact at this location. (3) Significant impacts were identified for the southbound 1- 405 between the 1 -105 Interchange and El Segundo Boulevard for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. The nearest arterial CMP monitoring stations are located at the intersections of Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard and El Segundo Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard. These intersections would be significantly impacted by the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. Impacts of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning with respect to the CMP would be significant. Plaza El Segundo (4) The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would significantly and unavoidably impact one intersection during p.m. peak hour (Sepulveda Boulevard/El Segundo Boulevard). (5) The proposed Plaza El Segundo Development is estimated to contribute approximately 162 trips in the southbound direction on the San Diego Freeway between the 1 -105 interchange and El Segundo Boulevard. During the afternoon peak hour, this number of trips would cause the D/C ratio to increase by 0.01, with a resulting LOS of F(0), which would be a less than significant impact at this location. (6) The nearest arterial CMP monitoring stations are located at the intersections of Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard and El Segundo Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard. These intersections would be significantly impacted by the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. Impacts of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development with respect to the CMP would be significant. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) El Segundo Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard. Convert the existing eastbound right -turn only lane to a shared through /right -turn lane. There exists three receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection. In addition, modify the raised center median to convert the westbound shared through left -turn lane to a dedicated second left turn lane and additional through lane (L- 1). 87 d) Plaza El Segundo From the list of mitigation measures required to address the complete implementation of the C -4 zone on the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, the following specific mitigation measures must be required to address the traffic impacts of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. (2) El Segundo Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard — Convert the existing eastbound right -turn only lane to a shared through /right -turn lane. There exists three receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection. In addition, modify the raised center median to convert the westbound shared through left -turn lane to a dedicated second left turn lane and additional through lane (L- 13). Finding: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) Because no additional mitigation measures are available, impacts would be significant and unavoidable at the two intersections where the City's level of service standard would be exceeded. (2) The two intersections that would exceed the City's level of service threshold, even after implementation of all feasible intersection improvements, are: • Sepulveda Blvd./El Segundo Blvd. • Aviation Blvd. /Rosecrans Ave. (3) There is no mechanism available for providing fair share contributions to mitigate freeway impacts. Therefore impacts to one freeway segment (southbound San Diego Freeway between the 1 -105 interchange and El Segundo Boulevard) would be significant and unavoidable. (4) In addition, improvements at three intersections require coordination and concurrence of Caltrans and /or other agencies. In the event that the concurrence of other jurisdictions cannot be obtained, impacts at these intersections would be significant and unavoidable. Plaza El Segundo (5) Because no additional mitigation measures are available, impacts would be significant and unavoidable at one intersection where the City's level of service standard would be exceeded. (6) The intersection that would exceed the City's level of service threshold, even after implementation of all feasible intersection improvements, are: :: ;,iii • Sepulveda Blvd./El Segundo Blvd. (7) In addition, improvements at two intersections require coordination and concurrence of Caltrans and /or other agencies. In the event that the concurrence of other jurisdictions cannot be obtained, impacts at these intersections would be significant and unavoidable. (8) The City finds that incorporation of such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City. The City finds that although the transportation and circulation impact will remain significant and unavoidable, no feasible mitigation measures are available to avoid or lessen the impact below a level of significance. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh this significant unavoidable impact. E. Insionificant Cumulative Impacts. The City Council finds that the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter do not identify or contain substantial evidence which identifies significant adverse cumulative environmental effects associated with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative in conjunction with the related Projects identified in Section III.B of the DER (collectively, the "Related Projects ") with respect to the areas listed below: 1. Aesthetics 2. Air Quality 3. Agricultural Resources 4. Biological Resources 5. Cultural Resources 6. Geology and Soils 7. Hydrology and Water Quality 8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 9. Land Use 10. Mineral Resources 11. Noise 12. Public Services 13. Recreation 14. Utilities i63 99 a) Sewer b) Water c) Natural Gas d) Electricity F. Cumulative Impacts Identified as Potentially Sionificant But Which Did Not Exceed Sinnificance Thresholds in the EIR. The City Council finds that although the following cumulative environmental effects were identified as potentially significant in the FEIR for the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative, changes or alterations within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies and the City have been adopted by such other agencies or can and should be adopted by such other agency to avoid or lessen the potential significant environmental effects listed below to a level of insignificance. Transportation and Circulation. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) Traffic resulting from the 52 related projects could contribute to potential future deterioration at the study intersections. This cumulative analysis was based on a worst -case set of assumptions where all of the related projects were constructed and built to the intensity currently envisioned. In addition, none of the traffic enhancements which may be associated with the 52 related projects were included in the analysis. It is likely that traffic conditions would be better than noted in the EIR analysis. (2) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact at nine intersections located wholly or partly within the City of El Segundo. (3) The cumulative effects identified are anticipated to occur with or without the project with the exception of the impact at the Park Place and Nash Street, Park Place and Douglas Street, and Rosecrans Avenue and Douglas Street intersections. These impacts are reduced to a level of insignificance with traffic improvements proposed with the exception of p.m. peak hour period at Rosecrans Avenue and Douglas Street. This is a worst - case analysis which does not include specific improvement measures which may be required of the cumulative projects; therefore, conditions are anticipated to be better than stated in the Draft EIR. 90 i iU Plaza El Segundo (4) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would contribute to a significant cumulative impact at seven intersections located wholly or partly within the City of El Segundo. (5) The cumulative effects identified are anticipated to occur with or without the project with the exception of the impact at the Rosecrans Avenue and Douglas Street intersection (p.m. peak hour) and the Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard intersection during the Saturday mid -day peak. These impacts are reduced to a level of insignificance with traffic improvements proposed by the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project with the exception of the p.m. peak period at Rosecrans Avenue and Douglas Street. This is a worst case analysis which does not include specific improvement measures which may be required of the cumulative projects; therefore, conditions are anticipated to be better than noted. However, the incremental effect of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development, in connection with the effects of past, present and probable future projects would be cumulatively considerable at seven intersections located wholly or partly within the City of El Segundo. b) Subsequent Environmental Documentation: (1) No subsequent environmental documentation is required. C) Mitigation: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezonin (1) In order to assist in addressing future cumulative traffic deterioration, the City of El Segundo through its Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee Ordinance will require the developer of a specific project to make a "fair share" contribution for programmed roadway improvements. In addition, project implementation of the signal system enhancements described above will benefit the entire system and reduce cumulative impacts along the roadway corridors (L -12). Plaza El Segundo (2) In order to assist in addressing future cumulative traffic deterioration, the project applicant must comply with the City of El Segundo Traffic Congestion Mitigation Fee Ordinance and make a "fair share" contribution for programmed roadway improvements. In addition, project implementation of the signal system enhancements described above will benefit the entire system and reduce cumulative impacts along the roadway corridors (L -19). d) Finding: Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning 91 (1) Payment of the El Segundo Traffic Mitigation Fee would reduce impacts related to cumulative traffic growth at intersections that are wholly or partly within the City of El Segundo to less than significant. Plaza El Segundo (2) Payment of the El Segundo Traffic Mitigation Fee would reduce impacts related to cumulative traffic growth at intersections that are wholly or partly within the City of El Segundo to less than significant. (3) The City Council finds that the FOR and the record of proceedings do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying a significant cumulative contribution to any significant unavoidable environmental effects of the Project with respect to Transportation and Traffic. G. Slanificant Unavoidable Cumulative Impacts. The City Council finds that in response to each impact identified below, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative, which lessen the significant adverse environmental impact. However, these impacts cannot be totally avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance if the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative are implemented. The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative contribution to these impacts would be cumulatively considerable under CEQA. Population, Housing, and Employment a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo (1) A review of the related projects listed in Table III -1 of the Draft EIR, confirms the projections for slow housing growth in the region; only 10,628 new housing units are currently proposed. In addition, approximately 62,646 jobs would be created by the same list of cumulative projects (see Table IV.J -3 of the EIR). (2) Based on the subregional job growth significant cumulative i demand. b) Mitigation: substantial disparity between projected and housing construction, there will be a npact on population growth and housing Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning 92 1 �. (1) There are no available mitigation measures to address the incremental contribution of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning to the significant cumulative impact related to population growth and housing demand. Plaza El Segundo (2) There are no available mitigation measures to address the incremental contribution of the proposed Plaza El Segundo to the significant cumulative impact related to population growth and housing demand. C) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that although mitigation can be incorporated into the Project to reduce the severity of the Project - specific population growth and housing demand impacts, no feasible mitigation measures exist to address significant and unavoidable cumulative population and growth and housing demand impacts. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh these significant unavoidable impacts. 2. Transportation and Traffic. a) Facts /Effects. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning (1) The impacts of cumulative traffic growth were incorporated into the traffic modeling for the Project. (2) There is no mechanism available for providing fair share contributions to improvements that would mitigate cumulative traffic impacts at six intersections located wholly outside the City of El Segundo. Therefore, cumulative traffic impacts would be significant and unavoidable at the following intersections (although such impacts would exist with or without the project): • Rosecrans Avenue and Hindry Avenue, p.m. peak hour. • Rosecrans Avenue and 1-405 SB Off -Ramp, a.m. and p.m. peak hour. • Marine Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard, a.m. and p.m. peak hour. • Marine Avenue and Aviation Boulevard, a.m. and p.m. peak hour. • Manhattan Beach Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard, a.m. and p.m. peak hour. 93 i • Manhattan Beach Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard, a.m. and p.m. peak hour. (3) No sub - regional traffic impact fee has been established or proposed for "fair- share" contributions to regional transportation improvements that might reduce the severity of cumulative traffic impacts. Plaza El Segundo (4) There is no mechanism available for providing fair share contributions to improvements that would mitigate cumulative traffic impacts at six intersections located wholly outside the City of El Segundo. Therefore, cumulative traffic impacts would be significant and unavoidable at the following intersections: • Rosecrans Avenue and Hindry Avenue, p.m. peak hour. • Rosecrans Avenue and 1-405 SB Off -Ramp, a.m. and p.m. peak hour. • Marine Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard, a.m. and p.m. peak hour. • Marine Avenue and Aviation Boulevard, a.m. and p.m. peak hour. • Manhattan Beach Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard, a.m. and p.m. peak hour. • Manhattan Beach Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard, a.m. and p.m. peak hour. b) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that although mitigation can be incorporated into the Project to reduce the severity of the Project - specific traffic impact, no feasible mitigation measures exist to address significant and unavoidable cumulative traffic impacts outside the City of El Segundo. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh these significant unavoidable cumulative impacts. 3. Solid Waste. a) Fact/Effects. (1) Implementation of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning in conjunction with the various related projects identified in Section 111.13 of the Draft EIR as well as cumulative growth in the County of Los Angeles would further increase demand on landfill capacity. Additional capacity to accommodate the cumulative disposal needs of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and related projects is the responsibility of local, county, 94 l l `1 and state solid waste management agencies and may become available as these agencies develop solutions to meet the future disposal needs at a regional level (e.g., expanding existing landfills, transporting waste to other landfills, converting waste to energy, recycling and waste reduction). (2) Similar to the proposed Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning, the related projects would be subject to the source reduction and recycling requirements established by the local jurisdiction in accordance with AB 939 (i.e., divert 50 percent of the solid waste generated from landfills through waste reduction, recycling and composting). As with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning, future projects would be required to participate in recycling programs, thus reducing the amount of solid waste to be disposed of at the landfills described above. (3) However, because the precise solutions to meeting the need for landfill capacity are not known and are the responsibility of other agencies, the incremental contribution of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning, in conjunction with the contributions of related projects, would be cumulatively considerable. b) Finding: (1) The City Council finds that while mitigation is not needed to reduce Project - specific solid waste impacts, no feasible mitigation measures exist to address significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts caused by solid waste generation. The Project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations outweigh these significant unavoidable impacts. H. Project Alternatives. 1. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration. Various alternatives to the Proposed Action were considered and dismissed without further study because they failed to accomplish the objectives of the Project or were otherwise not feasible. CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(c) requires EIRs to identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process, and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency's determination. Alternatives involving residential development were dismissed as being infeasible for two reasons. First, it may not be possible to remediate the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site to the levels required in order to develop residential uses. In the event that it is possible, it is likely cost prohibitive. Second, the City of El Segundo does not permit residential developments east of Sepulveda Boulevard because the City cannot adequately support residential developments in this area with City services. 95 ��1J 2. Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning a) No Project Alternative. (1) Description. Under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning No Project Alternative, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would remain under its current Industrial General Plan designation and zoning classifications. Reasonably foreseeable activities that would occur within the proposed Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site under the No Project Alternative include: 1) characterization and remediation activities that are currently ongoing on a portion of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would continue under the oversight of the cognizant regulatory agencies; 2) existing operative uses within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site (Air Products, Learned Lumber) would remain in their current locations; and 3) no new development would occur on the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. No new development is anticipated because, other than the existing operating uses, there is no known interest in development of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, other than the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning No Project Alternative therefore assumes the continuation of existing conditions on the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site as well as development of the related projects described in Section 111.6 (Related Projects) of the EIR. (2) Comparison to Project. Under the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning No Project Alternative, no additional traffic would be generated. The existing uses on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would remain in their present locations and there would be no change in current operations. Traffic generated by these uses would remain unchanged. Aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, geology and soils (except soil erosion impacts), hydrology, land use, noise, population, housing and employment, public service, transportation and traffic, utilities, and cultural resources impacts would be less than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and less than significant. Hazards and hazardous materials impacts of the No Project alternative would be greater than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning because only a portion of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be characterized and remediated. (3) Findings. The City Council rejects this alternative because it does not meet the objectives of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning to reuse and redevelop the site to provide commercial facilities needed by the City of El Segundo. This alternative would not facilitate the productive reuse of a former industrial site. This alternative would not provide improve traffic circulation by providing major road improvements that would provide significant overriding benefits to the community. This alternative would not provide for employment opportunities or generate significant local revenues through business license fees, property taxes and sales taxes. 96 i l U b) Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative. (1) Description. Under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative, the standards of the proposed C-4 zone would be modified to limit the mix of land uses permitted within the 70.8 net acre portion of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site that would be redesignated in the General Plan for Commercial Center use and rezoned to Commercial Center (C-4) in order to reduce total traffic generation from the Site. Total permitted square footage within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would remain the same (850,000 total square feet), but the mix of uses would be limited to the following: 590,000 square feet of shopping center, 185,000 square feet of large scale retail, 50,000 square feet of grocery store, 10,000 square feet of fast food restaurants, and 15,000 square feet of sit -down restaurants. Total traffic generation under this alternative would be reduced by approximately 11.7% in the p.m. peak hour and approximately 8.8% on a daily basis. All other components of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning, including the construction of new roadways, relocation of railroad rights -of -way, and stormwater retention basin would remain the same as the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning under this alternative. (2) Comparison to Project. Under this alternative, it is estimated that the development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would generate a total of approximately 25,859 daily trips, 1,033 trips in the a.m. peak hour, 2,346 trips during the p.m, peak hour, and 3,379 trips during the Saturday mid -day peak period. Of the 25 study intersections analyzed, it is anticipated that the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative would significantly impact 13 intersections during the a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour, or Saturday mid -day peak, or combinations thereof (see Table VI -1 of the Draft EIR). The same number of impacted intersections and the same specific intersections as identified would be impacted under the alternative as under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project. Therefore, traffic impacts associated with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative would be the same as those associated with the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and would be significant and unavoidable. Air quality would be less than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and less than significant, but would remain significant and unavoidable. Utility impacts related to sewer, water and electricity would be slightly less than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. The project - related utility impacts would remain less than significant. Aesthetics, biological resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology, land use, noise, population, housing and employment, public services, utilities (solid waste and natural gas), and cultural resources impacts would be the same as than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. The short-term noise and traffic impacts would be significant and unavoidable. (3) Findings. 97 The City Council adopts this alternative because it meets the project objectives of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning to reuse and redevelop the site to provide commercial facilities needed by the City of El Segundo described in Chapter II (Page II -14) of the Final EIR while reducing the traffic impacts by a significant amount (11.7% in the p.m. peak period and 8.8% of daily trips).. C) Alternative Land Use Alternative. (1) Description. Under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Alternate Land Use Alternative, the existing zoning of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be modified to allow development of proposed Sepulveda/Rosecrans Rezoning Site with industrial uses at a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.42:1. This would result in the development of approximately 1,548,000 square feet of industrial park within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site and represents a reduction in the development density permitted under the existing zoning of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site. The current zoning would allow a 0.6 FAR (2,211,142 square feet of industrial uses). Roadway extensions through the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be provided, although likely in a different configuration than under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. Storm water detention facilities would be provided that would be sufficient to handle storm water runoff generated under this alternative and railroad rights -of -way would be relocated as necessary. (2) Comparison to Project. Under the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Alternate Land Use Alternative, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be permitted to be developed with up to 1,548,000 square feet of industrial park. Under this alternative, it is estimated that the development on the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning site would generate a total of approximately 10,774 daily trips, 1,300 in the a.m. peak hour, 1,331 trips in the p.m. peak hour, and 542 trips during the Saturday mid -day peak hour. This is less traffic than would be produced by the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. However, an increase in the amount of truck traffic in the area is anticipated under this alternative. Under this alternative, 9 intersections would still be significantly impacted during the a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour or Saturday mid -day peak hour, or combinations thereof (Table VI -7). This is four less significantly impacted intersections than under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. Therefore, traffic impacts associated with the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning Alternate Land Use Alternative would be less than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project. Air quality impacts would be less than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning, but would remain significant and unavoidable. Operational noise impacts would be slightly less than the Plaza El Segundo development. Public services (police protection) and utility (sewer and water) impacts would be less than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. The project - related impacts would remain less than significant. 98 i Y 8 Biological resources, geology and soils, land use, construction noise, and cultural resources would be the same as the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. The short-term noise and traffic impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Aesthetics, air quality (construction and operational emissions), hydrology, hazards and hazardous materials, population, housing and employment, public services (fire protection), and utility impacts (solid waste, natural gas, and electricity) would be slightly greater than the Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning, but would remain as insignificant impacts. The sewer and water usage would increase by negligible amounts. The project - related impacts would remain less than significant. (3) Findings. The City Council rejects this alternative because it does not meet the objectives of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning to reuse and redevelop the site to provide commercial facilities needed by the City of El Segundo to the same extent as the proposed project. This alternative would not provide improve traffic circulation by providing major road improvements that would provide significant overriding benefits to the community. This alternative would not provide for employment opportunities or generate significant local revenues through business license fees, property taxes and sales taxes to the same extent as the proposed project. d) Rezoning of Plaza El Segundo Development Site Only. (1) Description. Under this alternative, the City would not take action with respect to the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning project, but rather would approve the General Plan Amendment and rezoning of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site to the new Commercial Center land use designation and Commercial Center (C-4) zone. Uses presently located within the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, but outside the boundary of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would remain the same. No new development is anticipated in this portion of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site because, other than the existing operating uses, there is no known interest in development of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site, other than the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. (2) Comparison to Project. Under this alternative, impacts would be the same as identified throughout this EIR for the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. The only difference from the analysis presented in this EIR would relate to land use compatibility. Under the alternative, the uses adjacent to the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would be industrial, rather than ultimately commercial, as would occur under the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. Placing commercial and industrial land uses adjacent to one another would not result in land use conflicts and no impacts related to land use compatibility would occur. Impacts of this alternative would be similar to the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning with respect to land use compatibility and the same as the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development for all other impacts. .. (3) Findings. The City Council rejects this alternative because it does not meet the objectives of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning to reuse and redevelop the site to provide commercial facilities needed by the City of El Segundo to the same extent as the proposed project. This alternative would not provide improve traffic circulation by providing major road improvements that would provide significant overriding benefits to the community because it would not include the extension of Park Place though to Nash Street. This alternative would not provide for employment opportunities or generate significant local revenues through business license fees, property taxes and sales taxes to the same extent as the proposed project. 3. Plaza El Segundo a) No Proiect Alternative. (1) Description. Under the Plaza El Segundo No Project Alternative, the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site would remain under its current Industrial General Plan designations and zoning classifications. Reasonably foreseeable activities that would occur within the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site under the No Project Alternative would include: 1) characterization and remediation activities that are currently ongoing on a portion of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site would continue under the oversight of the cognizant regulatory agencies; and 2) no new development would occur on the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site. No new development is anticipated because there is no known interest in development of the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site, other than the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. The proposed Plaza El Segundo No Project Alternative therefore assumes the continuation of existing conditions on the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site as well as development of the related projects described in Section 111.13 (Related Projects) of the EIR. (2) Comparison to Project. Under the Plaza El Segundo No Project Alternative, no additional traffic would be generated. The existing uses on the Plaza El Segundo site would remain in their present locations and there would be no change in current operations. Traffic generated by these uses would remain unchanged. Aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, geology and soils (except soil erosion impacts), hydrology, hazards and hazardous materials, land use, noise, population, housing and employment, public services, transportation and traffic, utilities, and cultural resources impacts would be less than the proposed Plaza El Segundo site and less than significant. (3) Findings. The City Council rejects this alternative because it does not meet the objectives of the Plaza El Segundo Development to reuse and redevelop the site to provide commercial facilities needed by the City of El Segundo. This alternative would not facilitate the productive reuse of a former industrial site. This alternative would not provide improve traffic circulation by providing major road improvements that would provide significant overriding benefits to the community. This alternative would not 100 "So provide for employment opportunities or generate significant local revenues through business license fees, property taxes and sales taxes. b) Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative. (1) Description. Under the Plaza El Segundo Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative, the Plaza El Segundo site boundaries and total proposed square footage would remain the same (425,000 square feet), but the mix of uses within the proposed Plaza El Segundo would be modified to result in an approximately 17% reduction in p.m. peak hour traffic generation and an approximately 13% reduction in daily traffic generation. The mix of uses that would be contained within the proposed Plaza El Segundo under the Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative would include: 165,000 square feet of shopping center, 185,000 square feet of large scale retail, 50,000 square foot grocery store, 10,000 square feet of fast food restaurants, and 15,000 square feet of sit -down restaurants. The proposed land uses and density would be within the requirements of the proposed C-4 zone. All other components of the proposed Plaza El Segundo, including the construction of new roadways (Park Place east of Sepulveda and Allied Way within the Plaza El Segundo site) and storm water retention basin would remain the same as the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development under this alternative. (2) Comparison to Project. Under the Plaza El Segundo Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative, the size of the proposed development would be the same; however, the mix of uses would be different in order to reduce the amount of traffic generated. Under this alternative, it is estimated that the development on the Plaza El Segundo site would generate a total of approximately 16,645 daily trips, with 779 a.m. peak hour trips, 1,477 p.m. peak hour trips, and 2,205 Saturday mid -day peak period trips. Of the 25 study intersections analyzed, it is anticipated that the Plaza El Segundo Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative would significantly impact six intersections during the a.m. peak hours, p.m. peak hour, Saturday mid -day peak hour, or combinations thereof (see Table VI -14). This is one less impacted intersection than would be impacted under the proposed Plaza El Segundo project. Therefore, traffic impacts associated with the Plaza El Segundo Reduced Traffic Alternative would be less than those under the proposed Plaza El Segundo project. Air quality would be less than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and less than significant, but would remain significant and unavoidable. Operational noise impacts would be slightly less than the Plaza El Segundo development. Utility impacts related to sewer, water and electricity would be slightly less than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. The project - related utility impacts would remain less than significant. Aesthetics, biological resources, geology and soils, hydrology, hazards and hazardous materials, land use, construction noise, population, housing and employment, public services, and utility impacts (solid waste and natural gas), and cultural resources would be the same as than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. The short-term noise and traffic impacts would be significant and unavoidable. 101 ig� (3) Findings. The City Council adopts this alternative since it meets all of the project objectives described in Chapter II (Page II -14) of the Final EIR while reducing the traffic impacts by a significant amount (17% in p.m. peak period and 13% of daily trips). C) Alternative Land Use Alternative. (1) Description. Under the Plaza El Segundo Alternate Land Use Alternative, the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site would be developed with industrial uses at a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.42:1. This would result in the development of an approximately 730,000 square foot industrial park within the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site. Roadway extensions through the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development site would be provided, although likely in a different configuration than under the proposed Plaza El Segundo. Storm water detention facilities would be provided that would be sufficient to handle storm water runoff generated under this alternative. (2) Comparison to Project. Under the Plaza El Segundo Alternate Land Use Alternative, the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Rezoning Site would be developed with up to 730,000 square feet of industrial park uses. Under this alternative, it is estimated that the development would generate approximately 5,081 daily trips, 613 a.m. peak hour trips, 628 p.m. peak hour trips, and 256 Saturday mid -day peak period trips. This is less traffic than would be produced under the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development, although truck traffic would increase under this Alternative. However, under this alternative, three intersections would be significantly impacted during the a.m. peak hour, p.m. peak hour, Saturday mid -day peak hour, or combination thereof (Table VI -21). This is four fewer than would be significantly impacted under the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. Therefore, traffic impacts associated with the Plaza El Segundo Alternate Land Use Alternative would be lower than the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development. Air quality impacts would be less than the proposed Plaza El Segundo development, but would remain significant and unavoidable. Operational noise and public services (police), utility (sewer, water and electricity) impacts would be lower than the Plaza El Segundo development. Geology and soils, land use, and cultural resources would be the same as than the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. Aesthetics, air quality (short-term construction emissions), biological resources, hydrology, hazards and hazardous materials, short-term construction noise, population, housing and employment, public services (fire), utility (solid waste and natural gas) impacts would be greater than the Plaza El Segundo development, but would remain as insignificant impacts. (3) Findings. The City Council rejects this alternative because it does not meet the objectives of the Plaza El Segundo Development to reuse and redevelop the site to provide commercial facilities needed by the City of El Segundo to the same extent as the 102 i 0 w proposed project. This alternative would not provide improve traffic circulation by providing major road improvements that would provide significant overriding benefits to the community. This alternative would not provide for employment opportunities or generate significant local revenues through business license fees, property taxes and sales taxes to the same extent as the proposed project. d) Rezoning of Plaza El Segundo Development Site Only (1) Description. There is no equivalent alternative for the Plaza El Segundo site because this alternative would approve only the Plaza El Segundo portion of the Sepulveda Rosecrans Site Rezoning. (2) Comparison to Project. There is no equivalent alternative for the Plaza El Segundo site because this alternative would approve only the Plaza El Segundo portion of the Sepulveda Rosecrans Site Rezoning so no comparison is necessary. (3) Findings. There is no equivalent alternative for the Plaza El Segundo site because this alternative would approve only the Plaza El Segundo portion of the Sepulveda Rosecrans Site Rezoning so no findings are necessary. 4. Findings Regarding Alternatives. a) Reasonable Range of Alternatives. The City Council finds that that (a) the FEIR describes a reasonable range of alternatives to the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development, which could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development and would avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development; and (b) the City Council evaluated the comparative merits of the alternatives. b) Environmentally Superior Alternative. CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6 requires that an analysis of alternatives to the Project identify one alternative as the environmentally superior alternative. Furthermore, if the environmentally superior alternative is the "No Project" alternative, the EIR must also identify the environmentally superior alternative from among the other alternatives. Sepulveda Rosecrans Site Rezoning The No Project Alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning, as it would avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning related to traffic, construction and operational air emissions and construction noise. However, the No Project Alternative would not meet any of the objectives of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning. 103 L8J such as plastics; and water. Fossil fuels such as gasoline and oil would also be consumed in the use of construction vehicles and equipment. Subsequent use and maintenance of the proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would also require the long -term consumption of these nonrenewable resources at reduced levels typical for commercial development. These would include energy resources such as electricity and natural gas, as well as petroleum -based fuels required for the increased number of vehicle trips to be generated by the project. The proposed Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning would add traffic to local roads, and would result in long -term increases in ambient air pollution and noise levels. Potential irreversible damage from environmental accidents associated with the project are unlikely and would be avoided by compliance with the mitigation measures proposed in this EIR as well as existing city, county, state, and federal safety regulations. Plaza El Segundo Similar to that discussed above, the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development would consume limited, slowly renewable, and non - renewable resources during construction. Such resources would include the following construction supplies: lumber and other forest products; aggregate materials used in concrete and asphalt such as sand, gravel, and stone; metals such as steel, copper, and lead; petrochemical construction materials such as plastics; and water. Fossil fuels such as gasoline and oil would also be consumed in the use of construction vehicles and equipment. Subsequent use and maintenance of the proposed Plaza El Segundo would also require the long -term consumption of these nonrenewable resources. These would include energy resources such as electricity and natural gas, as well as petroleum - based fuels required for the increased number of vehicle trips to be generated by the Plaza El Segundo. The proposed Plaza El Segundo would add traffic to local roads, and would result in long -term increases in ambient air pollution and noise levels. Potential irreversible damage from environmental accidents associated with the project are unlikely and would be avoided by compliance with the mitigation measures proposed in this EIR as well as existing city, county, state, and federal safety regulations. IV. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS. The City Council finds on the basis of the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter that the unavoidable significant impacts of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative are acceptable when balanced against the benefits of the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative. This determination is based on the following factors and the substantial public, social, economic, and environmental benefits flowing from the Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development Reduced Traffic Generation Alternative as identified in the FEIR and the record of proceedings in the matter. Each benefit set forth below constitutes an overriding consideration warranting approval of each project, independent of other benefits, despite each and every avoidable impact. (a) Development of a property that is substantially vacant and is currently underutilized. (b) The project would facilitate the environmental remediation of existing subsurface soil and groundwater contamination on and around the property associated with the previous use of the project site. 106 L It (c) Re- designation and rezoning of industrial property for more productive commercial uses. (d) Elimination of blighted areas and providing an attractive urban destination. (e) Increasing and further stabilizing the City's tax base through development of new commercial businesses. (f) Providing both short-term construction employment and long -term permanent employment (approximately 1,904 jobs for the Rosecrans/ Sepulveda Site Rezoning of which approximately 952 jobs would be associated with the Plaza El Segundo Development) within the City of El Segundo. (g) Increase in employment opportunities for the City's residents. (h) The Plaza El Segundo Development will add to the diversification of the economic base in the City by providing for new larger format retail uses that do not currently exist in the City. (i) The development will provide significant fiscal benefit to the City by generating additional business license and sales tax revenue for the City's General Fund. (j) The development will Increase City revenues through the generation of taxes that outweigh the City's cost of services. (k) The Plaza El Segundo Development will generate an annual net fiscal benefit (revenues versus City expenses) that would range from approximately $1.082,049 to $1,611,424 in the first year of operation, rising to a range of approximately $1,307,922 to $1,958,987 in the eighth year of operation. (1) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning is immediately adjacent to the 2,000,000 square -foot Continental Park office development, the 2,000,000 square -foot Raytheon campus, and other office buildings along the Rosecrans Avenue commercial corridor. The proposed project will provide additional retail uses and services to these employment centers. (m) Development of a project that is consistent with the Elements of the General Plan. (n) The project would provide a comprehensive and coordinated design of the entire project site, including landscape amenities to substantially improve the aesthetic appearance of the site and the surrounding area. (o) The project would reduce the maximum permitted floor area ratio on the property from 0.6:1 to 0.275:1. (p) Funding on -site and off -site Circulation Element planned improvements, including new and widened roadways, intersections, signals, medians and landscaping in the project vicinity at no cost to the City. (q) The Project will include the construction of two new roadways (Park Place and Allied Way extensions) that will further the City's goal of implementing 107 i85 the 2004 Circulation Element Master Plan of Streets and improving the circulation system in the southeast quadrant of the City. (r) The Sepulveda /Rosecrans Site Rezoning will include the widening of Sepulveda Boulevard on the east side of the street to provide acceleration and deceleration lanes to serve the project and widening a portion of the north side of Rosecrans Avenue to provide a dedicated right -turn lane. The developer will dedicate property for the lane widening providing a public benefit to the entire City. (s) Expansion of the planned ITS network that will increase its effectiveness in relieving congestion. (t) Contribution of $1,500,000 to the City aquatic related recreational uses. (u) Contribution of approximately $250,000 to enhance, promote and maintain the public improvements adjacent to businesses and property owners in the Downtown Specific Plan area of El Segundo. (v) Contribution of approximately $250,000 in traffic impact mitigation fees to offset the impacts of the project on public roadway infrastructure. (w) Contribution of approximately $119,000 in police, fire, and library, mitigation fees to offset the impacts of the project on public services. (x) A development agreement, including all of the consideration and benefits received by the City thereunder, which provides the City with certainty respecting the development process, including but not limited to the potential uses that will be developed on the property. V. RECIRCULATION. A. Facts. 1. The City received comments on the DEIR from members of the public and from public agencies in both written and oral form. The FOR contains written responses to all comments ( "Responses to Comments ") received on the DEIR as of December 15, 2005. Some comments were incorporated into the FEIR as factual corrections and minor changes. The FEIR includes all factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR. All comments and testimony received prior to and at the City Council's public hearing have been considered. B. Finding. Pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15088.5 and Public Resources Code § 21092.1, and based on the FOR and the record of proceedings in for the Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development, the City Council finds that: 1. Factual corrections and minor changes are set forth as additions and corrections to the DEIR; and 2. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR are not substantial changes in the DEIR that would deprive the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment on a substantial adverse environmental effect of the 108 �-�� Rosecrans /Sepulveda Site Rezoning and Plaza El Segundo Development, a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect, or a feasible Project alternative; and 3. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR will not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of the significant effects previously disclosed in the DEIR; and 4. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR will not involve mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the DEIR that would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment; and 5. The factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR do not render the DEIR so fundamentally inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment would be precluded. Thus, the City Council finds that none of the conditions set forth in CEQA Guideline § 15088.5 or Public Resources Code § 21092.1 requiring recirculation of a draft environmental impact report were met. The City Council further finds that incorporation of the factual corrections and minor changes to the DEIR into the FEIR does not require that the FEIR to be recirculated for public comment. VI. SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. The City Council finds and declares that substantial evidence for each and every finding made herein is contained in the FEIR, which is incorporated herein by this reference, and in the record of proceedings in the matter. To the extent applicable, each of the other findings made by the City Council in connection with its approval of the entitlement applications listed in Section I above are also incorporated herein by this reference. P:\Planning & Building Safety\PROJECTS \626- 650\EA -631 \Council Agenda Packeffinal Approved Documents\EA- 631.CEQA Resolution findings Exh A.RTGA.doc y � 109 Comstock Crosser & Associates DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. June 21, 2007 Gary Chicots Kim Christensen City of El Segundo Planning and Building Safety Department 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90245 -3813 Re: Development Agreement between Rosecrans- Sepulveda Partners 2, LLC, Rosecrans- Sepulveda Partners 3, LLC, and The City of El Segundo, dated March, 2005 and recorded on April 6, 2005 Dear Gary and Kim: We are requesting a modification be implemented to the Development Agreement ( "DA "} referenced above. Section 4.1.6 specifies that no health club or fitness center shall be permitted. There is no definition provided as to what constitutes such a facility; however, the original intent of this limitation was intended to prevent the leasing to a full service health club facility, both because of potential long term parking usage which could negatively impact other tenants, and the lack of retail sales tax generation. The specific health club which was under consideration when the limitation was imposed by the City Council was an approximately 40,000 square foot Equinox health and fitness facility. We are currently in negotiations with an approximately 6,000 square foot Yoga Works facility, to be located in "The Edge" portion of Plaza El Segundo. Their use (as defined in the lease) is limited to the following: "The Premises shall be used for upscale Yoga mind and body studio fitness systems, Pilates and Gyrotonic (provided such uses are acceptable to the City of El Segundo), nutritional counseling, and for the retail sale of related accessories, equipment, clothing, and related services as they may change over time. ". The Premises will be utilized primarily for Yoga classes and about 20% of the space will be devoted to the retail sale of Yoga equipment and apparel. 321 12th Street, Suite 200 Manhattan Beach, California 90266 310/546 -5781 Facsimile 310/545 -2802 Q 183 By this letter, we request that the City modifies Section 4.1.6 of the DA to allow a facility of the type and size described in the foregoing paragraph. The requested use will provide an outstanding draw for the customer clientele who would perhaps not otherwise be drawn to The Edge portion of PIaza El Segundo, and will greatly enhances our ability to lease the remainder of the space. Thank you for your consideration of our request. Sincerely, Rosecrans- Sepulveda Partners 2, LLC Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners 3, LLC By Dan Crosser Vice President of Managing Member X83 u. CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PUBLIC HEARING: June 28, 2007 SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment No. 763 for Development Agreement No. 07 -02 (First Amendment to Development Agreement No. 03- APPLICANT: Rosecrans Sepulveda Partners 2, LLC and Rosecrans Partners 3, LLC PROPERTY OWNER: Rosecrans Sepulveda Partners 2, LLC and Rosecrans Partners 3, LLC REQUEST: To amend Section 4.1.6 of the existing Develop- ment Agreement No. 03 -01 for Plaza El Segundo to allow for one health club or fitness center that does not exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable floor area PROPERTY INVOLVED: 710 -860 South Sepulveda Boulevard; 700 -740 Allied Way; 2005 -2015 East Park Place I. Introduction & Background Discussion On March 15, 2005, the City Council approved the Plaza El Segundo Development Project. The Plaza El Segundo Development Project is regulated by the development standards in the C-4 Zone (ESMC Chapter 15 -5G), conditions of approval, mitigation measures, and the requirements adopted in Development Agreement No. 03 -01. As construction, marketing and leasing of the Plaza El Segundo Development Project has proceeded, an issue arose that generated the proposed request by the developer, Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners, 2, LLC and Rosecrans- Sepulveda Partners, 3, LLC, to amend Section 4.1.6 of the Agreement. Section 4.1.6 of the Agreement ( "Health Clubs and Fitness Centers ") states that "no health club or fitness center shall be permitted." The developer is requesting the following amendment to Section 4.1.6: X90 "Section 4.1.6 Health Clubs and Fitness Centers. No health club or fitness center shall be permitted; provided, however, one (1) health club or fitness center shall be permitted, provided such use does not exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable floor area." The request for the amendment to § 4.1.6 of the Plaza El Segundo Development Agreement is intended to provide a greater mix of uses that are designed to both help obtain and retain other complimentary retail uses in a less visible portion of the shopping center site. The change also creates flexibility in leasing to a diverse and high -end tenant mix that will accommodate both consumer demand and the protection of high sales tax revenues within the range of uses permitted in the C-4 Zone. Health clubs and fitness centers were originally prohibited because a large, full service, health club facility of approximately 40,000 to 50,000 square feet was proposed that would provide little retail sales tax generation and would require a large number of parking spaces with high traffic generation. The proposed fitness center would be a small facility limited to yoga and pilates with a retail sales component (20% of the floor area) that would generate retail sales tax and that would have minimal impact to parking usage and traffic generation. The use would be compatible with other retail uses in the shopping center. II. Recommendation Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the facts as contained within this report and conduct a public hearing, and adopt Resolution No. 2625 (Exhibit 1) recommending that the City Council approve Environmental Assessment No. 763 and an Ordinance which will amend Development Agreement No. 03 -01. Ill. Proiect Description The following applications are proposed: Environmental Assessment No. 763 (EA No. 763) for First Amendment to Development Agreement No. 03 -01 —An amendment to the existing Development Agreement to allow only one health club or fitness center not to exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable floor area. The application requires review and recommendation by the Planning Commission to the City Council. The City Council will take final action on the application. IV. General Plan Consistency The El Segundo General Plan land use designation for the proposed Site is currently Commercial Center. The proposed project and its consistency with 2 i 91 relevant Element Goals, Objectives and Policies of the City of El Segundo General Plan are discussed below. Land Use The General Plan contains relevant Goals, Objectives and Policies in the Land Use Element. Goal LU4 is to "provide a stable tax base for the City through development of new commercial uses, primarily within a mixed -use environment, without adversely affecting the viability of Downtown." Objective LU4 -1 is to "promote the development of high quality retail facilities in proximity to major employment centers." The proposed health club or fitness center within the Plaza El Segundo Development project would be located in close proximity to major employment centers and contributes to the employment opportunities in the City. Objective LU4-4 is to "provide areas where development has the flexibility to mix uses, in an effort to provide synergistic relationships which have the potential to maximize economic benefit, reduce traffic impacts, and encourage pedestrian environments." The proposed health club or fitness center within the Plaza El Segundo Development project would help to provide synergistic relationships with the other retail businesses in the shopping center which would have the potential to maximize economic benefits; reduce traffic impacts because of reduced number of vehicle trips to multiple commercial uses within the shopping center; and to encourage greater pedestrian activities within the shopping center. Economic Development The General Plan contains relevant Goals, Objectives, and Policies in the Economic Development Element. The goal of Objective ED1 -1 is building "support and cooperation among the City of El Segundo and its businesses and residential communities for the mutual benefits derived from the maintenance and expansion of El Segundo's economic base." The proposed amendment to allow one health club or fitness center not to exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable floor area would increase and further stabilize the City' tax base through development of new commercial businesses, specifically by generating additional business license and sales tax revenue for the City's General Fund. According to Policy ED1 -1.2, long -run efforts for economic development should focus on "diversification of El Segundo's economic base in order to meet quality of life goals." and Policy ED1 -2.2 "maintains and promotes land uses that improve the City's tax base, balancing economic development and quality of life goals." The proposed amendment to allow one health club or fitness center not to exceed 6,500 square feet of leasable floor area would further diversify El Segundo's economic base and meet quality of life goals by providing a new use (yoga and pilates facility) that does not currently exist in the City. V. Environmental Review The proposed amendment to the Development Agreement is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305, as a Class 5 exempt project (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations), consisting of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20 %, which do not result in any changes in land use or density. Moreover, the proposed project is consistent with the FEIR, entitled Sepulveda/Rosecrans Site Rezoning and Plaza E/ Segundo Development Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse NO. 2003121037), certified by the City Council on March 15, 2005. VI. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the proposed First Amendment to the Development Agreement, subject to the findings in Draft Resolution No. 2625. VII. Exhibits 1. Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 2625 2. Draft Ordinance and First Amendment to Development Agreement 03 -01 3. Applicant's Letter of Request 2 01,2e� imberly Chri nsen, AICP, Planning Manager Planning and wilding Safety Department G ry Chicots, interim Director Planning and Building Safety Department P:\ PBS\ Projects \751 - 775 \EA - 763 \EA- 763.SR.DA 07- 02 .2007.06.28.PCSR.Amendmentl.doc n 4 L MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA June 28, 2007 Vice -Chair Wagner called the El Segundo Planning Commission meeting to CALL TO ORDER order at 7:00 p.m. in the El Segundo City Hall's Council Chambers, 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California. Commissioner Fellhauer led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. PRESENT: FELLHAUER, ROTOLO, WAGNER ABSENT FRICK and FUENTES None. Vice -Chair Wagner presented the Consent Calendar. None. PLEDGE TO FLAG ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT Commissioner Fellhauer moved, seconded by Commissioner Rotolo to approved MOTION the June 14, 2007, Minutes as submitted. Motion carried (3 -0). None. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Vice -Chair Wagner presented Agenda Item E -2, Environmental Assessment No. NEW BUSINESS - 763 and Development Agreement No. 07 -02. Applicant: Rosecrans - Sepulveda PUBLIC HEARING Partners 2, LLC; Rosecrans - Sepulveda 3, LLC. Property Owner: Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners 2, LLC; Rosecrans- Sepulveda 3, LLC. Address: 710 — 860 South Sepulveda Boulevard; 700 -740 Allied Way; 2005 -2015 East Park Place. Planning Manager Christensen presented the staff report of record. Commissioner Rotolo inquired if there were any different use requirement for the parking from the previous use. Planning Manager Christensen stated that the development has been designed and constructed with parking above and beyond what is required in the municipal code, and that in regards to the fitness center, staff had verified that the parcel intended for this use on the east side of Allied Way, will have sufficient parking well within the code requirements. 94 El Segundo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 14, 2007 Page 1 Commissioner Fellhauer inquired as to whether the amendment specifically stated one Health Club or Fitness Center adding, if someone was to open up another one in the future will they need to come before the Planning Commission? Also if the 6,500 square feet facility wanted to expand into a neighboring location, will they have to come before the Planning Commission? Planning Manager Christensen stated that the amendment is limited to one Health Club or Fitness Center facility only. Any future amendment to the development agreement will have to come back before the Planning Commission as well as the Council unless it is listed as a minor modification. Planning Manager Christensen clarified that the development agreement has a specific list of things that defines what a major modification is versus what minor modifications is and that if they want to have two such facilities, because the language is specific, they would have to come back to the Commission. Vice -Chair Wagner questioned as to whether the facility east of Allied Way is located in a small area where La Sirena Grill is going to be located. Dan Crosser — Applicant's representative PUBLIC Mr. Crosser stated that actually there are already two existing restaurants that COMMUNICATIONS are 2,500 square feet each. The other tenants are commercial retailers, several of which are apparel retailers. He stated that he believes this yoga facility is complimentary to the other retailers and will attract mostly female customers which is the center's primary customer base. He stated that every tenant is in favor of having this fitness center at the facility. Vice -Chair Wagner inquired of the applicant as to how much of the 6,500 square feet was 20% dedicated to onsite retail sales and how many people would they have at one time. Mr. Crosser stated that approximately 20% of the tenant space would be used for sales but he did not know how many people would be there at one time. Adam Gutenberg with Yoga Works — Principal Mr. Gutenberg stated that they have five existing locations in Los Angeles already; averaging about 20 students a classroom and that he expects to have two classrooms on average per day, 20 people per classroom. Commissioner Rotolo asked as to whether there'd be spinning classes. Commissioner Fellhauer inquired of staff if they knew the average tax rate that would be generated for the 6,500 square foot parcel. Planning Manager Christensen stated at this time she doesn't know what the projected sale tax's revenue will be. Commissioner Fellhauer moved, seconded by Commissioner Rotolo to approve MOTION Environmental Assessment No. 763 and Development Agreement No. 07 -02, Resolution No. 2624. Motion carried (3 -0). El Segundo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 14, 2007 Page 2 None. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED BUSINESS Planning Manager Christensen congratulated Vice -Chair Wagner for his REPORT FROM reappointment for another term and welcomed the new Planning Commissioner PLANNING AND Suzanne Fuentes who is absent but will be joining the Commission at the July BUILDING SAFETY 12, 2007 meeting. DIRECTOR Commissioner Rotolo wished everyone a Happy 4th of July. Commissioner Fellhauer congratulated for another term and welcomed the Fuentes for coming aboard. Vice -Chair Wagner for being appointed new Planning Commissioner Suzanne Vice -Chair Wagner invited everyone to come out to Recreation Park fro the 4u' of July, and sent his wishes to Chair Frick to get well. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS Commissioner Fellhauer moved to adjourn, Commissioner Rotolo seconded. MOTION Motion carried (3 -0). The meeting adjourned at 7:16 p.m. PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS 28`h DAY OF JUNE 2007. Gary Chicots, Secretary of the Planning Commission and Director of The Planning and Building Safety Department Cheryl Frick, Madame Chair Planning Commission City of El Segundo, California P:IPBSI PLAN- COMIPLAN- COMIMINUTES12007k2007 6 -28 Minutes.doc ADJOURNMENT El Segundo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 14, 2007 Page 3 9 Jr (JAIS VG3Aind3S CL 0 Ul) LLI U-= 02 V) L/) Ul) < (1) : '7 CL cu LIJ 0. c CL LLJ (a LLJ -7 CL 0 E Q Q, C,4 L/)o > LL, U) 0 u C( 0 Lo o II O Coro 0 A C: ct (3) Q) cr— CD 0) (JAIS VG3Aind3S CL 0 Ul) LLI U-= 02 V) L/) Ul) < (1) : '7 CL cu LIJ 0. c CL LLJ (a LLJ -7 CL 0 E Q Q, C,4 L/)o > LL, U) 0 u C( 0 Lo o II EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to amend El Segundo Municipal Code Section 7 -1 in its entirety to regulate public nuisances, including graffiti. (Net Fiscal Impact to City - None) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Introduction of ordinance and reading by title only; (2) Schedule second reading and adoption of ordinance for the August 7, 2007 Council Meeting. (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: On May 15, 2007, City Council directed staff to survey surrounding cities to determine what steps their communities had taken to address public nuisances, specifically, graffiti. As a result of that survey and a review of the El Segundo Municipal Code, it was determined that the public nuisance provisions (adopted 07- 14 -54) required updating. The amended ordinance will accomplish the following; • Defines and designates graffiti as a public nuisance, compliments current Penal Code section 594, Vandalism. • Establishes parental liability for any and all costs associated with graffiti caused by a minor and defines cost recovery procedures. • Establishes penalties, to include community service and, if a minor, suspension or delay of driving privileges. • Authorizes abatement of nuisances and establishes abatement hearing procedures. Additionally, staff is working to establish a graffiti removal hotline and a web based reporting system to facilitate public reporting of graffiti. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft Ordinance FISCAL IMPACT: Revenue Generated: $0.00 Amount Requested: $0.00 Account Number: NIA Project Phase: NIA Appropriation Required: Yes X No 1')U K ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 7 -1 OF THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE IN ITS ENTIRETY TO REGULATE PUBLIC NUISANCES, INCLUDING GRAFFITI. The City Council of the city of El Segundo does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares as follows: A. Article XI, § 7 of the California Constitution empowers the City to enact and enforce ordinances regulating conditions that may be public nuisances or health hazards, or that promote social, economic, or aesthetic considerations; B. Government Code § 38771 permits general law cities to identify public nuisances by ordinance; C. Code of Civil Procedure § 731 permits civil actions to be brought in the name of the people of the state of California to abate public nuisances; D. It is in the public interest for the City to take appropriate actions to protect citizens and their property from conditions that threaten public health, safety, and welfare including, without limitation, matters that devalue real property; E. A review of the El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC ") shows that it is desirable to update nuisance regulations including, without limitation, provisions prohibiting and abating graffiti; F. The this ordinance is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQK) and CEQA regulations (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.) because it consists only of revisions and clarifications to existing public nuisance codes and procedures related to such codes. Adoption of this ordinance will not have the effect of deleting or substantially changing any regulatory standards or required findings. This ordinance is an action being taken for enhanced protection of the environment. SECTION 2: ESMC Chapter 7 -1, entitled "Nuisances," consisting of §§ 7 -1 -1 to 7 -1 -10 is amended in its entirety to read as follows: i90 Page 1 of 19 "CHAPTER 1: NUISANCES 7 -1 -1: PURPOSE. 7 -1 -2: DEFINITIONS. 7 -1 -3: NUISANCE — GENERALLY. 7 -1-4: NUISANCES — DESIGNATED. 7 -1 -5: ABATEMENT AUTHORITY. 7 -1-6: FINDINGS. 7 -1 -7: POSSESSION PROHIBITED. 7 -1-8: POSSESSION BY MINORS. 7 -1 -9: POSSESSION IN DESIGNATED PUBLIC PLACES. 7 -1 -10: POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DEFACE, MARK OR DAMAGE PROPERTY. 7 -1 -11: PARENTAL LIABILITY. 7 -1 -12: ACCESSIBILITY TO GRAFFITI IMPLEMENTS. 7 -1 -13: AUTHORIZATION TO REMOVE. 7 -1 -14: NOTICE TO ABATE GRAFFITI. 7 -1 -15: RECOVERY OF COSTS FROM LAND OWNER. 7 -1 -16: FAILURE TO REMOVE GRAFFITI UPON NOTICE. 7 -1 -17: RECOVERY OF COSTS FROM MINOR OR PARENT OR GUARDIAN. 7 -1 -18: COMMUNITY SERVICE. 7 -1 -19: SUSPENSION OR DELAY OF DRIVING PRIVILEGES. 7 -1 -20: PENALTY. 7 -1 -21: ABATEMENT OF NUISANCE. 7 -1 -22: RESPONSIBILITY FOR ABATEMENT. 7 -1 -23: NOTICE OF HEARINGS FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT. 7 -1 -24: HEARING PROCEDURE. 7 -1 -25: COMPLIANCE WITH ABATEMENT ORDER. 7 -1 -26: CITY EXPENSES: RECORD OF COSTS. 7 -1 -27: HEARING ON THE COST OF ABATEMENT. 7 -1 -28: NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIEN AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES. 7 -1 -29: ORDER FOR TREBLE COSTS OF ABATEMENT. 7 -1 -30: JUDICIAL REMEDIES. 7 -1 -31: EMERGENCY ABATEMENT. 7 -1 -1: PURPOSE. This Chapter is adopted pursuant to the city's police powers; Government Code §§ 38771- 38773.7, 53069.3, including any successor statutes; and Civil Procedure Code § 731, including any successor statutes, for the purposes of identifying public nuisances; authorizing abatement of such nuisances; and imposing criminal and civil penalties upon persons for causing or permitting such public nuisances. Nothing contained in this chapter is intended to, nor will it, preclude the City from pursuing any other available civil or criminal Page 2 of 19 I,i U remedies concurrently or in addition to the proceedings established by this chapter to enforce this Code. 7 -1 -2: DEFINITIONS. Unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the following definitions will govern the construction of the words and phrases used in this chapter: A. "Aerosol Paint Container" means any aerosol container which is adapted or made for the purpose of spraying paint or other substances capable of defacing property. B. "Felt Tip Marker' means any indelible marker or similar implement with a tip which at its broadest width is 1/8 inch or greater, containing an ink that is not water - soluble. C. "Glass Cutters" means any tools or instruments designed, or intended, to cut or etch glass surfaces. D. "Graffiti" means any inscription, word, figure or design that is marked, etched, pasted, or otherwise placed on property without the prior approval of the property owner or person in lawful possession or control of the property, except as otherwise provided in article 2 of this chapter. E. "Graffiti Implement" means any implement capable of marking a surface to create graffiti including, without limitation, any aerosol paint container, paint stick, felt tip marker, marking pen, gum label, marking instrument, drill bit, grinding stone, scribe, glass cutter, or etching tool, or other implements capable of marking or scarring glass, metal, concrete or wood. F. "Graffiti Removal Costs" means all costs that would be considered abatement costs in the context of a nuisance abatement proceeding pursuant to this chapter. In addition, such costs expressly include, without limitation, costs of removal of graffiti or other material, costs of repair and replacement of the defaced property, all city staff time, costs of the police investigation, attorney time and fees, and any court costs incurred. G. "Gum Label" means any sheet of paper, fabric, plastic or other substance with an adhesive backing which, when placed on a surface, is not easily removed. H. "Hearing officer' means city manager or designee. "Incidental expenses" include, without limitation, actual expenses, Page 3 of 19 6 U i city administrative costs and other costs of the city of all previous code enforcement efforts, the preparation of the abatement work specifications, contracts, and staff time in inspecting the work, as well as the costs of printing, posting and mailings required by this chapter. J. "Minor" means, except as otherwise provided, a person under 18 years of age. K. "Paint or Graffiti Stick" means a device containing a solid form of paint, chalk, wax, epoxy or other similar substance capable of being applied to a surface by pressure and, upon application, leaving a mark at least 1/8 of an inch in width, visible from a distance of 20 feet, and not water - soluble. L. "Responsible person" means any person or persons creating, causing, committing or maintaining any public nuisance as defined by this code including, without limitation, any person owning, leasing, occupying or having charge or possession of real property and any parent or legal guardian of a minor creating graffiti. M. "Self- service merchandising" means open display of graffiti implements to which the public has access without the intervention of any employee. N. "Spray Actuator" means an object, such as a spray tip, nozzle, or button, which is capable of being attached to an aerosol paint container for the purpose of spraying the substance contained therein. O. "Vendor- assisted" means only an employee has access to the graffiti implement and assists the customer by supplying the product. The customer does not take possession of the product until it is purchased. ARTICLE 1: NUISANCES GENERALLY 7 -1 -3: NUISANCE — GENERALLY. Anything that is injurious to health; is indecent; offensive to the senses; obstructs the free use of property so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property; or obstructs the free passage or use in the customary manner of any public park, square, street or highway, is a public nuisance. 7 -1-4: NUISANCES — DESIGNATED. It is unlawful and it is declared to be a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any property within the city to maintain such property in such a Page 4 of 19 U y manner that any of the conditions listed below are found to exist. This section is not the exclusive definition or designation of what constitutes a nuisance within this city. It supplements and is in addition to other regulatory codes, statutes, and ordinances enacted by the city, state, or any other legal entity or agency having jurisdiction. Designated public nuisances include the following: A. A violation of any provision of applicable law including, without limitation, the El Segundo Municipal Code; B. Any land, the topography, geology, or configuration of which, whether in a natural state or as a result of grading operations, excavations, fill, or other alteration, interferes with the established drainage pattern over the property or from adjoining or other properties which does or may result in erosion, subsidence, or surface water drainage problems of such magnitude as to be injurious to public health, safety and welfare or to neighboring properties; C. Any building or structure which is partially destroyed, damaged, abandoned, boarded up, dilapidated, or permitted to remain in a state of partial construction; D. The failure to secure and maintain against public access all doorways, windows, and other openings into vacant or abandoned buildings or structures; E. Painted buildings and walls, retaining walls, fences or structures that require repainting, or buildings, walls, fences, or structures upon which the condition of the paint has become so deteriorated as to permit decay, excessive checking, cracking, peeling, chalking, dry rot, warping or termite infestation; F. Any premises, building or structure, wall, fence, pavement, or walkway which is painted in a garish manner or is out of harmony or conformity with the standards of adjacent properties; G. Any building or structure, wall, fence, pavement, or walkway upon which any graffiti, including paint, ink, chalk, dye, or other similar marking substances, is allowed to remain for more than twenty -four (24) consecutive hours; H. Any wall, fence, gate, or hedge that is damaged, broken, or a hazard or is maintained in violation of this code; Broken windows; Page 5 of 19 J. Any overgrown, dead, decayed, diseased or hazardous tree, weeds, vegetation, or debris which: 1. May harbor rats, vermin, or other disease carriers; 2. Is maintained so as to cause an obstruction to the vision of motorists or a hazardous condition to pedestrians or vehicle traffic; 3. Creates a danger or attractive nuisance to the public; 4. Detrimentally affects neighboring properties or property values; or 5. Constitutes a fire hazard. K. Building exteriors, roofs, landscaping, grounds, walls, retaining and crib walls, fences, driveways, parking lots, planters, sidewalks, or walkways which are maintained in such condition so as to become defective, unsightly, cracked or no longer viable; L. The accumulation of dirt, litter, trash, junk, feces, or debris in doorways, adjoining sidewalks, walkways, courtyards, patios, parking lots, planters, landscaped or other areas; M. Any premises upon which there is or is permitted to be, 1. Lumber, building materials, rubble, broken asphalt or concrete, containers, or other similar materials, except where construction is occurring under a valid permit; 2. Junk, solid waste, vegetation, salvage materials, scrap metals, hazardous waste, broken or neglected machinery, dirt or fill material deposited or stored contrary to any law, automobile parts, except within a commercial business lawfully engaged in retail sales; 3. Sinks, fixtures or equipment, appliances or furniture, except lawn furniture in residential yards and new or used furniture lawfully stored or displayed in connection with a valid business engaged in the sale or purchase of the same; 4. Inoperative vehicles, except where permitted by the zoning code. 5. Deteriorated driveways and parking lots, including those Page 6 of 19 1- U containing pot holes, or cracks; 6. Abandoned, broken, unused, neglected or unprotected equipment and machinery, ponds, reservoirs and pools, whether or not the same contains any water or liquid, excavations, abandoned wells, shafts, basements, foundations, or other holes, abandoned refrigerators or other appliances, abandoned motor vehicles, any unsound structure, skateboard ramps, or accumulated lumber, solid waste, junk, or vegetation which may reasonably attract children to such abandoned or neglected conditions; 7. Temporary service bins or construction debris storage bins stored on a public street or on private property, except where permitted by this code; 8. Any garbage can, solid waste container, solid waste, packing box or junk placed or maintained so as to be visible from neighboring properties or the public right -of -way, except for those times scheduled for collection, in accordance with this code; 9. Any property with accumulations of grease, oil, or other hazardous material on paved or unpaved surfaces, driveways, buildings, walls, or fences, or from which any such material flows or seeps on to any public street or other public or private property, or which is likely to seep or migrate into the underground water table; 10. Any front yard, parkway, or landscaped setback area which lacks turf, other planted material, decorative rock, bark, or planted ground cover or covering, so as to cause excessive dust or allow the accumulation of debris; 11. Any condition of vegetation overgrowth which encroaches into, over, or upon any public right -of -way including, without limitation, streets, alleys, or sidewalks, so as to constitute either a danger to the public safety or property or any impediment to public travel; 12. Animals, livestock, poultry, or bees kept, bred, or maintained for any purpose and in violation of this code; 13. Any property, or any building or structure thereon, maintained in such condition so that it is defective, unsightly or in such condition of deterioration or disrepair that it Page 7 of 19 4 L1 > causes or will cause an ascertainable diminution of the property values of surrounding properties or be otherwise materially detrimental to adjacent and nearby properties and improvements; 14. Any building or portion thereof maintained in a manner which constitutes a substandard building pursuant to Health and Safety Code § 17920.3. 7 -1 -5: ABATEMENT AUTHORITY. The city manager, or designee, is authorized to abate public nuisances summarily or otherwise in the manner provided by this chapter. ARTICLE 2: GRAFFITI 7 -1-6: FINDINGS. The City Council finds as follows: A. Graffiti on either public or private property, results in blight, decreases property values and deprives surrounding residents and owners of the right to comfortable enjoyment of life and property. B. Graffiti is obnoxious, constitutes a public nuisance, and is a threat to public safety which must be abated to prevent its proliferation. C. Graffiti must be removed as quickly as possible to minimize harm to persons and property in the community. D. This article is intended to be complementary to, and not in conflict with, Penal Code § 594, which provides that any person who maliciously defaces property is guilty of vandalism, and Penal Code § 594.1, which provides that certain activities involving the possession, sale and use of aerosol paint containers are misdemeanors. 7 -1 -7: POSSESSION PROHIBITED. It is unlawful for any person to mark, apply, or etch graffiti on any structure located on public or private real property within the city. 7 -1-8: POSSESSION BY MINORS. It is unlawful for any minor to possess any graffiti implement while on public or private property without the consent of the property owner, or the person in lawful possession or control of the property. Any law enforcement officer who observes a violation of this section may take immediate possession of the graffiti implements. 7 -1 -9: POSSESSION IN DESIGNATED PUBLIC PLACES. Except as may be authorized by the city manager, or designee, no person may possess any graffiti Page 8 of 19 1 t) r i implement while on any property owned or operated by the city. 7 -1 -10: POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DEFACE, MARK OR DAMAGE PROPERTY. It is unlawful for any person to possess any graffiti implement for the purpose of defacing, marking, or damaging any public or private property without the express consent of the property owner or the person in lawful possession or control of the property. 7 -1 -11: PARENTAL LIABILITY. Any parent or other legal guardian of a minor is personally liable for any and all graffiti removal costs associated with graffiti caused by the minor. This section does not limit the amount of recovery against the parent or other legal guardian for their own common law negligence. 7 -1 -12: ACCESSIBILITY TO GRAFFITI IMPLEMENTS. A. It is unlawful for any person to sell, give, or otherwise furnish any graffiti implement to any minor without the consent of the minor's parent or legal guardian. Evidence that a person, his or her employee, or agent, demanded and was shown bona fide evidence of majority and acted upon such evidence of majority in a transaction or sale is a defense to any criminal prosecution. B. It is unlawful for any person to sell, permit to be sold, offer for sale, or display for sale any graffiti implement by means of self - service merchandising or by means other than vendor - assisted sales. 7 -1 -13: AUTHORIZATION TO REMOVE. Graffiti may be removed by any of the following methods: A. Wherever the city manager, or designee, determines that graffiti, as defined in this subchapter, is located on public or privately owned property within the city so as to be capable of being viewed by a person utilizing any public right -of -way in the city, the city manager is authorized to provide for the removal of the graffiti upon the following conditions: If the graffiti is located on property owned by the city, the city manager, or designee, may immediately remove the graffiti by any practicable means. 2. If graffiti is located on property owned by a public entity, graffiti removal is authorized only after securing the consent of the public entity having jurisdiction over the property and such entity executes a release and waiver, approved as to form by the city attorney, and agrees to an assumption of costs incurred by the city for the removal of the graffiti. ' Page 9 of 19 `. 0 4 3. Except as provided below, where a structure is privately owned, the removal of graffiti may be authorized only after securing the consent of the owner and the owner having executed a release and waiver approved as to form by the city attorney. B. Graffiti located on privately owned structures or privately owned real property in the city and which can be viewed by a person utilizing any public right -of -way within the city may be removed by the city at the owner's expense as a public nuisance. This section applies under the following circumstances: 1. The private property owner persuaded, allowed or encouraged the graffiti problem; 2. The private property owner's consent cannot be obtained; or 3. The city manager determines that the removal of graffiti or other inscribed material from a privately owned property exceeded three (3) occurrences per privately owned real property during one calendar year. 7 -1 -14: NOTICE TO ABATE GRAFFITI. Whenever the city manager, or designee, determines that graffiti is located on privately owned structures or privately owned real property in the city in violation of this chapter, the city manager, or designee, may abate such public nuisance in the manner set forth in article 3 of this chapter. 7 -1 -15: RECOVERY OF COSTS FROM LAND OWNER. The costs of graffiti abatement may be recovered as set forth in article 3 of this chapter. 7 -1 -16: FAILURE TO REMOVE GRAFFITI UPON NOTICE. In addition to any graffiti removal costs incurred by the city for the abatement of graffiti from private property, failure to voluntarily abate graffiti after notification will result in the penalties set out in this chapter. 7 -1 -17: RECOVERY OF COSTS FROM MINOR OR PARENT OR GUARDIAN. A. If the city manager, or designee, abates graffiti in accord with this chapter, the city may recover the graffiti removal costs by making such costs a lien against the property of the minor creating, causing, or committing the nuisance. Further, such costs may be recovered against the property of the parent or guardian having custody or control of the minor up to and including the sum of t/ o Page 10 of 19 $25,000. B. For the purposes of this section, the terms "expense of abatement," "graffiti" and "minor" have the same meaning set forth in Government Code § 38772. C. The cost recovery procedures against the property of a minor or a parent or guardian of the minor are the same as set forth in article 3. D. The graffiti removal costs are also a personal obligation of the minor and his or her parent or legal guardian. 7 -1 -18: COMMUNITY SERVICE. A. After the conviction of any person for violation of this article, or any state law pertaining to vandalism of property with a graffiti implement, the city may petition the sentencing court to impose community service time, pursuant to Penal Code § 640.6. The sentencing court may require the performance of community service within the city in addition to any monetary penalties imposed. In the event the sentencing court approves community service, the city will request any adult or emancipated minor convicted of vandalism, as defined by Penal Code § 594(a)(1), to: 1. Complete a minimum of 24 hours, but not more than 48 hours, of community services cleaning up, removing and repairing property damaged by graffiti for the first conviction; and 2. Complete 48 hours, but not more than 96 hours of community services cleaning up, removing, and repairing property damaged by graffiti for each subsequent conviction. B. Any minor violating any provision of this subchapter or any state law pertaining to vandalism of property with a graffiti implement who is found to be a person described in Welfare & Institutions Code § 602 by reason of the commission of vandalism, may be required to perform community service time pursuant to Welfare & Institutions Code § 742.16. For any minor adjudicated guilty of vandalism, the city will petition the juvenile court and the court may, in addition to any other penalties imposed by the city, require the unemancipated minor to provide the necessary labor to clean up, repair, or replace defaced, damaged or destroyed property, or otherwise make restitution to the property owner. 0 9- Page 11 of 19 C. If a minor is personally unable to pay any fine levied for violating any provision of this article or is otherwise unable to make restitution for damages, the minor's parent or legal guardian are liable for payment of the fine or restitution. If the parent or legal guardian cannot make restitution, the sentencing court may waive payment of the fine or community service time by the parent or legal guardian upon finding good cause. If the sentencing court waives payment of the fine by the parent or legal guardian, the city will petition the sentencing court, and the court, at the court's option, may order the parent or legal guardian to provide the necessary labor, equal to the number of hours assigned to the minor adjudicated guilty of violating any provision of this subchapter, to clean up, repair, or replace property damaged by the unemancipated minor. 7 -1 -19: SUSPENSION OR DELAY OF DRIVING PRIVILEGES. For each conviction of a person aged 13 to 21 for violating this article, or any state law pertaining to vandalism of property with a graffiti implement, the city may petition the sentencing court to suspend driving privileges or delay the issuance of driving privileges in accordance with Vehicle Code § 13202.6. 7 -1 -20: PENALTY. A. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter for which no other penalty is otherwise provided is guilty of a misdemeanor. B. Any person failing to remove graffiti within the prescribed time period is guilty of an infraction and may be punished with a fine of $100 for a first conviction, $300 for the second conviction, and $500 for each subsequent violation. ARTICLE 3: NUISANCE ABATEMENT PROCEDURES 7 -1 -21: ABATEMENT OF NUISANCE. All or any part of a use or the condition of any property, including, without limitation, any use, or improvement, found to constitute a public nuisance, will be abated by rehabilitation, demolition, repair, cessation of use or a combination thereof, or in such other manner as designated in a nuisance abatement order, which is reasonably required to abate the public nuisance, pursuant to the procedures set forth in this article. 7 -1 -22: RESPONSIBILITY FOR ABATEMENT. Whenever the city manager, or designee, reasonably believes a public nuisance exists, the city manager, or designee, may commence abatement proceedings under this article. 7 -1 -23: NOTICE OF HEARINGS FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT. Page 12 of 19 A. Notices. To initiate abatement proceedings, the city manager, or designee, will cause written notice to be mailed and conspicuously posted on the property containing a nuisance. Notice will be titled in letters at least one inch in height and read substantially as follows: Notice of Public Nuisance Hearing On , 20 , the City of El Segundo will determine whether this property known and designated as , constitutes a public nuisance. If this property is found to constitute a public nuisance as defined by the El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC "), and if the public nuisance is not promptly abated by the responsible person as ordered by the hearing officer, then the City will abate the nuisance. If the City abates the nuisance, the cost of these proceedings, all previous code enforcement efforts concerning this condition of the property, and the cleaning, clearing, rehabilitation, repair, or demolition by the City will constitute a special assessment and a Nuisance Abatement Lien upon such land until paid. The City may foreclose on any such lien in order to reimburse the City for these costs. The alleged violations consist of the following: The methods of abatement available are: All persons having any objection to, or interest in, said matters should attend a hearing to be conducted by the City Manager or designee, to be held at on , at the hour of m., when their testimony and evidence will be heard and given due consideration. Dated: Department Officer B. Mailing /posting. Notice of the hearing will be served by posting the subject property and by registered or certified mail (postage fully prepaid) addressed to the owner of the property at the address appearing on the last equalized assessment roll or the supplemental roll, whichever is more current before the hearing notice is mailed. The notice will be posted on the property and mailed at least ten days before the hearing date. Proof of posting and mailing will be by declaration. Failure of any person to receive the notice will not affect the validity of any set forth in this chapter. 7 -1 -24: HEARING PROCEDURE. A. The hearing must be conducted by a hearing officer selected by the city manager. At the time set for such hearing, the hearing officer r, . j 6- IL Page 13 of 19 will conduct a hearing to determine, based upon the evidence presented, whether a public nuisance exists on the subject property. At the hearing, the hearing officer will accept reliable evidence from any person if such evidence bears on the issue of whether a public nuisance exists on the subject property. The hearing officer is authorized to take testimony and is authorized to administer oaths or affirmations under the Code of Civil Procedure § 2093(a). Based upon the evidence submitted including, without limitation, any written staff reports regarding the alleged nuisance, the hearing officer will determine whether or not a public nuisance exists on the subject property. B. As soon as is practicable following the close of such hearing, the hearing officer will render a decision on the matter. If a public nuisance is found to exist, the hearing officer will issue an order requiring the abatement of the public nuisance in a reasonable time and manner as set forth in the order. The hearing officer will promptly give written notice to the responsible person and any other interested person who requests, in writing, notice of such decision, including, a copy of the order. The order issued by the hearing officer will be deemed a final order and may be judicially reviewed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 1094.6. There is no right to a city council appeal. 7 -1 -25: COMPLIANCE WITH ABATEMENT ORDER. At no cost to the City, the responsible person will comply with all of the provisions of an abatement order. If the responsible person fails, for any reason, to comply with an abatement order within the time required in the order, the city manager, or designee, will cause the nuisance described in the abatement order to be abated by city forces or by private contractor. The city attorney is authorized to take such action as needed to gain entry upon the property where the public nuisance exists for purposes of abating a public nuisance. 7 -1 -26: CITY EXPENSES: RECORD OF COSTS. The department director or designee will keep an account of the costs, including incidental expenses, of abating nuisance on each separate lot or parcel of land where the work is done. 7 -1 -27: HEARING ON THE COST OF ABATEMENT. A. The department director or designee will give notice of the cost of abatement by registered or certified mail (postage fully prepaid) addressed to the owner of the property at the address appearing on the last equalized assessment roll or the supplemental roll, whichever is more current before mailing of the cost notice. The cost notice will include a statement of the hearing rights of the property owner concerning the cost of abatement. Upon written Page 14 of 19 request for a hearing by the property owner received by the city manager within ten (10) days after mailing the cost notice, a hearing will be held by the city manager, or designee, on the question of the cost of the abatement. B. Notice of the hearing will be mailed at least ten (10) days before the hearing by registered or certified mail, to the owner of the land. The city manager or designee will either confirm the cost of abatement or modify such amount. The decision of the city manager or designee is final. The city manager or designee will give notice of the decision on the cost of abatement by registered or certified mail to the property owner. 7 -1 -28: NUISANCE ABATEMENT LIEN AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES. A. Lien. Pursuant to Government Code §§ 38773, 38773. 1, and 38773.5, and any successor statutes, persons failing to abate a public nuisance as ordered pursuant to this chapter, will be obligated to pay all city expenses of abating the nuisance and all administrative costs associated therewith. A nuisance abatement lien in favor of the city for such expenses of the city will be created and recorded, pursuant to this section, against the property on which the nuisance is maintained. The lien will specify the amount of the lien, the name of the city, the date of the abatement order, the street address, legal description and assessor's parcel number of the parcel on which the lien is imposed, and the name and address of the recorded owner of the parcel. B. Notice of proposed recordings. Notice will be sent by certified mail at least ten (10) days before recording the lien, an itemized notice of the lien amount and proposed recording will be sent by certified mail to the property owner of record of the parcel of land on which the nuisance was abated by the city, based on the last equalized assessment roll or the supplemental roll, whichever is more current before recordation of the lien. The notice will be served in the same manner as a summons in a civil action in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §§ 415.10, et seq. If the owner of record, after diligent search, cannot be found, the notice may be served by posting a copy thereof in a conspicuous place upon the property for a period of ten (10) days, and publication thereof in a newspaper of general circulation published in the county in which the property is located. C. Recording. The city's nuisance abatement lien will then be recorded in the Ventura County Recorder's Office, and from the Page 15 of 19 date of recording, will have the force, effect, and priority of a judgment lien. D. Special Assessment. The city's total costs described in this article may also be collected as a special assessment against the lot or parcel on which the nuisance existed. After recordation of the nuisance abatement lien the city may provide a copy of the notice of proposed recordation, proof of service, and the recorded lien to the tax collector and the tax collector will add the described special assessment payments to the next regular tax bill levied against the respective lots or parcels and the amounts will be collected and subject to the same penalties and the same procedure under foreclosure and sale as in the case of tax delinquencies. However, if any real property to which the cost of abatement relates has been transferred or conveyed to a bona fide purchaser for value, or if a lien of a bona fide encumbrance for value has been created and attached thereon, before the date on which the first installment of the taxes would become delinquent, then the cost of abatement will not result in a lien against the real property but instead will be transferred to the unsecured roll for collection. E. Satisfaction. In the event that the lien or special assessment is discharged, released, or satisfied, either through payment or foreclosure, a notice of the discharge containing the information specified in the lien will be recorded by the city. F. Fees. Any fees incurred by the city for processing, recording of the lien and providing notice to the property owner may be recovered by the city as part of its foreclosure action to enforce the lien. 7 -1 -29: ORDER FOR TREBLE COSTS OF ABATEMENT. Upon entry of a second or subsequent civil or criminal judgment within a two (2) year period finding that an owner of property is responsible for a condition that may be abated in accordance with this article, except conditions abated pursuant to Health and Safety Code § 17980, the court may order the owner to pay treble the costs of the abatement. 7 -1 -30: JUDICIAL REMEDIES. A. Nothing in this chapter will be deemed to prevent the city attorney from: Commencing a civil action in the superior court to enforce all or any of the provisions of any abatement order; 2. Commencing a civil action to abate a public nuisance as an Page 16 of 19 a j �I alternative to or in conjunction with an administrative proceeding pursuant to this chapter; 3. Filing a civil action to recover the amount of a confirmed accounting from an owner or occupant of the lot to which it relates; or 4. Filing a criminal action to enforce this Code. B. Where a civil action is filed, if the court issues an order or a judgment which finds a public nuisance to exist, and orders or approves the abatement of the public nuisance, or where the court validates an accounting, the court will also award the city its actual costs of abatement, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by the city in such judicial proceeding. 7 -1 -31: EMERGENCY ABATEMENT. Notwithstanding any other provision of this code, whenever the city manager, or designee, determines that a public nuisance, as defined in this chapter, or in any other applicable law, exists upon a lot, and that such public nuisance constitutes an immediate threat or hazard or danger to persons or property, the city manager, without observing procedures set forth in this chapter with reference to public nuisance abatement, will forthwith immediately cause the abatement of such public nuisance in such manner as the city manager, or designee, determines is reasonably required. If the city manager, or designee, deems it feasible, the city manager, or designee, will attempt to give the owner and occupant, verbal notice of the existence of the public nuisance, and the proposed timing and method of abatement thereof. The city manager will, forthwith, report such circumstances to the city council. Where such abatement is ordered by the city manager, person abating such nuisance will, after completing the abatement of the public nuisance, comply with the provisions of this chapter." SECTION 3: Repeal of any provision of the ESMC, or any other City resolution or ordinance herein will not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before, this Ordinance's effective date. Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance. SECTION 4: 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 5: 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 Page 17 of 19 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 6: This Ordinance will take effect on the 31st day following its final passage and adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2007. ATTEST: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk / / APPROVED 0 T Mark D. HenWbvA By: -v , K r1 FV Berger, M 7- / stant City Attorney Page 18 of 19 Kelly McDowell, Mayor r, 1,,. 4w1() 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 , 2007, 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 2007, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Page 19 of 19 `' EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to receive and file report on Recreational Vehicle (RV) parking within the city and survey of other cities regarding RV parking (Fiscal Impact: None) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Receive and file report. 2) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: At the June 19, 2007 meeting, staff was directed to research and report back to Council regarding RV parking codes within the city and survey other cities' codes concerning RV parking. The El Segundo Police Department typically utilizes two Municipal Code Statutes related to Recreational Vehicle (RV) parking as listed below: 8 -5 -6: PARKING TIME LIMITS: A. Seventy Two Hours: No person who owns or has possession, custody or control of any vehicle shall park the vehicle upon any street or alley for more than a consecutive period of seventy two (72) hours. (Vehicles in violation of this law may be towed) B. Forty Eight Hours For Certain Vehicles: Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, it is unlawful for any person to park or stand any trailer, camp car or any other similar type of equipment owned, operated or controlled by such person, in or upon any public street, court, drive, alley or other public place in the City formore than forty eight (48) consecutive hours within any period of seven (7) days. (Ord. 659, 3 -13 -1967) (Vehicles in violation of this law may be cited) (Continued) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Survey regarding RV Parking in other South Bay Cities FISCAL IMPACT: NONE Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: ORIGI TED DATE: D ' in ief of Police REVIEWED DATE: Jeff �4WXrt, City Manager 3 1-lU BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION (continued) Police Department personnel typically mark RV's, trailers, and all other vehicles as part of their routine duties. Vehicles are normally marked with yellow chalk on the tire and a card is left for the registered owner denoting the date and time the marking occurred. A secondary card is kept in the Watch Commander's Office indicating the location of the vehicle /RV in question, where it was marked, the officer or cadet who marked it and when it is eligible for a citation (after 48 hours) and impound (after 72 hours). If the vehicle, trailer or RV is a habitual parking problem, less obvious markings may be used and warning cards may not be left. All South bay cities, including El Segundo, have Municipal Code sections which address parking on public streets. California Vehicle Code § 22651(k) authorizes a peace officer or parking control officer to impound a vehicle parked on a public street for more than 72 hours, providing there is local ordinance prohibiting such parking. See Attached survey regarding parking enforcement and related ordinances. 219 Attachment The Cities of Manhattan Beach, Hermosa Beach, and Redondo Beach all have ordinances, which prohibit parking for more than 72 consecutive hours on any public street or alley. These cities do not have an ordinance, which prohibit parking of RV's, camp cars, or trailers for more than 48 hours. Manhattan Beach - 14.36.060 Use of streets for storage of vehicles prohibited. No person who owns or has possession, custody or control of any vehicle shall park such vehicle upon any street or alley for more than a consecutive period of seventy -two (72) hours. Hermosa Beach - 10.32. 120 Parking in Excess of Seventy -two Consecutive Hours Prohibited. No person who owns or has possession, custody or control of any vehicle shall park such vehicle upon any street or alley or public parking lot for more than a consecutive period of seventy -two (72) hours. (Prior code § 19 -65) Redondo Beach - 3- 7.1313 Storage of vehicles on streets and alleys. It shall be unlawful for any person who owns or has possession, custody, or control of any vehicle to park such vehicle upon any street or alley for more than seventy -two (72) hours in the aggregate during any period of seventy -three (73) consecutive hours. (§ 74, Ord. 1539 c.s., as amended by § 1, Ord. 1828 c.s., eff. April 1, 1964) The City of Hawthorne has a 48 hour and 72 parking statute, which is similar to the City of El Segundo with slight variations. Hawthorne - 10.36.190 Use of streets for parking and /or storage of certain large vehicles, including recreational vehicles and house car, prohibited. A. Definitions. For the purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. 1. "Camper" means a structure designed to be mounted upon a motor vehicle and to provide facilities for human habitation or camping purposes. 2. "Chief of police" means the chief of police of the city of Hawthorne or his designee. 220 Attachment 3. "House car" means a motor vehicle originally designed, or permanently altered, and equipped for human habitation, or to which a camper has been permanently attached. 4. "Large motor vehicle" means any house car, pick up truck with camper, recreational vehicle or other vehicle that measures more than twenty - two feet in length, or is both more than eighty -four inches in width and more than eighty -four inches in height. The term "large motor vehicle" does not include a commercial vehicle as defined in Section 10.36.060, pick -up truck without a camper or sports utility vehicle. 5. "Non- motorized vehicle" means any trailer or any other device that is not self - propelled. 6. "Motor vehicle" means a passenger vehicle, pick -up truck without a camper, sports utility vehicle, motorcycle and motor -driven cycle but shall not include a house car. 7. "Recreational vehicle" means a motor vehicle designed for human habitation, camping, or recreational purposes. 8. "Residential district" means any area within the city that is zoned Rl, R2, R3 or R4. B. Measurements. To determine the width or length of the vehicles defined in this section, any extension to the vehicle caused by mirrors, air conditioners, or similar attachments shall not be included. C. Prohibited. No person shall, at any time, park or leave standing any large motor vehicle or non - motorized vehicle on any public street, highway or alley except 1. In residential districts, large motor vehicles, or nonmotorized vehicles attached to a motor vehicle, which are parked in the public street are allowed for the purposes of loading, unloading, cleaning, battery- charging, or other activity preparatory or incidental to travel for a period of time not to exceed forty -eight consecutive hours. 2. In residential districts, large motor vehicles, or nonmotorized vehicles attached to a motor vehicle, which are parked to the in the public street may be allowed for up to an additional twenty -four consecutive hours, but no more than a total of seventy -two consecutive hours, provided an extension has been granted by the chief of police. The request for an extension must be made - at least three city business (working) days in advance of the beginning of the extension period. The chief of police shall establish general standards for an 221 Attachment extension provided by this section. (Ord. 1851 § 1, 2006; Ord. 1841 § 1, 2006: Ord. 1837 § 1, 2006). The City of Lawndale has a 72 hour statute and recently passed an ordinance regarding Non - Resident RV parking. Their new ordinance only allows non- residents to park RV's on any public street for two hours. However, non- residents may obtain a parking permit for RV's. A resident may obtain a 7 day parking permit for a guest at no cost, if the RV is parked within 200 feet of the applicant's residence. Lawndale - 10.16.080 Removal of vehicles. The county sheriff or city municipal services officers shall remove to a safe place every vehicle which has been parked or left seventy -two or more consecutive hours without being moved under its own power more than one -half mile (two thousand six hundred forty feet). (Ord. 824 -97 § 2 (part)) ORDINANCE NO. 988 -07 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAWNDALE, CALIFORNIA, PROHIBITING NON - RESIDENTS FROM PARKING RECREATIONAL VEHICLES ON CITY STREETS WITHOUT A CITY - ISSUED VISITOR PERMIT SUMMARY: This ordinance would prohibit the parking of recreational vehicles owned by people who do not reside within the city on city streets, other than a visitor with a permit. WHEREAS, Califomia Vehicle Code Section 22507(a) authorizes cities to prohibit or restrict the stopping, parking, or standing of vehicles; and WHEREAS, 22507(a) also authorizes cities to give preferential parking privileges to residents and their guests, such as exempting residents and their guests from a prohibition or restriction on the stopping, parking, or standing of vehicles, and to memorialize such exemption from the prohibition or restriction by issuing a permit to the exempted parties; and WHEREAS, any restrictions on the stopping, parking or standing of vehicles cannot be enforced until signs or markings giving adequate notice of such restrictions have been placed where the restrictions will be applied as required by State law; and 222 Attachment WHEREAS, Lawndale Municipal Code ( "LMC') Chapter 10.08 establishes standards for the "Stopping, Standing and Parking" of motor vehicles within the City of Lawndale ( "City'); and WHEREAS, the lack of parking within the City creates health and safety concerns for residents who desire to park their vehicles in locations that are safe and near their homes; and WHEREAS, people who do not reside within the City and are not the guest of a resident of the City park recreational vehicles on public streets within the City, thereby depriving City residents of much needed parking spaces; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to prohibit people who do not live within the City and who are not a guest of a resident of the City from parking recreational vehicles on public streets within the City without a City- issued permit; and WHEREAS, the City Council, after notice duly given, held a public hearing on Monday, March 19, 2007 and on Monday, April 2, 2007 at 6:30 p.m., in the City Hall Council Chamber located at 14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale, California, to consider this matter; and any and all written comments received prior to the public hearing, staff's report and responses to such public comments, were reviewed and considered by the City Council; and all persons appearing in favor of or in opposition to this matter were given the opportunity to be heard in connection with said matter. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAWNDALE, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 10.08.025 is hereby added to the Lawndale Municipal Code to read as follows: "10.08.025 Prohibition on Non - Resident's Parking Recreational Vehicles Within the City; Exceptions. No person who does not reside within the city may park or stand or permit to remain for longer than a period of two (2) hours on any street or highway or public alley or on a parkway area between curb and sidewalk a recreational vehicle, as that term is defined in Health and Safety Code Section 18010, unless the owner of such recreational vehicle has obtained a city- issued recreational parking permit and said permit is displayed in the front window of the vehicle in a manner that is visible from the roadway or adjacent parkway. 223 Attachment A. Provision of Permits. When a city resident has a guest with a recreational vehicle staying at the resident's home, the resident may obtain a city- issued recreational parking permit from the city's municipal services department at no cost to the resident. Each permit shall be valid for seven days, commencing on the date that is stamped on the permit by city staff. Each city household shall be eligible to obtain two (2) city- issued recreational parking permits within any calendar year. B. Use of Permit. A recreational vehicle permittee must park its temporarily permitted vehicle within two hundred (200) feet of the residence of its city -host and shall comply with all other parking rules and regulations issued by the city and state. C. Revocation of Permit. No recreational vehicle permit may be given, sold or otherwise used by anyone other than the person identified on the application pursuant to which the permit was issued, nor may any permit be altered or reproduced." SECTION 2. City staff is directed to arrange for the acquisition and posting of signs to give adequate notice of the prohibition adopted by this ordinance prior to the issuance of citations for the violation of this ordinance. SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of any competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance, and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of and the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption, and within fifteen (15) days after its final passage, the City Clerk shall cause it to be published in a newspaper of general circulation and shall post the same in three locations. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of April, 2007. Harold E. Hofmann, Mayor 224 Attachment ATTEST. State of California ) County of Los Angeles ) SS City of Lawndale ) 1, Paula Hartwill, City Clerk of the City of Lawndale, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 988 -07 was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 19th day of March, 2007, and was duly approved and adopted at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 2nd day of April, 2007, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Mayor Harold Hofmann, Mayor Pro Tem Robert Pullen- Miles, Councilman Larry Rudolph, Councilmember Jim Ramsey, Councilmember Virginia Rhodes NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Paula Hartwill, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Tiffany J. Israel, City Attorney 2t"-) . i Attachment Torrance - ARTICLE 12 - OVERSIZED VEHICLES AND TRAILERS (Added by 0 -3686) The City of Torrance recently passed an ordinance specifically related to oversized vehicles and RV's. Residents may register their RV or oversized vehicle with the city for a one time $25.00 fee. This entitles the resident 96 days of parking on public streets per year not to exceed three consecutive days. The resident must also notify the Torrance Police Department's Traffic Division in advance the dates the RV will be parked. Non - residents may also apply for a 3 day parking permit for a $25.00 fee. Violations of this ordinance are considered an infraction and violators may be cited, towed or both. SECTION 61.12.010. DEFINITIONS. The following definitions will govern the construction of the words and phrases used in this Article: "Oversized Vehicle" shall mean any vehicle, as defined by Section 670 of the California Vehicle Code, or combination of vehicles, which exceeds twenty (20) feet in length, seven (7) feet in width, or eight (8) feet in height, exclusive of projecting lights or devices allowed by Section 35109 or 35110 of the California Vehicle Code, as may be amended. Oversized Vehicle does not include pickup trucks or sport utility vehicles, which are less than twenty -five (25) feet in length and eighty -two (82) inches in height. "Trailer" shall mean a trailer, semi trailer, camp trailer (including tent trailers), unmounted camper, or trailer coach as defined in Sections 242, 243, 550, 630, 635, and 636 of the California Vehicle Code, or fifth -wheel travel trailer, as defined in Section 324 of the Vehicle Code. SECTION 61.12.020. PARKING OF OVERSIZED VEHICLES AND TRAILERS. a) No person shall park or leave standing any Oversized Vehicle upon any public street or highway in the City. b) No person shall park or leave standing any Trailer, regardless of length or width, upon any public street or highway in the City. SECTION 61.12.030. EXCEPTIONS. The prohibitions contained in Section 61.12.020 shall not apply to any of the following: a) Oversized Vehicles or Trailers for which an Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit has been issued for a resident or an out -of -town visitor, in accordance with Section 61.12.050; 2 2 G Attachment b) Any Oversized Vehicle or Trailers displaying a valid Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permit issued pursuant to Section 61.12.090; c) Oversized Vehicles or Trailers parked or left standing as a result of a mechanical breakdown so as to allow the performance of emergency repairs on the vehicle for a period not to exceed seventy -two (72) hours; d) Commercial vehicles making pickups or delivery of goods, wares or merchandise, or while providing services to a residence, including, but not limited to, yard maintenance, pool care and maintenance, repair and construction services; e) Tow trucks and similar vehicles that are in the course of providing services; t) Public or utility vehicles and trailers that are in the course of providing services; g) Any public emergency vehicle. SECTION 61.12.035. REGISTRATION OF OVERSIZED VEHICLES OR TRAILERS. a) Each person registering an Oversized Vehicle or Trailer with the City must file with the City a completed application containing the following: 1) The name, address, and phone number of the registered owner of designated Oversized Vehicle or Trailer, 2) The name, address, and phone number of the applicant for the permit; 3) Proof of residency: a) Acceptable proof of residency must be current and must include the following: California Driver's License or California Identification Card and one of the following: Property Tax Bill or Public Utility Bill (telephone bills are not acceptable); 4) The registration from the California Department of Motor Vehicles for the Oversized Vehicle or Trailer that shows the Oversized Vehicle or Trailer is registered in the City of Torrance; 5) The license number, make, and model of designated Oversized Vehicle or Trailer; 6) Additional information the Police Department may require; The applicant must sign the application under penalty of perjury. b) The City will issue Oversized Vehicle Resident Registration Stickers to people who meet the requirements listed above. The Oversized Vehicle Resident Registration Stickers will be displayed on the street side of the bumper of an Oversized Vehicle or the bumper area of a Trailer so it is clearly visible from the street, which is usually the left side. SECTION 61.12.037. OVERSIZED VEHICLE RESIDENT REGISTRATION STICKERS — FEES. Oversized Vehicle Resident Registration Stickers will be issued upon payment of a fee that will be set by resolution of the City Council. SECTION 61.12.040. OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING PERMITS. 2�7 Attachment a) The purpose of authorizing the issuance of Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits is to give owners of Oversized Vehicles and Trailers the opportunity, for a limited time, to park the Oversized Vehicle or Trailer on a public street or highway directly in front of (or the side of the property if it is a comer lot) their residence, and to allow an out -of -town visitor who owns an Oversized Vehicle or Trailer to park on a public street or highway directly in front of (or the side of the property if it is a comer lot) the residence which the out -of -town visitor is visiting for a limited time period. b) A resident with an Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit who does not park their Oversized Vehicle or Trailer on a public street or highway directly in front of (or the side of the property if it is a comer lot) their residence will be subject to citation, towing, or both. c) An out -of -town visitor with an Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit who does not park their Oversized Vehicle or Trailer on a public street or highway directly in front of (or the side of the property if it is a comer lot) the residence which the out -of -town visitor is visiting will be subject to citation, towing, or both. SECTION 61.12.050. OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING PERMITS — ISSUANCE OF PERMITS. a) This subsection shall apply to Oversized Vehicles and Trailers that are registered with the City of Ton-ance. 1) The Police Chief or designee, is authorized to issue Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits, pursuant to the following: A) Each person desiring an Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit shall file with the Torrance Police Department a completed City application form containing the following: 1. The name, address, and phone number of the registered owner of designated Oversized Vehicle or Trailer; 2. The name, address, and phone number of the applicant for the permit; 3. Proof of residency: 1) Acceptable proof of residency must be current and must include the following: California Driver's License or California Identification Card and one of the following: Property Tax Bill or Public Utility Bill (telephone bills are not acceptable); 4. The registration from the California Department of Motor Vehicles for the Oversized Vehicle or Trailer that shows the Oversized Vehicle or Trailer is registered in the City of Torrance; 5. The license number, make, and model of designated Oversized Vehicle or Trailer; 6. The dates for which the permit is requested; 7. The dates and duration of any and all Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits issued to the applicant within the immediately preceding ninety (90) day period; 8. Additional information the Police Department may require; 9. The applicant must sign the application under penalty of perjury. W141 Attachment 2) Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits issued and approved by the Police Department shall include the license plate number of the designated Oversized Vehicle or Trailer, the date of issuance, and the day of its expiration. 3) Permits shall be displayed in the lower driver's side of the windshield or nearest window of the Oversized Vehicle for which it has been issued so that it is clearly visible from the exterior of the vehicle. Permits shall be displayed on the side of the Trailer for which it has been issued so that it is visible from the street, which is usually the left side of the Trailer. 4) The Police Chief or his designee is authorized to set up an oversized vehicle parking permit call -in phone number or intemet processing system. b) This subsection shall apply to Oversized Vehicles and Trailers that are not registered with the City (out -of -town visitor permits). 1) The Police Chief or designee, is authorized to issue Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits, pursuant to the following: 2) Each person desiring an Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit shall file with the Torrance Police Department a completed City application form containing the following: A) The name, address, and phone number of the registered owner of designated Oversized Vehicle or Trailer; 8) The name, address, and phone number of the applicant for the permit; C) The registration from the California Department of Motor Vehicles, or equivalent agency in another state, for the Oversized Vehicle or Trailer; D) The name, address, and phone number of the resident that is being visited; E) The license number, make, and model of designated Oversized Vehicle or Trailer; F) The dates for which the permit is requested; G) The dates and duration of any and all Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits issued to the applicant during the current calendar year; H) The dates and duration of any and all Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits issued to the resident being visited during the current calendar year; 1) Additional information the Police Department may require; J) The applicant must sign the application under penalty of perjury; K) Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits issued and approved by the Police Department shall include the license plate number of the designated Oversized Vehicle or Trailer, the date of issuance, and the day of its expiration. 3) Permits shall be displayed in the lower driver's side of the windshield or nearest window of the Oversized Vehicle for which it has been issued so that it is clearly visible from the exterior of the vehicle. Permits shall be displayed on the side of the Trailer for which it has been issued so that it is visible from the street, which is usually the left side of the Trailer. 4) The Police Chief or his designee is authorized to set up an Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit call -in phone number or intemet processing system. SECTION 61.12.060. OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING PERMITS — DURATION. 229 Attachment a) For Oversized Vehicles and Trailers registered with the City: 1) An Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit shall be valid for a period not to exceed twenty -four (24) hours. An Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit will be valid from 12:00 P.M. one (1) day until 11:59 A.M. the next day. Upon expiration of the permit, the applicant may apply for and be granted additional Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits if the applicant still qualifies under the conditions set forth in this Article. An applicant may request no more than three (3) consecutive Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits (a total of seventy -two (72) hours of parking to load and unload) at one time. In no event shall any person residence and /or designated Oversized Vehicle or Trailer be issued more than twenty -four (24) Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits within any ninety (90) day period and no more than ninety -six (96) Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits in any calendar year. b) For Oversized Vehicles and Trailers that are not registered with the City under subsection (a) above (Out-Of-Town Visitor Permits). 1) An Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit shall be valid for a period not to exceed twenty -four (24) hours. An Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit will be valid from 12:00 P.M. one (1) day until 11:59 A.M. the next day. Upon expiration of the permit, the applicant may apply for and be granted additional Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits if the applicant still qualifies under the conditions set forth in this Article. The Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit (Out -Of -Town Visitor Permits) will be tied to the residence being visited. An applicant may request no more than fourteen (14) consecutive Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits at one time. In no event shall any person, residence and /or designated Oversized Vehicle or Trailer be issued more than thirty (30) Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits in any calendar year. SECTION 61.12.070. OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING ON PUBLIC STREETS. No person shall run electrical cords, extension cords, hoses, cables, or other items across, above or on the parkway or sidewalk from a residential or commercial property to an Oversized Vehicle or Trailer parked on a public street. SECTION 61.12.080. OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING PERMITS — FEES. Oversized Vehicle Parking Permits will be issued upon payment of a fee that will be set by Resolution of the City Council. SECTION 61.12.090. OVERSIZED VEHICLE HANDICAP PARKING PERMITS. a) Purpose. The purpose of authorizing the issuance of Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permits is to allow a handicapped person to park a designated oversized vehicle on a street/highway directly in front of (or the side of the property if it is a comer lot) their residence. 230 Attachment b) Requirements. In order to be eligible to receive an Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permit, the following requirements must be met: 1) The applicant must be entitled to receive a handicapped placard or license plate pursuant to the provisions of the California Vehicle Code; 2) The oversized vehicle is the only vehicle owned by the resident and is required to meet the daily transportation needs of the resident. SECTION 61.12.100. OVERSIZED VEHICLE HANDICAP PARKING PERMITS — ISSUANCE OF PERMITS. a) The Police Chief or designee, is authorized to issue Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permits, pursuant to the following: 1) Each person desiring an Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permit shall file with the Torrance Police Department a completed City application form containing the following: A) The name, address, and phone number of the registered owner and applicant of designated Oversized Vehicle; 8) The license number, make, and model of designated oversized vehicle; C) The year for which the permit is requested; D) The years of any and all previous Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permits issued to the applicant; E) Additional information the Police Department may require; F) The applicant must sign the application under penalty of perjury. 2) Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permits issued and approved by the Police Department shall include the license plate number of the designated Oversized Vehicle, the date of issuance and the day of its expiration. 3) Permits shall be displayed in the lower driver's side of the windshield or nearest window of the vehicle for which it has been issued so that it is clearly visible from the exterior of the vehicle. SECTION 61.12.110. OVERSIZED VEHICLE HANDICAP PARKING PERMITS — DURATION. Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permits shall be valid for a period of one (1) year, so long as the holder thereof meets the requirements of this section relating to such permits. Permits may be renewed on an annual basis. SECTION 61.12.120. OVERSIZED VEHICLE HANDICAP PARKING PERMITS — FEES. Oversized Vehicle Handicap Permits shall be issued without any fees. SECTION 61.12.130. PERMIT DENIAL. A permit must be denied if the Police Chief or designee finds that. 231 Attachment a) The applicant or the person the applicant is visiting is not a bona fide City resident; b) The proposed location is not on a street directly in front of (or the side of the property if it is a comer lot) the residence of the applicant or the person the applicant is visiting; c) The out -of -town visitor is not a guest of the resident; d) Information submitted by the applicant is materially false; or e) If the application is for an Oversized Vehicle Handicap Permit: 1) The applicant is not entitled to receive a handicap placard or license plate under the California Vehicle Code; or 2) The Oversized Vehicle is not the applicant's only vehicle. SECTION 61.12.140. VIOLATION OF ARTICLE. a) Any person who violates any provision in this Article is guilty of an infraction and will be subject to citation, towing, or both. b) Every person who displays a fraudulent, forged, altered, or counterfeit Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit or Permit number with the intent to avoid compliance with this Article is guilty of a misdemeanor. c) Every person who displays a fraudulent, forged, altered, or counterfeit Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permit or Permit number with the intent to avoid compliance with this Article is guilty of a misdemeanor. d) Every person who displays a fraudulent, forged, altered, or counterfeit Oversized Vehicle Resident Registration Sticker with the intent to avoid compliance with this Article is guilty of a misdemeanor. e) Every person who forges, alters, or counterfeits an Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit, an Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permit, or an Oversized Vehicle Resident Registration Sticker is guilty of a misdemeanor. t) Every person who parks or leaves standing an Oversized Vehicle or Trailer on a public street or highway without a valid Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit or a valid Oversized Vehicle Handicap Parking Permit is guilty of an infraction and will be subject to citation, towing, or both. g) Every person who parks or leaves standing an Oversized Vehicle or Trailer on a public street or highway without a valid City of Torrance Resident Registration Sticker, except visitors with a valid Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit, is guilty of an infraction and will be subject to citation, towing, or both. 61.12.140 SECTION 61.12.150. STATE OF EMERGENCY. The prohibitions in this Article shall not apply to the parking of any oversized vehicle during the pendency of any state of emergency declared to exist within the City of Torrance by the City Council. SECTION 61.12.160. APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS. 2 32 Attachment a) The prohibitions in this Article will apply at all times, or at those times specified, except when it is necessary to stop a vehicle to avoid conflict with other traffic or to comply with the directions of a police officer or official traffic control device. b) The time limitations on standing or parking in this Article will not relieve any person from the duty to observe other and more restrictive provisions of the California Vehicle Code or the Torrance Municipal Code prohibiting or limiting the standing or parking of vehicles in specified places or at specified times. c) Nothing in this Article will be construed to permit vehicle habitation on a public street as prohibited by Section 61.6.31 of the Torrance Municipal Code. 233 TO THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS & BOARDS AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding the announcement of the appointment of candidates to the Recreation and Parks Commission, Library Board of Trustees and Senior Citizen Housing Corporation Board. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Recommendation - (1) Announce the appointees to the Recreation and Parks Commission, Library Board of Trustees and Senior Citizen Housing Corporation Board, if any; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: Committee /Commission and Board # of Openings Appointee(s) Term Expired Recreation and Parks Commission 1 05/30/07 Library Board of Trustees 2 06/30/07 Senior Citizen Housing Corp Board 2 06/30/07 ATTACMED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None M+s(iia Jen REVIEWED Assistant City Manager DATE: '4 10?5-/0, DATE: 31( llel 234 4 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Reports of Committees Boards and Commissions AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to receive and file the Annual Report of the Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee (CIPAC). Oral presentation will be made by CIPAC Chairman Mr. Jason Aro. (Fiscal Impact = none). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Receive and file the Annual Report of CIPAC; (2) Receive the oral presentation; and (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: CIPAC is a committee appointed by City Council to evaluate and recommend projects to be funded in the Capital Improvement Program. CIPAC has solicited public input into this effort and has completed its project evaluations. The attached annual report presents the recommendations of the Committee. Annual Capital Improvement Program It is estimated that $3,513,000 will be available for the Fiscal Year 2007 -2008 Capital Improvement Program from various funding sources. CIPAC is please to recommend funding for 12 of the 15 projects submitted for consideration for FY 2007 -2008. Partial funding for several projects is recommended due to funding constraints. Continued on next page ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: CIPAC Recommendations for FY 2007 -2008 and 10 -Year Plan (Annual Report) FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: NA Capital Improvement Program: NA Amount Requested: NA Account Number: NA Project Phase: NA Appropriation Required: NA ORIGINATED Y: DATE: -7/f �21Q Steve Figt94, Pu c Works Director Jr Stewart, City Manager DATE: VIV, 0 4 235 5 Background and Discussion Continued: 10 -Year Infrastructure and Maintenance Program As an additional effort this year, City Council requested that CIPAC review and recommend a 10 -year plan for the maintenance of the City's infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks, traffic signals, water mains, sewers, storm drains, pump stations, municipal buildings and other City assets. The purpose of the plan is to determine funding levels required to maintain the City's infrastructure in operable condition for the foreseeable future. The 10 -year plan prepared by City staff and reviewed by CIPAC (included as Appendix II of the annual report) indicates a need of approximately $5.3 Million annually. The proposed Capital Improvement Program recommended by CIPAC includes only $2.97 Million in funding for infrastructure replacement and maintenance leaving $2.33 million in deferred maintenance in FY 2007 -2008. The 10- year plan indicates required funding in current dollars and will be updated every three years. 2 3 G CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 -2008 r, G t {ER Nk-a�1 Z CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE Chairman: Vice - Chairman: Committee Member: Committee Member: Committee Member: Jason Aro Anthony Hedayat A.J. Paz Don Brann Crista Binder 237 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 -2008 Table of Contents I. Capital Improvement Project Recommendations for FY 2007 -2008 II. APPENDIX I - Project Detail Sheets III. Appendix II - 10 -Year Plan 238 CIPAC Annual Report For FY 2007 -2008 CIP Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee Chairman: Jason Aro Vice - Chairman: Anthony Hedayat Committee Members: A.J. Paz Don Brann Crista Binder DATE: July 17, 2007 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: The Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee (CIPAC) SUBJECT: Capital Improvement Project Recommendations for FY 2007 -2008 CIPAC has completed its evaluation of capital improvement projects and respectfully submits its recommendations for projects to be included in the FY 2007- 2008 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CIPAC evaluates, scores and ranks projects using objective prioritization criteria. CIPAC's efforts this year included a review of the criteria to verify it was current and met the needs of the City. CIPAC deemed that several minor modifications were warranted. The prioritization categories remain the same with minor changes to criteria descriptions and point allocations. Override scores assigned to highlight projects were changed from point allocations to letter assignments. Utilizing the revised prioritization criteria, fifteen (15) projects worth a total of $5,871,000 were evaluated by CIPAC for funding in FY 2007 -2008. CIPAC understands that $3,513,000 will be available from various fund sources. CIPAC is pleased that funding will be available for 12 projects in FY 2007 -2008. To allow more projects to move forward this year, CIPAC recommends that several projects be broken into components with the design component recommended for funding in FY 2007 -2008. As an additional effort this year, City Council requested that CIPAC review and recommend a 10 -year plan for the maintenance of the City's infrastructure. The 10- year plan prepared by City staff (Appendix II) and reviewed by CIPAC indicates a need of approximately $5.3 Million annually. The proposed Capital Improvement program recommended by CIPAC does not fully meet the needs indicated in the 10- year plan due to the shortage in available funds. The extent of current infrastructure needs indicated in the 10 -year plan and the escalating cost of sewage treatment is cause for the City to consider non - traditional methods in an effort to reduce costs. Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, environmental impacts of the City's infrastructure should be considered as we make 239 CIPAC Annual Report For FY 2007 -2008 CIP decisions regarding our future infrastructure and municipal operations. As the City's infrastructure ages, operational costs will increase as efforts are diverted to repairing system failures. Significant additional capital investment in our infrastructure is needed to maintain the system in serviceable condition and to avoid system breakdown. It is in the public's best interest that we do this. PUBLIC INPUT In an effort to solicit public input, CIPAC conducted a Public Workshop on May 23, 2007 in the City Council Chambers. The Workshop was taped and then broadcast later on local cable. During the Workshop, CIPAC presented a summary of the project submittals, a brief explanation of the scoring process, on -going projects previously submitted in FY 2006 -07 that are now being constructed, and then evaluated one project to demonstrate the evaluation process. Approximately 9 persons attended the workshop and requested that CIPAC consider one additional project for funding under the FY 2007 -2008 Capital Improvement Program. A drainage project on the 600 block of Maryland Avenue just north of Mariposa Street was submitted by a resident. FUNDING Funding levels for the FY 2007 -2008 CIP including funds derived from the Water Fund, Sewer Fund, Gas Tax and Proposition C are expected to total $3,513,000. This is an increase from FY2006 -2007 levels with increases from the Water and the Sewer Funds. Available General Funds, Gas Tax Funds and Proposition C Funds remain the same as the previous fiscal year. A breakdown of estimated funding amounts available for the FY2007 -2008 CIP is as follows: General Fund $750,000 Gas Tax $200,000 Water and Sewer rate increases are scheduled to increase again on October 1, 2007. These rate increases are consistent with the 2004 recommendations of the Water and Wastewater Rate Study Task Force as verified through a Proposition 218 protest ballot process conducted in December 2006. It is anticipated that Water and Wastewater Funds will be available for the FY2007 -2008 CIP in amounts as follows: Water Fund $ 986,000 Sewer Fund $1,477,000 Proposition C Funds are also being considered for the FY2007 -2008 CIP. These funds can be spent only on transit related improvements including the improvement of roadways carrying fixed transit routes. It is expected the Proposition C funding will be available in the following amount: Proposition C $100,000 Actual CIP funding levels will depend on final budget allocations adopted by the City Council for FY 2007 -2008. 240 CIPAC Annual Report For FY 2007 -2008 CIP PROJECT EVALUATIONS Staff submitted fifteen (15) projects for evaluation by CIPAC. During the May 23`d Public Workshop, residents requested that CIPAC consider an additional project to address gutter ponding on the 600 block of Maryland Street just north of Mariposa Street. After review by City staff the street drainage improvement project at 640 Maryland Street will be addressed as part of the normal Public Works Maintenance activities. The estimated cost of all projects submitted is $5,871,000. Considering the funding levels indicated above, it is evident that not all projects can be funded this year. It is recommended that City Council adopt the FY 2007 -2008 CIP including the projects identified in this report to be funded with Gas Tax, Proposition C and enterprise funds. It is further recommended that projects identified for General Funds be included in the CIP as funding permits according to the priorities established in this report. CIPAC met on seven occasions to discuss and evaluate projects. Regular meetings were held on April 4, April 18, April 24, May 2, May 8, May 29, June 13, 2007 and June 26, 2007 . A Public Workshop was conducted on May 23, 2007. Staff from four City Departments — City Manager's, Public Works, Administrative Services and Recreation and Parks made project presentations and furnished details regarding the candidate projects. CIPAC evaluated and scored each project according to point scoring criteria in the following categories: ➢ Mandate - Degree to which the City required to implement the project by law. ➢ Contractual Obligation - The extent to which the City is contractually obligated required to implement the project. ➢ Health and Safety - Extent to which the project will mitigate hazards. ➢ Funding Status - Extent to which funds have been previously committed to the project ➢ Project Readiness - Timeliness of initiation and completion of the project. ➢ Productivity Improvements / Costs Savings - Duration of project cost payback. ➢ Property, Facilities and Equipment Maintenance / Improvement - Degree to which the project replaces repairs or extends the life of a facility ➢ Community Interest - Degree to which the public desires the project to be completed. The following tables provide CI PAC's recommendations for FY 2007 -2008. 241 O i O O N LL � U O 7 V/ II^^ 0 N C a c O ` iO rn � m I I CD C O U ii, ,1 29? �! h C °- m C D G °- u m H a , m m c o a E 2> 2OCa o 2mci EN o -m p cm� H p V 2. y N ° M N 6 m 0 a) N 9 Z Uy Z N 1p p m O N N CUB C{�C t N pp�� g CUw G� yn S6 _ o _ p 0 «m0 a p p L N J�V o J c O E m m ,r O a m o �/��_ c x E O° 7;? m L } n o O - m m m t } n Cp Off' n m m E C A LL m C E q c y H �mV > o C n m d N NQm O 'F- E &$ Ol N o C N m N to co U m a U w .: SS ,' c a E� a `m c y H$ H i d => 5 E > 2E N c 2, 2 0� ca main s ° o� n° a m Q E m n� E 2 n L m m L °$ v QQ tam C yr o m c m N '+ m pg f— a a c m o c`J to m y> U yy `IO Cl O U f` N U Q d O` ,r0 n v O ^ n L .L-. H~ Q y m g O m c C C- 2 m .m C° .t. C n pl p g= 5 p c m y ��rw C C i- l0 c m r� C H m g n E C N L O O a c o E 2 cam €"EH _O N O C M r> E o' y EEp c e E = o�mffi�'cm C C d> J s —— 0 m E m z m o E U a Q m w °c 2 _ E a Z mp� r p J ma c �i m m U c c° m c Q m °- _° c L u a E .. 2 4 E j y P7 2 c A y O N H N Q- o O1 m O N 'i rn_ d m N o U � Q' 'o V% = U w N m m� O � m m U ° U M to UU a m _c _c yyn D Tj m L C n.0 0 - 7 —c N C M W C '> m° o ncm�? m° G o m E '> ncmJM N (� N o $oa t m m N 7 .0 E O m rn m u m a$ co2o o 5 C J m m tO v V Q n t o ul gym„ (n H m to a o, �n (D 'o E.c C '> m n m 0 w a �O $ J g ,mom C U. C i0 m J NO L f0 t.. '. 9 NO ° .j R .t- G m M 0 G m w a N > N f�0 N p1 N N N N C .0 N >+ m W M C l` .C°.. y y: y 0 `7 C Z; m C L_ C E m 5 m m C C E 0 m m m E c a m m cmi U E E m o m t6 Qm7 n JGn N E$} c m N m n N H m O E N a c Q U m� a d E $$' p m$ m p E a $ ° `p 0 E CS S U z .m. H o c °} O m �' LL > `o c E �_ 5� �' 3 ° i7 C J S c L E m u o J Q m m P m .E m 57 c m _ g c` 0 25 3 E 2 `� U� Ea) Q n y .. U� € � Q n m m in U Q o m U � m Q �n U m� c Q rn U�3 u J mm Q a- a J Z E a m m 0 a m m C) UX V a v U> tl �y a v a', 7 C >. U.0 mL a o o o wa C m m U 7 d� d CL 'a) n m a c > U Q o h.L� A y N C C 0 O L C w .m m m cmi E � 0 Y 0 o i Im -S o m E c m c `O a c c . ;. i'b n N c v v° F � H a m E _° J c c m n 2 4 U m . .R� O 0 F ; N CD O a' w (n Z Z Z C C ° m (n a C p fn ,3 65 (n O n g -2 n J E m U E a Q a is N H N y M F- N M R u7 (O 29? aM3 VMS U U U o Ica c q nU �pcd GU $aN p o m o ` C, U) c O S O m U Qi m 77 �, N m V m C m 2-- L O a m m 0) m LA x m m N C G. CO2o c c (p n c CL n N 0 O O +J OEamp� l0 c m O d h CO E w m m � N O L m m5£ E F N O m c a yC m 0 m E �' H . _ M> N g d m a ° n Q¢ 2S �j a _ N m _ E c e.. Q� o nE 4i m � m m� cmi o c din � :° m d ° _ o > w u °o K y� L m y E a0 4 a0 4 $ m J O o� o r N ° O O co 4 N LL ' c m ? oV o N g y�� m v m m G c 11 o O N 1 m $ c C N¢ N C_ LL C .� LL C C"' U C y E p C T G 2 f�0 7 N C14 Y'' LL C c E °c% O c ° c 25 c i m E m 25 m an y w0 O a1 C C A O C c n c Q Q n _ Q a O m C 2 V 'p m NY.O n E c m H a w N O n m> GO y �L c o w0 O n �� N N C m C m N N r O � N E 2 C C f(p Tp ( 0U,1 m c L m Ic N .L... U m Y.L.. N N .L.. E N - -': N N m r E N N N N m O j > m N N a f0 N Nc N dcQ�c g g ycl r d m cm c m N E mn-._ E 00 c N E E E E EGO $m E E 0E E E E g r O O p O O O 9 m p p p mmm N jQ� a O O O `� °° Q ad) > wi a¢ accm° Ha a as ao a UHF p m U U U 2� �v ° i U U L) L) U n P'U c m Z O 1- p E m N x am.'. CD am o ac d J. u E E m g m Q t Ri g ;u v m N 2. m O y° C 2 D m L Of to S d 0 C m 9.j c t`. c m � E N m N p m ll o N d m U E _ J U) x O 0 W Q m 3 a c U) W d p- �. c O m G J v`� E O p v 2 N- CD m a A a a a -' ~ a aM3 U L 'O V/ C LL m 00 O ti O O N LL �O N C O m C cO C E U O ^Q I.l A O m N p o m E? € E A R >ta ffi d C O O O .c 0- E m o m o g H E o A 9 m h Dm Ea Z U �aNin m E c v N o LL � y C 6 Q r r Z Z c c Q o m � � N CL E EL EL N � s s H N m � N Q E Ul O Y Z ffi C O t: � C 8 �b`o y AAmE U v N co E N O 'i j F S S A > �- my o p� O O y g y CCC 0 L 9Lp pppp N Y 0 S J p m LL E oo} N L p CD Z m 2�5� oE E CNy E to NS Ci gQE E O i y D L Ea�> IV r0 m C E��' E E 0$ a. 7R E d E U mtnoi.2 Uli� � — m . c_ 0 hL 5 LL {erg g N O1 UmmX c � U w N m O � E Z E d U 0 n {Up 3 N E A a N O m N p o m E? € E A R >ta ffi d C O O O .c 0- E m o m o g H E o A 9 m h Dm Ea Z U �aNin m E c v N o LL � y C 6 Q r r Z Z c c Q o m � � N CL E EL EL N s N Y a bj " Lo' H O a` Z . 16 �L) - rna %' E. E c n� O N 7 � �" Eta eos� s� c n _ m � E, � U E m N � O E S' a` C Q t Q N O 1 N - s H O �m< �p�U 34 c m r ' S E �b`o y N ~O cc Eg co E N O 'i j I y S A o mn N N E — D oo} L p CD CD 0 o p �$E �. E N t j�� N " 3 a` E m 8 E E d E 0 hL E m a.E 32 UmmX U'5a� w U E E d U 0 n {Up 3 C y A 3 � F U N r o s N Y a bj " Lo' H O a` Z . 16 �L) - rna %' E. E c n� O N 7 � �" Eta eos� s� c n _ m � E, � U E m N � O E S' a` C Q t Q N O 1 a` t ffi t Q H O � 8 N co c m 4 m a Y LL o 0 It U .2 G m m m mm > $ yU E N E E O y v a rn E rn _ U q m s m m Z U E > m > m U > m o CL U 4 R 4 O y U o o O LL m E J C m C LL p m a` pC C C f 5 o y S CD o y W O y y N m 4 Cffi Q a Q H to H � O a` t ffi t Q H O U < a U g UU t m L m ffi E o �S o E 0 > m� D � U m m > go r0 y y C m s t U mE to ,E b .- Z J Q n 0 N m C c C w m CC C �m O IL` 0 n 0 cr J 4 :� c m m a Y o 0 It U .2 o m m m mm m yU E v a rn rn rn a rn q m s m m Z U E > m > m > m > m o CL 4 4 R 4 O y o o O LL U C C C LL p m pC C C f 5 o y S S o y C E E E 8 u VV <SCa a m U U E U U U U O m � m N uy 4 m 9 Q t/7 LL dm m m t 49 3 F _ f O Y L g o m a o m w m N O F m g L ;,I( m 3 a a0 a O N a N O U < a U g UU t m L m ffi E o �S o E 0 > m� D � U m m > go r0 y y C m s t U mE to ,E b .- Z J Q n 0 N m C c C w m CC C �m O IL` 0 n 0 cr J 4 :� CIPAC Annual Report For FY 2007 -2008 C/P II. APPENDIX I Project Detail Sheets 248 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 200712012 I PROJECT TITLE I Sewer Main Repair I REQUESTING DEPARTMENT I Public Works Department — Wastewater Division I DESCRIPTION Repair and rehabilitation of 3,400 lineal feet of sewer main on Imperial Highway between Center and Main as determined by the evaluation of television inspection tapes of sewer mains in year 2000. Rehabilitation will be accomplished through slip lining and /or excavation and re- construction of damaged mains as needed. JUSTIFICATION These sections of piping were identified by the Sewer Master Plan as having some of the most severe structural problems in the City. CIPAC and the City Council allocated funds for construction for the segment from Center Street and McCarthy Court through the FY2006 -07 CIP. The two projects are proposed to be combined and constructed as a single project to benefit from the economy of scale the larger project provides. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU7 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends this project for full funding in line with the proposed 10 -Year Infrastructure Replacement and Maintenance Program to address capacity deficiency and physical deterioration as determined in the 2002 Sewer Master Plan. The 2007 -08 proposed allocation of funding will provide for the repair and rehabilitation of 3,400 lineal feet of sewer main. ESTIMATED FUNDS I EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007108 2008109 2009110 2010/11 2011112 TO DATE 9/30/07 1,600,000 765,000 835,000 2,530,000 1,700,000 1 2,700,000 2,043,000 CIPAC scored the proiect as follows: Score M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 5 0 2 2 2 1 3 2 17 FUNDING SOURCES I COST - BREAKDOWN G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement ESTIMATED 1. DESIGN 50,000 2. CONSTRUCTION 1,520,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 30,000 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) I I TOTAL 1 1,600,000 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 - 2012 24'7 Page 1 of 15 Appendix CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 PROJECT TITLE I Pump Station No. 1 Upgrades and Force Main and Station No. 7 Abandonment I REQUESTING DEPARTMENT I Public Works Department — Wastewater Division I DESCRIPTION Upgrade Pump Station No. 1 and replace the Force Main and abandon Pump Station No. 7. JUSTIFICATION In FY2006 -07, CIPAC recommended a study on the abandonment of Pump Station No. 7 and the upgrade of Pump Station No. 1. In 2006, staff determined that Pump Station No. 7 was no longer necessary and the Pump Station No. 1 could accept the flows via gravity. Pump Station No. 1 would need to be enlarged with modifications to its wet well and pumps. This project will provide for the design and construction of modifications to Pump Station No. 1 and the replace-1 ment of the force main leading from the station to the Imperial Highway trunk sewers. The design effort will be performed in conjunction with the Pump Station No. 7 Elimination Study project funded in the FY 2006 -07 CIP. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU7 CIPAC COMMENTS Pump Station 1 CIPAC recommends this project for full funding in line with the proposed 10 -Year Infrastructure Replacement and Maintenance Program to address capacity deficiency and physical deterioriation as determined in the 2002 Sewer Master Plan. The 2007 -08 proposed allocation of funding will provide for the abandonment of Pump Station No. 7 and the enhancement of Pump Station No. 1 to accept the additional flows via gravity. ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 20011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 2,530,000 175,000 542,000 2,230,000 CIPAC scored the proiect as follows: Score M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 3 0 3 2 2 1 3 2 16 Gas Tax FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement 1. DESIGN 300,000 2. CONSTRUCTION 2,180,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 50,000 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL 12,530,000 1 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007— 2012 MR Page 2 of 15 Appendix CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 PROJECT TITLE i Air and Marine Traffic Radar Tracking and ID System —� I REQUESTING DEPARTMENT I Administrative Services Department — City Manager's Office I DESCRIPTION: Upgrade and improve existing system that tracks and identifies LAX aircraft over -flying the City of El Segundo and to protect the Chevron Refinery through maritime domain awareness and marine terminal security. JUSTIFICATION: The system will replace the obsolete video camera monitoring system. The radar based solution will provide accurate tracking and timely identification of aircraft over - flights of El Segundo. Utilizing off the shelf radar technology, this networked -based system can be configured to support multiple applications (the proposed dual use to include: aircraft intrusion notification and critical infrastructure protection of Chevron's marine terminal) and is easily interfaced to third party data feeds and /or sensors. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU1, PS7 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends this project for partial funding to provide for replacement of the current obsolete video recording equipment. CIPAC scored this project based on completing Phase I in 2007 -08. Funding for Phase II and Phase III should be submitted for consideration in FY 2008 -09. ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9/30107 $336,000 25,000 CIPAC scored the proiect as follows: General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement C 1. EQUIPMENT COSTS Score M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT TOTAL 336,000 0 0 5 0 2 1 3 3 14C General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement C 1. EQUIPMENT COSTS 238,280 2. INSTALLATION & TRANSPORT 55,251 3. SALES TAX 19,658 4. CONTINGENCIES 22,811 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL 336,000 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 249 Page 3 of 15 Appendix CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 PROJECT TITLE Curb and Sidewalk Replacement Citywide REQUESTING DEPARTMENT Public Works -En in ering Division DESCRIPTION Curb and Sidewalk Repair Citywide. JUSTIFICATION Curb and sidewalk are displaced by tree roots and other causes creating potential trip hazards. Locations for curb and sidewalk requiring repair are generated throughout the year by field surveys from the Street Maintenance Division and requests from residents. Each year the amount of work identified for repair exceeds the funding allocated. Additional funding would enable the Street Maintenance Division to reduce the backlog of resident's requests and City survey's. It is estimated that every 20 years 10% of a street's concrete curbs and sidewalk must be replaced. This results in approximately $185,000 pf concrete work needed annually. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU7 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends partial funding for this project with the balance provided through the operating budget to ultimately provide funding in line with the proposed 10 -Year Infrastructure Replacement and Maintenance Program. The project will address the displacement of curbs and sidewalks caused by the roots of City and private trees. ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008109 2009110 2010111 2011112 TO DATE 9/30/07 $185,000 I I I $100,000 I $185,000 I $185,000 I $185,000 I $185,000 CIPAC scored the oroiect as follows: Score M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 0 0 5 1 2 0 2 3 13 General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR, Infrastructure Replacement All costs shown in current dollars 1. DESIGN 2. CONSTRUCTION $185,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL I $185,000 CIPAC FORM 2007 - 2012 Page 4 of 15 Appendix 250 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 I PROJECT TITLE I Pump Station 2 Upgrades and Force Main Replacement I I REQUESTING DEPARTMENT I Public Works Department — Wastewater Division DESCRIPTION Sewer Pump Station No. 2 Upgrades and Force Main Replacement. JUSTIFICATION With the elimination of Pump Station No. 7 and the upgrade of Station No. 1, Pump Station No. 2 is the next priority. This station is located on Franklin Street between Arena Street and Eucalyptus Drive. Improvements proposed at this station include the replacement of the pumps, valves and controls and the construction of additional wet well storage capacity. This station currently has only 35 minutes storage capacity if the pumps are not operational. This is not enough time for staff to mobilize with generators or bypass pumps. The 625' force main conveys the sewage from the station to a gravity sewer in Standard Street. The sewage that is pumped through these force mains carry ground solids that abrade the pipe walls. This project will also replace the 8" force main. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU7 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends funding the design portion of this project this year and deferring construction until the FY2008 -09 due to a shortfall in available sewer funds. Funding this project is in line with the proposed 10 -Year Infrastructure Replacement and Maintenance Program to address capacity deficiency and physical deterioration as determined in the 2002 Sewer Master Plan. This project will provide for the upgrade of Pump Station No. 2 to increase wet well storage. Staff requested the project be funded at $900,000 but CIPAC recommended that only $100,000 be utilized this year for design only and that future years fund the construction portion. ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 1 $900,000 I I 1 $100,000 1 1 1 1 1 CIPAC scored the proiect as follows: Sewer Funds Score M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 4. CONTINGENCIES 3 0 3 0 2 0 3 2 13 Sewer Funds FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST 1 DESIGN $80,000 2. CONSTRUCTION $820,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL $900,000 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 251 Page 5 of 15 Appendix CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 PROJECT TITLE Local Streets Rehabilitation Program REQUESTING DEPARTMENT Public Works Department — Engineering Division DESCRIPTION Pavement overlay of 1.2 miles of local streets per year. JUSTIFICATION In El Segundo, local streets are maintained through spot repair and slurry seal. As pavement ages, it get less flexible and eventually cracks. Slurry sealing helps keep water from getting into the cracks and damaging the subgrade. As environmental cracks enlarge, slurry sealing is less effective. A fresh wearing surface of conventional or rubberized asphalt is required from time to time. Throughout the industry it is generally accepted that streets can go about 30 years between overlays. Virtually all the City's local streets are much older than 30 years and there is no record that any local street has been overlaid. Cracking and alligatoring are evident on most streets. The local street overlay program proposed will mill and overlay 5% of local streets or about 1.2 miles per year annually. This will provide a new wearing surface on all local streets in twenty years. After this goal is met, the program can be reduced to overlaying on a 30 -year cycle. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU7 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends deferral of this project until sufficient funding is available for local streets. Available Gas Tax revenues will be allocated to the Arterial Streets Reconstruction program to supplement Proposition C funds that can only be used on Main Streets carrying fixed route transit service. Local Streets will continue to be maintained through spot repair and slurry sealing through the Public Works operating budget. CIPAC recommends that the City explore ways to provide funding for local streets at levels recommended in the proposed 10 -Year Infrastructure Replacement and Maintenance Program to address the deteriorating condition of the City's 25 miles of local streets. This project would provide for the pavement overlay of 1.2 miles or 5% of local streets annually ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 $400,000 $0 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 CIPAC scored the proiect as follows: Score M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 0 0 1 3 1 2 1 3 2 12 General Fund I FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN I G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement All costs shown in current dollars DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST 1. DESIGN 2. CONSTRUCTION $400,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL $400,000 CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 252 Page 6 of 15 Appendix CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 I PROJECT TITLE I Water Main Replacements I REQUESTING DEPARTMENT I Public Works Department — Engineerinq Division I DESCRIPTION Water Main Replacements: Lairport Street and Mariposa Avenue Lairport Street to Sepulveda Blvd JUSTIFICATION Based on a 50 -year life the City must replace 1 mile of water main to keep pace with the deterioration of the system. The Engineering Division is in the process of designing and constructing 1.5 miles of mains in the northcentral and southwest portions of the Cities west side. In FY2007 -08, it is proposed that Lairport Street and Mariposa Avenue Lairport to Sepulveda be replaced. Breaks occurred on these mains during November 2006 and these lines must be replaced to assure system integrity. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCEBU LU7 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends this project for full funding in line with the proposed 10 -Year Infrastructure Replacement and Maintenance Program to address the replacement of cast and /or ductile iron pipes. The 2007 -08 proposed allocation of funding will provide for the replacement of one mile of the City's 57 miles of water main. An additional $86,000 is recommended for this project to fully allocate available funding. ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 $900,000 0 $986,000 $1,225,000 $1,492,000 $1,116,000 $1,116,000 CIPAC scored the proiect as follows: Score M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 0 0 3 1 2 1 3 2 12 General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement All costs shown in current dollars 1. DESIGN 30,000 2. CONSTRUCTION 870,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL 1 900,000 CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 Page 7 of 15 Appendix 25,3 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 I PROJECT TITLE Washington Park Irriqation System Replacement REQUESTING DEPARTMENT I Recreation and Parks DESCRIPTION Replace the current irrigation system with a new system that will automatically control the sprinkler system with electric remote control valves. JUSTIFICATION The antiquated hydraulic irrigation system at Washington Park is in decline with no available replacement parts. The controller has been retro- fitted as a temporary repair to keep the sytem functioning as we wait for a replacement system. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU6 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends this project for funding in FY 2007 -08 if available general funds exist ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 210,000 210,000 CIPAC scored the Droiect as follows: Score M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 0 0 2 0 2 1 3 3 11 General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C. D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement All costs shown in current dollars TOTAL I $210,000 CIPAC FORM 2007— 2012 Page 8 of 15 Appendix 254 1. DESIGN 20,000 2. CONSTRUCTION 155,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 20,000 4. CONTINGENCIES 15,000 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL I $210,000 CIPAC FORM 2007— 2012 Page 8 of 15 Appendix 254 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 I PROJECT TITLE I Retaining Walls at Recreation Park REQUESTING DEPARTMENT I Recreation and Parks DESCRIPTION There are two areas of Recreation Park where hillsides are deteriorating and hardscape is being damaged and undermined. These areas are: 1) Softball Field — The hillside above the south side of the Softball Field is being undermined and the concrete walkway is starting to sag and break. Park staff has tried to remedy the situation over the years by installing rail road ties to support the bank. 2) Hillside below the Teen Center basketball court and Skate Park. JUSTIFICATION These two retaining walls will protect the hillsides from erosion and prevent further hardscape damage. (Several years ago retaining walls were installed in the Clubhouse and Picnic areas of Recreation Park. These retaining walls were installed for the same reasons of controlling the hillside and have done a great job.) GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU6 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends this project for funding in FY 2007 -08 if available general funds exist. ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 20011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 220,000 220,000 CIPAC scored the Droiect as follows: General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement All costs shown in current dollars Score M 1COJ HSI FS I PRI PI JPFEJCNITOT 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 0 1 0 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 3 1 11 General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement All costs shown in current dollars TOTAL I $220,000 CIPAC FORM 2007— 2012 Page 9 of 15 Appendix 25, 1. DESIGN 10,000 2. CONSTRUCTION 165,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 27,000 4. CONTINGENCIES 18,000 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL I $220,000 CIPAC FORM 2007— 2012 Page 9 of 15 Appendix 25, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 PROJECT TITLE Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Program REQUESTING DEPARTMENT Public Works Department — Engineering Division DESCRIPTION Proposed street rehabilitation projects: FY 2006 -07 FY 2007 -08 SF Unit Price Total $200,000 $848,690 JUSTIFICATION The Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Program will rehabilitate arterial and collector street citywide. On a biennial basis, Public Works inspects and rates pavements on arterials and collectors. A Pavement Condition Index (PCI, 0 -100, 100 being best) is assigned to each street based on pavement condition. Agencies typically attempt to keep their average PCI above 65, which is considered a minimum standard. The City's current average PCI rating is 56 which is "fair to good ". The goal of the program is to increase the condition of streets to a rating of 65. To do so, an investment in pavement overlay projects in the amount of $800,000 per year is required. Once this PCI rating is reached, the Arterial and Collector system can be maintained though simple lower -cost measures such as slurry sealing. If this level of investment is not made, the quantity of deferred maintenance will increase and streets will no longer be candidates for lower cost rehabilitation strategies. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE: LU7 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends this project for partial funding due to a shortfall in available gas tax and Prop C funds. Funding is recommended for this project in lieu of Local Streets to supplement Proposition C funding and to provide funding to cover a reasonably sized project. Funding this project is in line with the proposed 10 -Year Infrastructure Replacement and Maintenance Program to address the deteriorating condition of the City's 25 miles of arterial and collector streets. This project will provide for the pavement overlay to increase pavement condition to a standard pavement rating of 65 in a 10- year period ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 $1,050,000 $200,000 $239,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 CIPAC scored the project as follows: M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST G. General /Capital Improvement Fund 1. DESIGN 30,000 W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund 2. CONSTRUCTION $1,050,000 D. Developer Contributions 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 10,000 C. C.D.B.G. 4. CONTINGENCIES 10,000 A. Asset Forfeiture Fund 5. OTHER (LIST) GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement TOTAL $1,050,000 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 1 Mariposa Ave - Sepulveda to 176625 $2 $353,250 $100,000 $253,250 Nash 2 Maple Ave. -Nash to 400'West 21200 $2 $42,400 $100,000 3 Rosecrans Ave - Douglas to 137000 $2 $274,000 $274,000 Sepulveda 4 Aviation BI. - El Score 0 0 3 1 2 0 2 2 10 Segundo to 160720 $2 $321,440 $321,440 116th St. Score 0 0 3 1 2 0 2 2 10 Page 10 of 15 Appendix CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 PROJECT TITLE I LED Traffic Signal Retrofit � REQUESTING DEPARTMENT � Public Works Department — Engineering Division DESCRIPTION Proposed LED traffic signal retrofit: • Twenty -four 100% City -owned intersections • Seventeen shared intersections JUSTIFICATION The Light Emitting Diodes (LED) traffic signal retrofit is for the replacement of all remaining incandescent traffic signal lights within the City limits. LEDs can be used to replace all the lamps involved with traffic signals: red, yellow and green lights, the white walking man and the red hand. LEDs are an energy efficient alternative to incandescent lamps. The wattage rating of a 12" LED red ball is 110 watts less than a 12" incandescent red ball and has an estimated useful life of an additional six years. This converts to approximately $72.36 of energy savings per year for one 12" LED red ball. Additional advantages include lower maintenance costs and improved safety due to greater brightness. Southern California Edison (SCE) offers rebates for LED traffic signal retrofits. The estimated SCE incentive (subject to approval) would amount to approximately $1,349 per intersection. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU -7 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends that this project be funded in FY 2007 -08 if available general funds exits. ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 $170,000 $170,000 CIPAC scored the project as follows: General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement All costs shown in current dollars DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST 1. DESIGN 2. CONSTRUCTION $170,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL 170,000 CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 Page 11 of 15 Appendix 257 Score M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 0 0 3 1 2 1 2 0 9 General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement All costs shown in current dollars DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST 1. DESIGN 2. CONSTRUCTION $170,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL 170,000 CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 Page 11 of 15 Appendix 257 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2006/2011 I PROJECT TITLE I Stevenson Field Bleachers REQUESTING DEPARTMENT Recreation and Parks DESCRIPTION The bleachers at Stevenson Field in Recreation Park have ` been in place for many years. When the bleachers were 6, r installed there were no risers included that would prevent trash and debris from falling beneath the seats. It is very difficult, inefficient, and unsafe to constantly climb under the bleachers to retrieve trash and debris. JUSTIFICATION The risers would retro -fit to the existing bleachers and would attach to the bottom of the bench seats. With the risers in place, the bleachers would basically be sealed preventing the risk of small children and personal articles (keys, purse, wallets, etc.) falling beneath the bleachers as well as eliminating the need to climb under the bleachers to clean up the trash and debris. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU6 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC recommends this project for funding in FY 2007 -08 if available general funds exist ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 26,000 $26,000 CIPAC scored the project as follows: TOTAL $26,000 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 2 5 F Page 12 of 15 Appendix Score M 1CO1 HSI FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 0 1 0 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 8 TOTAL $26,000 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 2 5 F Page 12 of 15 Appendix General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN G. W. GT. D. C. A. GR. IR. General /Capital Improvement Fund Water Fund Gasoline Tax Fund Developer Contributions C.D.B.G. Asset Forfeiture Fund Grant/Other Agencies Infrastructure Replacement DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST 1 DESIGN 2,000 2. CONSTRUCTION 18,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 3,000 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL $26,000 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 2 5 F Page 12 of 15 Appendix CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 I PROJECT TITLE I Library Homework Center & Children's Story -time Room I REQUESTING DEPARTMENT I Library Services Department DESCRIPTION A new construction project for a Library Homework Center (2000 sq. ft.) and adjoining Children's Story-time Room (2,000sq.ft.), as an addition to the Youth Services Division area. Total expansion of 4,000 sq. ft. JUSTIFICATION Homework Center As in many communities, parents perceive the El Segundo Public Library as a safe and welcoming place for their children to visit after school. From the hours between 3 p.m. - 6 p.m., the Youth Services section of the library becomes filled with students needing to complete school assignments. Our current number of study tables and computer terminals does not accommodate this growing trend. With the close supervision of staff and volunteers, many public libraries throughout the country are incorporating homework centers into their children and young adult service areas. The proposal is to add a separate room for students to use print and electronic resources to assist them with their homework. Additional part-time staff and volunteers would be on site to supervise, tutor and instruct them in using the library materials and computers. Children's Story -time Room Children's story-time and reading programs run all year long and there is no current space in the Youth Services section to conduct these programs. Staff often have to compete with the full scheduling of the Friends of the Library Meeting Room to use it for their activities. During the Summer Reading Program, our special events must be held off site in another location. Our proposal is to add a children's space especially designed for storytimes and reading programs which would allow staff to schedule more programs and class visits per year, and accommodate up to 150 children per program. It would also serve as an activities room so that arts and crafts, live performers, and other larger events could be incorporated into our Youth Services' educational programs. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE: LU2 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC understands that additional funds will be available to cover the cost of this project. If not, CIPAC recommends that other available fund sources be used to implement this project ESTIMATED FUNDS I EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED I TO 2007108 2008109 2009110 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 $2,300,000 I I I $0 CIPAC scored the Droiect as follows: Score M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 2 1 2 6c General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement 1. DESIGN 2. CONSTRUCTION $2,300,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL 1 $2,300,000 40 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 Page 13 of 15 Appendix CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2007/2012 [—PROJECT TITLE I El Segundo Wireless for Downtown REQUESTING DEPARTMENT Administrative Services Department / Information Systems Division M CO DESCRIPTION r Provide a Wi -Fi hot zone covering El Segundo's downtown f business district, including the area on Main Street from EI °.."' Segundo Blvd. to Mariposa Ave., on Richmond St. from El a > Segundo Blvd. to Grand Ave., and on Grand Ave. from s Concord St. to Arena St. Access to the Internet will be 2 provided to residents and visitors in this area at no charge. 1 The system will also provide a separate secured network 2 for public safety use. All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 – 2012 ,e 15 s m O JUSTIFICATION - m Wi -Fi has become a standard for connecting to the Internet when away from the office. El Segundo has a very large population of high tech employees working in the City every day. This system will allow many of them to connect to the Internet for email or other communications needs while Min yy IQ LOO949 visiting the downtown area. This system will encourage R - them to spend their free time in our downtown area, helping our downtown merchants. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE The same system will be used to upload and download LU5 data to Public Safety vehicles such as Police and Fire, while they are in the area. Current radios are too slow to CIPAC COMMENTS transfer large files to or from the vehicles wirelessly. The CIPAC recommends this project for funding in FY 2007 -08 same system could be used in the future to provide if sufficient general funds exist to fund the project wireless video to the police for monitoring problem areas, or to see inside a store when a burglary is in progress, to know what to expect. ESTIMATED I FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9/30/07 r60,00o I 1 160,000 1 1 1 1 CIPAC scored the project as follows: General Fund M CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT Score 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 5c General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN G. General /Capital Improvement Fund W. Water Fund GT. Gasoline Tax Fund D. Developer Contributions C. C.D.B.G. A. Asset Forfeiture Fund GR. Grant/Other Agencies IR. Infrastructure Replacement DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST 1. DESIGN 5,000 2. CONSTRUCTION 40,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 5,000 4. CONTINGENCIES 10,000 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL 60,000 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 – 2012 260 Page 14 of 15 Appendix CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2006/2011 I PROJECT TITLE I Aviation Blvd. to El Segundo Blvd. Dual Left Turn Proiect __1 REQUESTING DEPARTMENT I Public Works Department — Engineering Division DESCRIPTION A dual North Bound left turn project from northbound Aviation Blvd. to westbound El Segundo Blvd. JUSTIFICATION The five -year street reconstruction program encompasses six (6) proposed projects. The identified streets are severely distressed with large quantities of alligator cracking and pot holes. In several cases, median irrigation has deteriorated the pavement. Continual maintenance is required for all identified streets and several surfaces have deteriorated beyond the point of repair. Project scope is dependant upon street condition and recommended by City staff and a pavement management consultant, and may include grind and overlay, removal of existing pavement sections, and partial street reconstruction as needed. GENERAL PLAN REFERENCE LU -7 CIPAC COMMENTS CIPAC does not recommend this project for funding in FY 2007 -08. ESTIMATED FUNDS EXPENSES FY FY FY FY FY COST ALLOCATED TO 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TO DATE 9130107 200,000 I I I $0 CIPAC scored the proiect as follows: Score M I CO HS FS PR PI PFE CN TOT 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 2 261 Page 15 of 15 Appendix General Fund FUNDING SOURCES COST - BREAKDOWN G. W. GT. D. C. A. GR. IR. General /Capital Improvement Fund Water Fund Gasoline Tax Fund Developer Contributions C.D.B.G. Asset Forfeiture Fund Grant/Other Agencies Infrastructure Replacement DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST 1. DESIGN 2. CONSTRUCTION 200,000 3. MANAGEMENT /INSPECTION 4. CONTINGENCIES 5. OTHER (LIST) TOTAL 1 200,000 All costs shown in current dollars CIPAC FORM 2007 — 2012 261 Page 15 of 15 Appendix III. APPENDIX II 0 -Year Plan CIPAC Annual Report For FY 2007 -2008 CIP 26 10 -Year INFRASTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM Ma r, tJ It V,R 1 Nk- l� L J rA FISCAL YEARS 2007 -2008 through 2016 -17 26:3 10 -YR Infrastructure and Maintenance Program Fiscal Years 2007 -08 through 2016 -17 Table of Contents Summary and explanation of proposed 10 -year plan II. Attachments 2F It J 1%V,RIr 1%k-111111F SUMMARY L •r. Public Works Department V 10- Year Plan FY 2007 -08 through 2016 -17 Much of the City's infrastructure was built in the early 1900s and is approaching or has reached the end of its useful life. Without sufficient investment in infrastructure replacement and maintenance, basic infrastructure dependent municipal services will be diminished. The following infrastructure replacement and maintenance plan indicates the Public Works Department's plan for the maintenance of the following critical infrastructure: 1. Streets, curbs and sidewalk 2. Traffic signals 3. Water mains and other water system elements 4. Sewer mains and pump stations 5. Storm drains and pump stations 6. Municipal Buildings Existing conditions, expected life cycles and engineering judgment were used to develop 10 -year plans that will improve and maintain the City's infrastructure at an acceptable and serviceable condition. The methodology used in developing the plans is discussed late in this document. FUNDING NEEDS The 10 -year plan proposed calls for a capital investment of $57 Million over ten years or an average of $5.7 Million per year. In FY 2006 -07, the City allocated approximately $2.2 Million toward infrastructure replacement and maintenance projects. An additional $3.5 Million per year would be required to implement the proposed plan. Page I of 6 265 10 -Year CIP FY 2007 -08 to 2016 -17 DISCUSSION ON PLANS ❖ Arterial and Collector Street Pavements (Attachment A) — The City maintains about 25 miles of Arterial and Collector Streets. A recent condition survey indicated that the City's arterial and collector pavement rated a 56 on a 0 — 100 scale. A minimum rating of 65 is a standard in the industry. The goal of the plan provided in Attachment A is to reach a rating of 65 in the ten -year period from FY 2007 -08 to FY 2016 -17. To accomplish this, an investment of approximately $800,000 annually is required. The type of work contemplated is primarily grinding and overlaying the existing deteriorated pavement. Streets are addressed on a worst -first basis and will coordinated with other infrastructure projects such that the new pavement will not be disturbed by trenching within a reasonable period. Presently, Arterial Street rehabilitation is funding in the amount of $200,000 per year. The recommended investment would require an additional $600,000 annually from Gas Tax, Proposition C, Safetea -lu, Proposition 42 Funds or General Funds. ❖ Local Street Pavements (Attachment B) — The City maintains about 25 miles of local streets. The condition of these streets varies greatly citywide. Historically, these streets have been maintained through slurry sealing to keep water out and to protect the subgrade. There is no record of any local street being reconstructed or overlaid. It is generally accepted in the industry that pavement has a 30 -year life. Treatments such as slurry sealing can effectively extend pavement life, but only to a point. Cracks that exist prior to slurry sealing often reflect through the slurry after a short time. This is because the old underlying pavement has become brittle with time. Currently, virtually every local street in El Segundo should be overlaid to apply a fresh, flexible wearing surface. The plan proposed in Attachment B accomplishes the local street overlays at a rate that would address every local street within a 20 -year period. This would require an investment of $400,000 annually. Upon reaching this goal, the rate could be reduced to a 30 -year cycle. Presently, there is no investment in local street overlays. The recommended investment would require an additional $400,000 annually from Gas Tax, Safetea -lu, Proposition 42 Funds or General Funds ❖ Curbs and Sidewalk (Attachment C) — Concrete sidewalks and curbs would have an indefinite life if not for the roots of City and private trees. Tree roots displace curbs and sidewalks causing gutter ponding and pedestrian trip hazards. The City presently budgets about $100,000 annually to mitigate these displacements. The proposed plan would accomplish treatment of 5% of the City's streets annually. Based on previous experience, approximately 10% of curbs and sidewalk require replacement when streets are addressed by concrete projects. The cost to replace this quantity of concrete improvement is approximately $185,000 per year. This 266 10 -Year CIP FY 2007 -08 to 2016 -17 investment would require an additional $85,000 from Gas Tax, Funds or General Funds. Community Development Block Grant Funds could supplement this funding to install curb ramps to enhance accessibility. ❖ Traffic Sigmals (Attachment D) — The City Maintains 60 Traffic Signals. El Segundo has 100% jurisdiction over 24 signals, 8 are shared with the City of Manhattan Beach, 5 are shared with the City of Hawthorne, 1 is shared with both Manhattan Beach and Hawthorne, 3 are shared with the County of Los Angeles and 9 are shared with the City of Los Angeles and 10 are maintained entirely by Caltrans. The City contracts with the County for maintenance of the 24 traffic signal maintained 100% by El Segundo and the shared intersections with Manhattan Beach and Hawthorne. The City of Los Angeles maintains the shared intersections along Imperial Highway and Caltrans maintains all signals on Sepulveda Boulevard and the Atwood Way onramp to the 105 Freeway. There have been no stand -alone traffic signal projects undertaken by the City in recent memory. Many signals are showing their age and require upgrading. Poles and signal heads are antiquated and controller cabinets are corroded and unsightly. Most signal lamps are still incandescent bulbs with small percentage using L.E.D. technology. The plan proposed in Attachment D provides for the rehabilitation of an existing traffic signal every other year at the investment of $200,000 in alternating years. Funding of L.E.D retrofits will also be accomplished through this proposed budget and through the County maintenance contract. •'r Water System (Attachment E) — The water system in composed of water mains, booster pumps and reservoirs. The City Maintains approximately 57 miles of primarily cast or ductile iron pipes. More than half of the system was built in the 50s and 60s. These pipes typically have a 50 -year life requiring that roughly 1 mile of main should be replaced annually. The water master plan completed in 2005 identified a 10 -year capital improvement program. The plan shown in Attachment E mirrors the master plan with a few adjustments. The plan consists of $900,000 in water main replacement annually and varying investments for pump station, reservoir and high tower maintenance. This level of capital improvement cannot be accommodated by the current rate structure. Expenses have escalated at a rate beyond what was anticipated in the rate studies. Assuming no General Fund subsidy to the water operation, there is currently about $200,000 available for water capital improvements. An additional investment in the amount $750,000 would be required in FY 2007 -08 to accomplish the improvements listed in the plan. Additional investment will be required in future years depending on water purchase costs and billing revenues. Attachment E 26, 10 -Year CIP FY 2007 -08 to 2016 -17 indicates the available funding and additional required investment expected considering scheduled rate adjustments and expected water purchase cost increases. ❖ Sewer System Improvements (Attachment F) The Sewer system is composed of 50 miles of sewer mains, 1,038 manholes, and 9 sewer pump stations and force mains. A Sewer Master Plan was prepared in 2002 and provided a report on the systems capacity and condition based on video inspection and hydraulic modeling. The plan identified a 10- year capital improvement program to address areas of capacity deficiency and physical deterioration. The plan also identified recommended improvements to sewer pump stations. The plan proposed in Attachment F is based on the 2002 plan and has been adjusted to account for additional condition assessment and operational needs determined since 2002. The plan provides for an ongoing program of sewer pipe lining and replacement to guard against blockages by root intrusion or structural failures. Since sewer pipes have a virtually indefinite life, the plan for lining or replacement is based on inspection data and capacity deficiencies. The plan identifies several locations where the sewers were marginally deficient in capacity; however, consultation with sewer crews indicated a greater need to address structural deficiencies through lining or replacement. During the last ten years, the city aggressively addressed its sewer pump stations. Because of this, the proposed 10 -year plan includes the improvement of only four pump stations. ❖ Storm Drain System (Attachment G) The storm drain system in El Segundo consists of County and City owned storm drain facilities. The City maintains all City -owned storm drain pipes, catch basins, manholes, channels and pump stations. As in all cities, there are small nuisance ponding issued that can be resolved through gutter regarding; however, no drainage deficiencies exist that require additional drains to mitigate flooding. Three new systems are required, however, to eliminate storm drainage from entering the sewer system. The proposed 10 -year plan includes these three projects. The largest maintenance issue confronting the City is its 3 pump stations. The stations consist of very large capacity pumps driven by large internal combustion engines. The engines, pumps and equipment must be maintained in good condition to accommodate storm events. The proposed 10 -year plan also includes measures to maintain these stations. The plan additionally includes three dry weather diversion projects mandated by storm water regulations. ❖ City Buildings (Attachment H) - The City owns and maintains 18 principal buildings including City Hall, the Police Station, fire stations, recreation buildings and the library. These 268 10 -Year CIP FY 2007 -08 to 2016 -17 structures are composed of systems that deteriorate with time and require periodic replacement and rehabilitation. The primary ongoing maintenance elements include roofing, fumigation, interior and exterior paint and wall coverings, heating, ventilation and air conditioning, windows, doors and plumbing fixtures. These efforts are currently funded through the Public Works Facilities Maintenance budget. The amount available in recent budgets has averaged about $100,000 annually. The 10 -year plan proposed in Attachment H addresses the building needs as projected by staff. The plan requires from $205,000 to $687,000 annually and would require an additional $105,000 to $587,000 from current budget levels. References: 1. Update to Pavement Management Program (Arterials & Collectors) by Bucknam and Associates, February 9, 2007 2. City of El Segundo Water Master Plan by AKM Consulting Engineers, September 2005. 3. City of El Segundo Sewer Master Plan by AKM Consulting Engineers, December 2002 2 sk Arterial Streets Capital Needs 2 Avail Funding 4 Shortfall Local Streets Capital Needs 8 Avail Funding 10 Shortfall Curbs and Sidewalk Capital Needs 2010 -11 Avail Funding 2012 -13 Shortfall Traffic Signals Capital Needs 1 2016 -17 Avail Funding ao Shortfall Water Capital Needs 5100,000 Avail Funding $500,000 Shortfall Sewer Capital Needs $150,000 - Avail Funding — -- s0 Shortfall Storm Drain Capital Needs $4,673,364 Avail Funding $5,118,200 Shortfall All Infrastructure Capital Needs $3,839,696 Avail Funding* $S2,971,714 Shortfall 10 -yr Infrastructure Capital Improvement Needs Summary osl 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2007 -08 20OB-09 2009 -10 2010 -11 2011 -12 2012 -13 2013 -14 1 2014 -15 1 2015 -16 1 2016 -17 Total _ $848,6 _ $801, $796.3641 _5884, _ — $874_2 — $929_ _ $818,724 _ _$874, _._ _$8_52,6 _ -- $928, $8,609,714 _ $200, $200, — — 52170 $200, _52l)0, 5200_ _$200, $200, _ _5200. $200_ $2,600,000 $648,890 5601,800 $596,364 $684,290 $674,200 ST29,906 $618,724 — - 5674,500 $652,696 5728,544 $6,609,714 $4,000,000 $0 $4.000.000 $1,850,000 $1,000,000 $850,000 $1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 $15,711,000 413,682,422 $29,393,422 $18,901,000 - $23,198,033 $42,099,033 so -- — -- $100,000 -- — $100,000 — — $650,000 — $500.000 - 6100,000 -- $1,300,000 — -- — $150,000 — — — so so — -- $2.900,000 $0 $o ao so - - -- SO -- (100,000 5100,000 $650.000 $500,000 $100,000 51,300,000 $150,000 - - -- — s0 — -- s0 $2,900.000 $4,613,690 $5,441,800 $4,673,364 $6,135,290 $5,118,200 $4,581,906 SS,117,724 $4,236,500 $3,839,696 $9,213,544 $S2,971,714 $676,230 $860,965 $490,076 - $602,093 - $1,819,392 - $3,183,177 - $4,718,931 - 46,457,079 - $8,433,976 - $10,693,079 - $33,880,455 $3,93T, 460 $4,580,835 44,163,288 $6,737,383 $6,937,592 $7,765,083 $9,836,655 $10,693,579 $12,273,672 $19,906,623 $86,852,169 'Deficits in the Sewer and Water Enterprise Funds create the negative available CIP funding Page 1 of 15 Eo� L. 0 75 2 FYI wm 271 10 ID 10 ..................... 9 > N .0 A Pt C 1` r cn m 12 Ln 0 (D .2 r cn z:W 0 c 0 0 W (n cn 0 > CL In 271 272 I I I N I I I I I I I I I I I I O N I I I i I I I I I I I 0 N I cl N M � N N N N p H N N , N I I O N I I I I I I I I I I N I I n wd N M I N H N p N I N N H N M N I M N N N N N N N I N N I M N M N M N H W V O u Q y� Q I o c LL o ¢ � m w � c j 0 a ooE � I cn I o � 5 � s < o i $ � a j s d i E a l 3 s � g 8 U z > co � .g o � l 0 o n •I w I I O OD N Y 272 273 � I . { \ ! { ! J ! § , a! m ;� R� m R i m ■� A� m� R� R� m . 273 §a g SN N O 8 8N 8N O N S n N 10 pM N 8 N n 4 8 ppN N O �p 8 N N n N M O 8 N b 8N oqN O N 8 N 8N N O 8 8N 8N O O 8 O 8N N O b 8 N N N N 8 N w UQ a 3g Y J � C C LL 7 LL C C t U 27,E h O N a N O m 10 N O N O O N � ' < I n m N O 1'1 I I M Qi ONi N p O N N O! N O N I � N O N O QN p ON M OJ 0 Q pO 8 m w 8 I N a M N N w M N v d I pp p� O V ffi 0 y C `0 o g F- d Q p 0 m C Z LL (0) O U §a g SN N O 8 8N 8N O N S n N 10 pM N 8 N n 4 8 ppN N O �p 8 N N n N M O 8 N b 8N oqN O N 8 N 8N N O 8 8N 8N O O 8 O 8N N O b 8 N N N N 8 N w UQ a 3g Y J � C C LL 7 LL C C t U 27,E h O N a 00 f -As T LU ZZ 2 V Q J Q M N � p 8f N 8N . O8 O N N � p Sf q 8N O N N � p N N8. O N N � p Sf N N � p N N ' SO Y N N Q N F- N N I E m g e D LL C J A LL C O � 9 U Q 275 N_ �0q N a N V O O N m C �/ i O 10 N O N UN N D � s s f0 p, Z W 0 7 O c U o NO N N8 00 SM p w J •V Q m � � O O N m 9 N O 6662111 O C� m N -y NN 8N v M O N m g O b N 10 10 m = �Q84q M8O m O a0 O `m N 8q Npp 3 m cc dA g LL T Q> O p N N C A N U C U w gN a o 0 N a N q N8 O O O M pl 8 N O N C O N N N N � N N m g w O N N8 8q � O O 8 m 8 e N N N N 4 8 } m d N N V O f0 d 61 N > D � f0 p, > 7 O c U o NO 00 p w J Ill E g� m 9 N O 6662111 C� m N -y L) p 10 m = Y N LC) `m g 3 m cc dA g LL T Q> O d CLL C A N Ir C U � N 276 N O n a o N W p) i Q L Q N N w N � aO 88 M N N N � pp SSO h N N N N � 8p 8F N N N 8N OS N N M N N N N E z m € LL C O e C � 9 U Q 277 h s m a � � s N N N � r Q O N 8 M n _Q � O N tp l7 N O N NN p U h N O N Q O O N 8 Nw th O N N N w n g N w m y4y� 25 } N LD a d 0 Cl) l9 C Q1 N U f`O l0 N c0 N 7. N d � � � C >� m r � m y m L m C m _U N N w N � aO 88 M N N N � pp SSO h N N N N � 8p 8F N N N 8N OS N N M N N N N E z m € LL C O e C � 9 U Q 277 h s m a E ca 229 ci ® � � � � ) � \ � / � � ( . � ; } � N gb v � � � $ � \ k$ . . � £ � � � � k � / cc § , k [ I � i En | | | f CL � � \ k .6 OT � 2 � ) �k � � � �� 16 2E ca c � � � � �`� a / . , cc f2 229 i u )� a� � , a �m �a f7 �t co )� k ®'!1\' \!\ §'! p ( § k \ §�% § § 9 ! R 9'k�7.} i'k k S \ § ® 7�_ 16 16 5 ■!f ; ( - },/ § ! 2�\ §col &k - .�. - §,$ c4 §K / K: \'\ $gym • -- -�- -� � & i A k R \ ( \ \ ƒ ( / CL 0 c > ■ |bCL • a §ate \�� 227 \�■ kkr- �k) 41 0 ) 27fj ; A , §� k {� k l k ! k ! (ILI k » � ■i 7 & i A k R \ ( \ \ ƒ ( / CL 0 c > ■ |bCL • a §ate \�� 227 \�■ kkr- �k) 41 0 ) 27fj L E � E W c> 2 Q $ © Q co � \ \ E / � _ f § § § # # $ � ! § ! , A ) � :2 �f 2 � § ' ■ ! �2 k \ , z % i / \ All /\ |. ,ƒ E ` ; |L ! j ; I a. - r . I , � I � \ \�. \| � , ` ) ® - � � - • ' � \ \ E / � _ m f § § § # # $ / ! § ! } ) � :2 �f 2 � § ' ■ ! �2 � \ , z % i / \ All /\ |. ,ƒ E ` ; |L ! j ; I a. - r \ \�. \| � m R a a & $ 2 ! / ! § ! , z % i / \ All /\ |. ,ƒ ` ; |L $ j ; I G w N 3 m N O O ppO pO � v 8 S N O N b N M N N N N I y$GQ Q a I , I I g 9 Obi N N Y O N N N M N M M N N M 0 0 0 �t E B tf oU oB Z $$2 $8 2 ix ul _ rt c Ti c n - z cr I I I i r O D 281 I I I 1 N I I b I o N I ' I O O O O O m N i I N I N N N N I N M N I N O N i M M M M N N M I I I I 1 N N I I I I , ' I I I 1 I 1 I I I I � N I , G w N 3 m N O O ppO pO � v 8 S N O N b N M N N N N I y$GQ Q a I , I I g 9 Obi N N Y O N N N M N M M N N M 0 0 0 �t E B tf oU oB Z $$2 $8 2 ix ul _ rt c Ti c n - z cr I I I i r O D 281 o N ' I I ' i I N I I I i I N N N N N N N N NN j Y 10 i N d I r I o N b N N M I ' °n I I o N ' I i I I N I I N 1 I j I I j I I I I I I I I r 8 I I LL I I Iao ' j I w cn m d cn N N N N M M M M M N M N N N N N oe� of uE c uT�i o oTi oB D _i3 _ _ o m _oB y o y Y uj o° $ $ I EE dic mu/ u °g E' SE'S era $ � � gin S. 3w g' ¢E ` j "gig K ' c =� K V c m c g j c E K¢ K E - Ix c 04 rl I �p m a8 R 28? § � � � $ 4 § § # § § A § K ; ; - § K - |■ | § } I # . |6 - . » a K I � - cr ` �` .£ - § § ! � # m � § � \ � K � § � � � $ 4 § § # § ) § a§ i§ �k § cz 0 L 0 § # ! k k - |■ | § } I # . |6 - . » a - cr ` �` .£ ) § a§ i§ �k § cz 0 L 0 § # ! k k ƒ § $ \ k ( k § 7 � � ! f \ } ! k § ■ k k $ + � K ( � B �af I� �7 �J 2 ■ j� �� \ 28" k - |■ | k ƒ § $ \ k ( k § 7 � � ! f \ } ! k § ■ k k $ + � K ( � B �af I� �7 �J 2 ■ j� �� \ 28" `vJ Z •� cW i C ❑ V Q y m J c � c LL LL m � U o m s N N R w O� m N s N � I s I w N O 8 o N ! N S m b N w O ' w O Vf O S O O N Q m Ck S N N N w N s N I M o m M N O N i I O p O w ' pO S O O w « p O O S o N I ' w , w o ry w I I i w 1p N r N I ° O O � , I SO ° I S 4 O O N 0 N I N m Q O O N I I I ' i , i ' w T o I I I I w N N °E I � I d e. UC n C O mm ((O.11 cov E o .q 4 a c a c 2 c i s U w y U 0 w w m E m m E 8 %a c Eo in n E m nE E a m t Z O Z O vim c m � m c rn c m m o,a mNm m:r = n a A= 16 w 3 w 3 LU g � i m J c � c LL LL m � U °N N R N � s N O 8 N N N w O N w O Vf O S O O N Q m Ck S N N N w N m J c � c LL LL m � U Q i H 2 g a W L) Q 2 2 Q Q LL 28 i M N n N 11 N V M U7 U9 N 8 r, O p O a O LO M S O pp O o tD S rn Cl) S tD S Co S ui S R in S S 0 °o S 25 0 0 LQ S in M S N M c0 L 0 N O S N 0 0 a0 0 o S in h 0 o N 0 M N C o N 0O oO N I n O 0 ooc m N � N t0 LO LO ,. �.•,. ...r I M M C i17 n U7 M uQi co 8 O R 8 ap l C n o N C u7 CO o a0 °o M LO �D ' o a0 c i17 0 Q� $ M C O u� N Oco_ t0 f7 00 N 0 O 00 °o N LOn �7 S S 0 0 0 S� S S - n -V N n M In t0 CO N m O M a a Ld n In n O O n O S S to SO 00 SO p 00 O 8 8 N p 00 co S N N M m m M M 0 S g o Co o M a S a g M a0 S �n S M co N CO n O O M S N U7 O I O oc tD M O O p O M p O a0 M Q M N r g 7�$$ W g yl > Q U E y _ � ` N c x X w C C > v w to O y w` U g LL E U- Q = Lu U Q = c a c a 8 in g (� m m 3: c o c 3 28 i x z LLI ■ Ul) 0 0 0 OD \� � � U) \� k cv m 2 V) x 0 E a c E CD k f ) Uj (U > < k a / � :01 17 c A In , U_ U_, c 0 :� co 2c o ai o m CL) .1 4) U) :3 0 r CD 0 z C14 s C? L) LLI z z w z R ■ :3 u 4c LL 0 .2 tm m 0 u 2 Vs c 0 L) Je0 z 28 7 Ct C14 CN co C', \�.LO in m c Ln x C r_ 0 (D 45 0 C7 c > o E La cr Z E a > LLJ (D > 0 \ / c LL L) L) m 76 '3: G o 3: S 0 .2 tm m 0 u 2 Vs c 0 L) Je0 z 28 7 x 2.1 z 5 CL w z c z LL cc c 0 C, m 0 L) co IT k >- a) 17 En z 0 ME 0 a L6 Ct In 0 co L o0 Ln c; C5 Ct q Cl) Ct q LQ Ct CIO LO Ln ",I O CnI 'ni U, ct LO O IQ In LO cn U W V) m 0 G7 2 a) cy, 0 L) > E > 0 Tic E m > 0 L) m 7 S U N 0 0 Lul LL a a. A Q. cc c 0 C, m 0 L) co IT k >- a) 17 En z 0 ME z z w z R ■ LL E 4) u CL c 0 m 4 C", u ro- LL r- 0 L) U) cr Z 0 28,9. 4L LC3 Lri CN C, C', � \\ C, C� Lr, cli Ld 0 0 L6 vi N t, k 0) 0 04 04 cli C6 � 7 cNi C-i CY c CD (D t5 'm ED uj (D 0 Lu a) a) > 0 L) \ k c wl M LL :3 . C IL , a. Q) cr V5 (D E 4) u CL c 0 m 4 C", u ro- LL r- 0 L) U) cr Z 0 28,9. rC O LL LU U Z Z w Z R LL (D 0 M QI co N 'o U �00 CD -= 0) rn U2 Z LL C 2 L) 0 :3 cc '46) cr F- (n 290 S C, SC� Ld C, Lr) O C, LO T. LO co 0 C, cNi N 46 r. O Ld o cn Ct S O O LQ v cn C4 C6 vi o c c Cc)" CF L) 9 0 LI)2.r- cm c .0 r- x LU U) CY aCi > > 0 C-) c 0 Z5 L) * Lcul L) cD LU > 0 m a) 0 o 0 -0 L c Lul 0 F6 L E LL I (u cc -2 (D 0 M QI co N 'o U �00 CD -= 0) rn U2 Z LL C 2 L) 0 :3 cc '46) cr F- (n 290 ATTACHMENT H FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN - Fire Station 2 TOTAL 5,000 20,500 29,500 43,000 63,500 30,000 42,000 15,000 4,000 25,000 35,000 40,000 Year Built: 1958, 1965 (Tower) Square Footage: 4,976 Type Construction: Masonary/Wood Notes: Complex has limited maintenance funding because of replacement in 09/10 and future in question. ZV cc F-4 7!2!2007 Flf i I�i� : FY 1 a3f 'i* FY i4A10 . f'iF4WIG Fl136�� .: Doors - Interior /Exterior 300 8,000 15,000 Energy Retrofit 5,000 5,000 Floor Coverin s 3,000 1 10,DDO1 10,0001 Fumigation 12,000 HVAC Duct Cleaning 8,000 10,000 HVAC Equipment 10 000 30 000 Paint - Exterior 6,500 12,000 i0,000 Paint - Interior 3,500 4,000 25,000 Restroom Retrofit 2,00 3,500 12,000 15,000 Roof 45,000 25,000 Wall Covenn s 2,000 3,0 0 Waterseal - Exterior 5,000 5,000 Window Coverings 3,5001 2,500 4,000 Windows 1 35,000 TOTAL 5,000 20,500 29,500 43,000 63,500 30,000 42,000 15,000 4,000 25,000 35,000 40,000 Year Built: 1958, 1965 (Tower) Square Footage: 4,976 Type Construction: Masonary/Wood Notes: Complex has limited maintenance funding because of replacement in 09/10 and future in question. ZV cc F-4 7!2!2007 ATTACHMENT H FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN - Hardball DescAptlam ... warm., Actual '" +V. 4107,; _ FY,.0744 P FY 0t3109 Pr p¢. 'FY 08110 'Proposed `. FY 10111 ` FY 1 t /12 P FY 17113 : FY 13114 'Proposed FY WIS ' FY 15116 'Proposed FY 16/17 Proposed Doors - Interior /Exterior 1,000 2,500 Energy Retrofit Floor Coverin s 1,000 1,000 Fumigation 3,500 4,000 HVAC Duct Cleaning HVAC Equipment Paint - Exterior 3,000 6,000 6,()00 Paint - Interior 1,800 5,000 4,500 Restroom Retrofit 3,000 4,000 4,000 Roof 3,000 20 000 Wall Coverings Waterseal - Exterior Window Coverings Windows 1 1,350 2,000 4,000 TOTAL 9,150 3,000 3,000 6,000 7,500 0 10,000 20,000 4,500 7,500 0 10,000 Year Built: 1961 Square Footage: 960 (2 -story) Type Construction:Stucco/Wood Notes: Stucco repair required on Northside of roof overhange. TJ 7/2/2007 ATTACHMENT H FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN - Hilltop �Desai' ' oa fy 1111? F?,yl FlF;t3/1� :;FYa4115 >f:Y W1.6 TYI N7:' Doors - Interior /Exterior 2,000 4,500 Energy Retrofit Floor Coverings Fumi ation 500 500 HVAC Duct Cleaning HVAC Equipment Paint - Exterior 4,500 Paint - Interior 3,00 500 4,500 Restroom Retrofit 2 000 M000 12,000 Roof 18,000 Wall Coverings Waterseal - Exterior Window Coverings Windows TOTAL 3,000 5,000 4,500 22,500 10,000 500 0 0 16,500 0 0 0 Year Built: 1970 Square Footage: 760 Type Construction: Masonary/Wood Notes: INZ zz tz 7/2/2007 ATTACHMENT H FACIUTY MAINTENANCE PLAN - Joslyn Center Des altitaai tP ' P 1'r I. w 7 P!r FY- 11I1�.` F'M 4 3 ` FY y, %!it ;Pr " Flf 74145 ; FY liF16 pr fY 16117 P Doors - Interior /Exterior 1,500 1,500 20,000 Energy Retrofit 1,DDO 4,500 Floor Coverin s 20,0001 25,000 Fumigation 3,500 1 3 500 HVAC Duct Cleaning 3,500 8,000 HVAC Equipment 15 000 45,000 Paint - Exterior 4,5 16,000 Paint - Interior 50 '10,000 7,9001 20,000 8,000 Restroom Retrofit 3,000 6,000 8,000 Roof 35,000 Wall Coverings 2,000 5,000 8,000 Waterseal - Exterior Window Coverings 7000 10,000 10 000 Windows 25,0001 30,000 TOTAL 12,000 17,500 21,500 28,500 9,500 27,900 14,500 36,000 28,000 65,000 41,000 66,500 Year Built: 1966 Square Footage: 7,350 Type Construction: Stucco/Wood Notes: Extensive termite damage throughout building. N CD N. 7/2/2007 ATTACHMENT H FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN - Library x with tictamY "1fsON0 P �$�9$t ? FY0910; @d FY 1.01a1 :`fY, 11112 FY Q2/!3' PmPbw .FYI, 4 propomw FY 14115 #Y;15/46 Proposed FY.16/17 Proposed Doors - Interior /Exterior 10,000 15,000 Energy Retrofit 20,000 45,000 Floor Coverin s 33,000 10,000 1 10,000 Fumigation HVAC Duct Cleaning 15,000 18,000 HVAC Equipment 40 000 25,000 Paint - Exterior 30,000 38,000 Paint - interior 28,000 30,000 Restroom Retrofit 3,000 10,000 12,000 Root 60,0001 Wall Coverings 3 000 Waterseal - Exterior 3,000 Window Coverings 5,0001 8000 Windows 60,000 10,()00 1 1 15,0001 20 000 TOTAL 33,000 123,000 26,000 50,000 28,000 25,000 45,000 10,000 43,000 25,000 70,000 98,000 Year Built: 1940,1963,1991 Square Footage: 30,330 Type Construction. Concrete, Masonary /Stucco, Wood Notes: Built in 3 phases. C.� CA 7/2/2007 ATTACHMENT H FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN - Maintenance Facility / 3S►1r 15 Actua + Faf Q7i1>> ;FY b8108 •TFY X118/,10. :'P . FY 19/11 P► Fi 11112. FY-12f.13- ..FY 13/14 ; FY 14/15: ed FY 15116 `Pr .: FY 16/17. Pr Doors - Interior /Exterior 20 000 35 000 Energy Retrofit 8,000 2,000 25,000 Floor Coverings 1 15,000 12,000 Furniciation & Treatment 5,000 6,000 6,000 HVAC Duct Cleaning 2,500 3,500 4 000 HVAC Equipment 40 000 Paint - Exterior Paint - Interior 4 000 5 000 Restroom Retrofit 4,000 10000 Roof 35 000 Wall Coverings 3 000 8,000 Waterseal - Exterior 4 000 Window Coverings 3,0001 4,500 Windows 15.000 1 10 000 TOTAL 10,500 42,000 26,000 44,000 3,000 3,500 31,000 13,000 12,000 51,000 14,500 39,000 Year Built: 1983 Square Footage: Admin. 5,214, Maint. Shop 17,170, Garages 8,814 Type Construction: MasonaryfWood Notes: 06/07 New A/C on Admin. Sever termite damage in Maint. Shop v� 7/2/2007 ATTACHMENT H FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN • Parks Buildings UescH' `orr FY D$l06; Actuai.`, F11 6►0 ?'; ?P '- � f T/08. FY `P ed .'F�f�09HO. "Pr .Flf IIM17 P : 1 X 11/12 FY 12't13,.. FY 13hlL FY-14115 ,P FY 45116 Pr FY1SF17 Proposed* Doors - Interior /Exterior 6,500 3,000 2 500 Energy Retrofit Floor Coverin s Fumigation 2 000 4.000 HVAC Duct Cleaning HVAC Equipment Paint - Exterior 5 000 Paint - Interior 2,000 Restroom Retrofit 3 000 2,000 Roof 25,000 Wall Coverings Waterseai - Exterior Window Coverings Windows TOTAL 6,500 2,000 10,000 25,000 3,000 0 0 4,000 0 0 4,500 0 Year Built: 1970 Square Footage: 1,870 Type Construction:Wood /Stucco Notes:Garages require major repair work when roof replaced. IV 7/2/2007 ATTACHMENT H FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN - Pine Field A .t :De'sed " orr .. : -' Y Achtsl .::. r� M i .. lQ7i!0�$` d{ a, F1f'A$l09 P ' :.;fi1i91a01f 10!11 < ProlXsed . =F1(11f1T fY 123 P �1("13h14. ,pr F1/4413 P osed FY 15116 ' Pr . FY 1611.7. Pr Doors - Interior /Exterior 800 Energy Retrofit Floor Coverings 800 4001 500 Fumi ation HVAC Duct Cleaning HVAC E ui ment Paint - Exterior 1 000 1.000 Paint - Interior 300 450 500 Restroom Retrofit Roof 1,000 Wall Coverings Waterseal - Exterior Window Coverings Windows TOTAL 1,100 0 1,000 1,800 400 450 0 0 0 1,000 0 1,000 Year Built: 1978 Square Footage: Conssesion - 584, Score Keeper - 110 Type Construction:Masonary/Wood Notes: Sever wood damage from termites. New fixtures in R.R. 05 INZ 7/2/2007 ATTACHMENT H FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN - Police Station hYAS�[08 ' 1I A6J7 *XrA�lOa , F1f OSI09 _: fY 0W1D FYi0f1a FY 11N2 FY 12118 - Pr ed, , "FY 13!14 ' Pr : fY 14{13 t? ed." FY 15/16 Pr e4 f1f 1611T Pribilimed , Doors - Interior /Exterior 10,0()0 5,000 Energy Retrofit 1,000 35,000 Floor Coverings 38,000 10,000 40,000 Fumigation HVAC Duct Cleaning 18,000 18,000 HVAC Equipment 3,000 25.000 30,000 Paint - Exterior Paint - Interior 4,50 3,000 21,000 31000 25 000 18,000 Restroom Retrofit 3,000 5,000 5,000 6,000 Roof 52,000 Wall Coverings 4,000 6 000 Waterseal - Exterior 18,000 Window Coverings 4,000 5,000 Windows 1 30,0001 TOTAL 4,500 25,000 62,000 41,000 28,000 35,000 40,000 24,000 57,000 48,000 35,000 46,000 Year Built: 1978, 2000 Square Footage: Station - 26,466, 911 Center - 4,980 Type Construction: Concrete, Masonary/Wood Notes: New Chiller /Boiler in 2001 N :.o 7/2/2007 ATTACHMENT H FACILITY MAINTENANCE PLAN - Softball Des FaF Q5�96 wig A ... PY p1' ;. Ey 019lD9 , ; _ f'Y Q9/f 0 FY;tO/17 Pr FY, 1111.2 ;P FY 12('13 FY 13114.' Pr "FY 14!15. P FY 13/16 Pr , FY 16117 Doors - Interior /Exterior Energy Retrofit Floor Coverin s 2,000 2,000 Fumigation HVAC Duct Cleaning HVAC Equipment Paint - Exterior 2,000 2,500 3 000 Paint - Interior 1 000 1,000 Restroom Retrofit 500 1,000 1,000 Roof 15,000 Wall Coverings Waterseal - Exterior Window Coverings Windows 1,350 1,3501 1,5001 TOTAL 2,500 1,350 0 3,000 3,500 1,350 0 0 1,000 4,000 15,000 3,500 Year Built: 1961 Square Footage: 640 Type Construction: Stucco/Wood Notes: New North window 06/07 W O O 7/2/2007 ■ m c 0 co 0 u o 48) m 0 7 LL 0 3: C 4) z 0) CY 0 >- U) z 301 ) C� C� if) Cl) U') z. LO C14 co LQ � \ � Cl) CD C� v LO LLJ "Z: = 0 m 0 CU 0 r- CD )� CY 0 > 0 0 E cr Lu x LU 'E CD E CD > 0 LU > 0 \ k LLJ ƒ U cr m c 0 co 0 u o 48) m 0 7 LL 0 3: C 4) z 0) CY 0 >- U) z 301 -E L) uj z 4c z w z R LL a_ c (D (D LO) 0 c 7r 0 S -E \{ c c 0 20 M U) F- 302 C'4 co LO C:, Ld 0 0 M. Al ° l cn \ � . IQ Iq Cl) c" L I Cr4 .0 LLJ 0 / m L) E cu cr, c cu > LLJ 1 0 4) 0 CD \ ) LLI LL Im, E LL 0 0 CLI CL I -g V) x x 0 1 a) J k I a_ c (D (D LO) 0 c 7r 0 S -E \{ c c 0 20 M U) F- 302 u z 4c ■ z u 4 LL 's 0 0 U) 0 c 0 co L6 > c (D 6 .0 LL CD m >, D cr �— z 0 W 303 0 cq 00 V. C, 8 t. C, Iq o co co \ 0 ) } ° cn CP ` (D > 0 _ ƒ ) El j L) CY LU L) *I LU c 7 'I to � > o IF LIJ FL LL ml m a. I cL w I Ix ! 's 0 0 U) 0 c 0 co L6 > c (D 6 .0 LL CD m >, D cr �— z 0 W 303 DOWNTOWN COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Reports of Commissions, Boards and Committees AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding Downtown Subcommittee status report and recommendations for Downtown El Segundo gateway signage design and signage locations. (Fiscal Impact: None). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Receive a progress report from the Downtown Subcommittee; 2) Approve gateway signage design and sign locations; 3) Request staff prepare cost detail for signage fabrication and installation; 4) Report back to Council with a funding and implementation plan; 5) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The City Council established an ad hoc Downtown Subcommittee for the purpose of making expenditure recommendations for impact fees totaling $250,000 which had been set -aside in the development agreement between the City and Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners, LLC (Plaza El Segundo) for downtown business promotion. In November 2006, the Council approved the Subcommittee's work plan, approved the Subcommittee's request for an allocation of $180,800 from the development agreement account, and authorized two professional service contracts to complete work plan deliverables. City Adworks was retained to provide creative services for developing a downtown logo, tagline, and banner and wayfinding signage designs. However, after much discussion and consideration, the Subcommittee now proposes a gateway signage program be undertaken in (Please see attached page marked "Background and Discussion ") ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: City Adworks' Gateway Signage Design Concepts; Site Location Maps FISCAL IMPACT: None Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: Yes X No ORIGINATED BY: DATE: Bill Crowe, �ssi tangy City Ma REVIEWED Jeff gtoart/City Manager DATE: ?/1 I/G 1 304 1#1 Background and Discussion (con't): place of the wayfinding program. The Subcommittee is recommending that Downtown gateway signage is proposed to be positioned at three key intersections (Grand /Sepulveda, GrandNista Del Mar, and Imperial /Main) and seeks Council approval of the revised scope and proposed signage design. Of the previously approved allocation, $75,000 was set -aside for banner and wayfinding signage fabrication /installation expenses. As gateway signage is anticipated to be more costly, staff is working to identify supplemental and alternative funding resources. Regarding the monument sign location recommended for the Grand /Sepulveda intersection, the owner of property on the northwest corner has offered to finance and install a gateway sign based upon City Adworks' design. Locations identified for pylon gateway signs (N /E corner of GrandNista Del Mar and N/E corner of Grand /Sepulveda) are currently under review with affected businesses and property owners. With respect to the intersection of Imperial /Main, staff would propose to revisit gateway signage options with the City Council at the point in time when LAWA- financed settlement agreement street improvements are considered. In summary, the Subcommittee recommends the City Council take action to: 1) Approve City Adworks' gateway signage design concepts; 2) Designate three street intersections - Grand /Sepulveda, GrandNista Del Mar, and Main /Imperial — for placement of downtown gateway signs; 3) Authorize City Manager to expend trust funds for signage design /fabrication /installation (not to exceed $75,000); 4) Authorize City Manager to negotiate and accept on behalf of the City developer /property -owner financed and installed gateway signage or funding to supplement purchase and installation costs for approved gateway signage locations; 5) Authorize City Manager as may be required to negotiate right -of -way encroachment agreements for gateway signage placement; and 6) Direct City Manager to report back to City Council with a detailed funding and implementation plan. 305 kv, $�'$ \: u u NMOINMOG Jr. §�\ }777 \:� UW3 44, CD CD cm � \� / \ r\�n} V it yC ° v K O w o o H aas - t2fx !Hg J � CO 4$y'J3q =HH HZ u�"x. veWi ..•`�'� = °p ,t„p '4 iY ar 1 O. Vn YY P� i^ rr - . 1 v Jam i - if I t M o' W wl � i oa N Q r e U Q• © m ~ r N � • � N cr s W eN°e _ IX ' Li i 11 s - . 1 v Jam i - if I t M o' W wl � i oa N Q r e U Q• © m ~ r N � • � N cr s W eN°e r es z dNd�M a- oZ I �r• 11 0 r 307 0 0 D x W D A 0 T — $ } O N c j m z u 1 pOp y m� f;rl O U V ; m m m zpzC- „OTDG w Cm O D N �Zpp TO�TC 0 m 7� AArtr �m z Z r O m z .A O T W H g D Z< Z >uz (n(nwcm :: m mcctn ; m mZZ o z0 p T N Z A T T D N m Z Z N CCCZp 0 ° y O O T \Z Z” 00 Sz 2 0 lZS Z z y O (� D 'o m m C T z 0 5 J d O T C7 D w' D �.Qnq obi J tp n m r C�Q3_Oc 0 m W` lG G 3� O` C d Z z 0 ur a �o vry,� ma 0 mI m N. ]' % d T 3 V J a s J d 1 v m O d P d 3 N N J TJ m O N N J o f7l m 3 » -n y mo 01 d, < � d 53 3 �. Q d a g C '�" a '� o s N tp�p J N d n 9 m D d O d i Ip A n N 3 > D V a$ H m 3 d m w c Q d _ m d n q me p� A m 7 to n D Q % N V m C m y N o. N �i A O O Q O n x m n y m m >O D C O m m N O a �o 0, N N W OD A A 0• (Q�.11 (J� + Om 0cn mA� >r> m0 i:kTZnDrnT; $vv�OeoOCr0tDilDnT NDOmDjvOA0020.DD= a ' mz '� 7c r-II v '� rt� r < v 1 pOp y m� f;rl O U V ; m m >Z Zy D cn1m Mcni HD ay � ;A CTC zpzC- „OTDG w Cm O D N �Zpp TO�TC r mr nN-�pm n 2z 0 0 0 AArtr �m z Z r O m z D S ti C m m x: 0 0 0 > Oxxz1iD�-Cmm^A� W H g D Z< Z >uz (n(nwcm :: m mcctn ; m mZZ o z0 p T Nm 00 ; A T O Z Z A T T D N m Z Z N CCCZp 0 TDZ��GIzO 0 �i O O m$ m m W 0 m Z 9 Z Z” 00 Sz 2 0 lZS Z z y O (� D 'o m m C T z 0 5 J X r T O C 0 m O ; N n Z m m 0 C z m N O a �o 0, N W OD N A U m U W• � i� N i i N C m i •__ 309 0 D O T D v v A O r D ii n ? O O m N D m j Z C z O 7 W OD A A 0• (Q�.11 (J� + tip A �O tW0 OOO OD 1 1 1 a ' (A(J�� QNQ1� OOOf tO �+N W 000 W OD N A U m U W• � i� N i i N C m i •__ 309 0 D O T D v v A O r D ii n ? O O m N D m j Z C z O 7 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER 6/812007 THROUGH 6/21/2007 Date 6/11/2007 6/13/2007 6/14/2007 6/14/2007 6/15/2007 6/18/2007 6/20/2007 6/20/2007 6/20/2007 6/21/2007 6/21/2007 6/8-6/21/07 Payee Amount Description West Basin 810,680.59 H2O Health Comp 2,211.38 Weekly claims 6/8 Employment Development 48,800.00 State Taxes Estimate IRS 240,000.00 Federal Taxes Estimate State of CA 1,301.54 Child support withholdings Nationwide Retirement 27,774.87 457 contributions Cal Pers 250,288.99 Retirement La Salle 43,725.00 ABAG Payment Lane Donovan Golf Ptr 21,843.16 payroll transfer Federal Reserve 150.00 Employee EE Bonds Health Comp 1,290.38 Weekly claims 6/15 Workers Comp Activity 35,375.07 SCRMA checks issued 1,483,440.98 DATE OF RATIFICATION: 7/03/07 TOTAL PAYMENTS BY WIRE: Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by: 1,483,440.98 - K4_rl� (o a a Yepup Trea rer Date Acting Direyj6r of Finance Z 2G Date l z6 v� Dat on actual expenditures is available in the City Treasurer's Office of the City of El Segundo. 310 :21021213 3SWAU0S 2131I1dN100 01 inn SHO3Ho OIOA :3100 3103HO 133HUO3NI 013n0 SH33H0 010A V/N uNambiniV 013n0 SMO3H0 QIOA = -'ZL -M -30-SV IVA0dddV d0 31VO JVNVW .1110 2101032110 33NVNIH 0N11OV w6eueyy NI0 e4l Aq panwtlde stuawlsnfpe iolpue sl Luasin .pas Ape3 UaliwnpueH =H sanadde ra6euep4 41!0 a4l Le41 sasue Uogenlls a Ua4M Jo paplOAe aq ueo sagleued luawAed alel jo pawelgo aq ueo slunooslp tuawAed ldwoid eje4Ar seouelsw 'sluawaake lenloeiluoa lua um 44m tuaMSUOO sa3uu8s aaAoldwe t3equoo 'spunjai snoueA 'stuautasmgwlaj asuadxe laAejl asAoldue pue 4seo Attad 'saolAtas Allptn jol slueLuAed :se y3nS *ja6eueyy A4!0 a4l Aq panoldde sluawlsnlpe rofpue stuawasingslp asealad A11e3 patetaua6 jslndw00 = H 8 speLlo lgauag aaAoldw3 pue IloLted = V :u0ge3ugea ioH suopied0 AllO to Yoddns uI sa3wes PUB sagddns'slepalew jol sluawAod A3ua6tn /A3ua6jewe -uou Ile joy spag3 palejeua6 jalndwo0 = a :S3000 aseelat of uollezuoytne 113uno3 AL!0 iol pla4 s)l3Btl3 ieln6aH :IenojddV jo-4 pace% I -LuAed col pury to lgglgelleAe a41 pue spueutaO eql to A3emo3e a4t of se Alglao 1 'opun6aSl3 W AIO a41 uI GDWO saowaS angeJlsiulwpV 10 JQpWQ ayt ul algetlene Si SeJrplpUadxa len33e uo uolleuuolul S3l30NV SO-1 HO A1Nf100 VINNO111VO HO 31V1S 9L'6l1'£O9'l S S1NV8kIVMW101 L6'ZZC LSn211 S3OIA213S 301S1n0 SOL t0 OL01, 83H10 ONnH 1SnH.L 318VON3dX3 £OL - S333 213dO13A30 - ONn3 1sn211 318VON3dX3 ZOL 0V'SLL'£ 3ONV21nSNl'dW303811321 LOL 99 540'L L 3ONV21nSNV3Ad3S321 dW00 S213N21OM £09 LL 049'Z 30NV8nSNI A- LITSVI1 Z09 W 999'£) LN3n3O"3H IN3Wd1n03 LOB - ONnd 3$21(100 dIOJ E09 61, 'LVO'9 ONf13 b31VM31SVM ZOg 00'1EL' lZ ONnd A11111n 2131VM LOB - 30NVN3.LNIVW S311111OV3 90V - ONnd 1N3W30V1d3H 31n1On81SV21dNl Zoe LO'OLZ'996 ONn31N3W3A021dW1 N1ldVO toe - ELN 1OR11SIO 1N3WSS3SSV ZoZ - ONnd'V'M'V'l ZZL - ONn3'S d'O'3 OZL VW33 LZL - LN"D V1W fill - ONn3 AVM3NI8 tze as - E 31011210 VOl Ott - ONn3 NOI1V9111W NOI83dAH L L L 61 96S'LSV ONnH NOI1V1lV1SN1 ONnOS 3WOH 9U - WV210021d 1N3W1S3ANI Ali-MnO WV SLL SVL9 NOI1V18OdSNVW.3.dO8d Ott 1169 N011V.i8OdSNV2l1.V. dOHId ZLL 00'909'Z 1NY89 HOOIS 13A30 'MOO I.I.I. V£SZE'L ONn33mn113j21O313SSV 60L - ONnd 931.I.W13V N011V310321 031VIOOSSV OOt - ONn3 XVl SVO 31V1S got - ONn3 AL3dVS O133V211 VOL 6V'Z89't LV ONn:J 1"3N39 too ONn-i A9 S1V101 SINVNLIVM OONM3S 13 30 A110 r� V99099Z - 60V099Z CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER 6/22/2007 THROUGH 7/5/2007 Date Payee Amount Description 6/27/2007 Health Comp 2,284.43 Weekly claims 6/22 6/28/2007 Employment Development 36,478.36 State Taxes Estimate 6/28/2007 IRS 190,455.85 Federal Taxes Estimate 6/29/2007 State of CA 1,301.54 Child support withholdings 6/29/2007 Federal Reserve 150.00 Employee EE Bonds 6/29/2007 Umpqua Bank 233,730.06 Ohno Costruction Retention 7/2/2007 Nationwide Retirement 27,711.41 457 contributions 7/3/2007 Cal Pers 252,441.66 Retirement 7/5/2007 Lane Donovan Golf Ptr 21,558.66 payroll transfer 7/5/2007 Health Comp 6,443.76 Weekly claims 6/29 7/5/2007 Unum Provident 410.70 LTD insurance 7/5/2007 Cal Pers 360,314.60 Retirement 6/22- 7/5/07 Workers Comp Activity 32,159.94 SCRMA checks issued 1,165,440.97 DATE OF RATIFICATION: 7/26/07 TOTAL PAYMENTS BY WIRE: Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by: 1,165,440.97 Q n �crLK -..�. 7 �5r1 % Dep ty Trea urer Date 7 0 Acting Di r c nance Date 7ormation an er 7iTreasurer's I on actual expenditures is available in the Office of the City of El Segundo. 31,E REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 2007 - 5:00 P.M. 5:00 P.M. SESSION CALL TO ORDER — Mayor McDowell at 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor McDowell - Present Mayor Pro Tern Busch - Present Council Member Boulgarides - Present Council Member Fisher - Present Council Member Jacobson - Present PUBLIC COMMUNICATION — (Related to City Business Only — 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total) Individuals who have received value of $50 or more to communicate to the City Council on behalf of another, and employees speaking on behalf of their employer, must so identify themselves prior to addressing the City Council. Failure to do so shall be a misdemeanor and punishable by a fine of $250. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Consideration and possible action to appoint the City Attorney as labor negotiator regarding the terms and conditions of the City Manager's employment contract. MOTION by Council Member Jacobson, SECONDED by Mayor Pro Tern Busch to appoint Mark Hensley, City Attorney, as labor negotiator regarding the terms and conditions of the City Manager's employment contract. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 2. Consideration and possible action to appoint the City Manager as labor negotiator for terms and conditions of employment of unrepresented management/confidential employees (City employees who are not members of bargaining units). MOTION by Mayor McDowell, SECONDED by Mayor Pro Tern Busch to appoint Jeff Stewart, City Manager, as labor negotiator for terms and conditions of employment of unrepresented management/confidential employees (City employees who are not members of bargaining units). MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 Mark Hensley, City Attorney, announced that Council would be meeting in closed session pursuant to items identified on the agenda. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 PAGE NO. 1 313 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)) — 2 matters 1. City of El Segundo vs. City of Los Angeles, et. al. LASC No. BS094279 2. Solomon vs. City of El Segundo LASC No. BC372401 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(b): -0- potential case (no further public statement is required at this time); Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(c): -1- matter. DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS — EVALUATION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEE (Gov't Code §54957): -1- matter Position: City Manager CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54957.6):-2- matter 1. Labor Negotiator: Jeff Stewart, City Manager Unrepresented Employees: Management/Confidential Employees (all City Employees who are not members of bargaining units) 2. Labor Negotiator: Mark Hensley, City Attorney Unrepresented Employee: Jeff Stewart, City Manager CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8): -0- matter Council moved to open session at 6;00 p.m. SPECIAL MATTERS: -1- matter 1. Interview of candidates and potential appointments to the Recreation and Parks Commission, Planning Commission, Library Board of Trustees, Senior Citizen Housing Corporation Board and Investment Advisory Committee. [Note: the interviews will commence at approximately 5:45 p.m. and take place in the Council Conference Room located adjacent to the Council Chambers.] Council consensus to re- appoint Dave Wagner to the Planning Commission, for a full term to expire May 30, 2011 and Suzanne Fuentes to the Planning Commission for a partial term to expire June 30, 2008. Council consensus to postpone interviews for the Recreation and Parks Commission and Senior Citizen Housing Corporation Board until July 17, 2007. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 PAGE NO. 2 314 Council consensus to postponed interviews of Investment Advisory Committee, Community Cable Advisory Committee and Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee until October 16, 2007. MOTION by Mayor McDowell, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgarides to extend the term of Recreation and Parks Commissioner Randall until it is filled. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. Council recessed at 6:55 p.m. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 PAGE NO. 3 315 REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 2007 - 7:00 P.M. 7:00 P.M. SESSION CALL TO ORDER — Mayor McDowell at 7:00 p.m. INVOCATION — Pastor Brandon Cash, Oceanside Christian Fellowship PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Councilmember Jim Boulgarides PRESENTATIONS — a. Proclamation by the Mayor and Members of the City Council presented by Council Member Jacobson to Kevin Smith, Fire Chief, proclaiming Saturday, June 23, 2007 as Super CPR Saturday to encourage participation in Cardio - Pulmonary Resuscitation training. b. Proclamation by the Mayor and Members of the City Council presented by Council Member Fisher to Debbie Bundy, Chairman, Recreation and Parks Commission, proclaiming July as Parks & Recreation Month. ROLL CALL Mayor McDowell - Present Mayor Pro Tern Busch - Present Council Member Boulgarides - Present Council Member Fisher - 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. Joe Svezia, Resident; spoke in favor of restricting the parking of recreations vehicles, boats, trailers, and commercial vehicles on residential streets. John Coppelman, President Del Aire Neighborhood Association; spoke regarding businesses at 118th Place and Aviation Boulevard and the proposed medical marijuana dispensary on the property. Requested Council assistance in opposing the issuance of this permit. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 PAGE NO. 4 316 Dr. Michelle Rogers, Rotary; announced the annual "Movie in the Park" on Saturday, August 4, 2007 at Chevron Park, "Night at the Museum ". Dave Burns, Resident; Spoke regarding the Disaster Council and requested City Council adopt national standards of emergency preparedness to upgrade their preparedness. He stated that he felt that the Disaster Council needed to have better representation from large and small businesses. Keith and Kaitlyn Covington, Residents; spoke regarding the recent announcement that El Segundo had the 4t' worst air quality in the State. Lilly Ronney, Senior El Segundo High School, member of Mr. Craig Gaste's, Political Behavior Class, spoke regarding a school project to review the filming procedures in El Segundo. Requested Council not restrict filming permits that profit the School District and also requested to be a part of the sub - committee reviewing the process. Suzanne Fuentes, Resident; supported the film permit review sub - committee. A. PROCEDURAL MOTIONS Consideration of a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions on the Agenda by title only. MOTION by Council Member Boulgarides, SECONDED by Council Member Jacobson to read all ordinances and resolutions on the Agenda by title only. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. 5/0 B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Consideration and possible action regarding the review of surrounding agency graffiti abatement policies and consideration of a graffiti abatement policy for the City of El Segundo. (Fiscal Impact: None) Council consensus to receive and file a report regarding graffiti abatement policies of surrounding agencies for possible implementation in El Segundo. Directed Staff to return at the July 17, 2007 meeting with an Ordinance that includes restitution measures and directed Staff to establish a hot line, and on -line reporting capability. Also directed the Police Department to review prevention, detection and prosecution methods that have worked in other cities. 2. Consideration and possible action regarding the approval of an amendment to the existing Memorandum of Understanding for increased grant funding and approval of Contract Change Orders in conjunction with the Douglas Street Gap Closure Project. (Fiscal Impact: $390,675 in Change Orders and $5,380,500 in additional grant funding. Steve Finton, Public Works Director, gave a report. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 PAGE NO. 5 317 MOTION by Council Member Boulgarides, SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Busch to authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3000A to MOU /LOA P0006330[CFP #6330] in a form as approved by the City Attorney to provide additional grant funding in the amount of $5,380,500; Appropriate grant funding in the amount of $5,380,500 to the Douglas Street Gap Closure Project; Authorize the Director of Public Works to execute Change Order Numbers 10 -1, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 to the existing Public Works Agreement No. with SEMA Construction, Inc., in the total amount of $390,675. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 2a. Consideration and possible action regarding approving minor use and development standard deviations to the proposed Plaza El Segundo Development Agreement ( "Agreement ") in accordance with Section 4.2.2. of the Agreement for the property located at 710 -850 South Sepulveda Boulevard: 700 -740 Allied Way; and 2005 -2015 East Park Place. Applicant: Rosecrans - Sepulveda Partners, 2, LLC and Rosecrans - Sepulveda Patners, 3, LLC. (Fiscal Impact: None) Mark Hensley, City Attorney, gave a report. MOTION by Mayor ProTem Busch, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgarides to approve the proposed Agreement No. 3455B Operating Memorandum No. 1 to provide for minor use and development standard deviations to the Agreement. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 3. Consideration and possible action regarding the announcement of the appointment of candidates to the Recreation and Parks Commission, Planning Commission, Library Board of Trustees and Senior Citizen Housing Corporation Board, and postponing interviews for Investment Advisory Committee, Community Cable Advisory Committee and Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee until October 16, 2007. Mayor McDowell announced the re- appointment of Dave Wagner to the Planning Commission, for a full term to expire May 30, 2011 and Suzanne Fuentes to the Planning Commission for a partial term to expire June 30, 2008. Announced interviews for the Recreation and Parks Commission and Senior Citizen Housing Corporation Board were postponed until July 17, 2007 and interviews of Investment Advisory Committee, Community Cable Advisory Committee and Capital Improvement Program Advisory Committee were postponed until October 16, 2007. Approved the extension of the term for the current Recreation and Parks Commissioner until filled. 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. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 PAGE NO. 6 318 4. Approved Warrant Numbers 2559965 to 2560188 on Register No. 17 in the total amount of $1,441,876.79 and Wire Transfers from 5/25/07 through 6/7/07 in the total amount of $937,504.07. 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 5. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY CLERK MORTESEN. 6. Awarded Contract No. 3722 to Palp, Inc., DBA Excel Paving Company for the reconstruction of Virginia Street between Sycamore Avenue and Maple Avenue to enhance drainage — Approved Capital Improvement Program — Project No. PW 07 -04. (Fiscal Impact: $86,993) 7. Approved Amendment No. 1 to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) No. 3571A between City of El Segundo and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) setting the terms and conditions to increase the amount of grant funding to $3,250,000 for the Nash Street/Douglas Street One -Way to Two -Way Street Conversion Project and approval of a expenditure of Traffic Mitigation fees of $1,750,000 to cover the required 35% local match. METRO MOU No. P0008079 (Fiscal Impact: MTA Grant Revenue of $3,250,000 and Traffic Mitigation fees $1,750,000) Authorized the City Manager to execute the amendment approved as to form by the City Attorney. Approved expenditure of Traffic Mitigation fees in the amount of $1,750,000 to cover the required 35% local match. 8. Adopted Resolution No. 4510 amending Resolution No. 4162 restricting parking on Coral Circle from 10:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. (Fiscal Impact: $2,000, sign installation cost) 9. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY MAYOR MCDOWELL. MAYOR PROTEM BUSCH NOT PARTICIPATING DUE TO A POTENTIAL CONFLICT REGARDING THE LOCATION OF HIS RESIDENCE. 10. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY MAYOR MCDOWELL. 11. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BOULGARIDES. 12. Adopted Resolution No. 4512 amending Resolution No. 4499 per the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS). The amendment revises the Resolution to be consistent with the City's PERS (Public Employees Retirement System) reporting requirements regarding the Employer Paid Member Contribution (EPMC). (Fiscal Impact: None) 13. Adopted Resolution No. 4511 appointing Mayor Kelly McDowell, City Manager Jeff Stewart, or designee, to serve as board member, alternate board member and substitute alternate board member on the Independent Cities Risk Management Association (ICRMA) government board. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 PAGE NO. 7 31,9 l7 14. Received and filed a determination that the City Council does not protest the issuance of a new Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license for on -site sale and on -site consumption of alcohol (Type 41 — On -Sale Beer and Wine) at a new restaurant located at 225 Richmond Street, EA No. 747 and AUP No. 07 -04. Applicant: Neil Cadman 15. Adopted plans and specifications for the Nash Street/Douglas Street One -Way to Two -Way Street Conversion Project. Approved Capital Improvement Program. Project No. PW 07- 09. (Fiscal Impact: MTA Grant Revenue of $3,250,000 and Traffic Mitigation fees $1,750,000) Authorized staff to advertise the project for receipt of bids. 16. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BOULGARIDES. MOTION by Council Member Fisher, SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Busch to approve Consent Agenda Item Numbers 4, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, and 15. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA 5. Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of June 5, 2007. Clerk Mortesen read the following correction into the record of the Council Meeting Minutes of June 5, 2007 under Council Reports: "Council Member Fisher expressed concerns regarding the ongoing Edison equipment problems. Asked staff to contact Edison and recommend that they inspect all El Segundo power poles to address safety issues." MOTION by Mayor ProTem Busch, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgarides to approve the Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of June 5, 2007 as corrected. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 Mayor ProTem Busch left the Dias due to a potential conflict regarding the location of his residence. 9. Consideration and possible action regarding approval of an Amendment to a Pipeline License Agreement (Contract 2478) with Air Products Manufacturing Corporation in a form as approved by the City Attorney to extend the length of pipelines in Kansas Street (377 additional feet) and Grand Avenue (168 additional feet) to provide nitrogen, hydrogen and compressed air service to facilities operated by International Rectifier Corporation at 1521 Grand Avenue per Environmental Assessment No. 751 and Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Review No. 07 -03 as approved by the Planning Commission. (Fiscal Impact: $5,400, annual license fee) MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 PAGE NO. 8 34:0 MOTION by Mayor McDowell, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgarides to approve Amendment No. B to a Pipeline License Agreement (Contract 2478) with Air Products Manufacturing Corporation in a form as approved by the City Attorney to extend the length of pipelines in Kansas Street (377 additional feet) and Grand Avenue (168 additional feet) to provide nitrogen, hydrogen and compressed air service to facilities operated by International Rectifier Corporation at 1521 Grand Avenue per Environmental Assessment No. 751 and Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Review No. 07 -03 as approved by the Planning Commission. (Fiscal Impact: $5,400, annual license fee) MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOICE VOTE; AYES: MCDOWELL, JACOBSON, FISHER AND BOULGARIDES; NOT PARTICIPATING: MAYOR PROTEM BUSCH. 4/0/1 Mayor ProTem Busch returned to the Dias. 10. Consideration and possible action to accept a cash contribution from Chevron Products Company, donated to the El Segundo Fire Department in support of Super CPR Saturday (Cardio - Pulmonary Resuscitation; $1,000) and Suppression Training ($3,056.45). (Fiscal Impact: $4,056.45) Authorized the City Manager to transfer the monies into the CPR General Fund account and Suppression Training account. MOTION by Mayor McDowell, SECONDED by Council Member Boulgarides to accept a cash contribution from Chevron Products Company, donated to the El Segundo Fire Department in support of Super CPR Saturday (Cardio - Pulmonary Resuscitation; $1,000) and Suppression Training ($3,056.45). (Fiscal Impact: $4,056.45) Authorized the City Manager to transfer the monies into the CPR General Fund account and Suppression Training account. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 11. Consideration and possible action to approve the use of the City of El Segundo logo and vehicle graphics of the El Segundo Fire Department on a new special edition "Hot Wheels" die -cast replica toy fire vehicle, to be designed and produced by Mattel, Inc. (Fiscal Impact: None) MOTION by Council Member Boulgarides, SECONDED by Mayor McDowell to approve the use of the City of El Segundo logo and vehicle graphics of the El Segundo Fire Department on a new special edition "Hot Wheels" die -cast replica toy fire vehicle, License Agreement No.3724, subject to return to Council for design approval. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 16. Consideration and possible action regarding the acceptance of a $5,000 donation from the Continental Development Corporation for the Girl Scout House Camp Eucalyptus. (Fiscal Impact: Acceptance of the $5,000 donation) MOTION by Council Member Boulgarides, SECONDED by Mayor ProTem Busch to accept a $5,000 donation from the Continental Development Corporation for the Girl Scout House Camp Eucalyptus. (Fiscal Impact: Acceptance of the $5,000 donation) MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0 F. NEW BUSINESS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 PAGE NO. 9 321 G. REPORTS — CITY MANAGER - NONE H. REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY - Announced City Council in closed session approved the City defending the action in the matter of Solomon vs. City of El Segundo LASC No. BC372401. I. REPORTS — CITY CLERK Reminded Council and the public the next regular Council meeting would be July 17, 2007. The July 3, 2007 meeting was canceled. J. REPORTS — CITY TREASURER - NONE K. REPORTS — CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Fisher — Wished the community a great summer. Council Member Jacobson — Spoke regarding the need to drive safely with children out of school for the summer. Council Member Boulgarides — Requested staff agendize a report on air quality monitoring options. Requested public support of the Senate Bill for free parking for veterans. Reported on the Disaster Council Meeting. 17. Consideration and possible action regarding development of environmental and energy efficiency policies related to the purchase, operation and maintenance of City -owned vehicles, equipment and infrastructure. (Fiscal Impact: None) Council received and filed the report. Requested staff develop a City policy, stating goals and objectives, related to energy efficiency measures to be implemented by the City. Requested a summary of the El Segundo's, along with other cities' procedures, rules and regulations regarding parking enforcement of recreational vehicles, boats, commercial vehicles and trailers. Also requested a summary of other cities. Mayor Pro Tern Busch — Spoke regarding the upcoming July 4th celebration and fire works. Congratulated all the El Segundo school graduates. Mayor McDowell — Thanked staff and schools for their support of El Segundo's annual City Government Presentations to Td and 5t' grade students. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 PAGE NO. 10 32? 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. Dave Burns, Resident; further spoke regarding the Disaster Council and his concerns. Ralph Lanphere announced the annual "Clean up of the Beach" this Saturday sponsored by NRG Power and Kiwanis Club. MEMORIALS — Owen Winfred Lambert and Mary Anna Riley Kent. CLOSED SESSION — NONE ADJOURNMENT at 8:25 p.m. Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 19, 2007 3f JEJ0. 11 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to waive the formal bidding process per the El Segundo Municipal Code Sec. 1 -7 -10 and authorize the Fire Department to purchase WebEOC Crisis Information Management Software to implement in the City Emergency Operations Center. Fiscal Impact: $55,050 RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Recommend that the City Council waive the formal bidding process per the El Segundo Municipal Code Sec. 1 -7 -10, and authorize the Fire Department to purchase WebEOC Crisis Information Management Software; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The City's Disaster Council has directed staff to ensure that there is an information management system in place to support disaster operations. This need was identified in the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) post- exercise critique as a tool for improving operations and information exchange in an emergency. The WebEOC software product will improve emergency operations capability, information management, and coordination with city staff and City Council, local, state, and federal agencies. WebEOC is the original web - enabled crisis information management system and provides secure real -time information sharing to help managers make sound decisions quickly. WebEOC will be used to integrate EOC data, information, mapping, Incident Command System, and EOC sections. The system allows users to access information via an Intranet or Internet. Continued next page ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: $55,550 Amount Requested: $55,050 Account Number: 001 - 400 - 2505 -8108 Project Phase: N/A Appropriation Required: _Yes X No ORIGINATED BY: DATE: Kevin S. Smith, Fire Chief June 19, 2007 REVIEWED Jeff �S"t )06f, City Manager DATE: 1/' 324 it] BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION continued: WebEOC is used by agencies within DOD, DOE, DHS, EPA, NASA, state, county, and cities, domestic and international airlines, healthcare associations, corporations, public utilities, and universities. Staff recommends the purchase of this incident management system because of its widespread use amongst other agencies including local municipalities such as the City of Los Angeles and Long Beach. A common incident management system will enable agencies impacted by a disaster to share information more readily. WebEOC has developed a fusion switch designed specifically to allow WebEOC installations to share data. The City of Los Angeles will serve as the starter fusion switch on the west coast that will enable Southern California agencies with WebEOC installations including El Segundo to share EOC information. 325 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of a resolution authorizing the annual destruction of identified records in accordance with the provisions of § 34090 of the Government Code of the State of California. (Fiscal Impact: Not to exceed $1,000) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Adopt Resolution authorizing the destruction of certain records; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: Each year various Departments need to transition older documents to storage or destruction and make space for the new year's records. By reviewing the older records and inventorying the current ones, available storage space is used more efficiently. Documents from the Administrative Services Department (recruitment), City Clerk's Office (election material, expired /completed contracts, Fair Political Practices Commission filings, miscellaneous administrative records), Fire Department (emergency medical service reports, copies of invoices and purchase orders), Library (invoices and receipts), Police Department (parking and traffic citations, traffic collision reports, animal control licenses, daily report log, expired restraining orders, subpoenas, misdemeanor arrest reports, found property, stored vehicle reports) and Treasurer's Office (bank deposits and statements, check registers and cancelled checks) are proposed to be destroyed in accordance with Government Code § 34090. (continued on next page) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution with Attachments FISCAL IMPACT: Not to exceed $1,000 Operating Budget: $1,000 Amount Requested: $1,000 Account Number: 001 -400- 1301 -6214 Project Phase: Appropriation Required: ORIGINATED BY: PC Cindy Mo esen, City Clerk REVIEWED Jeff Manager DATE: 1 -9 -07 DATE: .71 t 1 10 326 Background & Discussion — Continued All listed records meet the required retention schedule adopted by City Council and the City Attorney has given written approval for the destruction of these records. Staff has also implemented the following procedures for retaining City Council meeting audio - video recordings and streaming video files. Audio and video tapes are retained until DVD's have been created and verified. Streaming video files are retained on the internet for one year and on an in -house server for no less than three years. At an interval of time not to exceed ten years, City Council meeting video media will be transferred to new media and copies kept permanently in the City Clerk's Office and at off -site storage. In addition recordings of previous City Council meetings that are in VHS format will be converted to DVD so that the original VHS media can be disposed of. 327 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF PUBLIC RECORDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of El Segundo as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council finds as follows: A. Certain documents from the Administrative Services Department, City Clerk's Office, Fire Department, Library, Police Department and Treasurer's Office are proposed to be destroyed in accord with Government Code § 34090; B. The City Attorney has giving written approval for the destruction of these records pursuant to Government Code § 34090; C. Based upon the documents presented to it for destruction, it does not appear to the City Council that these records need be retained and are occupying valuable storage space. SECTION 2: Pursuant to Government Code § 34090, the City Council approves the destruction of the records referred to in attached Exhibit "A," which is incorporated by reference, and authorizes the City Clerk to dispose of the records in any lawful manner. SECTION 3: Upon destroying these documents, the City Clerk is directed to complete a certificate verifying the destruction of these records and file the certificate with the City's official records. SECTION 4: The City Clerk is directed to certify the adoption of this Resolution; record this Resolution in the book of the City's original resolutions; and make a minute of the adoption of the Resolution in the City Council's records and the minutes of this meeting. SECTION 5: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17`h day of July 2007. Kelly McDowell, Mayor 328 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO 1 I, Cindy Mortesen; City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City is five; that the foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor of said City, and attested to by the City Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 17`h day of July 2007, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS Mark D. Hensley Karl H. Berger Assistant City, 321 EXHIBIT A 330 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02, Amended 06/07/06 by Resolution 4471): APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: X/P DepartmeX I ead Date ty Attorney S60 7 ate I HEREBY CERTIFY that the items listed above are approved for destruction on in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Date 331 PACity Clerk \Destruction_Retention\2007 Certs \city clerk 4.doc CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02, Amended 06/07/06 by Resolution 4471): APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: bmoll" x /11 /07 Department Head Date APPRO RUCTION: Ci AttVTIFFY Date I HEREBY that the items listed above are approved for destruction on in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk PACity Clerk0estruction_Reten6on\2007 Certs\ASD.doc Date 332 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02, Amended 06/07/06 by Resolution 4471): APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: I HEREBY C 0 S -116 -131 Date � D 15ate TIFY that the items listed above are approved for destruction on in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Date PACity Clerk \Dcstruction_Rctention\2007 Certs \city clerk 4.doc 333 DOCUMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION — 6/2007 BOX 10 2412 4/3/96 D & J Footlhill Electric Emergency Generator System PW 95 -5 2413 8/1/95 Southwest Roofing PW 93 -15 Re -Roof Police Dept. 2415 2/7/96 DJ Construction Sidwalk Replacement PW 95 -4 2420 10/3/95 DJ Construction Cross gutter PW 95 -8 2422 10/3/95 National Plant Services Manhole Lining PW 95 -6 2395 5/16/95 Pavement Coatings, Slurry Seal PW 94 -14 334 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02, Amended 06/07/06 by Resolution 4471): Senior Housing Board 1/24/96 12/11/96 4 5 Years City Clerk Agenda Packets Completed/Expired 1993 1996 5 Completion + 10 City Clerk Contracts — SEE Years ATTACHED El Segundo City Employees 6/1/93 6/1/93 5 6 months City Clerk Association Election Ballots April 9, 2002 General 4/9/02 4/9/02 6 5 Years City Clerk Municipal Election Roster of Voters June 18, 2002 Special 6/18/02 6/18/02 7 5 Years City Clerk Municipal Election Roster of Voters Los Angeles County Election 2000 2001 7 2 Years City Clerk Information State Election Information 2003 2003 7 2 Years City Clerk APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: �110 Date Date I HEREBY CERVJKY that the items listed above are approved for destruction on in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk PACity Clerk \Destruction_Retention\2007 Certs\city clerk 2.doc Date 33 DOCUMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION — 6/2007 BOX 5 COMPLETED /EXPIRED CONTRACTS DATE COMPLETED/EXPIRED 2110 A -D 6/1/91 LA County CDBG Reimbursable Contract 6/30/96 2320 2/1/94 Service Agreement with United States Escrow, Inc. 1/31/96 2378 12/6/94 Lease with Eaton Corporation 12/31/95 2384 1/17/95 Aerospace - Technical Services Contract 6/30/96 2388 4/4/94 Meyer, Mohaddes Assoc. Consultant Services 10/2/95 2396 6/4/95 Lance, Sol] & Lunghard Consultant Services 8/18/95 2398 1/16/96 State DOT Utility Agreement - lower water main 12/31/96 2400 6/21/95 West Coast Basin - Water Rights Agreement 6/30/96 2404 7/6/95 Hartzog & Crabill, Inc. Consultant Services 6/30/96 2405 7/12/95 On -Site Microfilming Service - Bldg. Dept. 6/30/96 2406 A -B 7/1/95 CDBG Redondo Beach (So. Bay Youth Project) 6/30/96 2407 7/1/95 CDBG Just Right Help Consulting Services 6/30/96 2408 7/1/95 CDBG Tamtec Consulting Services 6/30/96 2423 10/3/95 Professional Services Agmt Finance Consultant Susan Merrill 2/29/96 2424 1/1/96 Eaton Corporation Lease Agreement 12/31/96 2427 3/1/96 CDBG Consulting Services Vickie Myers 6/30/96 2428 3/1/96 CDBG Consulting Services Tomoko Gherardi 6/30/96 2437 & A 12/8/95 Letter Agreement Sharon Hightower Interim Planning Dir. 4/16/96 2467 8/29/96 Eval. Storm Drain Catch Basins SMBRP 12/31/96 2189 Majich Bros — furnish & install 10" water line PW 89 -5 54-93 2190 Majich Bros — replace & install water mains PW 90 -3 6 -1 -93 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02, Amended 06/07/06 by Resolution 4471): Public Records Requests 1/1/99 12/31/99 1 2 Years City Clerk Public Records Requests 1/1/03 12/31/03 1 1 2 Years City Clerk Campaign Statements — Term. 1 7 Years City Clerk PACs: Friends of Our 1997 Schools Campa'p Statements — Term. 1 7 Years City Clerk PACs: Citizens Action PAC 1998 City Council Agenda Packets 1/2/996 7/7/96 2 5 Years City Clerk (original scanned into document imaging) City Council Agenda Packets 7/11/96 10/15/96 3 5 Years City Clerk (original scanned into document imaging) City Council Agenda Packets 10/17/96 12/17/06 4 5 Years City Clerk (original scanned into document imaging) APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: in 9 9 'AOLIX 4 ; ATU1;:6Lhsi'Ki]F -(6 "0`7 Date S ///0/, �- _ Date I HEREBY CERTIFY that the items listed above are approved for destruction on in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk PACity Clerk \Destruction_Retention\2007 Certs\city clerk l.doc Date 33"7 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02, Amended 06/07/06 by Resolution 4471): Original FPPC 700 Conflict Date 1998 I)MC 1999 8 7 Years City Clerk of Interest Forms and Misc. FPPC Correspondence — SEE ATTACHED Copies of FPPC 700 Conflict 1998 1999 8 5 Years City Clerk of Interest Forms and Misc. FPPC Correspondence — SEE ATTACHED Misc. City Clerk 1/1/03 12/31/03 10 3 Years City Clerk Chronological Correspondence Files APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: City I HEREBY 1 07 me Date b R ION: 4 11609 orney Date that the items listed above are approved for destruction on _ in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk PACity Clerk \Destruction_Retention\2007 Certs\city clerk 3.doc Date 338 DOCUMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION — 6/2007 BOX Original FPPC 700 Conflict of Interest Forms 1998/1999 and Misc. FPPC Correspondence: Cindy Mortesen Harvey Holden Brian Polkinghorne Cathy Domann Sandra Massa -Levitt Garry Horwitz Mary Kobus Emanuel Ursa Gerry Chong Don Lewis Emanuel Ursa Kirk Walske Jeffery Stewart Ed Schroder Leigh Engibous Craig Pedego Belur Devaraj Bernice Whitcomb Carl Nessel Bobby Green Charles Pulci David Sharp Gary Morris Don Carter John Gilbert John Hilton Thomas Coonan Eric Moore Roger Groman John Vautrain Steve Tsumara Jim Falk Edna Jane Conley Robert Hyland Judy Andoe Margie Randall Debra Brighton Richard Williams William McCaverty Erika Condon Greg Johnson Debbie Bundy Caroline Rowan Michael Dugan Collen Glynn -Rich Bret Bermard A.J. Pax Thomas Killinger Laurie Jester John Van Hook, Jr. Steven Edlefsen Paul Garry Mike Rotolo Peter Freeman Ron Darville Harry Reeves Carol Lynn Wingate Linda Lidster Karen Ackland Edna Freeman Patrick Miner David Gaulton Louise McCann Wm. Hatcher Carl Jacobson Keith A. Covington Jamie Taylor Willard Krick Tim Norland Loran Hammond Richard Lundquist Sandy Gutt Hanna Bowen Copies of FPPC 700 Conflict of Interest Forms 1998/1999 and Misc. FPPC Correspondence: Mayor Mike Gordon Mayor Pro Tern Sandra Jacobs Council Member Nancy Wernick Council Member John Gaines Council Member Kelly McDowell Planning Commissioner Gary Wycoff Planning Commissioner Stacey Palmer Planning Commissioner James Boulgarides Planning Commissioner Brian Crowley Planning Commissioner Michael Kretzmer City Manager Mary Strenn City Attorney Mark Hensley City Treasurer Bill Bue Planning Commissioner Philip Mahler 339 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02): Dispatch Summaries Dispatch Printouts EMS Reports Jan 2000 Jun 2000 Mar 2000 Mar 2000 6 Soo Current + 6 yrs (Minors 18 +1) Fire Dispatch Printouts EMS Reports Oct 2000 Dec 2000 7 Current + 6 yrs (Minors 18 +1) Fire Dispatch Summaries Dispatch Printouts EMS Reports Jul 2000 Dec 2000 Sep 2000 Sep 2000 8 Current + 6 yrs (Minors 18 +1) Fire Dispatch Printouts EMS Reports Apr 2000 Jun 2000 9 Current + 6 yrs (Minors 18 +1) Fire Invoices and PO copies 1999 2000 10 2 years Fire APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: Department Head ESTRUCTION: ity Attorney b - l-' .0-- Date W-13z,7 Date I HEREBY CERTIFY that the items listed above are approved for destruction on in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Date 340 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02): Journal Listing copies Jan 2005 Dec 2005 1 Current + 1 yr . Fire Billing copies Jan 2005 Dec 2005 2 Current + 1 yr. Fire Billing copies Jan 2004 Dec 2004 3 Current + 1 yr. Fire Billing copies Jan 2003 Dec 2003 4 Current + 1 yr. Fire Payroll copies Jan 2004 Jan 2006 1 5 Current + 1 yr. Fire APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: Department Head i i APPROVED CTION: 5-0-0-7 Date dt I A" City Attorney Date I HEREBY C RTIFY that the items listed above are approved for destruction on in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Date ,'1 1 . \ \ch3k03\redirects$\Ilecates\My Documents\Fortns \Certificate of Destruction \Cert of Destruction - FD Request—submit March 2007.doc CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02): APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: /1 Carty epartm pt Head TRUCTION: ate A Date I HEREBY CERTIFY that the items listed above are approved for destruction on in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Date 342 C \Documents and SettmgsULemay \L.ocal Settingffemporary Inlernet Files \0I.K3 \LibraryCert of Destruction doc CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule ado tea o ine t-it t- ounc>it icesoiuuon ,+Ly i ado tea i zi ► iiul. J: PARKING CITATIONS YR 2002 YR 2002 1 2 Y ICEITRAFFIC PARKING CITATIONS YR 2003 YR 2003 1 2 YEARS POLICE /RECORDS ANIMAL CONTROL LICENSES YR 1993 YR 1997 1 2 YEARS POLICE/TRAFFIC CITATIONS INFRACTIONS ONLY YR 2002 YR 2002 2 2 YEARS POLICE /RECORDS DAILY REPORT LOGS YR 2001 YR 2004 1 2 YEARS POLICE /RECORDS RESTRAINING ORDERS (EXPIRED) YR 1995 YR 1999 1 EXPIRATI POLICE RECORDS NO LONGER ACTIVE ON OF ORDER SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM YR 2001 YR 2004 1 2 YEARS POLICE/RECORDS RECORDS CHECK AND CLEARANCE YR 2003 YR 2004 1 2 YEARS POLICE /RECORDS LETTERS APPLICATIONS STORED /IMPOUND VEHICLE RPTS. YR 1995 YR 1996 2 7 YEARS POLICE /RECORDS TRAFFIC COLLISION/ PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY REPORTS; MISDEMEANOR ARREST REPORTS; FOUND PROPERTY REPORTS -City Attorney IHEREBY STRUCTION: 6.-j L]- or7 Date Date that the items listed above are approved for destruction on _ in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk PACity Clerk\Destruction _Retention\2007 Certs\PD.doc Date 341 CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02, Amended 06/07/06 by Resolution 4471): Union Bank Deposit Slips & 1995 2000 Audit + 4 Years Treasury Bank Statements Check Register — Workers 1995 2000 Audit + 4 Years Treasury Comp Cancelled Checks — The 1994 1997 Audit + 5 Years Treasury Lakes Cancelled Checks — Acct 1995 1999 Audit + 5 Years Treasury Payable Cancelled Checks — Payroll 1995 2000 Audit + 5 Years Treasury & Workers Comp Bank Reconciliation — The 1995 1996 Audit + 5 Years Treasury Lakes APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: Head Date P ST CTION: ' 6/15/0 ity Attorney Date I HEREBY CERTXFY that the items listed above are approved for destruction on in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk Date 344 PACity Clerk \Destruction_Retention\2007 Certs \treasury.doc CITY OF EL SEGUNDO RECORDS DESTRUCTION FORM The records listed below are scheduled to be destroyed, as indicated on the Retention Schedule adopted by the City Council (Resolution 4291 adopted 12/17/02, Amended 06/07/06 by Resolution 4471): APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION: oz A4& 4 Depart nt kPE? I HEREBY CEKT 6�66-� (' �1 ad 9 Date CTION: Date that the items listed above are approved for destruction on in accordance with City policies and procedures: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk PACity Clerk \Destruction_Retention\2007 Certs \treasuryldoc Date 345 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding a Resolution providing for salary and benefit changes to Chapter 1A2 (Management - Confidential Series) of the El Segundo Administrative Code and a Resolution updating the Nationwide Retirement Solutions Governmental Deferred Compensation Matching Plan and Trust Plan. (Fiscal Impact: $185,895) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Adopt the attached Resolutions; 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: Executive Management and Mid- Management/Confidential job classifications are periodically reviewed by the City Council for possible salary and /or benefit adjustments. The last salary increase received by this group of unrepresented employees was 4.0 %, effective 6/24/2006. At Council's direction, staff initiated the review process for possible July 1, 2007 salary and /or benefit adjustments starting in June, 2007. (continued on next page) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1) Resolutions 2) Attachment A — Salary Tables FISCAL IMPACT: $185,895 ($46,700 in FY 2006 -2007 and $140,195 in FY 2007 -2008) Operating Budget: Amount Requested: $185,895 (for period July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008) Account Number: 001 -400 - 2901 -6244 Project Phase: Appropriation Required: X Yes NO ORIGINATED BY: DATE: July 5, 2007 Robert Hyland, Interim for of Human Resources REVI7ey/'/ity DATE: ? I r Jeff Manager Agenda 558 1 1 346 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: A. Adoption of the attached Resolution providing for changes to Chapter 1 A2 (Management - Confidential Series) of the El Segundo Administrative Code would result in the following: 1. A 3.5% salary increase for all Executive Management, Mid - Manage ment/Confidential Employees, with the exception of the City Manager, effective 7/7/2007. A 3.0% salary increase for Battalion Chiefs, effective 6/23/2007 was previously approved by Council on 7/19/2005. For reference, the Consumer Price Index (CPI -U) for the Los - Angeles- Riverside - Orange County area averaged 3.583% for the twelve month period from June 2006 — May 2007, 2. The City will annually contribute an additional 1.0% of employee's salary, on a matching basis, to employee 401(A) Deferred Compensation accounts. The City currently contributes 3.5% of the employee's salary. This matching contribution will apply to all members of the Executive Management, Mid- Management/Confidential group of employees, with the exception of the City Manager. 3. Employees will be entitled to an additional holiday, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day (third Monday in January). Battalion Chiefs assigned to Fire Suppression duty, in lieu of time off, will receive an additional twelve hours of Holiday Pay. 4. Battalion Chiefs possessing a Masters Degree from an accredited college or university will receive education incentive pay in an amount equal to 6% of base salary per month. Educational Incentive Pay is effective 6/23/2007 and was previously approved by Council on 7/19/2005. 5. Executive Management, Mid- Management/Confidential employees appointed after July 1, 2007 will be eligible to receive the City- provided retiree medical insurance contribution, after a minimum of five full -time years of service with the City of El Segundo. 6. The fiscal impact of the changes is $185,895, equal to a 4.35% increase in total compensation for the group of employees. B. The attached Resolution updating the Nationwide Retirement Solutions Governmental Deferred Compensation Matching Plan and Trust Plan reflects the increase in the City's matching contribution from 3.5% to 4.5% of employees salary. 3 4'7 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR SALARY AND BENEFIT CHANGES TO CHAPTER 1A2 (MANAGEMENT - CONFIDENTIAL SERIES) OF THE EL SEGUNDO ADMINISTRATIVE CODE The City Council of the City of El Segundo does resolve as follows: Section 1: Section 1A2.010 and of the El Segundo Administrative Code, entitled "Basic Salary Schedule," is amended as shown on "Attachment A." Section 2: Section 1A2.107, entitled "Retiree Medical Insurance Contribution," is added to the El Segundo Administrative Code to read as follows: "Employees appointed to positions after July 1, 2007 who service retire from the City of El Segundo, are eligible to receive the City provided retiree medical insurance contribution after a minimum of five full -time years of service with the City of El Segundo. " Section 3: Section 1A2.120 of the El Segundo Administrative Code, entitled "Deferred Compensation Plan," is amended as follows: "The City will annually pay an amount equal to the employee's contribution to deferred compensation up to a maximum of 4.5% of the employee's total pay, for all Management - Confidential employees participating in City approved deferred compensation plans." Section 4: Section 1A2.139, of the El Segundo Administrative Code, entitled "Holidays and Holiday Pay," is amended as follows: "Except as otherwise herein specifically provided, employees are entitled to the following holidays: January 1St November 11 th The third Monday in January Thanksgiving Day and the Friday thereafter The last Monday in May December 24th July 4th December 25th The first Monday in September December 31St provided, however, (a) that in the event any of these holidays fall on the last day an employee is off on his or her regular days off period, the following day is observed as a holiday for the purpose of this section; provided, further, however, (b) that in the event any of these holidays fall on the first day of an employee's regular days off period, the previous day is considered a holiday for the purpose of this section. Notwithstanding the above, this provision does not apply to Battalion Chiefs who receive pay in lieu of 1 I time off for holidays." Section 5: Section 1A2.140, of the El Segundo Administrative Code, entitled "Holidays and Holiday Pay — Battalion Chiefs," shall be amended as follows: Battalion Chiefs assigned to fire suppression duty will be paid for 156 hours in lieu of holidays once a year on or about the 10th day of December. Battalion Chiefs who serve in that capacity less than a full year will be paid holiday pay on a pro rata basis. Section 6: The City Clerk will certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; enter the same in the book or original resolutions of said City; and will make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said City, in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted. Section 7: This Resolution will remain in effect until superseded by a subsequent resolution. Section 7: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July, 2007. ATTEST: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney In Karl H. Berger Assistant City Attorney 2 Kelly McDowell, Mayor 349 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO 1 I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City is five; that the foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor of said City, and attested to by the City Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the day of , 2007, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk 350 ATTACHMENT A CITY OF EL SEGUNDO PROPOSED SALARY TABLES MANAGEMENT /CONFIDENTIAL GROUP EFFECTIVE PAYROLL BEGINNING JULY 7, 2007 GRADE STEP A STEP B STEP C STEP D STEP E 1m 2,020.42 2,122.70 2,230.16 2,343.07 2,461.68 2m 2,070.93 2,175.77 2,285.92 2,401.64 2,523.23 3m 2,122.70 2,230.16 2,343.07 2,461.68 2,586.31 4m 2,175.77 2,285.92 2,401.64 2,523.23 2,650.96 5m 2,230.16 2,343.07 2,461.68 2,586.31 2,717.24 6m 2,285.92 2,401.64 2,523.23 2,650.96 2,785.17 7m 2,343.07 2,461.68 2,586.31 2,717.24 2,854.80 8m 2,401.64 2,523.23 2,650.96 2,785.17 2,926.17 9m 2,461.68 2,586.31 2,717.24 2,854.80 2,999.32 10m 2,523.23 2,650.96 2,785.17 2,926.17 3,074.31 llm 2,586.31 2,717.24 2,854.80 2,999.32 3,151.16 12m 2,650.96 2,785.17 2,926.17 3,074.31 3,229.94 13m 2,717.24 2,854.80 2,999.32 3,151.16 3,310.69 14m 2,785.17 2,926.17 3,074.31 3,229.94 3,393.46 15m 2,854.80 2,999.32 3,151.16 3,310.69 3,478.29 16m 2,926.17 3,074.31 3,229.94 3,393.46 3,565.25 17m 2,999.32 3,151.16 3,310.69 3,478.29 3,654.38 18m 3,074.31 3,229.94 3,393.46 3,565.25 3,745.74 19m 3,151.16 3,310.69 3,478.29 3,654.38 3,839.39 20m 3,229.94 3,393.46 3,565.25 3,745.74 3,935.37 21 m 3,310.69 3,478.29 3,654.38 3,839.39 4,033.76 22m 3,393.46 3,565.25 3,745.74 3,935.37 4,134.60 23m 3,478.29 3,654.38 3,839.39 4,033.76 4,237.96 24m 3,565.25 3,745.74 3,935.37 4,134.60 4,343.91 25m 3,654.38 3,839.39 4,033.76 4,237.96 4,452.51 26m 3,745.74 3,935.37 4,134.60 4,343.91 4,563.82 27m 3,839.39 4,033.76 4,237.96 4,452.51 4,677.92 28m 3,935.37 4,134.60 4,343.91 4,563.82 4,794.87 29m 4,033.76 4,237.96 4,452.51 4,677.92 4,914.74 30m 4,134.60 4,343.91 4,563.82 4,794.87 5,037.61 31m 4,237.96 4,452.51 4,677.92 4,914.74 5,163.55 32m 4,343.91 4,563.82 4,794.87 5,037.61 5,292.64 33m 4,452.51 4,677.92 4,914.74 5,163.55 5,424.95 34m 4,563.82 4,794.87 5,037.61 5,292.64 5,560.58 35m 4,677.92 4,914.74 5,163.55 5,424.95 5,699.59 36m 4,794.87 5,037.61 5,292.64 5,560.58 5,842.08 37m 4,914.74 5,163.55 5,424.95 5,699.59 5,988.13 38m 5,037.61 5,292.64 5,560.58 5,842.08 6,137.84 39m 5,163.55 5,424.95 5,699.59 5,988.13 6,291.28 40m 5,292.64 5,560.58 5,842.08 6,137.84 6,448.56 41 m 5,424.95 5,699.59 5,988.13 6,291.28 6,609.78 42m 5,560.58 5,842.08 6,137.84 6,448.56 6,775.02 43m 5,699.59 5,988.13 6,291.28 6,609.78 6,944.40 44m 5,842.08 6,137.84 6,448.56 6,775.02 7,118.01 45m 5,988.13 6,291.28 6,609.78 6,944.40 7,295.96 46m 6,137.84 6,448.56 6,775.02 7,118.01 7,478.36 47m 6,291.28 6,609.78 6,944.40 7,295.96 7,665.32 48m 6,448.56 6,775.02 7,118.01 7,478.36 7,856.95 351 49m 6,609.78 6,944.40 7,295.96 7,665.32 8,053.37 I- Z W x Q Q T M O N LO 4- M to W O N O 0 r M M W r M M 0 W fL LO O f� W N W M T W LO W O M O N r- C:> . CD . � M N LO O f- 00 00 N CD N r . o LO Co M O CO) U') f- M LO qT it CO OD . M N O M M CO 4rN. 0) T6 (V Nti. MOOT. MM. O 6 46641:00. 606 6C . 4 64666N . w L0001,-W Mf-- Tto0C0 CV) 0f .- C0Cnu) C0r- Mt0C0T CC) M00f-0CD 000) 0M L00 IL N ";t (q cct cv! LQ R q cw! IQ 0rM( OMNLOMTNCDNtoCAM(OOq1tCOMf-NNMTCV N w 0 00 M OD M M M M 0 0 0 0 r N N N M (M M�� LO Lo CO W W f- r N N N M M T T T r r T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T r r T T T r r T T fA J M W N LO f- T M O N LO 'Cr M LO (D O N M W T M W W T (M M O W f- LO O r- w T f� O O M w f� O m Q U M CV) M(Mti0 CIO 19T00IT MNLn0fl- 00CDNCDCV r11)t0MMq;r0ML0f-M CV) M CD CnNT0 QZ MLOC OMqorNM 6 NNI-MC00 :6 C7L6404(6C04 (6CiM(6r 1: 004h 'i C0 Z I- U f- co (O LO LO LO CO f- 00 T M f- T LO O CO M O r- (O LO LO CO f.- M tO CO r CO M O OD O M M M LO LO (O O Z Z a tC000N�Cfl0TML0000 ML000TM(0MNL000rN00Nt0MMC0cq tq AN0 U W Z W f f*- f- 00 00 00 OD 000) 0) MM0000 T NNNMMCM dTLOLOOr rNN W Q O Vr r r T T T T T T T r T T r T r r T T T T T r T T T r U) J Z W U) r (D (O N LO f- r W O N in � M Lo W O N M CO T M 00 CO T CM M O CO f- Lo O OD O r ti r M 00 W U) O mJ OMMMMCMf- OC It(Od MNLO Of `00(0NC0NTl0L0MMNr 0ML0�0MCMN(00 _ OOLo00LO( OMB- NM MNNI_Gi OOT6C6646R6641000O- �:6C66 O W F- Q m M t` W LO LO LO W fl- M r M ti r LO O 0 M O� CO to LO CO f- M LO O r CO M M M O M f,- (O qcr }} T04 'cr(OOOONcrC000 TML0000ML0W MWM"90OTNMNLOMOMCDTMCON F_ o W >- r.: r,: r,: C6 C6 C6 CO 00C7A0A0Ad0000TrrTNNNCMMM " - -i i 6 6 TTN Vowa. CO CC U W NC) — W WN LOf` rMO Nto'crMLO(OONMCOTMMCO CMMOWr -- W - MOMCOLO IL Q > OOMMMMMf- OC D�C 0dMNoO1 -ODCONCONrtOLOMM 'T ON'ct '�OODCOf- Q►- Q � L0It 00L0OD t0( OMcrNMrMNNtiM COOrCTCMLn4OC(OO4Td4OOOT(0 U f- qct rMf-C OLOLOLO( Df- 00rM fl- TLOO CO CV) Of-COtOLoCOr- MtOCOr000MM CV) OLc) W fl tit ;TN "COMOCN V ( OOOTMLO0OMLO00TM (OMNto00TN0N000OLO00r00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - U. W ( O CC) tif` tititi CC) 00ODODOOMMMM0000rTTrNNNMMM�M0000rr WI.- T T T T r r T T r T r r T T T r T T T T r O� N M� to CO f- CD M O � N M IT LO CO f- 000 M O - N M qt Lo CO f- 00 M O O CO N W 0 d LO LO LO LO O Lo V) V) U') V) 00 w (O w w w w CO w w f` f-- ti f- ti f` fl- f- fl- f` M CO CO O U M LO fl- Ma"LOdMLOW(D"MW MMCDTMM0(0f-t001-W"M00WL0TMW I- O MMI�OCOq:COV:MNLo91-�000DNCONTUI U) MM14:OMLOhMLo lo: OMCOCnLoUn" O (DM��-NMTMNNI.- M(oOT(M MUl cr0 1 00D q, WC>MWMC) O";rTCO0 't 00 N O LO U") (D r- ODTMf- TL000D CV) 0I- 00LOV )W1-M0C0TcoM0001-00MM0000DI-T IL CL 00 C) O LU 0O6 006 0430MM0000 NNNMMMi i ILOL0 CO(O11TNNNM fA J T T T T T T T T T T T r r T T T T T r T T T r r T T r r Iy w V m J M W N LO f- T M O N LO 'Cr M LO (D O N M W T M W W T (M M O W f- LO O r- w T f� O O M w f� O m Q U M CV) M(Mti0 CIO 19T00IT MNLn0fl- 00CDNCDCV r11)t0MMq;r0ML0f-M CV) M CD CnNT0 QZ MLOC OMqorNM 6 NNI-MC00 :6 C7L6404(6C04 (6CiM(6r 1: 004h 'i C0 Z I- U f- co (O LO LO LO CO f- 00 T M f- T LO O CO M O r- (O LO LO CO f.- M tO CO r CO M O OD O M M M LO LO (O O Z Z a tC000N�Cfl0TML0000 ML000TM(0MNL000rN00Nt0MMC0cq tq AN0 U W Z W f f*- f- 00 00 00 OD 000) 0) MM0000 T NNNMMCM dTLOLOOr rNN W Q O Vr r r T T T T T T T r T T r T r r T T T T T r T T T r U) J Z W U) r (D (O N LO f- r W O N in � M Lo W O N M CO T M 00 CO T CM M O CO f- Lo O OD O r ti r M 00 W U) O mJ OMMMMCMf- OC It(Od MNLO Of `00(0NC0NTl0L0MMNr 0ML0�0MCMN(00 _ OOLo00LO( OMB- NM MNNI_Gi OOT6C6646R6641000O- �:6C66 O W F- Q m M t` W LO LO LO W fl- M r M ti r LO O 0 M O� CO to LO CO f- M LO O r CO M M M O M f,- (O qcr }} T04 'cr(OOOONcrC000 TML0000ML0W MWM"90OTNMNLOMOMCDTMCON F_ o W >- r.: r,: r,: C6 C6 C6 CO 00C7A0A0Ad0000TrrTNNNCMMM " - -i i 6 6 TTN Vowa. CO CC U W NC) — W WN LOf` rMO Nto'crMLO(OONMCOTMMCO CMMOWr -- W - MOMCOLO IL Q > OOMMMMMf- OC D�C 0dMNoO1 -ODCONCONrtOLOMM 'T ON'ct '�OODCOf- Q►- Q � L0It 00L0OD t0( OMcrNMrMNNtiM COOrCTCMLn4OC(OO4Td4OOOT(0 U f- qct rMf-C OLOLOLO( Df- 00rM fl- TLOO CO CV) Of-COtOLoCOr- MtOCOr000MM CV) OLc) W fl tit ;TN "COMOCN V ( OOOTMLO0OMLO00TM (OMNto00TN0N000OLO00r00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - U. W ( O CC) tif` tititi CC) 00ODODOOMMMM0000rTTrNNNMMM�M0000rr WI.- T T T T r r T T r T r r T T T r T T T T r O� N M� to CO f- CD M O � N M IT LO CO f- 000 M O - N M qt Lo CO f- 00 M O O CO N W 0 d LO LO LO LO O Lo V) V) U') V) 00 w (O w w w w CO w w f` f-- ti f- ti f` fl- f- fl- f` M CO CO O U M RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTIONS GOVERNMENTAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION MATCHING PLAN AND TRUST (PLAN). BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of El Segundo as follows: SECTION 1: The City Council finds as follows: A. The City of El Segundo is an "employer" for purposes of the Internal Revenue Code; B. The City adopted a Deferred Compensation Plan which is available to all eligible employees pursuant to Internal Revenue Code ( "IRC ") § 457; C. Certain tax benefits accrue to employees participating in said Deferred Compensation Plan; D. The City wishes to provide an additional incentive to its employees to voluntarily set aside and invest portions of their current income to meet their future financial requirements and supplement their existing retirement programs(s); E. Nationwide Retirement Solutions, Inc. (NRS) provided the City with a specimen plan document (the NRS Governmental Deferred Compensation Matching Plan and Trust); F. It is in the public interest for the City to attract and retain employees of the highest caliber in order to provide and maintain high standards of service. SECTION 2: The Nationwide Retirement Solutions Governmental Deferred Compensation Matching Plan and Trust ( "Plan") is adopted. The Plan will be maintained for the exclusive benefit of eligible employees and their beneficiaries. SECTION 3: The City Manager is authorized to execute all documents and make any additional administrative decisions or determinations to implement the Plan. The City Manager or Director of Administrative Services, or designee, are named trustees for the Plan. SECTION 4: The City of El Segundo Deferred Compensation Matching Plan ( "Matching Plan") is adopted. The City Manager or Director of Administrative Services or designee is authorized to execute all documents and make any additional administrative decisions or determinations to implement the Matching Plan. SECTION 5: The employer's contribution for the Plan and Matching Plan will match an employee's annual contribution to the employee's 457 plan up to four and one -half percent (4.5 %) of the annual total pay. SECTION 6: Management/Confidential employees, eligible under the City's Deferred Compensation Plan are also eligible for the Plan and Matching Plan. 353 SECTION 7: The City Clerk is directed to certify the adoption of this Resolution; record this Resolution in the book of the City's original resolutions; and make a minute of the adoption of the Resolution in the City Council's records and the minutes of this meeting. SECTION 8: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and remain effective unless repealed or superseded. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July, 2007. Kelly McDowell, Mayor STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City is five; that the foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor of said City, and attested to by the City Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the day of , 2007, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk � f APPROVED A 'TQ F Mark D. Hens,yi By: rl I: Berger Assistant City Attorn y E EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA DESCRIPTION: MEETING DATE: July 9, 2007 AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda Consideration and possible action regarding amending the City Manager's contract and authorizing payment of the bonus provided for in the City Manager's current contract. (potential fiscal impact approximately $18,000) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Approve Amendment No. 2 to the City Manager's Contract; 2) Authorize payment of the $17,500 bonus provided for in the City Manager's current contract; 3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: On June 19, 2007 the City Council appointed the City Attorney as labor negotiator for purposes of negotiating the terms and conditions of the City Manager's contract based upon direction received from the City Council. Based upon the negotiations, the City Council and City Manager have (subject to final action being taken by the City Council) agreed to the following changes to the City Manager's contract: 1. The City Manager's annual base salary shall be increased from $162,680 to $178,374 (this includes a 3.5% increase plus converting $10,000 from the bonus based portion of his contract to his base salary); and, 2. The City Manager's annual discretionary bonus payment (to be determined by the City Council) shall be reduced from a maximum of $17,500 to $7,500. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft Amendment No. 2 to City Manager's Contract FISCAL IMPACT: Approximately $18,000 ORIGINATED BY: DATE: July 9, 2007 Mark Hensley, City Attorney 355 12 AMENDMENT NO.2 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT ("AMENDMENT NO.2 ") is entered into this 17th day of July, 2007, between the City of E1 Segundo ("CITY ") and Jeffrey L. Stewart ( "EMPLOYEE ") with respect to that certain EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT entered into between the CITY and EMPLOYEE on May 3, 2005 as amended by AMENDMENT NO. 1 on August 1, 2006 (`AGREEMENT"). Effective as of July 1, 2006, the CITY and EMPLOYEE do hereby agree to amend Section 4(A) the AGREEMENT and replace this section in its entirety with the following language: `'(A) EMPLOYEE'S annual base salary is $178,374 which shall be paid in equal bi- weekly payments. In addition, subject to the City Council's sole discretion, on July 1, 2008, EMPLOYEE shall be eligible to receive a single payment in an amount not to exceed $7,500 based on EMPLOYEE'S performance during the prior twelve- month period of this Agreement. In addition, the City Council shall evaluate EMPLOYEE'S performance and salary annually following the effective date of this AGREEMENT and determine in its sole discretion whether to increase EMPLOYEE'S compensation. Any increase in compensation must be a writing signed by the parties;" All of the other terms and conditions of the AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. CITY: Kelly McDowell, Mayor EMPLOYEE: Jeffrey L. Stewart 356 ATTEST: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney 357 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding a license agreement for the installation of an overhead canopy and fagade in the airspace above the public right -of -way at 347 Main Street (Fiscal Impact — none). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Recommendation — (1) Authorize the City Manager to execute a license agreement with Kirk Lebowe and James Savela for installation of an overhead canopy and fagade in the airspace above the public right -of -way at 347 Main Street; (2) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: Kirk Lebowe and James Savela, co- owners of a real estate company located on the property at 347 Main Street, have requested City approval to install an overhead canopy and fagade projecting three (3) feet over the public right -of -way, as depicted on Exhibit "A ". The canopy and fagade comply City Code and the projection is less than projections on adjacent buildings. Previous license agreements have been approved in the past for 10 (ten) similar encroachments in the downtown area. The license would be revocable by the City at any time without cause. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft Revocable License Agreement with liability insurance and Exhibit "A ". FISCAL IMPACT: None Capital Improvement Program: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: ORIG FntoqO,�Xrector of Public Works DATE: July gyp, 2007 REVIEW DATE: /y v� Jeff , City Manager 13 0 06 LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO AND KIRK LEBOWE & JAMES SAVELA L This LICENSE is made and executed this 2A day of May, 2007, between the CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, a municipal corporation ( "CITY "), and Kirk Lebowe & James Savela ( "LICENSEE "). 1. LICENSE; DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY. CITY licenses LICENSEE to use, on the terms and conditions in this License, a portion of the air -space above the real property located to the east of the property /building at 347 Main Street, which is more particularly depicted in attached Exhibit "A" ( "Property "). CITY's action is not, and should not be construed to be, a conveyance of a property interest or a lease; it is a license to use property only. 2. USE OF PROPERTY. A. LICENSEE may temporarily use the Property for the purposes of installing an overhead canopy and related actions. B. CITY may change, amend, or terminate LICENSEE's use of Property at any time, and in its sole discretion, verbally or in writing. 3. TERM. Except as provided in Section 4, the term of this License will be begin upon the date of execution of this agreement and extend for a period of 30 (Thirty) years, thereafter. Upon mutual written agreement between parties, this License may be renewed for additional time. 4. TERMINATION. A. As stated above, CITY may terminate this License at any time with or without cause; upon written or verbal notification, Termination will be effective upon notification, unless CITY specifies otherwise B. LICENSEE may terminate this License at anytime in writing at least five (5) days before the effective termination date. C. By executing this document, LICENSEE waives any and all claims for damages that might otherwise arise from CITY's termination under this Section. D. Upon termination, LICENSEE will remove all personal property and improvements from Property within two (2) days. Property will be Ieft in a clean and orderly fashion. 5. COMPENSATION. Not Applicable (N /A). Page 1 of 6 359 6. CONDEMNATION. If all or part of Property is acquired by eminent domain or purchase in lieu thereof, LICENSEE acknowledges that it will have no claim to any compensation awarded for the taking of Property or any portion thereof or for loss of or damage to LICENSEE's improvements. 7. RELOCATION BENEFITS. LICENSEE acknowledges that it has been informed that CITY is a public entity and that Property was previously acquired by CITY for a public purpose. LICENSEE further acknowledges that any rights acquired under this License arose after the date of acquisition of Property and that said rights are subject to termination when Property is needed by CITY. LICENSEE hereby acknowledges that at the time of said termination of this License by CITY, it will not be a "displaced person" entitled to any of the relocation assistance or benefits offered to displaced persons under State or Federal law. 8. ALTERATIONS. LICENSEE will not make, or cause to be made, any alterations to Property, or any part thereof, without CITY's prior written consent. 9. HAZARDOUS/TOXIC WASTE. CITY has not, nor, to CITY's knowledge, has any third party used, generated, stored or disposed of, or permitted the use, generation, storage or disposal of, any Hazardous Material (as defined below) on, under, about or within Property in violation of any law or regulation. LICENSEE agrees that it will not use, generate, store or dispose of any Hazardous Material (as defined below) on, under, about or within Property in violation of any law or regulation. LICENSEE agrees to defend and indemnify CITY, to the extent stated in Section 12, against any and all losses, liabilities, claims or costs arising from any breach of any warranty or agreement contained in this Section. As used in this Section, "Hazardous Material" means any substance, chemical or waste that is identified as hazardous, toxic or dangerous in any applicable federal, state or local law or regulation (including petroleum and asbestos). 10. SIGNS. LICENSEE will not place any sign upon Property without CITY's prior written consent. LICENSEE will pay for all costs of any approved signage and comply with all applicable sign codes and ordinances. 11. ASSIGNMENT. LICENSEE will not be permitted to assign this License or any interest therein. 12. INDEMNIFICATION. A. LICENSEE will hold CITY harmless and free from any and all liability arising out of this License, or its performance. Should CITY be named in any suit, or should any claim be against it, by suit or otherwise, whether the same be groundless or not, arising out of this License, or its performance, pursuant to this License, LICENSEE will defend CITY (at CITY's request and with counsel satisfactory to CITY) and will indemnify it for any judgment rendered against it or any sums paid out in settlement or otherwise. B. For purposes of this section "CITY" includes CITY's officers, officials, Page 2 of 6 360 employees, agents, representatives, and certified volunteers. C. LICENSEE expressly agrees that this release, waiver, and indemnity agreement is intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and that if any portion is held invalid, it is agreed that the balance will, notwithstanding, continue in full legal force and effect. D. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions will survive termination of this License. E. The requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by LICENSEE as required by Section 13 below, 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 LICENSEE pursuant to this License, including but not limited to the provisions concerning indemnification. 13. INSURANCE. A. Before commencing performance under this License, and at all other times this License is effective, LICENSEE will procure and maintain the following types of insurance with coverage limits complying, at a minimum, with the limits set forth below: Type of Insurance Limits (combined single) Commercial general liability: $ Coo/ d� U B. Commercial general liability insurance will meet or exceed the requirements of the most current ISO Forms. The amount of insurance set forth above will be a combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage for the policy coverage. Liability policies must be endorsed to name CITY, its officials, and employees as "additional insureds" under said insurance coverage and to state that such insurance will be deemed "primary" such that any other insurance that may be carried by CITY will be excess thereto. Such insurance will be on an "occurrence," not a "claims made," basis and will not be cancelable except upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to CITY.e�eept L/ fef nonpayment ofuremiums, which may be. cancelable upoa ton (1.01)1- �--�ice. C. LICENSEE will furnish to CITY duly authenticated Certificates of Insurance and Endorsements evidencing maintenance of the insurance required under this License and such other evidence of insurance or copies of policies as may be reasonably required by CITY from time to time. Insurance must be placed with Page 3 of 6 361 insurers with a current A.M. Best Company Rating equivalent to at least a Rating of "A:VII." Certificate(s) must reflect that the insurer will provide thirty (30) day notice of any cancellation of coverage. 1,i6eNS.W will require its insurer to modify such certificates to delete any exculpatory wording stating that failure of the insurer to mail written notice of cancellation imposes no obligation, and to delete the word "endeavor" with regard to any notice provisions. D. Should LICENSEE, for any reason, fail to obtain and maintain the insurance required by this License, CITY may obtain such coverage at LICENSEE's expense and charge the cost of such insurance to LICENSEE under this License or terminate pursuant to Section 4. 14. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW. LICENSEE will, at its sole cost and expense, comply with all of the requirements of all federal, state, and local authorities now in force, or which may hereafter be in force, pertaining to Property and will faithfully observe in the use of Property all applicable laws. The judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction, or the admission of LICENSEE in any action or proceeding against LICENSEE, whether CITY be a party thereto or not, that LICENSEE has violated any such ordinance or statute in the use of Property will be conclusive of that fact as between CITY and LICENSEE. 15. BREACH OF AGREEMENT. The violation of any of the provisions of this License will constitute a breach of this License by LICENSEE, and in such event said License will automatically cease and terminate. 16. WAIVER OF BREACH. Any express or implied waiver of a breach of any term of this License will not constitute a waiver of any further breach of the same or other term of this License. 17. ENTRY BY CITY AND PUBLIC. This License does not convey any property interest to LICENSEE. Except for areas restricted because of safety concerns, CITY and the general public will have unrestricted access upon Property for all lawful acts. 18. INSOLVENCY; RECEIVER. Either the appointment of a receiver to take possession of all or substantially all of the assets of LICENSEE, or a general assignment by the LICENSEE for the benefit of creditors, or any action taken or offered by LICENSEE under any insolvency or bankruptcy action, will constitute a breach of this License by LICENSEE, and in such event said License will automatically cease and terminate. 19. NOTICES. Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, all notices or other communications required or permitted by this License or by law to be served on or given to either party to this License by the other party will be in writing and will be deemed served when personally delivered to the party to whom they are directed, or in lieu of the personal service, upon deposit in the United States Mail, certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed to LICENSEE at: Page 4 of 6 362 or to CITY at: Either party may change its address for the purpose of this Section by giving written notice of the change to the other party. 20. ACCEPTANCE OF FACSIMILE SIGNATURES. The Parties agree that agreements ancillary to this License and related documents to be entered into in connection with this License will be considered signed when the signature of a party is delivered by facsimile transmission. Such facsimile signature will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature. 21. GOVERNING LAW. This License has been made in and will be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California and exclusive venue for any action involving this License will be in Los Angeles County. 22. PARTIAL INVALIDITY. Should any provision of this License be held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be either invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this License will remain in effect, unimpaired by the holding. 23. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This instrument and its Attachments constitute the sole agreement between CITY and LICENSEE respecting Property, the use of Property by LICENSEE, and the specified License term, and correctly sets forth the obligations of CITY and LICENSEE. Any agreement or representations respecting Property or its licensing by CITY to LICENSEE not expressly set forth in this instrument are void. 24. CONSTRUCTION. The language of each part of this License will be construed simply and according to its fair meaning, and this License will never be construed either for or against either party. 25. AUTHORITY/MODIFICATION. The Parties represent and warrant that all necessary action has been taken by the Parties to authorize the undersigned to execute this License and to engage in the actions described herein. This License may be modified by written agreement. CITY's city manager, or designee, may execute any such amendment on behalf of CITY. Page 5 of 6 363 26. COUNTERPARTS. This License may be executed in any number or counterparts, each of which will be an original, but all of which together will constitute one instrument executed on the same date. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this contract the day and year first hereinabove written. CITY OF EL SEGUNDO Jeff Stewart ✓.S'/l7Es 5 ��L N� �� City Manager ATTEST: Taxpayer ID No. Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: MARK D. HENSLEY, City Attorney Karl H. Berger, Assistant City Attorney Page 6 of 6 364 EXHIBIT "A" -5" 3 6 FROM : TOM BRUNDIDGE -STATE FARM PHONE NO. : 310 322 0831 Jun. 04 2007 11:47AM P1 CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE This certifies that ❑ STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY. Bloomington. Illinois ® STATE FARM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY. Bloomington, Illinois ❑ STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Scarborough. Ontario ❑ STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY, Winter Haven, Florida (] STATE FARM LLOYDS. Dallas, Texas insures the following policyholder for the coverages indicated below.. Policyholder James & Ashley Savela 6 Kirk Lebowe Address of policyholder 347 Main Street, F,.1 Sc-gvndo, CA 90245 Location of operations 347 Main Street, El Segundo, CA 90245 Description of operations Trash Bin in Street The policies listed below have been issued to the policyholder for the policy periods shown. The insurance described in these policies is e..a ,....,Aa.nna rrl rhncn nnlkips The limits of liability shown may have been reduced by any paid claims. sUD)eut to Em uic will uuuo,v90. o,,.. w ............. �.....� �_. -_._ -. -. - POLICY PERIOD - LIMITS OF LIABILITY POLICY NUMBER 92 -GA 8234 -2 TYPE OF INSURANCE Effective Date : Expawbon Dals Comprehensive 05 -3i -2007 t 05 -31 -2008 Business Liability (at beginning of policy period) BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE This insurance includes: ®Products - Completed Operations ® Contractual Liability ❑ Underground Hazard Coverage Each Occurrence $500,000 ® Personal Injury ® Advertising Injury General Aggregate $1,000,000 ❑ Explosion Hazard Coverage ❑ Collapse Hazard Coverage Products - Completed $2,000,000 ❑ Operations Aggregate POLICY PERIOD BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE EXCESS LIABILITY Effective Date ; Expiration Date (Combined Single Limit) 0 Umbrella Each Occurrence $ 0 Other Aggregate $ Pan t STATUTORY Pan 2 BODILY INJURY Workers' Compensation and Employers Liability Each Accident $ Disease - Each Employee$ Disease - Policy Limit $ POLICY PERIOD LIMITS OF LIABILITY POLICY NUMBER TYPE OF INSURANCE Effec.bve Dgft ; ExpirAon Disbe (at beginning of policy period) THE CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE 19 NOT A CONTRACT OF INSURANCE AND NEITHER AFFIRMATIVELY NOR NEGATIVELY AMENDS, EXTENDS OR ALTERS THE COVERAGE APPROVED BY ANY POLICY DESCRIBED HEREIN. Additional insured includes: City of E1 Segundo, its officers, It any of the descrind policies, are canceled before agents and employees its expiration date, State Farm will try to mail a written notice to the certificate holder 30 days before cancellation. if however we fait to mail such notice. Name and Address of Certificate Holder no tx fia ' wifl be imposed on to Fa is or -vas. City of £1 Segundo, its officers, agenra and employees 350 Main Street:, Rm 5 El Segundo, CA 90245 re of AM0( ed reserAahw AGENT 06/02 007 Title Dale Agent's Code Stomp AFO Cone F412 TOM BRUNDIDGE LUTCF 214 STANDARD ST. SUITE Q EL SEGUNDO, CA, 90245 s6�t�sA ,1- r2,zoo2 P6nW In U.SA. BUS (310) 322 -5840 TOLL (906) 603 -0303 „..., owua r:ane� �aaiia�a� nwu�mwo %.vulNauy 900 old River Rd Bakersfield, CA 93311 -6000 U -23- 1401 -F412 F U 3 SAVELA, JAMES 8 ASHLEY 8 LEBOWE, KIRK 349 RICHMOND ST EL SEGUNDO CA 90245 -3729 Location: 347 MAIN ST EL SEGUNDO CA 90245 -3814 Loss Payee: FIORANTE, JOSEPH FRANK Forms, Options, and Endorsements Special Form 3 FP -6143 Business Policy Endorsement FE-6464 Amendatory Endorsement FE -6205 Debris Removal Endorsement FE -6451 Policy Endorsement FE- 6506.2 Glass Deductible - Section I FE- 6538.1 Terrorism Insurance Cov Notice FE -6999 Amendatory Collapse FE-6551 Policy Endorsement- Business FE -6610 Loss Payable Endorsement FE -6309 Real Estate Agents Endorsement FE- 6405.1 Inc Cost and Demolition Cov FE-6587 Continued on next page apply - refer to policy ncncmrf+u_ a.tn j rria.rr i r- POLICY NUMBER 92-GA- 8234 -2 Business- Office Policy MAY 31 2006 to MAY 31 2007 DATE DUE SEE .BALANCE DUE NOTICE MAY 31 2006 $2, 274.00 Coverages and Limits Section 1 A Buildings $292,500 B Business Personal Property 30,800 C Loss of Income Actual Loss Deductibles - Section I Basic 1,000 Other deductibles may apply - refer to policy Section II L Business Liability $500,000 M Medical Payments 5,000 Gen Aggregate (Otherthan PCO) 1,000,000 Products - Completed Operations 1, 000, 000 (PCO Aggregate) Annual Premium $2,273.0 Forms, Opts, & Endrsmnt Lc Amount Due $2,274.0 Premium Reductions Yrs in Business Discount Gov. A - Inflation Index: 175.6 Cov. B - Consumer Price: 199.2 NOTICE: Information concerning changes in your policy language is included. Please call your agent if you have any questions. 1103 201E i Agent TOM BRUNDIDGE Telephone (310) 322 -5840 or (800) 603 -0303 #Z 80 3537 7725 See reverse side for important information. REB Prepared MAR 22 2006 367 Policy Number DECLARATIONS PAGE 92 -GA- $234 -2 5_1 STATE FARM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY -w- 900 OLD RIVER RD, BAKERSFIELD CA 93311-6000 A STOCK COMPANY WITH HOME OFFICES IN BLOOMINGTON, ILLINOIS Named Insured and Mailing Address 23- 1401 -F412 U SAVELA, JAMES & ASHLEY & LEBOWE, KIRK 347 MAIN ST EL SEGUNDO CA 90245 -3814 Cov A - Inflation Coverage Index: 171.1 3USINESS POLICY - SPECIAL FORM 3 Cov B - Consumer Price Index: 194.6 AUTOMATIC RENEWAL - If the POLICY PERIOD is shown as 12 MONTHS, this policyy will be renewed automatically subject to the premiums, rules and forms in effect for each succeed' policy erio . If fhis policy is terminated, we will give you and the Mortgagee/Lienholder written notice in compliance with the p�licy provisions or as required by law. Policy Period: 12 Months The policy period begins and ends at 12:01 am standard time at the Effective Date: MAY 31 2005 premises location. Expiration Date: MAY 31 2006 Location of Covered Premises: 347 MAIN ST EL SEGUNDO CA 90245 -3814 Coverages & Property Section I A Buildings B Business Personal Property C Loss of Income - 12 Months Section II L Business Liability M Medical Payments Products- Completed Operations (PCO) Aggregate General Ag regate (Other Than PCO1 Limits of Insurance 285,000 30,000 Actual Loss 500,000 5,000 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Forms, Options, and Endorsements I Special Form 3 FP -6143 Policy Endorsement FE- 6506.2 Terrorism Insurance Cov Notice FE -6999 Amendatory Endorsement FE -6205 Debris Removal Endorsement FE -6451 Policy Endorsement- Business FE -6610 Business Policy Endorsement FE -6464 cupancy: UTTice Deductibles - Section I $ 1,000 Basic In case of loss under this policy, the deductible will b applied to each occurrence and will be deducted from th amount of the loss. Other deductibles may apply - refer i POLICY PREMIUM Continued on Reverse Side of Page I OTHER LIMITS AND EXCLUSIONS MAY Prepared AUG 15 2005 Cou FP- 8030.2C A7AW 13 06/1993 TOM RU Your policy consists of this page, any endorsements , 4S0) 322 -5 and the policy form. PLEASE KEEP THESE TOGETHER. 1 Y - $ 2,334.00 Agent 368 (01217. EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of plans and specifications for Replacement of Water Mains, located at 600 -700 block of Lomita and Sierra Streets, 800 block of Bungalow Drive, 800 block of Maryland Street and 900 -1000 block of Walnut Avenue. Approved Capital Improvement Project - Project No: PW 07 -10 (Estimated Cost = $832,000) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Recommendation — (1) Approve Plans and Specifications; (2) Authorize staff to advertise the project for the receipt of construction bids; and (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The Capital Improvement Program includes an annual project for the replacement of water mains at various locations. (Background and discussion continued on the next page...... ) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Location Map FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: Capital Improvement Program: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: $1,255,672.93 $ 832,000 501 -400- 7103 -8207 Adopt Plans and Specifications No ORIGIN TED DATE: t en Finton, Director of Public Works REVIEWED /. ", DATE: Man er 3G9 14 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: (continued) The purpose of the annual program is to replace deteriorated water mains. Plans and Specifications have been prepared by staff for replacement of the following water mains: • Approximately 1,225 feet of 8" water main in Lomita Street from Mariposa Avenue to Maple Avenue • Approximately 1,225 feet of 8" water main in Sierra Street from Mariposa Avenue to Maple Avenue • Approximately 740 feet of 8" water main in Bungalow Drive from Maple Avenue to Walnut Avenue • Approximately 740 feet of 8" water main in Maryland Street from Maple Avenue to Walnut Avenue • Approximately 590 feet of 8" water main in Walnut Avenue from Maryland Street to Center street Sepulveda Boulevard at Holly Avenue relocation to avoid petroleum pipeline. The construction activities will be phased to minimize the inconvenience to residents. Each street will be considered a phase and the contractor will be directed to complete the construction on each phase prior to starting construction of the next phase to limit traffic and parking impacts. The total estimated cost of the project, including inspection and construction contingencies is $832,000. Anticipated bid opening is Tuesday, August 14, 2007. Funds for this project have been allocated from the Water Enterprises Funds. 370 371 CITY MAP r ePL(ACF—"-1e►vT OF WATLIZ 1` /)P,% S City of fl Besoado CITY OF HAWTHORNE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES [ lall MAMA11W rA0 U. 0 W AM�TOw rw •AMATOw rw _____ _ ___ YG r wOMRT MY ef R { s M RIa1R MIrtw t •Ma1R m .ram pp I Aa�AOS OR ANDAILYD Ir w euAMa rw IIII 1IIIIIII� 11111111 RIIIII �� ❑ FORIAN! VAMSAS IOMR I� ,n I VMLWTAW g wrralwnR 1 UWLJ ❑�� a RIOIwaRT.AA1t rxioRwAR rAU�A�a aa.wR MAAA.AW O �� B CNIa1R WML AV a.owaw O BL1J ® .MaLAN D'a wwrcuR Ort q z nawAOr wo I L BEB L.A., ai1MR SELDOM n FHE aaN1R z �.A GR KOM Y�NYII11.011 Iju��ujl BBB a�KY ►T..OR MIMPIRST ^ ®B❑ —8T ---I� WB ..T ClOIMR MRa.Mn `7 ®B L MN1rOR I4IAMRAR IrMWTAR / IALiCWTn � ❑ M S ; A. s s s s w� s s , �.✓► �` 0 NWo c m acti �N Lo o L) ❑ MAJ 371 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding the award of a contract to Shaw Industries Inc. for the installation of new carpeting at Joslyn Center. (Fiscal Impact = $11,418.03) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Recommendation — (1) Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract in a form as approved by the City Attorney with Shaw Industries Inc. in the amount of $11,418.03 by piggybacking onto State of California Contract No. 4- 97- 72 -0008A for replacement of carpeting at Joslyn Center; and (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The existing carpet at Joslyn Center is worn and requires replacement. Replacement of this carpet is scheduled and budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2006 -2007 Facilities Maintenance Fund. Staff recommends piggybacking onto the State of California Contract No. 4-97-72-0008A with Shaw Industries Inc. for the purchase of carpeting at Joslyn Center. The State contract was secured through a competitive bid process and other public agencies can piggyback onto the contract to take advantage of competitive pricing provided. City Council has approved piggybacking of this same contract for a re- carpeting project at the Library in July 2006 and a project at Fire Station No. 1 in October 2006. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: $306,000 Amount Requested: $11,418 Account Number: 405 - 400 - 0000 -6215 Project Phase: Award of Contract Appropriation Required: No ORIGIN TED BY: DATE: Z 3 e% `St v e n Finton, 9D t Qector of Public Works REVIEWED DATE: / Jeff S,*Xaf, ,, City Manager 372 15 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of plans and specifications for the slurry sealing of Sycamore Avenue from Penn Street to Sheldon Street and streets in the area bounded by Sheldon Street, Mariposa Avenue, El Segundo Boulevard and the west City Limits. Project No. PW 07 -11— (Fiscal Impact = $226,000). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Adopt plans and specifications; (2) Authorize staff to advertise the project for receipt of construction bids; (3) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The Public Works Department administers a slurry sealing program as a preventive measure to extend the life of pavement Citywide. The slurry sealing process consists of the application of a thin asphalt slurry layer on existing asphalt pavement to prevent water intrusion. (Background and discussion continued on next page......) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Map FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: Capital Improvement Program Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: ORIGINATED R $167,600 $58,965.87 $226,565.87 $167,000 001 - 400 - 4202 -6206 (Operating) $18,965.87 301 - 400 - 8201 -8512 (Blue Stone Balance) $40,000 301 - 400 - 8203 -8951 (Virginia Street Balance) Adopt plans and specifications No ctor of Public Works rt, City Manager DATE : -7 !v o DATE: 373 16 Background and Discussion continued The City is divided into five areas for slurry sealing; four quadrants west of Sepulveda Boulevard and one area east of Sepulveda (see attached map). Previously, only the four quadrants west of Sepulveda Boulevard were included in the slurry sealing program and streets were slurry sealed on a four -year cycle. It became evident, however, that streets east of Sepulveda Boulevard were deteriorating and should be included in the program as the fifth slurry sealing area. This reduced the slurry sealing frequency to five years. Conventional pavement management practice indicates that asphalt pavements should be slurry sealed at least every eight years. The City's five year cycle exceeds this standard. The Southeast portion of the area west of Sepulveda Boulevard was treated underthe last contract completed in 2006. Staff has prepared plans and specifications for the Fiscal Year 2006 -2007 Slurry Seal Program which includes streets in the area bounded by Mariposa Avenue, Sheldon Street, El Segundo Boulevard and the west City limit as shown on the attached map. This area was last slurry sealed in FY1999 -00 and is the area that has gone the longest without slurry treatment. Additionally, Sycamore Avenue from Sheldon Street to Penn Street is proposed to be slurry sealed as a final pavement treatment to conclude the street improvement recently completed on this block. Slurry sealing is budgeted through the Public Works operating budget in the amount of $116,600 per year. Slurry sealing costs have escalated due to its connection to the oil market. This year's project is estimated at $225,000. To continue with the five year cycle, it is recommended that the following funding be used on this project: Amount Description $116,600 Slurry sealing budget (Public Works operating budget) Sidewalk Replacement funding (Public Works operating budget). $50,000 Due to the availability of Community Development Block Grant Funds, these operating funds are available for the slurry sealing project. Balance available after completion of the Blue Stone $18,965.87 replacement project in the intersection Grand Avenue and Main Street. $40,000 Savings from Virginia Street Reconstruction project currently under construction. $226,565.87 Total 374 JL 17 -Zi Y3 y6i If I /Ifs, EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2006 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to award a Standard Public Works Contract to All American Asphalt Inc. for Rehabilitation on the westbound lanes of Rosecrans Avenue from Douglas Street to Sepulveda Boulevard in the amount of $226,863. Approved Capital Improvement Project - Project No. PW 07 -08 - (Contract Amount = $226,863). RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: Recommendation — (1) Authorize the City Manager to execute a Standard Public Works Contract in a form as approved by the City Attorney with All American Asphalt Inc. in the amount of $226,863; and (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: On June 5, 2007, the City Council adopted the plans and specifications and authorized staff to advertise the project for competitive bids. (Background and discussion continued on the next page......) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Location map FISCAL IMPACT: CIP $135,000 Developer Contribution: $135,000 Amount Requested: $248,801.30 Account Number: 301 -400- 8203 -8203, $35,000; Gas Tax 001 -400- 8203 -8808, $100,000, Prop C Developer Contribution, $135,000 Project Phase: Award of Contract Appropriation Required: No YORIGIN D BY- DATE: on, D' ector of Public Works REVIEWED B - DATE: Jeff rt, City Manager 17 376 BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: (continued) On July 10, 2007, the City Clerk received and opened the following five (5) bids: COMPANY AMOUNT All American Asphalt $ 226,863.00 Griffith Company $ 233,796.40 Hardy & Harper, Inc. $ 245,000.00 Papl, inc. DBA: Excel Paving $ 258,216.20 Sequel Contractors, Inc. $ 276,183.40 The lowest bid from All American Asphalt is responsive. All American Asphalt references verified successful experience with similar projects and have completed projects for the City in the past. Funding for this project in the amount of $135,000 is available through the Five -Year Pavement Reconstruction Program in the Fiscal Year 2006 -2007 Capital Improvement Program Gas Tax and Proposition C funds. Half of projects costs, up to $135,000, is available for this project from developer contributions. Staff recommends award of a Public Works Contract to All American Asphalt for $226,863. The amount requested includes the total bid of $226,183 and an additional 10% for potential change orders due to unforeseen conditions. 377 Q to (/> > z 0 M m T X O L m 0 1 r O 0 o N m m O - G m z i S SEPULVEDA BLVD S AVIATION BLVD I "7Q cn S m m o MAIN ST I 1 p m o SHELDON ST.. PENN ST.. r m RI � I D it WASHINGTON ST In N SEPULVEDA BLVD I- I l .li � fT c 0 CD cn z 8 AVIATION BLVD I "7Q EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding the award of a contract to C.C. Layne and Sons Inc. for the construction and installation of new custom cabinets at Camp Eucalyptus. (Fiscal Impact: $17,882) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Award the contract to C. C. Layne and Sons Inc. and authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement for services; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: When the Camp Eucalyptus building was completed, a task force determined to best meet community needs inside the building, storage cabinets were necessary in the large room. With input from the user groups, specifications and designs of the cabinets were drafted and approved by the task force. City Council approved the adopted the plans and specifications (Attachment #1) at their September 8, 2005 meeting and authorized staff to advertise the project for bids. Contract (Continued on the next page....) ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Attachments: 1. Sept 6,'05 City Council Report w /Camp Eucalyptus Cabinet Specifications 2. Bid Log from PW05 -06 Camp Eucalyptus Cabinet Project (05) 3. Estimate from C. C. Layne & Sons Inc. (Feb. `07) Fiscal Impact: $ 17,882 Operating Budget: Camp Eucalyptus Trust Account Account Number: 703 - 200 - 5101 -2602 Project Phase: Award Contract Appropriation Required: Yes_ No X ORIGINAT MlYafd Brune, Recreation and Parks Director Citv Manager DATE: 71z10 7 DATE: 7/' f /G� 379 Background and Discussion: (...continued from previous page) documents, plans, and specifications for installation of cabinets at Camp Eucalyptus were prepared and advertised ( #PW- 05 -08). No bids were received at that time (Attachment #2). In February 2007, City staff received an estimate for $17, 882 from El Segundo business C. C. Layne and Sons, Inc. (Attachment #3) to construct and install the proposed cabinets. At that time, there were not enough funds from past donations in the Camp Eucalyptus trust account to fully fund the project. However, at the June 19, 2007 City Council meeting, Council accepted a $5000 donation from the Continental Development Corporation pledged toward Camp Eucalyptus which would complete the funding necessary for the cabinet project as estimated by C.C. Layne & Sons. z 380 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA ATTACHMENT #1 MEETING DATE. September 6, 2005 AGENDA HEADING- Consent Agenda Consideration and possible action regarding the adoption of plans and specifications for a public works project at Camp Eucalyptus Interior cabinets - Project No PW 005 -08 (Estimated cost $15,000) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION. Recommendation — (1) Adopt plans and specifications, (2) Authorize staff to advertise the project for receipt of bids, (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION. When Camp Eucalyptus was completed, a Task Force was assigned as to how best meet the community's needs with this building It was agreed that the cabinets on either side of the large room would be needed for storage With input from the user groups, the specifications and design were drafted The majority of the funding for this project is derived from donations of Chevron and Leadership El Segundo in the total amount of $12,800 The scope of work provides for construction of two rows of cabinets on either side of large room to be constructed out of wood with a natural finish Each cabinet will be 36" wide x 48" tall and 36 "deep with a single door and heavy duty deadbolt ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS. Cabinet specification and drawing FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget* Capital Improvement Program- Amount Requested. Account Number: 703 - 200 - 5101 -2602 = $12,800 (Chevron & Leadership El Segundo donation) 001 - 400 - 5202 -6206 = $ 2,200 (Contract services) Project Phase: Adoption of Plans and Specifications Appropriation Required: None ORIGINATED BY- DATE: Stacia Mancini, Director of Recreation and Parks R DATE: anager 047 381 Camp Eucalyptus 641 California Street Project No PW05 -08 Scope and Location of work Construction of approximately 70 linear feet of all wood constructed finished cabinets at Camp Eucalyptus Approximately 17'6" linear feet of cabinets on either end of main room with two rows in height Cabinet Specifications. (1) 36" wide x 45" tall x 36' deep (2) 1 Slab door with concealed hinges and deadbolt lock function per cabinet (3) Wood interiors with adjustable shelving One shelf per cabinet (4) Natural finish (5) Include all end caps to fit cabinets into opening MM 382 jltu3nosl .l I ;.e/t Q OSII L ZE6 WU eEiut_ •�.! - �,tiS cos of= S �}Z-ru us TD M rgn �' of i'� PLYwoo t,� lu� oyE ©PC- N 46909; 8 oafs �I -111 1 I C"-. Go cn CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ATTACHMENT #2 BID LOG NO. #PW 05 -08 City of El Segundo Installation of Cabinets at Camp Eucalyptus Date of BID Opening: Tuesday, October 4, 2005 Time of BID Opening: 19:00 A.M. Place of BID Opening: City Clerk's Office CiD PAN,YyNA`i►�E' /�bFtESS i .. � y y, ,� '� 3s ..�: _, :• - . ;• � _, � } +fig i r nOrr7�irtal � �,.r J : r m , � � � 1 G 2 I . i 3 4 I 5 6 7 t 8 9 10 4 10 Staff Pr( FORMSO ly Clerk's Department `y Clerk's Department blic Works Department 384 ATTACHMENT #3 C.C. Layne & Sons Inc. 213 Richmond St. El Segundo, CA 90245 (310) 322 -0174 FAX (310) 322 -1409 City of El Segundo 150 Illinois Street El Segundo, Ca. 90245 Attn: Gary Ochwat REF: Quotation for camp Eucalyptus storage cabinet installation Quotation based on the following: 1. Labor, material, and equipment to install storage cabinets. 2. Shelves and dividers to be made of 1" melamine. 3. Doors to be 1 318" solid core birch doors 4. Each door to have heavey duty dead bolt. 5. Paint doors. Price quoted is: $17,882.48 Thank you for the opportunity to be of service, C. Craig Layne February 26, 2007 38 5 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding approval to waive rental fees per municipal code section 8 -8 -7 D 1 for the use of Recreation Park facilities for the United States Coast Guards 217th birthday celebration picnic. (Fiscal Impact: $ 2,670) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1). Approve fee waiver per municipal code section 8 -8 -7 D 1 for use of Recreation Park facilities by the United States Coast Guard to host it's 217th Birthday Celebration on August 3, 2007; 2). Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The City of El Segundo has been approached by Lt. Ken Rockhold, United States Coast Guard helicopter rescue station located at LAX, requesting a fee waiver for the use of various El Segundo Recreation Park facilities on Saturday, August 3, 2007, in order to host the Coast Guards 217th Birthday Celebration. As per Lt. Rockhold's email (Attachment #1), each individual Coast Guard unit is responsible for hosting their own "Coast Guard Day" event and will provide a social, recreational opportunity for members of the Coast Guard and their families. Estimated attendance for the proposed event is 100, and the facilities requested include Recreation Park's fire circle, picnic areas 9 and 10, the softball field and grass area for two bounce houses. Fees proposed to be waived equal $2,670. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Attachment #1: Correspondence from Lt. Kenneth H. Rockhold, USCG requesting waiver FISCAL IMPACT: $ 2,670 (requesting to be waived) Operating Budget: - -- Account Number: 001 - 300 - 0000 -3879 Amount Requested: $2,670 (requesting to be waived) Project Phase: - -- Appropriation Required: _Yes X No ORIGINAXuneftZ, DATE: Richard Recre ation and Parks Director DATE: )It VU 1 Jeff Sfefoft, City Manager 19 :380 ATTACHMENT # 1 Email Correspondence from Lt. Ken Rockhold, USCG Air Station Los Angeles: - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Kenn.eth.H.RockholA usc:.m,il [ mailto :Kenneth.H.Rockhold @uscg.mil: Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 1 :21 PV To: Van Fcssen., Jeff Subject: Coast Guard Day at E1 Segun.dc Rec Park Good afternoon Mr. Van Fossen,, My name is LT Ken Rockhold and 1 work for the United States Coast Guard at Air Station. Los Angeles. I would east Like to start by saying thanks for :Helping us _ry and secure -_ Segundo Recreation Park. Several of our members have a recreation pass and think your park would be a great venue for our celebration. The United States Coast Guard celebrates his birthtay every year in August and this year we are celebrating our 217th. Each individual Coast. Guard unit around the nation is responsible for pitting on their own day of activities in celebration of our beloved organization. This day known to the organization as oast Guard Day ", is also a chance for the members of the unit no spend time together away from work enjoying the company of co- workers that in a social environment and boosting morale. Our unit, the ne- Lcopner rescue station located at LAX, puts on a picnic that includes some Field activities, games, anal plenty of great food. One cause for concern amergst our planning committee is funding. Our morale activities are funded Largely by the members at our Air St.ati.on. As it is very expensive everywhere in the greater Los Angeles area, we rely heavily on the goodwill of neighboring communities to envoy an ever.- such as this. On behalf of tine members of :n.ited States Coast Guard Air Station. Los Angeles, 1 am requesting to be allowed free usage of El Segundo Recreation Park on August 3rd between the hours of 9:O0am to 2:CCpm:. Use plat: to have about 100 people in attendance. Thank you very much for your consideration.. V /R, LT Ken. Rockhold USCG Air Station Los Angeles Phone: 1310) 215.2112 ext. 244 Fax: ;310) 213.2460 Kenneth.H.Rockhc:Q uscq.m.i1 387 2 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to waive the formal bidding process and approve the purchase of 40 TASER International Model X26 Tasers with digital cameras and holsters from Pro Force Law Enforcement in an amount not to exceed $56,832 from the asset forfeiture fund. (Fiscal impact: None) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Pursuant to El Segundo Municipal Code Sec. 1 -7 -10, waive the formal bid process based on a sole source vendor for the purchase of 40 TASER International Model X26 Tasers with digital cameras and holsters from Pro Force Law Enforcement. 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: On September 19, 2006, the City Council approved the 2006/2007 budget which included a Capital Outlay Request to purchase 60 TASER International Model X26 Electronic Control Devices. In December 2006, the El Segundo Police Department use of force staff began testing and evaluating the TASER X26 device in both a training and field environment. On April 3, 2007, the City Council authorized the purchase of 20 X26 Tasers to be utilized and evaluated by field personnel. Following these evaluation periods, staff has concluded the most efficient manner of deployment would be assigning an X26 Taser device to all police field personnel. The X26 Taser is the only ambidextrous law enforcement electronic control device with the added feature of an integrated audio and video digital camera. The primary reason for recommending the TASER X26 device is the capability of the attached digital video camera which provides both audio and video recordings of an incident when the X26 is deployed. The ability to capture both audio and video recordings is beneficial for use during criminal prosecution, excessive use of force allegations and investigations, and use of force tactics training. Additionally, the X26 Taser is smaller in size and easier to manipulate. Although the X26 Taser is smaller than the current M26, the controlling capabilities are equal. — Continued — ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None. FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: None Amount Requested: $56,832 Account Number: 109 - 400 - 3105 -8104 Project Phase: uavla Lumm REVIEWED Yes of Police Jeff 1$&&I rt, City Manager DATE: 7 10 -0-7 DATE: IM ❑C As noted previously, the X26 Taser is the only ambidextrous law enforcement electronic control device with the added feature of an integrated audio and video digital camera. The justification to utilize Pro Force Law Enforcement as a sole source vendor is based on the fact Pro Force Law Enforcement's is the singular authorized distributor of the Taser Model X26 within California. Staff recommends the City Council waive the bidding requirements and authorize a purchase from Pro Force Law Enforcement in an amount not to exceed $56,832 for the purchase of 40 additional TASER International Model X26 Tasers with digital video camera attachments and holsters, to supplement the current electronic control devices in the field. 389 EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding award of contracts to: S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. for construction related to Group 21 (42 residences) and Group 22 (17 residences) of the Residential Sound Insulation (RSI) Program. (Estimated construction cost and retention: $1,840,740) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Award contract to S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. for Group 21; 2) Reject Bid from WE Construction, Inc. for Groups 21 and 22; 3) Accept the withdrawal of Bid from Ardalan Construction Company for Group 22; 4) Award contract to S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. for Group 22; 5) Authorize the City Manager to execute construction contracts in a form approved by the City Attorney; and 6) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: On May 22, 2007 the City Clerk's office opened sealed bids for Group 21 (RSI 07 -03) of the City's Residential Sound Insulation (RSI) Program. The results of the bid openings were as follows: (Please see attached page entitled "Background and Discussion (cont.,) ") ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1) Bidder's Proposal and Statement from S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. for Group 21 2) Bidder's Proposal and Statement from WE Construction, Inc. for Group 22 3) Letter requesting withdrawal of Bid (and follow up letter) from Ardalan Construction Company for Group 22 4) Bidder's Proposal and Statement from S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. for Group 22 FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: $10,200,000 Amount Requested: $1,840,740 Account Number: 116- 400 -0000 -8960 Groups: 21 and 22 Appropriation Required: X Yes _ No C�; 5�� 'James S. O'Neill, Program Man REVIEWED BY: Jeff Wwart, Citv Ma .Ju DATE: 7 /I/ 350 21 Background and Discussion (cont.) Group 21 (RSI 07 -03) 1. S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. 2. WE Construction, Inc. 3. Professional Building Contractors, Inc. 4. NSA Construction Group, Inc. 5. Ardalan Construction Company $ 839,200.00 $ 945, 800.00 $1,147,440.00 $1,277,000.00 $1,398,600.00 A review was performed on the Bid from S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. was determined to be responsive. S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. has completed construction work on Groups 5 — 9 (137 residences) on the City's RSI Program, and is under contract to perform construction work related to Group 17 (27 residences), which is scheduled for later this year. On June 12, 2007 the City Clerk's office opened sealed bids for Group 22 (RSI 07 -05) of the City's Residential Sound Insulation (RSI) Program. The results of the bid openings were as follows: Group 22 (RSI 07 -05) 1. WE Construction, Inc. $ 686,000.00 2. Ardalan Construction Company $ 691,000.00 3. S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. $ 834,200.00 4. Professional Building Contractors, Inc. $ 857,241.00 A review was performed on the Bid from WE Construction, Inc. and determined to be non- responsive. On the "Designation of Material Suppliers and Subcontractors," a manufacturer was listed for aluminum windows who does not produce an aluminum window capable of meeting the specifications. Additionally, staff has confirmed that the manufacturer, who is listed as the supplier for both aluminum and vinyl windows did not provide pricing for the job prior to the Bid being submitted to the City. These items constitute the Bid being considered non - responsive. Prior to any review by City staff of the second lowest bid, submitted by Ardalan Construction Company, Ardalan sent a letter requesting the withdrawal of their Bid. Subsequently, they have sent a second letter further documenting the reason for their request to withdraw their Bid. A review of the third lowest bid, submitted by S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. was performed, and the Bid was deemed responsive. Again, S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. has completed construction work on Groups 5 — 9 (137 residences) on the City's RSI Program, and is under contract to perform construction work related to Group 17 (27 residences), which is scheduled for later this year. The amount requested for the contracts is as follows: Group 21 (42 residences) S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. $ 923,120.00 Group 22 (17 residences) S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. $ 917,620.00 which represents the Total Bid amounts shown on their respective bids and an additional 10% of that Total Bid for potential change orders related to unforeseen conditions. As City Council is aware, eighty percent (80 %) of costs associated with the Residential Sound Insulation Program are covered by federal grant funding from the FAA until those funds identified in the Grant Implementation Plan to the City of Los Angeles are exhausted. Remaining expenses, with the exception of elective "Owner Upgrades" selected by property owners, are now covered by the new settlement with Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA). ,�Ro C._ !7z)/ Lt/ zUU / 11:06 3154718807 SL CONT WICKER 13IDDERS'S_P OPOSAL AND STATEMENT CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Project Number RSI 07 -03 "Residential Sound Insulation Program — Group 21" • 117M To the Mayor and City Council City of El Segundo 350 Main St. El Segundo, CA 90245 PAGE 01 The undersigned declares that he /she has carefully examined the location of the proposed work and has otherwise satisfied himselflherself as to the nature and location of the work, and is full informed as to all conditions and matters which can in any way affect the work or cost thereof, that he/she has examined the Contract Documents, and has read the accompanying "BIDDING INSTRUCTIONS" and hereby agrees to provide the following: To furnish all labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and services and to do all the work required for the "Residential Sound Insulation Program — Group 21" in strict conformity with the Contract Documents and at the following lump sum price, to Wit: ID Address Descri lion Engineer's Estimate Did Amount Bidder's Property Subtotal 21.01 945 Pepper Street 9114 RSI Improvements $0'2 Joe) Door tint upgrade I $ RUE 21.02 945 Pepper Street #214 RSI Improvements $ vZ w $ a l DD Door tint upgrade ; $ k�-°' 21.03 945 Pepper Street #314 RSI Improvements $ OOC) $ 02/ /00 Door tint upgTrade $ •C> 21.04 945 Pepper Street #113 RS1 Improvements $ 1 00 $ Door tint upUade $ °`' 21.05 945 Pepper Street 4213 RSI Im rovements ( f $ l $ 100 Door tint upgrade $ \ '"' 21.06 945 Pepper Street #313 RSI Improvements v $ 04 $ l UD Door tint u ade 21.07 945 Pepper Street 4109 RSI Im rovements J�Ir;��'A SIf. $12 Cb0 tint �Door upgrade 4 $ 21.08 945 Pepper Street #209 RSI Improvements it $21 VLX $ 99 Ov Door tint upgrade ' ° , $ O ° 21.09 945 Pepper Street 4309 RSI Improvements $JVJ.q6 W $ ODD $al � Door tint u grade ,1 Bidder's Proposal and Statement 1 City of El Segundo Group 21 Residential Sound Insulation Program 391 05/22/2667 11:06 3154718867 SL CONT WICKER PAGE 02 21.10 945 Pepper Street #110 RS1 Improvements Door tint upgrade $ i� 14Q '`" I' 0 ±;faF�'; $ °`' 21.11 945 Pepper Street #210 RSI Improvements $ iq (Ql7 Door tint upgrade 5. ON I'. i ' $ °' 21.12 21.13 945 Pepper Street #310 945 Pepper Street #11 I RSI Improvements $ 19.000 $ �� 4 $ -c Door tint upgrade RSI Improvements ii' ' •A Ki . $ 0 o ° � $ Door tint up ade $ 21.14 21.15 945 Pepper Street #211 945 Pepper Street #311 RSI Improvements .' 1 $ coo $ (� �� $ Door tint upgrade RSI Improvements $ $ [ (DOC) Door tint upgrade ,' $ 21.16 945 Pepper Street #112 RSI Im rovements $ iL 000 $ Door tint up o 21.17 945 Pepper Street #212 RSI Im rovements $ O Dcc $ i �d Door tint u2grade $ 2I.18 945 Pepper Street #312 RSI Improvements $ 400 �7 $ Doortintupgradc $ 21.19 950 Main Street 9101 RSI Im rovements ,. $ 1 $ ar Door tint upgrade $ d 21.20 950 Main Street #201. RSI Improvements 11 LID, 000 $ 10D Door tint u ade $ Q VU 21.21 950 Main Street 9301 RSI Improvements $ coo.$ Door tint u ade $ 0 21.22 950 Main Street #102 RSI Improvements $ tq. 000 $ [� i too Door tint u ade '' `� $ ho av 21.23 950 Main Street #202 RSI Im rovements $ 006 11100 Door tint upgrade 5 $ 160 21.24 950 Main Street 9302 RSI Im rovements •' $ Tq. 000 $ 19.(00 Door tint upgrade $ 21.25 950 Main Street #103 RSI Improvements $ 11000 $ i 10 Door tint upgrade ''is 21.26 950 Main Street #203 RSI Improvements " i $ P9.600 $ Door tint upgrade " $ , 21.27 950 Main Street 4303 RSI Im rovements $ R M $ Door tint upgrade $ 00 21.28 950 Main Street 9104 RSI Im rovements 2' $ Cbo $ Door tint upgrade , $ 100 21.29 950 Main Street #204 RSI Improvements i $ Door tint u2gradc ; V, ' ; $ 21.30 950 Main Strect #304 RSI Improvements '4Il`i1' a "��. $ 1 q 000 ' $ } Oo Door tint upgrade " %r $ 21.31 950 Main Street # 105 RSI Improvements Door tint upgTade Bidder's Proposal and Statement 2 City of F1 Segundo Group 21 Residential Sound Insulation Program 3 qr' 05/22/2007 11:06 3154718807 SL CONT WICKER PAGE 03 21.32 950 Main Street #205 RS' Improvements OOU $ �� too Door tint u pgrade ; d 41>s 3Wr ° iW'l $ 21.33 1 950 Main Street #305 RSI Improvements d $ i `1'7 ;I I $ (9,00 $ !7� Door tint up grad e •�1i14I $ 21.34 950 Main Street 9106 RSI Improvements llr ti! $ (,b $ j d� Door tint u de " ` _i ' 1 ~ ` $ I co "O 21.35 950 Main Street #206 RSI Improvements $ L 000 p 1 $ l Door tint upgrade 3:Ot"a' W 1 $ 21.36 1 950 Main Street #306 RSI Improvements M$240. ' '' $ coo $ (Q J 00 Door tint upgrade V At $ 21.37 950 Main Street #107 RS1 Improvements :_`� • ` $ (61, OOv 100 Door tint upgrade $ $ 160 21.38 950 Main Street 9207 RSI Improvements r , $ i R, 000 �r $ (q, 1.00 Door tint upgrade $ ° 21.39 9- 50 Main Street #307 RSI Improvements $ tq, 000 Q $ i-1 100 Door tint upgrade $ 21.40 950 Main Street #108 RSI Improvements $ A 1 00 $ 1 Door tint $ (00 21..41. 950 Main Street #208 RSI Improvements Al 000 $ Door tint u ade F°" $ 21.42 950 Main Street #308 RSI Im rovements MOO O ' $ 41,000. $ v� l Door tint u ade G H $ Total Bid (Contract Sum) (words) (figures) In case of discrepancy between the words and figures, the words must prevail. NOTICE: BIDDERS WILL NOT BE RELEASED DUE TO ERRORS AND ILLEGIBLE BIDS MUST BE DISQUALIFIED NOTICE: Total Bid (Contract Sum) must equal the total of Schedule of Values. If the Total Bid does not equal the total of the Schedule of Values, it is grounds for rejection of the Bid. Furthermore, inconsistencies between the Schedule of Values and the Plans for each Dwelling are grounds for rejection of the Bid This bid is based upon completing the work as set in the Construction Schedule published in the Contract Documents. If awarded the contract for the Work, the undersigned hereby agrees to sign the contract and furnish the necessary bonds not more than ten (10) calendar days after Notice to Proceed date. Enclosed is a Bidder's Bond, certified cheek or cashier's cheek, which is not less than ten percent (10 %), as a guarantee that the undersigned will enter into the contract if awarded to the undersigned. The undersigned further agrees that in case of default in executing the required Bidder's Proposal and Statement Group 21 City of El Segundo Residential Sound Insulation Program l4PS 393 contract with necessary bonds and insurance, within the time limits above specified, said bonds or check and money payable therein must be fortified to and become the property of the City of El Segundo, State of California. Name of Firm: S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. 316 South ree Address: Syracuse, NY 13202 Telephone Number: J 47 e 9 7`%-4 Contractor's License Number: Type of License: (. ' License Expiration Date: Type of Entity:0 Sole Proprietorship Partnership�orporation 0 Other 1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Contractor Representative Title: Signature: Dated this \�t day 'F mss VII - Leap If Corporation, please attach evidence of authority to sign. *aCN- � 394 Bidder's Proposal and Statement 4 City of El Segundo Group 21 Residential Sound Insulation Program BIDDERS'S PROPOSAL AND STATEMENT CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Project Number RSI 07 -05 "Residential Sound Insulation Program — Group 22" PROPOSAL To the Mayor and City Council City of El Segundo 350 Main St. El Segundo, CA 90245 The undersigned declares that he /she has carefully examined the location of the propos(:d work and has otherwise satisfied himself/herself as to the nature and location of the work, and is full informed as to all conditions and matters which can in any way affect the work or cost thoreof, that he /she has examined the Contract Documents, and has read the accompanying "BEDDING INSTRUCTIONS" and hereby agrees to provide the following: To furnish all labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and services and to do all the work required for the "Residential Sound Insulation Program — Group 22" in strict conformity with the Contract Documents and at the following lump sum price, to Wit: ID Address Description Cost ' Property Subtotal 22.01 770 West Imperial Avenue, Unit 46 RSI Improvements $'2 $ • _ 22.02 770 West Imperial Avenue, Unit 46 RSI Improvements $� *?-*j j $ _ 22.03 909 Hillcrest Street RSI Improvements $ W1310 $ ��_� Window and Door tint Upgrade $ `� 22.04 714 Redwood Avenue RSI Improvements $ 4 ',%p`10 $ 22.05 428 West Acacia Avenue RSI Improvements $ 1.0 $ 22.06 625 Hillcrest Street RSI Improvements $ $ L_ Window and Door tint Upgrade $ �� 22.07 710 West Mariposa Avenue RSI Improvements $ �o Window grill Upgrade $ Door C grills Upgrade $ Air Conditioning Upgrade $ Windows 4 & 7 glass Upgrade $ HEPA filter Upgrade $ , Cf Bidder's Proposal and Statement Group 22 City of El Seg undo Residential Sound Insulation I'rcgram 395 22.08 208 West Acacia Avenue RSI Improvements $ Door E Upgrade 22.09 310 West Imperial Avenue, Unit 4 RSI Improvements 22.10 951 McCarthy Court, Unit I RSI Improvements $ Windows 1 -3, 5, & 6 rills U grade 22.11 951 McCarthy Court, Unit 2 RSI Improvements $ �6 Windows 1 -4 & 6 -8 rills Upgrade Air Conditioning Upgrade 22.12 951 McCarthy Court, Unit 3 RSI Improvements $ o so Windows 1 -5 & 7 -9 ills Upgrade $ Air Conditionin g Upgrade 22.13 951 McCarthy Court, Unit 4 RSI Improvements $ o,.* Windows 1 -3 and 5 -8 rills Upgrade $ 22.14 718 Virginia Street RSI Improvements $ $ Ll 22.15 718 `/2 Virginia Street RSI Improvements $ Sao , $ Windows 7 & 8 Upgrade 22.16 205 East Acacia Avenue RSI Im rovements $ SGT 3 °O $ Door A Upgrade $ Window tint UpEade $ Window 1 Upgrade $ 22.17 209 West Acacia Avenue RSI Improvements $ _ $ o� Total Bid (Contract Sum) (words) (figures) In case of discrepancy between the words and figures, the words must prevai I. NOTICE: BIDDERS WILL NOT BE RELEASED DUE TO ERRORS. AND ILLEGIBLE BIDS MUST BE DISQUALIFIED NOTICE: Total Bid (Contract Sum) must equal the total of Schedule of Values. If the Total Bid does not equal the total of the Schedule of Values, it is grounds for rejection of the Bid. Furthermore, inconsistencies between the Schedt le of Values and the Plans for each Dwelling are grounds for rejection of the Did O 3.F Bidder's Proposal and Statement 2 City of El Se€ undo Group 22 Residential Sound Insulation 11regram This bid is based upon completing the work as set in the Construction Schedule published in the Contract Documents. If awarded the contract for the Work, the undersigned hereby agrees to sign the contract and furnish the necessary bonds not more than ten (10) calendar days after Notice to Proceed date. Enclosed is a Bidder's Bond, certified check or cashier's check, which is not less than ten percent (10 %), as a guarantee that the undersigned will enter into the contract if awarded to the undersigned. The undersigned further agrees that in case of default in executing the required contract with necessary bonds and insurance, within the time limits above specified, said bonds or check and money payable therein must be fortified to and become the property of the City of El Segundo, State of California. Name of Firm: �' F (° -S '- Address: �✓f'�L� r�ph %l•. 2J �' %? S:� S, Telephone Number: t • (La r i �� Contractor's License Number: k�-? 3 �1 Type of License: 1S . License Expiration Date: Type of Entity: ❑ Sole Proprietorship ❑ PartnershipO Corporation ❑ Other I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Contractor Representative: Title: C 2' o j CA 0`67, Signature: i Dated this -_ day of 2007. If Corporation, please attach evidence of authority to sign. Bidder's Proposal and Statement 3 City of El Segundo Group 22 Residential Sound Insulation Program 397 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF ADDENDA Bidder acknowledges receipt of the following addenda, has become familiar with their contents, and has accounted for all such changes in the Bidder's Proposal and Statement. The Bidder must attach copies of transmittal letters and facsimile cover sheets for each identified addendurn. Addendum Number Addendum Number Addendum Number Addendum Number Addendum Number Addendum Number Addendum Number Addendum Number Signature: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Date: Dated this a day of -7 -,�, 2007. Bidder's Proposal and Statement 4 City of El Sek undo Group 22 Residential Sound Insulation I'rcgram 3y� DESIGNATION OF MATERIAL SUPPLIERS AND SUBCONTRACTORS In compliance with the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act (Chgtpt,;r 2, commencing at Section 4100, Division 5, Title I of the Government Code of the State of California) and any amendments thereof, each bidder must set forth below: (a) the nE.m(; and location of the place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or r. ,-nder service to the prime contractor in or about the construction of the work or improvement to be performed under this contract in an amount in excess of one -half of one percent (0.5 °1 <,) cif the prime contractor's total bid, and (b) the portion of the work which will be done by each subcontractor under this act and their license number. The prime contractor must list cnl:, one subcontractor for each such portion as is defined by the, prime contractor in this bid. If a prime contractor fails to specify a subcontractor or if a prime contractor specifies mere than one subcontractor for the same portion of work to be performed under the contract in excess of one -half of one percent (0.5 %) of the prime contractor's total bid, the Contractor must be de ,,med to have agreed that he /she is fully qualified and will perform that portion themselves. No prime contractor whose bid is accepted must (a) substitute any subcontractor, (b) permit any subcontract to be voluntarily assigned or transferred or allow it to be performed by anyo -ie other than the original subcontractor listed in the original bid, or subcontract any portion of the work in excess of one -half of one percent (0.5 %) of the prime contractor's total bid as to which the original bid did not designate a subcontractor, except as authorized in the Sublettin€ and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act. Subletting or subcontracting of any portion of the wcrk in excess of one -half of one percent (0.5 %) of the prime contractor's total bid as to which no subcontractor was designated in the original bid must only be permitted in cases o F F ublic emergency or necessity, and then only after a finding reduced to writing as a public record of the City awarding this contract setting forth the facts constituting the emergency or necessity. MATERIAL SUPPLIERS Bidder's Proposal and Statement Group 22 City of El Sep undo Residential Sound Insulation 11regram 399 Name of Supplier Supplier Address Supplier Phone Number Aluminum Windows ^.►; �C7�n(/ , N C � F1% — i97 Vinyl Windows Wood Doors c �,�OV t VL.,. /yo Cie( / Secondary (Storm) Doors , Sliding Glass Doors Toy�PMC� �(,Hru� (G 9o/ /�tnRnA /S( 6/g - 711z8. Bidder's Proposal and Statement Group 22 City of El Sep undo Residential Sound Insulation 11regram 399 Secondary Sliding Glass Doors 7,0 Address & City of Subcontractor's Business Location Percentage of Bid 'Total / G — —I Fireplace Dampers % G n /3 y $ • Jas, ti. q o 9 i? t. f 41 v L7 /v 6 -A-3 6 6 C7 • C? — d� Fireplace Glass Doors HVAC Equipment h �1 erLl 9 r �� -� — SUBCONTRACTORS Work Activity Name of Subcontractor Address & City of Subcontractor's Business Location License Number Percentage of Bid 'Total / G �NSKIa►�'io*, M, lJ �'++su �g%+ 41 v L7 /v 6 -A-3 6 6 Bidder's Proposal and Statement Group 22 City of El Sep undo Residential Sound Insulation I'rcgram 400 =.;,-G 0 A R D A L A N ('( )N�TRUCTION COMPANY c.r :I1'iJCr1'--r.1 ntp.rl;,.:rmFi'T June 13, 2007 1. -S Ml111 N1r. Janus O'Neill, Prulect Manager (it) of to Segundo - RSI Program ?ti() Alain Street 1:I Sevundo, CA 90245 Re: RSI -- Group Denr \9r. UN'Iell, We participated in the RSI - (:croup ?' bid opcninF yesterday and with this icrt ?r, Ltic arc kindly reauesting. the withdrawal of our bid (prior ro pftssing of 72 hoar, from the bid dare) under the provisions provided h%. State of(alifomia. -this withdrawal is due to an unfortunate clerical error in the bid calculations. !'leas• feel tree to contact me if thcrc ; +r; ;v), c,ucstmn ' iMcerely. 1,dalan (construction Co., Inc. \10 n Ardal.i_n - Presidrnl -' - Irani F_. Idillcrrst Drive. t;nit n — Thousand OaLs. CA 91 ;(? — P. R(ii- 8-- -9: 9? , 1 , A(i" iv -.a ;p7 401 A R D A L A N t�NSTRUCTiON COiv1PANY June 13, 2007 Mr. James O'Neill. Project Manager City of 1.1 Segundo — KSI Program ')50 Main Street F.l Segundo. CA 90245 Re: RS] — Group 22 Dear Mr. O'Neill, ;-.,_ �j1 CU: 15ThUCTIrr: MM-)A(:EMEW Via Fax Onit (4) r AA E S 7?�I, Per your request we are providing the details of the error that occurred in our hid calculation and we will take this opportunity to address some other concerns as well. The follo%vinc is an explanation of the proces: and attached you will find a bid _preadsheet and a hand written worksheet. Typically the estimator for a project should stay at the Head Quarters until a hid is complete and the pricing is ready to be submitted. On June 12°i, due to staff scheduling and other commitments, I had to drive to El Segundo and submit the bid. This caused the final details of the bid to be completed by others, less familiar with the project. As you can see on the attached hid spreadsheet, there is a blank space for Vinyl Window materials. This number was inadvertently left out. But there is more to it. We had contacted all the typical participating subs and suppliers including. both Milgard (Local I and Graham (Headquarters) to provide us with a bid. On .tune I 1 'h, Milgard notified us that due to a mia up they may or may not bid the job, but if we get it, thcv will work with us. I told them that we certainly hope to get their price and as a matter of fact wee are counting nn it. Since we had not received a confirmation that either (Milgard or Graham ) u•as going to .submit a bid to us, as a backup Plan i had prepared an estimate for the 1- inyl u- indow5 haeed on historic numbers. This number which was 590,000 "vas to be inserted in the spreadsheet in case no bids were received. As it turned out, no bids were received and the backup figure of S90.000 was never inserted in the spreadsheet, hence the error in the final calculations. -'After the bid. I spoke to Graham's Rep. in Kansas who is apparently in charge of the R51 projects. lie stated that they have a process prior to hidding to contractor; that the,, have never worked for 1tiefore. I asked if he would submit his bid to us. he qua; hesitwit and h:l n(-,t done so. I also have tried numerous times to contact the Rep. for Milgard (Post bid), but have had no luck with any call back. 4 V -1 ' Page 2 — J. O'Neill The bidding process is tedious and extremely time consuming for any responsible contractor. As a bona fide, capable and responsible contractor, we rely on specified manufacturers to treat al) participants fairly and with a degree of professionalism. We have heard that Milgard in fact had a price before the bid contrary to what we »•ere told on June I l ", We know for sure Graham had a price but since they did not kno,v u�, they elected not to bid to us. Here we are sliming and submitting a Non- Collusion affidavit. while others may have decided to make it difficult for us to submit a proper bid. Of course as a new contractor in the area, we would naive not to expect certain decree of Sinicism, but I am confident in a matter of time, any entity dealing with us will appreciate the ethics that we practice as apart of day to day business. 1 hope this lengthy letter answers your questions. In conclusion I would like you to know that -e have the highest degree of commitment towards the agencies that we work urith and we hope to have the opportunity to do more projects with the City of El Segundo. Plcase feel free to contact me if I can help clarify any other questions. >1nccrcIv, Ardalan Construction Co., Inc. '�4ori ,�rdalan _ _ --- President Attachments (2) Ifflj F. HiIlcrest DriNc. Unit A — Thousand 0,6 :s, CA o; 162 _ u 905 -82: -9203. F. 805- 4- 19 -4_E_ 403 Bid Estimate for El Segundo RSI Group 22 June 12 - 2007 Division Sco e Sub/Sup I Labor Material Total 1000 General Conditions 3,500 S 75,000 Incl. a 75,000 2000 Abatement &Demo Vision 28,000 $ S 28.000 2000 Prep & Cleanup 3,000 5 7,000 $ 3,000 $ 7 000 6000 Enlarge Windows Lower Sill $ _15,000 $ 18.000 75,000 Header 5 1,200 $ 500_ $ 1.700 $ 11,000 Misc. Carpentry Attic & CraW Sjx. S 10,000 $ 1,000 9000 Patch & Finish $ _ 34.000 3 5,000 $ 39,000 8000 Alum. Primary Window Peerless $ 17,000 3 53,000 $ 70,000= Alum. Pnma Door Torrance $ 10.000 S 46,100 $ 56,100 A)um. Second. Window $ Alum. Second. Door Torrance $ 4,000 Incl. $ 4,000 %� Doors _ $ 3,000 $ 2,D00 $ 5,000 Vinyl Windows Waibn on B)D - Mi and ?? $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Front Doors S tty $ 4,500 3 Sd,000 $ 58.500 JMer Doors $ 3,000 Incl. $ 3 000 Mmc 5 4,000 S 4_,000 $ 15000 HVAC Sonox, $ 117,000 Incl. _8.000 $ 117.000 16000 Elect. Auston $ 28000 $ 28.000 $ 559 .300 Subtota' $ 10.000 $ 15,000 W 584,300 $' 60.000 i -- 4Bon L COST _ -- _- " Markup " Bid - ($37,900 r Unit _ $ 644,300 Genera l Conditions Site Supvn $ 30,000 Office Supvn S 10.000 Accounting $ 3,500 Office Exp $ 3,000 Srte Expense $ 10,000 insurance $ 7,500 Transportation $ 3,000 Misc $ 5.000 Final Ong $ 3,000 $ 75,000 7 r 'J iH -II r- -!, -: -, o , V.1r-4 PEP) C- W 14 q-" rl 17 -pr, . .............. Z f A 'r4, 405 L-f c 14 A bb/12/2007 10:51 3154718807 SL CONT WICKER PAGE 01 BIDDERS'S PROPOSAL AND STATEMENT CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Project Number RSI 07 -05 "Residential Sound Insulation Program — Group 22" PROPOSAL To the Mayor and City Council City of El Segundo 350 Main St. El Segundo, CA 90245 The undersigned declares that he/she has carefully examined the location of the proposed work and has otherwise satisfied himself /herself as to the nature and location of the work, and is full informed as to all conditions and matters which can in any way affect the work or cost thereof, that he /she has examined the Contract Documents, and has read the accompanying "BIDDING )[INSTRUCTIONS" and hereby agrees to provide the following: To furnish all labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and services and to do all the work required for the "Residential Sound Insulation Program — Group 22" in strict conformity with the Contract Documents and at the following lump sum price, to Wit: ID Address Descri tion Cost Property Subtotal 22.01 770 West Imperial Avenue, Unit 46 RSI Improvements $ -318 010 Is 22.02 770 West Imperial Avenue, Unit 46 RSl Improvements $ Qsa 7 �= $ 22.03 909 Hillcrest Street RSI Improvements $ "Q Window and Door tint Upgrade $ 22.04 714 Redwood Avenue RSI Improvements $ k�sp` 22.05 428 West Acacia Avenue RST Improvements $ A "" $ 55 1 +zc 22.06 625 Hillcrest Street RSI Improvements $ 15� �bm- Window and Door tint Upgrade oQ $ 22.07 710 West Mariposa Avenue RSI Improvements $ Z.ocb•" ^ � A '° $`-N Window ill U2gradc $ 2zt Door C grills Upgrade $ �pp•oP Air Conditioning Upgrade $ 2.. 5z Windows 4 & 7 glass Upgrade I Q-N $ 2,M HEPA filter Upgrade $ jC0 Bidder's Proposal and Statement Group 22 City of 61 Segundo Residential Sound Insulation Program 40� 46/12/2007 10:51 3154718807 SL CONT WICKER PAGE 02 22.08 208 Wcst Acacia Avenue I RSI Improvements $��CS: $ fit\ Door E U pgrade $ - °° 22.09 310 West Imperial Avenue, Unit 4 RSI Improvements $ 22.10 951 McCarthy Court, Unit 1 RSI Improvements ! $ Z`d few $� Windows 1-3, 5, & 6 ills Upgade $ '4bb� 22.11 951 McCarthy Court. Unit 2 RSI Improvements $ .,, $ ` Windows 1 -4 & 6 -8 ills Upgrade Air Conditioning Upgrade 22.12 951 McCarthy Court, Unit 3 RSI Improvements $" .-� $ Windows 1 -5 & 7 -9 &gills Upgrade $ Air Conditioning Upgrade .0-3. $ 2 `rte 22.13 951 McCarthy Court, Unit 4 RSI Improvements $ " 'xPa Windows 1 -3 and 5 -8 ills Upgrade $ 22.14 718 Virginia Street RSI Improvements $ C> $ 22.15 718'/2 Virginia Street RSI Improvements $ 'S tw' Windows 7 & 8 Upgrade $ 22.16 205 East Acacia Avenue RSI Improvements $ ':1C w $ !s6t'�Sjb Door A Upgrade $ -7 1m Window tint Upgrade $ pry Ss� Window 1 Up&e $ �(1J ° 22.17 209 West Acacia Avenue RSI Improvements $ $ \ O cm Total Bid (Contract Sum) (words) (figures) In case of discrepancy between the words and fig2res, the words must revail. NOTICE: BIDDERS WILL NOT BE RELEASED DUE TO ERRORS AND ILLEGIBLE BIDS MUST BE DISQUALIFIED NOTICE- 'Total Bid (Contract Sum) must equal the total of Schedule of Values. If the Total Bid does not equal the total of the Schedule of Value±t, it is grounds for rejection of the Bid. furthermore, inconsistencies between the Schedule of Values and the Plans for each Dwelling are grounds for rejection of the Bid Bidder's Proposal and Statement 2 City of El Segundo Group 22 Residential Sound Insulation Program 407 This bid is based upon completing the work as set in the Construction Schedule published in the Contract Documents. If awarded the contract for the Work, the undersigned hereby agrees to sign the contract and furnish the necessary bonds not more than ten (10) calendar days after Notice to Proceed date. Enclosed is a Bidder's Bond, certified check or cashier's check, which is not less than ten percent (10 %), as a guarantee that the undersigned will enter into the contract if awarded to the undersigned. The undersigned further agrees that in case of default in executing the required contract with necessary bonds and insurance, within the time limits above specified, said bonds or check and money payable therein must be fortified to and become the property of the City of El Segundo, State of California. S &L Specialty Contracting, Inc. Name of Firm: 315 South Franklin Street Syracuse, NY 132U2 Address: Telephone Number: Contractor's License Number: Type of License: License Expiration Date: Type of Entity:0 Sole Proprietorship ❑ Partnership bX orporation ❑ Other I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Contractor Representative: Tfte s U y, %-)� Nk S Dated thi If Corporation, please attach evidence of uthority to sign. Bidder's Proposal and Statement 3 City of El Segundo Group 22 Residential Sound Insulation Program EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action regarding an extension of the Funding Agreement extending financial assistance to the El Segundo Unified School District ( ESUSD) for the purpose of school facilities and programs. (Fiscal impact $250,000 ) RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: 1) Approve a one -year extension to the Funding Agreement with the ESUSD in a form approved by the City Attorney. 2) Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: The City entered into a Funding Agreement with the School District June 19, 2001 to provide annual payments to the District beginning October 1, 2001 and for the next four years thereafter, in the amount of $250,000. The timetable for the City's commitment was for a period not to exceed five years and for an amount not to exceed $250,000 per year. This agreement has expired, but the City budgeted the $250,000 payment in the 2006- 2007 adopted budget. Staff is recommending a one -year extension of the Funding Agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney. ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Original Funding Agreement and addendum FISCAL IMPACT: $250,000 Operating Budget: $250,000 Amount Requested: $250,000 Account Number: 001 -400- 2901 -6405 Project Phase: NIA Appropriation Required: iYes x No ORIGINATED: DATE: a2bVIA,11 ftt,� Deborah Cullen, Interim Director of Finance Jeff/S) rt, City Manager DATE: 1110 22 409 FUNDING AGREEMENT This Funding Agreement ( "Agreement ") is made this 19 day of June 2001, between the City of El Segundo ( "City ") and the El Segundo Unified School District ( "District "). RECITALS WHEREAS the City is desirous of providing funds to District for purposes of funding student services as well as maintenance of District facilities that are not being funded by other sources; WHEREAS such services benefit the youth of El Segundo by providing such youth with vital services that will lessen the need for City services such as police and park and recreation services and will result in better educated youth in the City; WHEREAS the City believes that the District's educational services play a critical role in providing the City with future citizens that will dedicate their time and knowledge to the community and thereby increase the quality of life in the City of El Segundo; NOW THEREFORE, the City and District do hereby agree, covenant and warrant as follows: Section 1. Funding of District Services. The City shall on or before October 1, 2001 and on or before October 1, for each of the next four years thereafter, pay the District $250,000. The District shall use such funds for providing student services and maintenance of facilities that serve the needs of the students of the District and are not being funded by other sources. In the event that the City determines that it is not in the City's best interest to make any of the $250,000 payments, the City can terminate its obligation to make such payments by giving the District 30 days advance written notice of its intent to cancel its payment obligation hereunder. Section 2. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of the City and the District with respect to the subject matter hereof and all prior written and oral agreements regarding the subject matter hereof are superseded by this Agreement. 4.1 r� Section 3. Modifications This Agreement can only be modified in a writing approved by the City Council and the District Board. This Agreement is hereby approved as of the date first written above. DISTRICT: President, 9 trict Board ATTEST: CITY: Mayor Mike Gordon ice/ _ /,�� _� � _.��/.► :, Board Seer, dy Moo se , Cit Clerk Approved as to Form: Bo d Co nsel Mark D. Hensle, City Attorney 4�� H SEGUNOO fO SCNOOt El Segundo Unified School District 641 SHELDON STREET • EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA 90245 (310) 615 -2650 • FAX (310) 640 -8272 SUPERINTENDENT BRUCE AULD June 30, 2007 Mr. Jeff Stewart, City Manager City of El Segundo 321 Main Street El Segundo, California 90245 Dear Mr. Stewart: BOARD OF EDUCATION MICHAEL D. BRINEY ANN M. COLES ROBIN K. FUNK CHRIS J. POWELL WILLIAM J. WATKINS, Ed.D. Thank you for meeting with me last Monday regarding the status of the City's annual $250,000 contribution that is made to the District in accordance with the Joint Use Facilities Agreement. I appreciate that an addendum for the 2006 -07 fiscal year will be forthcoming. Concerning future years, please be advised of the following circumstances: • For the 2007 -08 fiscal year and consistent with past practice, this same amount has been budgeted. Unfortunately for the 2007 -08 fiscal year, the District's special education funding has been permanently reduced by $350,000. To further reduce the general fund budget will have catastrophic consequences. • California school district budgets are primarily funded by the State. For the 2007- 08 fiscal year there are two circumstances that could result in the State applying a revenue deficit across the board. These are, much lower than projected State income and a significant error in calculating ongoing Proposition 98 expenses. There is precedent for applying revenue deficits. In fact, revenue deficits have been applied intermittently throughout my administrative career. Revenue deficits often remain in effect for several years. In short, the District values the City's contribution and apportions these funds to essential educational programs, not the !east of which are the elementary reading remediation specialists. As such, I respectfully request that the long -term continuation of this annual contribution be considered. AS' 4Au' Superintendent of Schools �PII.rL'!I /P� /o /��nrfr /rir� J/rr�ial -i rri�r/1/iP cri >ri�uii�r %y rarY/��it art /rirrrrirz- ��nur� Pi�r�i�n�i�t�i�//%ia%tr /itrrPl P�iicrr/n�/zw��uc /icy. cnrit�esri�srrzf� orfc rP,2� /a irr.P�t //�� c./�ciirl nez %rf lorrPfyr riz //jP 2sr FPii frty. 41 -_, EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 17, 2007 AGENDA ITEM STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Reports — City Council Members AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration of possible action regarding the City's position on U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Approve resolution endorsing the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement; (2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION: On behalf of Mayor Pro Tern Busch and myself, and at the behest of Congresswoman Jane Harman, I am requesting City Council go on record in support of a safer, cleaner environment. One means for local government action is by endorsing the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement; which provides a framework for local action in reducing greenhouse gases. The intent of the Agreement is to have as many cities as possible agree to the greenhouse gas reduction principles. Presently, there are over 525 cities nationwide that have endorsed the Climate Protection Agreement By endorsing the Agreement, El Segundo will be joining other South Bay communities including Torrance, Rolling Hills Estates, Manhattan Beach, Rancho Palos Verdes, and Hermosa Beach and taking a positive stand for environmental protection. As documented below, El Segundo has a proactive track - record in support of energy and resource conservation that has resulted in: • Retrofitting sixteen intersections with LED traffic signal heads • Retrofitting city facilities through an energy efficiency public - private partnership resulting in energy savings of 10,558,433 kilowatts and savings of $1.9 million dollars • Participating in South Bay COG energy conservation programs • Acquisition of alternate fuel and high efficiency vehicles • Implementation of recycling program resulting in highest diversion rate in the state • Utilization of recycled water in parks and street medians • Utilization of BioDiesel in diesel powered city vehicles • Participation in energy conservation public education campaigns ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 1. Congresswoman Harman's Letter of Support for Climate Protection Agreement 2. Resolution adopting U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement FISCAL IMPACT: Operating Budget: Amount Requested: Account Number: Project Phase: Appropriation Required: Yes X No ORIGINATED BY: DATE: Kelly cDowell, yayor REVIEWED Jeff,61yrdpt, rAy Manager DATE: ) /I I /G 41 :j 23 COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY SUDCOMMmEE ON W,ey.=WM. IWFORMATIDN SIwIIro, Am TER oma Rawc Atil uaw CHAIR SUBCOAMRrl'S ON G��M CONGRESSWOMAN JANE HARMAN BLUE DOG COALITION 36TH DIsnucT, CALIFORNIA NATIONAL SK%WM WOWMQ GRDUP CQ4MM CONGRESSIONAL March 1.2, 2007 SPACE POWER CAUCUS CO4CHAIR Mayor Kelly McDowell City of El Segundo 350 Main Street El Segundo, CA 90243 -3813 Dear Kelly: COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE ,Suecommmu oN TaLw4MMuNNCATXNNs AND TIE Wivowr SUNCOMMInTEE ON Ewww AND Am QuAUTy NEW DEMOCRAT COALITION Like you, I have been actively reviewing possible steps to reduce global warming. Though the Federal Government has been slow to address this critical issue, many local governments have taken important steps to ensure a safer, cleaner environment. One of the many ways in which cities are doing this is by signing on to the U.S. Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement, which encourages the implementation of policies and programs that will help the city meet or exceed the greenhouse gas reduction targets set forth by the Kyoto Protocol. When a city has met its goals for reducing emissions it is recognized as a "Cool City." With assistance from organizations such as the Sierra Club, many cities are coming up with innovative energy solutions that are not only helping to curb global warning, but are also saving taxpayer dollars, and creating healthier living environments for their citizens. I am fortunate to represent a number of conscientious and forward thinking cities that have already taken action against global warming by constructing green buildings, retrofitting street lamps and traffic lights with energy efficient bulbs, providing incentives for ride sharing, and purchasing high efficiency vehicles for their city fleets. Some of these cities, including Manhattan Beach and Hermosa Beach, have already signed on to the U.S. Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement, and have implemented environmental policies to earn classification as Cool Cities. I hope that your city will consider qualifying as a Cool City, and I offer my help in the effort. Please contact Jim Kennedy in my El Segundo office if we can provide more info. Regards, &AA0.4 OXOV JANB HARMAN RESPOND TO: EL : WANNItlQIlZ[tL Qlr: ❑ 2321 RosEcRANs AVENUE ❑ 2400 RAYeURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING ❑ 544 NORTH AVALON BOULEVARD SUITE 3270 WASHINGTON, DC 20515 SUITE 307 EL SEGUNDO, CA 80245 PHONE: (202) 226 -5220 WILMINGTON, CA 80744 PHONE: (310) 643 -3638 FAx: (202) 226 -7280 PHONE: (3101549 -8282 FAX: (310) 643 -8445 FAX: (310) 548 -8260 Webshe: www.house.gov/haman 414 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EL SEGUNDO, CALIFORNIA, ENDORSING THE U.S. MAYORS CLIMATE PROTECTION AGREEMENT SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares as follows: A. The City of El Segundo is concerned that our stewardship of the environment be responsible. B. The U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement provides a framework for local action in reducing greenhouse gases that has been adopted successfully across our nation and throughout the world C. Mayors from around the nation have signed the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement which, as amended at the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting, reads: The U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement A. We urge the federal government and state governments to enact policies and programs to meet or beat the target of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, including efforts to: reduce the United States' dependence on fossil fuels and accelerate the development of clean, economical energy resources and fuel - efficient technologies such as conservation, methane recovery for energy generation, waste to energy, wind and solar energy, fuel cells, efficient motor vehicles, and biofuels; B. We urge the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation that includes 1) clear timetables and emissions limits and 2) a flexible, market -based system of tradable allowances among emitting industries; and C. We will strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution by taking actions in our own operations and communities such as: 1. Inventory global warming emissions in City operations and in the community, set reduction targets and create an action plan; 1 415 2. Adopt and enforce land -use policies that reduce sprawl, preserve open space, and create compact, walkable urban communities; 3. Promote transportation options such as bicycle trails, commute trip reduction programs, incentives for car pooling and public transit; 4. Increase the use of clean, alternative energy by, for example, investing in "green tags ", advocating for the development of renewable energy resources, recovering landfill methane for energy production, and supporting the use of waste to energy technology; 5. Make energy efficiency a priority through building code improvements, retrofitting city facilities with energy efficient lighting and urging employees to conserve energy and save money; 6. Purchase only Energy Star equipment and appliances for City use; 7. Practice and promote sustainable building practices using the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED program or a similar system; 8. Increase the average fuel efficiency of municipal fleet vehicles; reduce the number of vehicles; launch an employee education program including anti - idling messages; convert diesel vehicles to bio- diesel; 9. Evaluate opportunities to increase pump efficiency in water and wastewater systems; recover wastewater treatment methane for energy production; 10. Increase recycling rates in City operations and in the community; 11. Maintain healthy urban forests; promote tree planting to increase shading and to absorb CO2; and 12. Help educate the public, schools, other jurisdictions, professional associations, business and industry about reducing global warming pollution. SECTION 2: The City Council of the City of El Segundo endorses the U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement as amended by the 73rd annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting and urges mayors from around the nation to join this effort. 2 4)F SECTION 3: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded. SECTION 4: The City Clerk will certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; will enter the same in the book of original Resolutions of said City; and will make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the record of proceedings of the City Council of said City, in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July, 2007. Kelly McDowell, Mayor STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ) I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City is five; that the foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor of said City, and attested to by the City Clerk of said City, all at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 170' day of July, 2007, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk APPROVED Mark D. Hey Mari H. Berger Assistant City ttorney `! 3 417