Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
2011 JAN 18 - CC PACKETAGENDA
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 350 Main Street
The City Council, with certain statutory exceptions, can only take action upon properly posted and listed
agenda items. Any writings or documents given to a majority of the City Council regarding any matter on
this agenda that the City received after issuing the agenda packet are available for public inspection in
the City Clerk's office during normal business hours. Such Documents may also be posted on the City's
website at www.elsegundo.org and additional copies will be available at the City Council meeting.
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, JANUARY 18, 2011 — 5:00 P.M.
Next Resolution # 4702
Next Ordinance # 1458
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.
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
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) -1- matter
1. City of El Segundo vs. City of Los Angeles, et. al. LASC Case No. BS094279
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(b): -1-
Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(c): -1- matter.
APPOINTMENT OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEE (Gov't. Code § 54957) -1- matter
Position/Title: City Manager
CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54957.6): -0-
matters
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8): -0-
matters
2 l'U4
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. Any writings or documents given to a majority of the City Council regarding any matter on
this agenda that the City received after issuing the agenda packet, are available for public inspection in
the City Clerk's office during normal business hours. Such Documents may also be posted on the City's
website at www.elsegundo.org and additional copies will be available at the City Council meeting.
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, JANUARY 18, 2011 - 7:00 P.M.
7:00 P.M. SESSION
CALL TO ORDER
INVOCATION — Pastor Scott Lambert, Hilltop Church of Christ
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Council Member Carl Jacobson
Next Resolution # 4702
Next Ordinance # 1458
3_U3
PRESENTATIONS
a. Presentation of trophies to the 2010 Holiday Parade winners by the El Segundo
Chamber of Commerce — Marsha Hansen, Executive Director.
b. Presentation of an official Commendation to Peter and Edna Freeman for their
years of community service to the City of El Segundo.
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 (PUBLIC HEARING)
1. Consideration and possible action to open a public hearing and
receive testimony regarding: 1) an Environmental Assessment for a
proposed Negative Declaration; 2) a Specific Plan Amendment
amending the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land Use Plan; and 3) a
Zone Text Amendment amending the El Segundo Municipal Code
( "ESMC ") regulating the permitted uses in the Small Business (SB)
and Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones. Applicant: Matt Crabbs
(Fiscal Impact: N /A)
Recommendation — (1) Open the public hearing; (2) Discussion; (3)
Introduce, and waive first reading of an Ordinance for Specific Plan
Amendment No. 10 -01 and Zone Text Amendment No. 10 -04; (4)
Schedule second reading and adoption of the Ordinance on February 1,
2011 or on the first regularly scheduled meeting thereafter; (5)
Alternatively, discuss and take other possible action related to this item.
4 llU4
2. Consideration and possible action regarding a public hearing
related to the Proposition 218 majority protest ballot process for
Residential Trash Collection. (Fiscal Impact: Up to $560,700 in
annual savings if the fee is imposed.)
Recommendation — (1) Open the Public Hearing; (2) Receive all written
and verbal testimony regarding the proposed fee increases, including
receiving written protest ballots; (3) Close the public hearing; (4) Take no
further action until the Council is presented with the protest ballot results
at the February 1, 2011 Regular City Council Meeting; (5) Alternatively,
discuss and take other action related to this item.
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
3. Consideration and possible action regarding Adoption of the
Resolutions updating the employer's contribution under the Public
Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act for the El Segundo Fire
Fighters' Association, the El Segundo Police Officers' Association,
the El Segundo City Employees' Association, the El Segundo Police
Support Services Association, and the El Segundo Supervisory and
Professional Employees' Association. Fiscal Impact: Active
Employees: $31,600; Retirees $32,600.
Recommendation — (1) Adopt the Resolutions; (2) Alternatively, discuss
and take other action related to this item.
D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS
E. CONSENT AGENDA
All items listed are to be adopted by one motion without discussion and passed unanimously. If a call for
discussion of an item is made, the item(s) will be considered individually under the next heading of
business.
4. Warrant Numbers 2580178 to 2580365 on Register No. 6 in the total
amount of $975,932.53 and Wire Transfers from 12/09110 through
12/22/10 in the total amount of $1,624,953.38; and Warrant Numbers
2580564 to 2580727 on Register No. 7 in the total amount of
$413,993.75 and Wire Transfers from 12/23/10 through 01/06/11 in the
total amount of $619,616.42.
Recommendation — Approve Warrant Demand Registers and authorize
staff to release. Ratify: Payroll and Employee Benefit checks; checks
released early due to contracts or agreement; emergency disbursements
and /or adjustments; and wire transfers.
5
U
5. Special Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2010 and Regular City
Council Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2010.
Recommendation — Approval.
6. Consideration and possible action regarding approval of revised
Class Specifications for the classifications of Police Officer Trainee
and Construction Coordinator (At- Will).(Fiscal Impact: None
Recommendation — (1) Approve the proposed Class Specifications for
Police Officer Trainee and Construction Coordinator (At- Will); (2)
Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
7. Consideration and possible action to adopt a resolution approving a
list of capital projects recommended for Measure R Highway
Program funding and authorize the City Manager to execute all
documents necessary for the administration of projects funded
through Measure R. (Fiscal Impact: Approximately $4.4 million
reimbursement of Measure R grant funds under Phase 1.)
Recommendation — (1) Adopt the attached resolution; (2) Alternatively,
discuss and take other action related to this item.
8. Consideration and possible action regarding approval of a an
agreement between the City of El Segundo, West Basin Municipal
Water District ( WBMWD), and El Segundo Energy Center (ESEC) for
construction of a recycled water pipeline (RW) and a potable water
pipeline (PW) for additional water services to ESEC. (Fiscal Impact:
None)
Recommendation — (1) Approve an agreement between the City,
WBMWD and ESEC; (2) Authorize the City Manager to execute the
agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, related to the design,
permit, finance, and construction of the water pipelines by WBMWD for
water services to ESEC; (3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action
related to this item.
6 (►U
9. Consideration and possible action regarding: 1) approval of an
updated list of pre- approved consultants that provide environmental
review services pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act
guidelines (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
regulations to assist the City in the processing of entitlement
projects; and 2) to authorize the City Manager to execute
Professional Services Agreements in an amount not to exceed
$200,000 (increased from $125,000 currently), in a form approved by
the City Attorney, for developer reimbursed environmental review
services pursuant to CEQA and NEPA regulations from the pre -
approved list of consultants (Fiscal Impact: None
Recommendation — (1) Approve the attached list of consultants to provide
environmental review and traffic consultant services; (2) Authorize the City
Manager to sign Professional Service Agreements for developer
reimbursed environmental review services approved as to form by the City
Attorney in an amount not to exceed $200,000; (3) Alternatively, discuss
and take other possible action related to this item.
10. Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of Plans and
Specifications for the 2010 -2011 annual contract for curb, gutter,
sidewalk and other minor improvements at various locations
citywide. Approved Capital Improvement Program. Project No.: PW
11 -01 (Fiscal impact: $50,000 Gas Tax funds
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.
11. Consideration and possible action to allow banners from the El
Segundo High School Band to be hung over Main Street at no cost.
(Fiscal impact: $178)
Recommendation — (1) Approve the request from the El Segundo High
School Band regarding its banners; (2) Alternatively, take such additional,
related, action that may be desirable.
12. Consideration and possible action to receive the proceeds from the
sale of Fire Station #2. Net proceeds: $1,539,685.65. (Fiscal Impact:
$1,539,685.65 Proceeds from Sale deposited to the Economic
Uncertainty Fund.)
Recommendation — (1) Receive proceeds from the sale of Fire Station #2;
(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
I. REPORTS — CITY CLERK
13. Consideration and possible action regarding an initiative (the
"Initiative ") amending the El Segundo Municipal Code to transfer all
functions of the El Segundo Fire Department to the Consolidated Fire
Protection District of Los Angeles County (aka the Los Angeles
County Fire Department) (Fiscal Impact: Unknown)
Recommendation — (1) Adopt a resolution certifying the Initiative as
qualifying for the ballot. (2) OPTION ONE: Adopt Resolutions calling for a
special election regarding the Initiative, and consider adoption of
Resolutions regarding ballot arguments, City Attorney impartial analysis
and rebuttal arguments; (3) OPTION TWO: Adopt Resolutions calling for a
regular election and consider adoption of Resolutions regarding ballot
arguments, City Attorney impartial analysis and rebuttal arguments; (4)
OPTION THREE: Adopt the Ordinance or schedule a Council Meeting
within 10 days and consider adoption of the Ordinance at that meeting; (5)
OPTION FOUR: Continue consideration of the actions set forth in 2, 3 and
4 above, for a period not to exceed 30 calendar days, to a regular Council
Meeting and request Staff to prepare a report pursuant to Elections Code
§ 9212; (6) Take such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
J. REPORTS — CITY TREASURER
K. REPORTS — CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Council Member Fuentes —
Council Member Brann — k-1 u 8
8
Council Member Jacobson —
Mayor Pro Tern Fisher —
Mayor Busch —
Announcement of retirees for 2010
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 sue.) for the purposes of conferring with the City's Real Property
Negotiator, and /or conferring with the City Attorney on potential and /or existing litigation; and /or
discussing matters covered under Government Code Section §54957 (Personnel); and /or conferring with
the City's Labor Negotiators.
REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION (if required)
ADJOURNMENT
POSTED:
DATE:C,lyt,. /X 90!/
TIME: /�..' ��.� ,-,-n .
NAME: �� � •��.
M
PRESENTATIONS
a. Presentation of trophies to the 2010 Holiday Parade winners by the El
Segundo Chamber of Commerce — Marsha Hansen, Executive Director.
(.. i ., �I
r
ommenbatton Citp of Cl Oegunbo, California
WHEREAS, Peter and Edna Freeman have been residents of El Segundo since 1957; and
WHEREAS, The Senior Citizen Housing Board Corporation was established for the benefit of
the residents of El Segundo; and
WHEREAS, Edna Freeman volunteered for the Senior Citizen Housing Board Corporation
from 1989 through 2009; and
WHEREAS, Peter Freeman volunteered for the Senior Citizen Housing Board Corporation
from 1991 through 2010, serving as Board President for several years; and
WHEREAS, Peter and Edna Freeman combined have served on the Senior Citizen Housing
Board for over 40 years.
NOW, THEREFORE, on this 18th day of January, 2011, the Mayor and Members of the City
Council of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby commend, acknowledge, and humbly
thank Peter and Edna Freeman for their exemplary service to the City of El Segundo.
C.cr�rz`xt _,l'(.ei��Cv°L ..��v� % /tcc7�ir� (� r✓.o�zcot., GCc� »fut � /ii��rinres . %CiP- r� /c.9
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Special Orders of Business - Public Hearing
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to open a public hearing and receive testimony regarding: 1)
an Environmental Assessment for a proposed Negative Declaration; 2) a Specific Plan
Amendment amending the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land Use Plan; and 3) a Zone Text
Amendment amending the El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC ") regulating the permitted uses
in the Small Business (SB) and Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones. Applicant: Matt Crabbs
(Fiscal Impact: N /A)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Open the public hearing;
2. Discussion;
3. Introduce, and waive first reading of an Ordinance for Specific Plan Amendment No.
10 -01 and Zone Text Amendment No. 10 -04;
4. Schedule second reading and adoption of the Ordinance on February 1, 2011 or on
the first regularly scheduled meeting thereafter; and /or,
5. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. Draft Ordinance
2. Draft Ordinance (Strike- out/Underline Version)
3. Planning Commission staff report dated December 9, 2010 and attachments
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Kimberly Christensen, AICP
REVIEWED BY: Greg Carpenter, Director
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City Manag
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
g Manager��
and Building Safety;'
On December 9, 2010, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Specific
Plan Amendment and Zone Text Amendment. After receiving testimony and documentary
evidence, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 2684, recommending that the City Council
approve Environmental Assessment No. 881, Specific Plan Amendment No. 10 -01, and Zone
Text Amendment No. 10 -04.
I. Introduction
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment consists of a change in the Land Use Plan of the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan (ESMC Title 15, Chapter 11) to allow for a wider range of office uses.
Specifically, the amendment would allow more general and multimedia - related offices. The
Zone Text Amendment consists of changes to the permitted uses of the Small Business (SB) and
(!ice
Ir-
IL
Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones (ESMC Title 15 Chapter 6) to allow art studios and more
general and multimedia- related offices.
Project Applications
The applications include the following:
1) Environmental Assessment (EA) No. 881 California Environmental Quality Act
(CE OA) — A Negative Declaration (ND) for Environmental Assessment No. 881 is
proposed for this project pursuant to the Public Resources Code and the CEQA
Guidelines.
2) Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) No. 10 -01 — to amend ESMC § 15- 11- 2(E)(1)(a)
(Smoky Hollow Specific Plan — Development Plan).
3) Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 10 -04 — to amend ESMC §§ 15 -6C -1 (Small
Business (SB) Zone — Purpose), 15 -6C -2 (Permitted Uses — SB), 15 -6D -1 (Medium
Manufacturing (MM) Zone — Purpose), and 15 -6D -2 (Permitted Uses — MM).
II. Backaround
On July 8, 2010 the applicant, Matt Crabbs, submitted the subject request for amendments to the
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the SB and MM Zones. City staff reviewed and evaluated the
proposed amendments and prepared an Initial Study to evaluate any potential environmental
impacts and a draft Ordinance.
On December 9, 2010, the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of
Environmental Assessment No. EA -881, Specific Plan Amendment No. 10 -01 and Zone Text
Amendment No. ZTA 10 -04 amending the El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC ") to allow art
studios and a wider range of office uses in the SB and MM Zones. A draft ordinance including
the recommended changes to the ESMC is attached to this report (see Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2) and
discussed briefly below. Exhibit 2 provides a strikeout - underline format for all modified ESMC
sections.
III. Analysis
The overall goal of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) and Zone Text Amendment
(ZTA) is to allow a wider range of uses in the SB and MM Zones and revitalize the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan area. Staff continues to receive requests to establish creative media and
general office uses for vacant buildings in the Smoky Hollow area.
Summary of Amendments
The SB and MM Zones currently only permit general office uses with specific limits on the area
they can occupy on a site:
OA
'13
1. General offices are allowed as accessory uses, in conjunction with any other permitted use as
long as the office use does not occupy more than a certain percentage of the total building
square footage (40% in SB and 60% in MM).
2. They are allowed as primary uses, but limited to offices involved in industrial related activities
such as engineering, industrial design and consulting. As primary uses, they are also limited
to a maximum of 15,000 square feet per site.
3. In the MM Zone, office uses are further limited by a provision for mixed use projects (office,
commercial, and industrial) that requires light industrial users to make up at least fifty percent
of the total project's square footage.
The proposed amendments would maintain the same area and percentage limitations, but expand
the range of permitted office uses to allow all types of general and multimedia - related offices.
Art studios (production space only), which are not currently allowed, would also be permitted.
General offices and multimedia- related offices are specifically defined in ESMC §15 -1 -6
(Definitions).
Benefits
The proposed uses would benefit the Smoky Hollow area and the City as a whole. The potential
benefits to property owners include: the flexibility to lease or sell property to different types of
tenants; an increased demand for commercial office space (which could increase property
values); increased investment in the physical infrastructure and appearance of properties in
Smoky Hollow; increased employment opportunities; and increased tax revenues for the City.
General Plan and Municipal Code Consistency
On December 9, 2010, the Planning Commission determined that the City Council can make the
necessary findings to adopt the draft Ordinance. The findings are discussed in Planning
Commission Resolution No. 2684 (See Exhibit No. 3).
IV. Planning Commission Hearing and Public Input
The Planning Commission held its public hearing on the proposed SPA and ZTA on December
9, 2010. The applicant and four business and property owners offered testimony during the
public hearing. The speakers expressed support for the proposed amendments. They stated that
they believed the proposed uses will have benefits for the Smoky Hollow area that include
increased occupancy rates for commercial properties, increased property values, and improved
physical appearance of properties in Smoky Hollow. Five letters of support for the application
were submitted to the Planning and Building Safety Department for consideration by the
Planning Commission (See Exhibit No. 3).
The Commission briefly discussed and expressed support for the proposed uses. The
Commission recommended approval of the proposed ordinance as drafted.
Ui4 3
V. Environmental Review
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an Initial
Study of Environmental Impacts was prepared and a Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impacts is proposed for this project. The draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration were
available for public comment from November 5, 2010 to December 6, 2010. The State
Clearinghouse circulated the Negative Declaration to selected State agencies for review and no
State agencies submitted comments during the review period. A letter received from the State
Clearinghouse on December 10, 2010, stated that the City has complied with the State
Clearinghouse review requirements pursuant to CEQA. Five letters were received from the
public (during the review period) expressing support for the project.
VI. Recommendation
Planning staff recommends that the City Council introduce and waive first reading of the
attached draft Ordinance to approve Environmental Assessment No. EA -881 and amend the
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and to allow the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones. Second
reading and adoption of the Ordinance would occur on February 1, 2011.
PAPlanning & Building Safety \0 Planning - Old\PRO]ECTS (Planning) \876- 900\EA -88 1 \City Council 01182011\EA -881 Smoky Hollow Office
Uses ZTA CC Report 0118201 Ldoc
4 �11:�
EXHIBIT I
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT AND
A ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE SMOKY HOLLOW
SPECIFIC PLAN AND THE PERMITTED USES IN THE SMALL
BUSINESS (SB) AND MEDIUM MANUFACTURING (MM) ZONES TO
ALLOW ART STUDIOS AND A WIDER RANGE OF OFFICE USES.
The City Council of the city of El Segundo does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council incorporates by reference all of the findings and
conclusions set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2684 as if fully set forth.
SECTION 2: Environmental Assessment. The City Council certifies the Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impacts proposed for this project pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines §15070. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was prepared
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §§ 15072 and 15073 and was available for public
comment from November 5, 2010 to December 6, 2010.
SECTION 3: El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC ") § 15- 11- 2(E)(1)(a) is amended to
read as follows:
"Small Business Area: This district covers the portion of the Specific Plan
area from Standard Street to the alley east of Lomita Street. The area is
characterized by smaller or incubator industrial and manufacturing uses located
on small parcels, many without off - street parking. It is an area in which small
"incubator" business concerns exist and many continue to flourish. Presently,
one hundred twelve (112) various parcels exist in the area. Seventy eight (78) of
the parcels, seventy percent (70 %) of the existing parcels, are under ten
thousand (10,000) square feet in size, many are under five thousand (5,000)
square feet. The desire is to maintain a small industrial business environment,
but not to preclude lot consolidation, business expansion and growth. Design
guidelines will allow some flexibility to achieve visual enhancement of the area.
The small business area is a transition between the pedestrian scale downtown
and the medium sized manufacturing area to the east. Uses will basically remain
the same as at present, with an emphasis on the smaller industrial user and
limited general and multimedia related office space."
SECTION 4: ESMC § 15 -6C -1 is amended to read as follows:
"PURPOSE: The purpose of this zone is to perpetuate the existence of the small
business and incubator industrial user in the Smoky Hollow area. As such, this zone is
to be utilized only within the boundaries of the Smoky Hollow specific plan. It is
recognized that the areas that provide small businesses a place to establish and
prosper are becoming more and more scarce and at the same time becoming
Page 1
016
increasingly desirable. This unique environment is felt to be an appropriate location for
light industrial activities, research, and technological processes, restaurants, cafeterias
and offices. It is also the purpose of this zone to allow maximum site development
flexibility in return for well conceived and efficient site planning and landscaping to
complement the good development which presently exists in the area."
SECTION 5: ESMC § 15 -6C -2 is amended to read as follows:
"PERMITTED USES: The following uses are permitted in the SB zone:
A. Art studios (Production space only).
B. General offices in conjunction with any other permitted use as long as the office
use does not occupy in excess of forty percent (40 %) of the total building square
footage.
C. General and /or multimedia related offices, up to fifteen thousand (15,000) square
feet per site.
D. Light industrial uses.
E. Manufacturing.
F. Public facilities and utilities.
G. Research and development.
H. Restaurants and cafes without drive - through facilities.
Warehousing and distribution.
J. Other similar uses approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety, as
provided by chapter 22 of this title."
SECTION 6: ESMC § 15 -6D -1 is amended to read as follows:
"PURPOSE: The purpose of this zone is to provide a transitional land use area
between the high intensity aircraft/aerospace office uses east of Sepulveda Boulevard
and the small single parcel industrial businesses of the westerly portion of the Smoky
Hollow area. As such, the zone is to be utilized only within the boundaries of the Smoky
Hollow specific plan. This zone provides for the continuation and development of
medium size light industrial, manufacturing, and limited office activities."
SECTION 7: ESMC § 15 -6D -2 is amended to read as follows:
Page 2
-,
"PERMITTED USES: The following uses are permitted in the MM zone:
A. Art studios (Production space only).
B. General offices in conjunction with any other permitted use as long as the office
does not occupy in excess of sixty percent (60 %) of the total building square
footage.
C. General and /or multimedia related offices, up to fifteen thousand (15,000) square
feet per site, except for mixed use projects of 30,000 square feet or more, in
which the size may be greater.
D. Light assembly and processing.
E. Light industrial.
F. Manufacturing.
G. Mixed use projects including commercial, office and light industrial uses. In
mixed use projects of 30,000 square feet or more where the light industrial uses
make up at least fifty percent (50 %) of the total project's square footage.
H. Parking structures and parking lots.
Public facilities, public utilities.
J. Research and development.
K. Restaurants and cafes without drive - through facilities.
L. Retail sales for wholesale outlets.
M. Warehousing and distribution.
N. Other similar uses approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety, as
provided by chapter 22 of this title."
SECTION 8: CONSTRUCTION. This Ordinance must be broadly construed in order to
achieve the purposes stated in this Ordinance. It is the City Council's intent that the
provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a
manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance.
SECTION 9: ENFORCEABILITY. Repeal of any provision of the ESMC does 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.
Page 3
oi8
Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or
prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance.
SECTION 10: VALIDITY OF PREVIOUS CODE SECTIONS. If this entire
Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any
repeal or amendment of the ESMC or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be
rendered void and cause such previous ESMC provision or other the city ordinance to
remain in full force and effect for all purposes.
SECTION 11: 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 12: 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 13: This Ordinance will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent
ordinance.
Page 4
�)i�
SECTION 14: This Ordinance will become effective on the thirty -first (31st) day
following its passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2011.
Eric Busch, Mayor
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that
the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing
Ordinance No. was duly introduced by said City Council at a regular meeting held
on the day of , 2011, 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 , 2011, 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
M
Karl H. Berger, Assistant City Attorney
PAPlanning & Building Safety \Planning - Old \PROJECTS (Planning) \876 - 900 \EA - 881 \Planning Commission \EA -881
Smoky Hollow Office Uses Ordinance 01182011.doc
Page 5
EXHIBIT 2
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT AND
A ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE SMOKY HOLLOW
SPECIFIC PLAN AND THE PERMITTED USES IN THE SMALL
BUSINESS (SB) AND MEDIUM MANUFACTURING (MM) ZONES TO
ALLOW ART STUDIOS AND A WIDER RANGE OF OFFICE USES.
The City Council of the city of El Segundo does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council incorporates by reference all of the findings and
conclusions set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2684 as if fully set forth.
SECTION 2: Environmental Assessment. The City Council certifies the Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impacts proposed for this project pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines §15070. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was prepared
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §§ 15072 and 15073 and was available for public
comment from November 5, 2010 to December 6, 2010.
SECTION 3: El Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC ") § 15- 11- 2(E)(1)(a) is amended to
read as follows:
"Small Business Area: This district covers the portion of the Specific Plan
area from standaFd stFeetstandard Street to the alley east of Lomita Street. The
area is characterized by smaller or incubator industrial and manufacturing uses
located on small parcels, many without off - street parking. It is an area in which
small "incubator" business concerns exist and many continue to flourish.
Presently, one hundred twelve (112) various parcels exist in the area. Seventy
eight (78) of the parcels, seventy percent (70 %) of the existing parcels, are under
ten thousand (10,000) square feet in size, many are under five thousand (5,000)
square feet. The desire is to maintain a small industrial business environment,
but not to preclude lot consolidation, business expansion and growth. Design
guidelines will allow some flexibility to achieve visual enhancement of the area.
The small business area is a transition between the pedestrian scale downtown
and the medium sized manufacturing area to the east. Uses will basically remain
the same as at present, with an emphasis on the smaller industrial user with
anGillafy and limited general and multimedia related office space."
SECTION 4: ESMC § 15 -6C -1 is amended to read as follows:
"PURPOSE: The purpose of this zone is to perpetuate the existence of the small
business and incubator industrial user in the Smoky Hollow area. As such, this zone is
to be utilized only within the boundaries of the Smoky Hollow specific plan. It is
recognized that the areas that provide small businesses a place to establish and
prosper are becoming more and more scarce and at the same time becoming
Page 1
U41
increasingly desirable. This unique environment is felt to be an appropriate location for
light industrial activities, research, and technological processes, restaurants, cafeterias
and Felated iRdUGtFial offices. It is also the purpose of this zone to allow maximum site
development flexibility in return for well conceived and efficient site planning and
landscaping to complement the good development which presently exists in the area."
SECTION 5: ESMC § 15 -6C -2 is amended to read as follows:
"PERMITTED USES: The following uses are permitted in the SB zone:
A. Art studios (Production space only).
AB. General offices in conjunction with any other permitted use as long as the office
use does not occupy in excess of forty percent (40 %) of the total building square
footage.
€C. General and /or multimedia related offices, up to fifteen thousand (15,000) square
feet per site_, ,
6D. Light industrial uses.
OE. Manufacturing.
€F. Public facilities and utilities.
G. Research and development.
GH. Restaurants and cafes without drive - through facilities.
#I. Warehousing and distribution.
IJ. Other similar uses approved by the diFeGtGF Of SGMMURity, eGeneFA-G and
develepment6eFyiGes,.Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by
chapter 22 of this title."
SECTION 6: ESMC § 15 -6D -1 is amended to read as follows:
"PURPOSE: The purpose of this zone is to provide a transitional land use area
between the high intensity aircraft/aerospace office uses east of Sepulveda Boulevard
and the small single parcel industrial businesses of the westerly portion of the Smoky
Hollow area. As such, the zone is to be utilized only within the boundaries of the Smoky
Page 2
0 -) n
44.
Hollow specific plan. This zone provides for the continuation and development of
medium size light industrial a44d1 manufacturing, and limited office activities."
SECTION 7: ESMC § 15 -6D -2 is amended to read as follows:
"PERMITTED USES: The following uses are permitted in the MM zone:
A. Art studios (Production space only).
AB. General offices in conjunction with any other permitted use as long as the office
does not occupy in excess of sixty percent (60 %) of the total building square
footage.
€C. General and /or multimedia related offices, up to fifteen thousand (15,000) square
feet per site, n indUS#ial Felated aGtivities sUGh as e ,
, light assem
except for mixed use proiects of 30.000 sauare feet or
more, in which the size may be greater.
6D. Light assembly and processing.
€E. Light industrial.
€F. Manufacturing.
G. Mixed use projects including commercial, office and light industrial uses. In
mixed use proiects of 30,000 square feet or more where the light industrial uses
make up at least fifty percent (50 %) of the total project's square footage.
GH. Parking structures and parking lots.
HI. Public facilities, public utilities.
f -J. Research and development.
J--K. Restaurants and cafes without drive - through facilities.
K-. L. Retail sales for wholesale outlets.
6M. Warehousing and distribution.
NIA. Other similar uses approved by the diFeGteF of Gemmunit '
develepmeRt se ,Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by
chapter 22 of this title."
Page 3
(_►123
SECTION 8: CONSTRUCTION. This Ordinance must be broadly construed in order to
achieve the purposes stated in this Ordinance. It is the City Council's intent that the
provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a
manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance.
SECTION 9: ENFORCEABILITY. Repeal of any provision of the ESMC does not affect
any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and
imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this Ordinance's effective date.
Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or
prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance.
SECTION 10: VALIDITY OF PREVIOUS CODE SECTIONS. If this entire
Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any
repeal or amendment of the ESMC or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be
rendered void and cause such previous ESMC provision or other the city ordinance to
remain in full force and effect for all purposes.
SECTION 11: 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 12: 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 13: This Ordinance will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent
ordinance.
Page 4
)r
44
SECTION 14: This Ordinance will become effective on the thirty -first (31st) day
following its passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2011.
Eric Busch, Mayor
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that
the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing
Ordinance No. was duly introduced by said City Council at a regular meeting held
on the day of , 2011, 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 , 2011, and the same
was so passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
By:
Karl H. Berger, Assistant City Attorney
PAPlanning & Building Safety \Planning - Old \PROJECTS (Plan ning) \876 - 900 \EA - 881 \Planning Commission \EA -881
Smoky Hollow Office Uses Ordinance 01182011 strikeout and underline.doc
Page 5
r
EXHIBIT 3
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
PUBLIC HEARING: December 9, 2010
SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment No. EA -881, Specific
Plan Amendment SPA 10 -01, and Zone Text
Amendment ZTA 10 -04
APPLICANT: Matt Crabbs
PROPERTY OWNER: Various
REQUEST: Environmental Assessment, Specific Plan
Amendment, and Zone Text Amendment to amend
the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land Use Plan and
the permitted uses in the Small Business (SB) and
Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones to allow art
studios and a wider range of office uses in the
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area.
PROPERTY INVOLVED: Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
Introduction
The proposed project is an ordinance amending the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
Land Use Plan and the permitted uses in the Small Business (SB) and Medium
Manufacturing (MM) Zones to allow art studios and a wider range of office uses in
the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area.
Recommendation
Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the facts as
contained within this report and submitted during the public hearing, and then adopt
Resolution No. 2684 recommending that the City Council approve Environmental
Assessment No. 881, Specific Plan Amendment 10 -01, and Zone Text Amendment
10 -04.
026
III. Background
The Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the SB and MM Zones currently only permit
industrial related office uses, subject to certain area limitations. Property owners in
Smoky Hollow have had greater difficulty in leasing and selling their property to
industrial business tenants in recent years because of a lack of demand for these
types of uses.. The demand for commercial office and creative and multi -media
office space has increased significantly in place of industrial uses. In response to
this changing business demand and the difficulty in selling and /or leasing his
property in Smoky Hollow, the applicant initiated the proposed Specific Plan
Amendment and Zone Text Amendment to allow art studios and a wider range of
office uses in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area. Specifically, the intent of the
proposed amendments is to allow all general office and multimedia - related office
uses as permitted uses in the Smoky Hollow area subject to the current area
limitations. The proposed amendments, if approved, would benefit the applicant
and other property owners by providing greater flexibility in finding tenants for
properties in the SB and MM Zones within the Smoky Hollow Plan area.
IV. ANALYSIS
The analysis section will describe the proposed Amendments, discuss their
consistency with the El Segundo Municipal Code, the General Plan, and outline the
Initial Study of their potential environmental impacts.
A. SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT:
The intent of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment is to amend the Land Use
Plan of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan (ESMC § 15- 11- 2(E)1.a) to allow for a wider
range of office uses. The Land Use Plan currently calls for small industrial users
with ancillary office space. The proposed Amendment will allow limited general and
multimedia related office uses as primary uses. The Land use concept for the Small
Business area will be amended as follows (in strikethrough and underline format
indicating the proposed text to be deleted and added):
a. Small Business Area: This district covers the portion of the Specific Plan
area from standaFel StFeet.Standard Street to the alley east of Lomita Street. The
area is characterized by smaller or incubator industrial and manufacturing uses
located on small parcels, many without off - street parking. It is an area in which
small "incubator" business concerns exist and many continue to flourish. Presently,
one hundred twelve (112) various parcels exist in the area. Seventy eight (78) of
the parcels, seventy percent (70 %) of the existing parcels, are under ten thousand
(10,000) square feet in size, many are under five thousand (5,000) square feet. The
desire is to maintain a small industrial business environment, but not to preclude lot
consolidation, business expansion and growth. Design guidelines will allow some
flexibility to achieve visual enhancement of the area. The small business area is a
2
transition between the pedestrian scale downtown and the medium sized
manufacturing area to the east. Uses will basically remain the same as at present,
with an emphasis on the smaller industrial user with ansil+aFyand limited general and
multimedia related office space.
B. ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT
The intent of the proposed Zone Text Amendment is to amend the permitted uses in
the SB and MM Zones to allow art studios, general offices, and multimedia related
offices as permitted uses. Currently these zones permit only office uses that are
involved in industrial related activities such as engineering, industrial design and
consulting. Art studios are prohibited. The SB and MM Zones also set percentage
and area limitations on the permitted office uses. Specifically, the SB Zone limits
offices in conjunction with other permitted uses (ancillary office) to a maximum of
40% of building area. In the MM Zone, ancillary office uses can occupy a maximum
of 60% of building area. As primary uses, industrial - related offices are allowed up to
15,000 square feet per site in both zones. In addition, the MM Zone requires that
mixed use projects including commercial, office and light industrial uses maintain
light industrial uses in 50% of the total project's square footage. The proposed
amendment would not change these percentage and area limitations on offices; it
would only increase the types of office uses permitted and allow art studios as
permitted uses. Specifically, the proposed amendment would amend the SB and
MM Zones as follows (in strike - through and underline format indicating the proposed
text to be deleted and added):
1. Small Business
15 -6C -1: PURPOSE: The purpose of this zone is to perpetuate the existence of
the small business and incubator industrial user in the Smoky Hollow area. As
such, this zone is to be utilized only within the boundaries of the Smoky Hollow
specific plan. It is recognized that the areas that provide small businesses a place
to establish and prosper are becoming more and more scarce and at the same time
becoming increasingly desirable. This unique environment is felt to be an
appropriate location for light industrial activities, research, and technological
processes, restaurants, cafeterias and Felated indUStFoal offices. It is also the
purpose of this zone to allow maximum site development flexibility in return for well
conceived and efficient site planning and landscaping to complement the good
development which presently exists in the area.
15 -6C -2: PERMITTED USES: The following uses are permitted in the SB zone:
A. Art Studios (production space only).
�B. General offices in conjunction with any other permitted use as long as the
office use does not occupy in excess of forty percent (40 %) of the total
3 ;; 8
t 21
building square footage.
9:C. General and /or multimedia related offices, up to fifteen thousand (15,000)
square feet per site, '
GD. Light industrial uses.
D-.E. Manufacturing.
F. Public facilities and utilities.
F—G. Research and development.
G-.H. Restaurants and cafes without drive - through facilities.
#:I. Warehousing and distribution.
4,J. Other similar uses approved by the Director of GemmuRity, and
Planning and Building Safety, as provided by chapter
22 of this title.
2. Medium Manufacturing.
15 -6D -1: PURPOSE: The purpose of this zone is to provide a transitional land
use area between the high intensity aircraft/aerospace office uses east of
Sepulveda Boulevard and the small single parcel industrial businesses of the
westerly portion of the Smoky Hollow area. As such, the zone is to be utilized only
within the boundaries of the Smoky Hollow specific plan. This zone provides for the
continuation and development of medium size light industrial ads, manufacturing.,
and limited office activities.
15 -6D -2: PERMITTED USES: The following uses are permitted in the MM zone:
A. Art Studios (production space only).
XB. General offices in conjunction with any other permitted use as long as the
office does not occupy in excess of sixty percent (60 %) of the total building
square footage.
8-.C. General and /or multimedia related offices, up to fifteen thousand (15,000)
square feet per site,
IF
4
022
> > light
except for mixed use proiects of 30,000
square feet or more, in which the size may be greater.
QD. Light assembly and processing.
0:E. Light industrial.
F. Manufacturing.
:G. Mixed use projects including commercial, office and light industrial uses. In
mixed use projects of 30,000 square feet or more WheF9 the light industrial
uses must make up at least fifty percent (50 %) of the total project's square
footage.
C.H. Parking structures and parking lots.
kbl. Public facilities, public utilities.
a-:J. Research and development.
J.K. Restaurants and cafes without drive - through facilities.
K.L. Retail sales for wholesale outlets.
L--M. Warehousing and distribution.
M-.N. Other similar uses approved by the Director of Gemmunity,
Planning and Building Safety, as provided by chapter
22 of this title.
FINDINGS:
Consistency with the El Segundo Municipal Code
Pursuant to ESMC Title 15, Chapter 26 (Amendments), in order to recommend City
Council approval of the proposed amendments, the Planning Commission must find
that the amendments are necessary to carry out the general purpose of Title 15.
The purpose of this Title (ESMC § 15 -1 -1) is to serve the public health, safety, and
general welfare and to provide economic and social advantages resulting from an
orderly planned use of land resources. Planning staff believes that the Planning
Commission can make the findings in order to recommend City Council approval of
the proposed amendment. The findings are discussed in the proposed resolution.
5 U��J
V. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
ESMC 15 -1 -1 (Purpose, Title) states that Title 15 is the primary tool for
implementation of the goals, objectives, and policies of the El Segundo General
Plan. Accordingly, the Planning Commission must find that the proposed Zone Text
Amendment is consistent with those goals, objectives, and policies. Planning staff
believes that the Planning Commission can make the findings in order to
recommend City Council approval of the proposed amendment. The findings are
discussed in the proposed resolution.
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project has been analyzed for its environmental impacts and an Initial
Study of Environmental Impacts (Exhibit B) was prepared pursuant to Public
Resources Code § 15063 (California Environmental Quality Act). A Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impacts is proposed for this project pursuant to CEQA
§15070. The draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were available
for public comment from November 5, 2010 to December 6, 2010. No State
agencies submitted comments during the review period. Four letters were received
from the public expressing support for the project (See Exhibit C).
The draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration concluded that no impacts would
occur for the following issue areas: Aesthetics, Agricultural Resources, Air Quality,
Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas
Emissions, Mineral Resources, Public Services, and Recreation. The draft Initial
Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration concluded that impacts would be less
than significant for the following issue areas: Hazards and Hazardous Materials,
Land Use and Planning, Noise, Population and Housing, and Transportation/Traffic.
A detailed analysis of environmental impacts is provided in the draft Initial Study and
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts.
VII. CONCLUSION
The proposed Specific Plan and Zone Text Amendments are consistent with the El
Segundo Municipal Code and General Plan, and an Initial Study determined that
their potential environment impacts will be less than significant. Therefore, staff
recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2684,
recommending City Council approval of an Environmental Assessment, a Specific
Plan Amendment, and a Zone Text Amendment to amend the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan Land Use Plan and the permitted uses in the Small Business (SB) and
Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones to allow art studios and a wider range of office
uses in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area.
6
0341
VIII. EXHIBITS
A. Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 2684, including Draft Council
Ordinance
B. Initial Study and Negative Declaration (ND)
C. Comment Letters Received from the Public
D. Applications
Prepared by: Paul Samaras, Principal Planner
Kimberly C istensen, AICP, Planning Manager
Department Planning & Building Safety
Greg irpentef, Director
Dep ment of Planning & Building Safety
PAPlanning & Building Safety \0 Planning - Old \PROJECTS (Planning) \876 - 900 \EA - 881 \Planning Commission 12092010 \EA -881 PC SR
12092010.doc
7
034
RESOLUTION NO. 2684
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE APPROVING A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT AND A ZONE
TEXT AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE SMOKY HOLLOW SPECIFIC PLAN
AND THE PERMITTED USES IN THE SMALL BUSINESS (SB) AND MEDIUM
MANUFACTURING (MM) ZONES TO ALLOW ART STUDIOS AND A WIDER
RANGE OF OFFICE USES.
(EA NO. 881, SPA NO. 10 -01, and ZTA NO. 10 -04)
The Planning Commission of the City of El Segundo does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The Planning Commission finds and declares that:
A. On July 8, 2010, Matt Crabbs initiated an application for Environmental
Assessment No. EA -881 and Specific Plan Amendment No. 10 -01 to
amend the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land Use Plan and Zone Text
Amendment No. 10 -04 to amend the permitted uses in the Small Business
(SB) and Medium Manufacturing (MM) zones to allow art studios and a
wider range of office uses in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area. These
proposed changes are set forth in the draft ordinance attached as Exhibit
"A," and incorporated by reference (the "Ordinance ");
B. The application was prepared and reviewed by the City's Planning and
Building Safety Department for, in part, consistency with the General Plan
and conformity with the ESMC;
C. In addition, the City reviewed the project's environmental impacts under
the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§
21000, et seq., "CEQA ") the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal
Code. of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines ") and the
City's Environmental Guidelines (City Council Resolution No. 3805,
adopted March 16, 1993);
D. The Planning and Building Safety Department completed its review and
scheduled a public hearing regarding the application before the Planning
Commission for December 9, 2010;
E. On December 9, 2010, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to
receive public testimony and other evidence regarding the proposed
Ordinance, including, without limitation, information provided to the
Planning Commission by City staff and public testimony; and
F. This Resolution and its findings are made based upon the evidence
presented to the Commission at its December 9, 2010, hearing including,
without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Planning and Building
-I-
033
SECTION 2: Factual Findings And Conclusions. The Commission finds that the
following facts exist:
A. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would amend the Land Use Plan
of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan to allow a wider range of general and
multimedia related office uses in the Small Business area.
B. The proposed Zone Text Amendment would amend the permitted uses in
the SB and MM Zones to allow to allow art studios and a wider range of
general office uses in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area
C. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment and Zone Text Amendment
would affect the entire Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area with the
exception of properties with an activated Medium Density Residential
(MDR) Zone or Grand Avenue Commercial (GAC) Overlay Zone.
D. On December 17, 1985, the El Segundo City Council adopted the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan and a Final Environmental Impact Report.
SECTION 3: Environmental Assessment. Because of the facts identified in Section 2 of
this Resolution, the proposed project was analyzed for its environmental impacts and a
Initial Study was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15063. The Initial Study
demonstrated that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment. A
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is proposed for this project pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines §15070. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was
prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §§ 15072 and 15073, and was available for
public comment from November 5, 2010 to December 6, 2010.
SECTION 4: General Plan Findings. As required under Government Code § 65454 the
ESMC amendments proposed by the Ordinance are consistent with the El Segundo
General Plan as follows:
A. It conforms with the Land Use Element Goals, Objectives and Policies.
Specifically, the ordinance is consistent with Goal LU1 to maintain El
Segundo's "small town" atmosphere, and provide an attractive place to
live and work. The proposed ordinance may help stimulate more
investment in the Smoky Hollow area, including tenant improvements to
existing buildings and construction of new developments. The Smoky
Hollow Site Plan Review process and the use of the existing Smoky
Hollow design guidelines help improve the design of new developments
and tenant improvements and help make Smoky Hollow a more attractive
place to live and work. In addition, the proposed ordinance is consistent
with Goal LU4, in that it would allow for the expansion and diversification
of the types of offices and, thus the economic base of the City, and result
in a mix of uses that would interact at the local level for their mutual
benefit. The floor area limits placed on currently permitted office uses in
-2- 0 3 4
the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area would remain in place and limit any
adverse economic impacts to businesses in the Downtown area.
B. It conforms with the Land Use Plan of the General Plan, which proposes
industrial, retail, office, and residential uses in the Smoky Hollow Plan
area.
C. The proposed ordinance conforms with the Economic Development
Element Goals, Objectives and Policies. Specifically, the ordinance is
consistent with Goal ED1, in that the addition of the proposed office uses
will help "diversify the local mix of uses /businesses" (Policy ED1 -1.2) and
"expand the City's economic base." The ordinance is also consistent with
Goal ED2, in that it will "provide a supportive and economically profitable
environment as the foundation of a strong local business community."
SECTION 5: Zone Text Amendment Findings. In accordance with ESMC § 15 -26 -4 and
based on the findings set forth in Section 2, the proposed Zone Text Amendment is
consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan as follows:
A. It is consistent with the purpose of the ESMC, which is to serve the public
health, safety, and general welfare and to provide the economic and social
advantages resulting from an orderly planned use of land resources.
B. It is necessary to facilitate the development process and ensure the
orderly development of properties with art studio and general and
multimedia related office uses that are compatible with surrounding
properties and developments.
SECTION 6: Specific Plan Findings. After considering the above facts, the Planning
Commission finds as follows:
A. The proposed amendment would apply to the entire Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan area with the exception of properties with an activated
Medium Density Residential (MDR) Zone or Grand Avenue Commercial
(GAC) Overlay Zone.
B. The proposed amendment to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan is consistent
with the General Plan land use designation for the properties involved.
SECTION 7: Recommendations. The Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council adopt the ordinance set forth in attached Exhibit 'A" which is incorporated into
this ordinance by reference.
SECTION 8: Reliance On Record. Each and every one of the findings and
determination in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence,
both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings
and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the
-3- (!35
Planning Commission in all respects and are fully and completely supported by
substantial evidence in the record as a whole.
SECTION 9: Limitations. The Planning Commission's analysis and evaluation of the
project is based on the best information currently available. It is inevitable that in
evaluating a project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the
project will not exist. One of the major limitations on analysis of the project is the
Planning Commission's lack of knowledge of future events. In all instances, best efforts
have been made to form accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are the
limitations on the city's ability to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national
problems and issues. The City must work within the political framework within which it
exists and with the limitations inherent in that framework.
SECTION 10: This Resolution will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent
resolution.
SECTION 11: The Commission secretary is directed to mail a copy of this Resolution to
any person requesting a copy.
-4- 03/-N
SECTION 12: This Resolution may be appealed within ten (10) calendar days after its
adoption. All appeals must be in writing and filed with the City Clerk within this time
period. Failure to file a timely written appeal will constitute a waiver of any right of
appeal.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of December, 2010.
ATTEST:
Greg Carpenter, Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
0
David Wagner, Chairperson.
City of El Segundo Planning Commission
Karl H. Berger, Assistant City Attorney
Wagner -
Fellhauer -
Baldino -
Barbee -
Newman -
PAPlanning & Building Safety \0 Planning - Old \PROJECTS (Plan ning)\876-900\EA-881 \EA-881 PC Reso 12092010
03
-5-
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT AND
A ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE SMOKY HOLLOW
SPECIFIC PLAN AND THE PERMITTED USES IN THE SMALL
BUSINESS (SB) AND MEDIUM MANUFACTURING (MM) ZONES TO
ALLOW ART STUDIOS AND A WIDER RANGE OF OFFICE USES.
The City Council of the city of El Segundo does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. On July 8, 2010, Matt Crabbs filed an application to amend the ESMC's
regulations regarding the permitted uses in the Small Business (SB) and
Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones to allow art studios and a wider range
of office uses in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area;
B. This Ordinance was prepared and reviewed by the City's Planning and
Building Safety Department for, in part, consistency with the General Plan
and conformity with the ESMC;
C. In addition, the City reviewed the project's potential environmental impacts
of this Ordinance pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA ") the regulations
promulgated thereunder (14 Cal Code. of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq.,
the "CEQA Guidelines ") and the City's Environmental Guidelines (City
Council Resolution No. 3805, adopted March 16, 1993);
D. The Planning and Building Safety Department completed its review and
scheduled the public hearing regarding the application before the Planning
Commission for December 9, 2010;
E. On December 9, 2010, the, Planning Commission held a public hearing to
receive public testimony and other evidence regarding the proposed
amendment, including, without limitation, information provided to the
Planning Commission by City staff and public testimony;
F. On December 9, 2010, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
2684 recommending that City. Council approve Environmental Assessment
No. EA -881 for Specific Plan Amendment No. 10 -01 and Zone Text
Amendment No. 10 -04;
G. On January 18, 2010, the City Council held a public hearing and
considered the information provided by City staff and public testimony;
and adopted an ordinance approving Environmental Assessment No. EA-
Page 1
038
881 for Specific Plan Amendment No. 10 -01 and Zone Text Amendment
No. 10 -04; and
H. When adopting this Ordinance, the City considered the entire
administrative record concerning the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the
ESMC regulations regarding the permitted uses in the Small Business
(SB) and Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones including, without limitation,
information set forth in staff reports presented to the El Segundo Planning
Commission and City Council; public testimony; the City's General Plan;
and other evidence set forth in the record or commonly known to the
community.
SECTION 2: Environmental Assessment. Because of the facts identified in Section 1 of
this Ordinance the proposed project was analyzed for its environmental impacts and a
Initial Study was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15063. The Initial Study
demonstrated that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment. A
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts is proposed for this project pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines §15070. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was
prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §§ 15072 and 15073, and was available for
public comment from November 5, 2010 to December 6, 2010.
SECTION 3: General Plan Findings. As required under Government Code § 65454 the
ESMC amendments proposed by this Ordinance are consistent with the El Segundo
General Plan as follows:
A. It conforms with the Land Use Element Goals, Objectives and Policies.
Specifically, the ordinance is consistent with Goal LU1 to maintain El
Segundo's "small town" atmosphere, and provide an attractive place to
live and work. The proposed ordinance may help stimulate more
investment in the Smoky Hollow area, including tenant improvements to
existing buildings and construction of new developments. The Smoky
Hollow Site Plan Review process and the use of the existing Smoky
Hollow design guidelines help improve the design of new developments
and tenant improvements and help make Smoky Hollow a more attractive
place to live and work. In addition, the proposed ordinance is consistent
with Goal LU4, in that it would allow for the expansion and diversification
of the types of offices and, thus the economic base of the City, and result
in a mix of uses that would interact at the local level for their mutual
benefit. The floor area limits placed on currently permitted office uses in
the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area would remain in place and help
reduce any adverse economic impacts to businesses in the Downtown
area.
Page 2
039
B. It conforms with the Land Use Plan of the General Plan, which proposes
industrial, retail, office, and residential uses in the Smoky Hollow Plan
area.
C. The proposed ordinance conforms with the Economic Development
Element Goals, Objectives and Policies. Specifically, the ordinance is
consistent with Goal ED1, in that the addition of the proposed office uses
will help "diversify the local mix of uses /businesses" (Policy ED1 -1.2) and
"expand the City's economic base." The ordinance is also consistent with
Goal ED2, in that it will "provide a supportive and economically profitable
environment as the foundation of a strong local business community."
SECTION 4: Zone Text Amendment Findings. In accordance with ESMC § 15 -26 -4
and based on the findings set forth in Section 2, the proposed Zone Text Amendment is
consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the General Plan as follows:
A. It is consistent with the purpose of the ESMC, which is to serve the public
health, safety, and general welfare and to provide the economic and social
advantages resulting from an orderly planned use of land resources.
B. It is necessary to facilitate the development process and ensure the
orderly development of properties with art studio and general and
multimedia related office uses that are compatible with surrounding
properties and developments.
SECTION 5: Specific Plan Findings. After considering the above facts, the City Council
finds as follows:
A. The proposed ordinance would affect the entire Smoky Hollow Specific
Plan area with the exception of properties with an activated Medium
Density Residential or Grand Avenue Commercial overlay Zone.
B. The proposed amendment to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan is consistent
with the General Plan land use designation for the properties involved.
SECTION 6: ESMC § 15- 11- 2(E).1.a is amended to read as follows:
"Small Business Area: This district covers the portion of the Specific Plan
area from standaFd- s# Standard Street to the alley east of Lomita Street. The
area is characterized by smaller or incubator industrial and manufacturing uses
located on small parcels, many without off - street parking. It is an area in which
small "incubator" business concerns exist and many continue to flourish.
Presently, one hundred twelve (112) various parcels exist in the area. Seventy
eight (78) of the parcels, seventy percent (70 %) of the existing parcels, are under
ten thousand (10,000) square feet in size, many are under five thousand (5,000)
Page 3
(140
square feet. The desire is to maintain a small industrial business environment,
but not to preclude lot consolidation, business expansion and growth. Design
guidelines will allow some flexibility to achieve visual enhancement of the area.
The small business area is a transition between the pedestrian scale downtown
and the medium sized manufacturing area to the east. Uses will basically remain
the same as at present, with an emphasis on the smaller industrial user with
aneillaf}and limited aeneral and multimedia related office space."
SECTION 7: ESMC § 15 -6C -1 is amended to read as follows:
"PURPOSE: The purpose of this zone is to perpetuate the existence of the small
business and incubator industrial user in the Smoky Hollow area. As such, this zone is
to be utilized only within the boundaries of the Smoky Hollow specific plan. It is
recognized that the areas that provide small businesses a place to establish and
prosper are becoming more and more scarce and at the same time becoming
increasingly desirable. This unique environment is felt to be an appropriate location for
light industrial activities, research, and technological processes, restaurants, cafeterias
and Felated iadUstriaf offices. It is also the purpose of this zone to allow maximum site
development flexibility in return for well conceived and efficient site planning and
landscaping to complement the good development which presently exists in the area."
SECTION 8: ESMC § 15 -6C -2 is amended to read as follows:
"PERMITTED USES: The following uses are permitted in the SB zone:
A Art Studios (Production space only).
AB. General offices in conjunction with any other permitted use as long as the office
use does not occupy in excess of forty percent (40 %) of the total building square
footage.
€C. General and /or multimedia related offices, up to fifteen thousand (15,000) square
feet per site_,
6D. Light industrial uses.
DE. Manufacturing.
€F. Public facilities and utilities.
G. Research and development.
Page 4
«�i
GH. Restaurants and cafes without drive - through facilities.
#I. Warehousing and distribution.
4J. Other similar uses approved by the
,Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by chapter
22 of this title."
SECTION 9: ESMC § 15 -6D -1 is amended to read as follows:
"PURPOSE: The purpose of this zone is to provide a transitional land use area
between the high intensity aircraft/aerospace office uses east of Sepulveda Boulevard
and the small single parcel industrial businesses of the westerly portion of the Smoky
Hollow area. As such, the zone is to be utilized only within the boundaries of the Smoky
Hollow specific plan. This zone provides for the continuation and development of
medium size light industrial a+d1 manufacturing, and limited office activities."
SECTION 10: ESMC § 15 -6D -2 is amended to read as follows:
A. Art studios (Production space onl
AB. General offices in conjunction with any other permitted use as long as the office
does not occupy in excess of sixty percent (60 %) of the total building square
footage.
€C. General and /or multimedia related offices, up to fifteen thousand (15,000) square
feet per site,
, light assem or
more, in which the size may be greater.
CD. Light assembly and processing.
DE. Light industrial.
€F. Manufacturing.
G. Mixed use projects including commercial, office and light industrial uses. In
mixed use projects of 30,000 square feet or more wheFe the light industrial uses
must make up at least fifty percent (50 %) of the total project's square footage.
6tH. Parking structures and parking lots.
MI. Public facilities, public utilities.
Page 5
4-J. Research and development.
J-.K. Restaurants and cafes without drive - through facilities.
4-(-. L. Retail sales for wholesale outlets.
L—. M. Warehousing and distribution.
M-.N. Other similar uses approved by the diFeGtGr ef G9Mmunay, eG0ReFA1G and
heRt ,Director of Planning and Building Safety, as provided by
chapter 22 of this title.
SECTION 11: CONSTRUCTION. This Ordinance must be broadly construed in
order to achieve the purposes stated in this Ordinance. It is the City Council's intent
that the provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and
others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance.
SECTION 12: ENFORCEABILITY. Repeal of any provision of the El Segundo
Municipal Code does 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 13: VALIDITY OF PREVIOUS CODE SECTIONS. If this entire
Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any
repeal or amendment of the ESMC or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be
rendered void and cause such previous ESMC provision or other the city ordinance to
remain in full force and effect for all purposes.
SECTION 14: 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 15: 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 16: This Ordinance will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent
ordinance.
Page 6
A3
SECTION 17: This Ordinance will become effective on the thirty -first (31st) day
following its passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2011.
Eric Busch, Mayor
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that
the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing
Ordinance No. was duly introduced by said City Council at a regular meeting held
on the day of , 2011, 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 , 2011, and the same
was so passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
By:
Karl H. Berger, Assistant City Attorney
PAPlanning & Building Safety \Planning - Old \PROJECTS (Planning) \876- 900 \EA - 881 \Planning Commission \EA -881
Smoky Hollow Office Uses Ordinance 12092010.doc
Page 7
"J L1 ,t
1.
4
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Initial Study /Negative Declaration
Environmental Checklist Form
Project Title:
Lead agency name and address:
Contact person and telephone number:
Project location:
Project sponsor's name and address:
General plan designation:
Zoning:
Environmental Assessment EA -881;
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
Amendment SPA 10 -01; and Zone
Text Amendment ZTA 10 -04
City of El Segundo
350 Main Street
El Segundo, California 90245
Kimberly Christensen, AICP
(310) 524 -2340
City of El Segundo — Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan area
Matt Crabbs
21056 th Street
Santa Monica CA 90405
Smoky Hollow
Small Business (SB) and Medium
Manufacturing (MM)
8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to
later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or offsite features necessary for
its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
The proposed project consists of a Specific Plan Amendment to the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan Land Use Plan and a Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) to the permitted uses
in the Small Business (SB) and Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones. The proposed
amendments would allow a wider range of office uses and art studios in the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan area.
Specifically, the project will modify the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land Use Plan to
allow limited general and multimedia office uses in the Small Business area. Currently
the Land Use Plan emphasizes industrial uses with only ancillary office space. The
project will also modify the Small Business (SB) and Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones
permitted uses to allow general and multimedia related office uses and art studio uses.
General office uses are defined in the El Segundo Municipal Code (ESMC) as "Offices
maintained and used as a place of business conducted by persons whose business
activity consists principally of services to the person as distinguished from the handling
of commodities. This does not include medical - dental offices." The ESMC defines
multimedia related office uses as "A building, part of a building, structure, or defined
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 1
s►4
area which is utilized primarily for the office space directly related to film, television
music video, multimedia, or other related activities." The SB and MM Zones currently
only permit offices involved in industrial related activities, such as engineering, industria
design and consultation, or as ancillary uses to permitted manufacturing, light industrial;
warehousing, distribution, light assembly, processing or mixed use. Art studios are not
permitted in the SB and MM Zones.
The SB and MM Zones currently set percentage and area limitations on the types of
office uses permitted. Specifically, the SB Zone limits offices in conjunction with other
permitted uses (ancillary office) to a maximum of 40% of building area. In the MM Zone,
ancillary office uses can occupy a maximum of 60% of building area. As primary uses,
industrial - related offices are allowed up to 15,000 square feet per site in both zones. In
addition, the MM Zone requires that mixed use projects including commercial, office and
light industrial uses maintain light industrial uses in 50% of the total project's square
footage. The project would not change these percentage and area limitations on
offices; it would only increase the types of office uses permitted and allow art studios as
permitted uses.
9. The following discussion offers an explanation in addition to the explanations for every
"No Impact" answer on the checklist:
The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use Plan and the
permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in any environmental impacts
beyond what was considered in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. The
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan EIR estimated that approximately 164,221 square feet of
new floor area would be developed in addition to the existing development which was
estimated at 2,320,441 square feet at the time of the Plan adoption in 1985.
Development within the Specific Plan area has been limited since its adoption and
consisted primarily of re- development where new buildings replaced older buildings
serving the purpose. In addition, a portion of the Medium Density Residential (MDR)
Overlay district was activated for development of multiple - family residential units.
Existing light industrial and auto - related uses were demolished to accommodate the new
residential development. As a result, the building area devoted to nonresidential uses
has not changed substantially in the Smoky Hollow area. The current estimate of
existing development in the SB and MM Zones (excluding the activated MDR area) is
approximately 2,330,272 square feet. This current estimate of existing development
was derived using data from the LA County Assessor, GIS footprint data, a field survey,
and building permit records.
In addition to the current estimate of existing development, staff estimated the potential
for additional development in the Smoky Hollow area based on the existing development
and the current zoning regulations (FAR and parking requirements). Staff estimated
that approximately 141,961 additional square feet could be developed within the Smoky
Hollow area (build -out potential). This estimate was derived using data from the LA
County Assessor, GIS footprint data, a field survey, and building permit records.
Methodology
Using the data cited above, staff first established an estimate of the existing
development for each parcel and for the entire Smoky Hollow Plan area (approximately
2,330,272 square feet of total floor area). Next, using the current FAR standard, staff
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment Cio Gegundo
Page 2
calculated the maximum possible additional development on each parcel and the Smoky
Hollow area as a whole. Staff found that approximately half of all parcels in Smoky
Hollow are currently developed at a higher FAR ratio than currently permitted. Thus,
there is no potential for additional development on half the parcels in the Smoky Hollow
area.
In order to determine a reasonable estimate for build -out potential for the remaining
parcels, staff made certain assumptions. First, staff assumed that not all underutilized
parcels (parcels where the existing development/building area was less that the
permitted maximum) were likely to develop. Instead, staff assumed that properties
currently developed at less than 50% of their maximum permitted Floor Area Ratio
(FAR) will redevelop up to the maximum permitted FAR (.6 FAR). Second, staff
assumed that vacant undeveloped land would develop up to the maximum permitted
FAR. These assumptions are consistent with the methodology used to estimate the
build -out potential citywide (including the Smoky Hollow area) during the update of the
Circulation Element of the General Plan in 2004. The same assumptions were used in
the EIR prepared for the Circulation Element update (Transportation and Traffic
Analysis).
Finally, several developed and undeveloped parcels were excluded from the potential
development build -out: 1) Field surveying and building permit records indicated that
several vacant (but paved) parcels currently provide code required parking spaces for
existing businesses on adjacent parcels and they are unlikely to be developed due to
the shortage of parking in Smoky Hollow; 2) some vacant parcels are public owned
properties housing equipment for utilities and other purposes; 3) the property located at
the SE corner of Grand Avenue and Kansas Street (approximately 4.5 acres) was
developed with an office /industrial facility approximately 91,000 square feet until it was
demolished recently. The area of that facility was discounted from the total potential
build -out area; and 4) the property located at 1700 East Grand Avenue was recently
developed with a Federal Military Entrance Processing Center (MEPC) at 0.18 FAR.
The Federal government has a long -term lease on the property, thus the property is not
anticipated to build out to the maximum permitted FAR in the foreseeable future.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of E! Segundo
Page rf
Page 3 `t
New office development and conversion potential
The proposed Specific Plan and Zone Text Amendments could encourage more office
development in the Smoky Hollow area. Based on the current zoning restrictions on
office development, approximately 126,685 square feet of office space could potentially
be developed. When the City adopted the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan, office uses
accounted for approximately 10.5% of the land uses. Assuming the percentage has not
changed significantly and all potential office is developed, then the percentage of office
uses in the Smoky Hollow area could rise to approximately 15 %. In addition, existing
industrial or auto - related uses could potentially convert into office uses. However, it is
unlikely that all the potential additional office could be developed, or that there will be
significant conversion of industrial uses into office uses, because of the limited parking
within the Smoky Hollow area.
The Smoky Hollow Specific Plan EIR includes an inventory of the parking supply in the
Specific Plan area. Based on that inventory, the entire Specific Plan area is significantly
deficient in parking supply and is dependent on nonconforming parking and street
parking to accommodate the existing parking demand. The EIR parking inventory
estimated the required number of parking spaces for the entire Smoky Hollow area at
4,700 and the provided number of off - street parking spaces at 2,715 (approximately
2,000 less than the requirement). The parking requirement for industrial /manufacturing
uses is one space per 500 square feet and the requirement for office uses is one space
per 300 square feet of floor area. Thus, in order to convert industrial space into office
space, the property owner /developer would be required to substantially increase the
number of parking spaces on the property. Since most properties in the Smoky Hollow
area are currently deficient in parking (street parking is already being used to address
the parking demand), significant conversion of industrial space into office space is
unlikely. The same limitation would apply to properties with existing buildings that could
be expanded to the maximum permitted FAR.
In summary, the development (build -out) potential in the SB and MM Zones is
approximately 141,961 square feet and will likely occur as a mix of industrial and office
uses. The environmental impacts resulting from the anticipated development of 141,961
square feet were previously documented and addressed in the Environmental Impact
Reports (EIR) for the El Segundo General Plan certified on April 4, 1994 and the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan, prepared in November 1985. Furthermore, mitigation measures
that are integrated into the General Plan and the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan EIR will
reduce the level of impacts to less than significant. The Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
currently permits office uses (engineering, design, and consulting) that are similar to the
proposed office uses (general and multimedia) and have similar impacts. Finally, the
level and significance of future development impacts from the increased percentage of
office uses in the SB and MM Zones, will be further assessed through a Negative
Declaration or an EIR that will be prepared for site - specific developments.
Consistency with the General Plan
The proposed amendment and the inclusion of more (general and multimedia related)
types of office uses in the Smoky Hollow area (the Small Business and Medium
Manufacturing Zones) is necessary to help provide a supportive and economically
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 4
(Icj8
profitable environment as the foundation of a strong local business community. The
proposed office uses, while limited, will diversify the types of services available in the
area. As a result, the existing light industrial, storage, office, and limited residential
tenants /occupants will interact with the proposed office uses in a mutually beneficial
manner.
The addition of the proposed office uses is also necessary to help improve the physical
condition and appearance of properties in the Smoky Hollow area.
The proposal is not intended to change the character of the Smoky Hollow area. The
existing development guidelines, parking, FAR, and other requirements are proposed to
remain. With this existing regulatory framework in place, the existing properties and
development will be compatible with the proposed (general and multimedia - related
offices) uses. The Smoky Hollow area with its current lot configuration is one of a few
places in the City where the opportunity exists to help small to medium size businesses
start up.
The proposed amendments are intended to increase the types of office uses permitted
in the Smoky Hollow area, but not the amount of floor area they will occupy. The
proposed uses have the same impacts as other permitted office uses, which were
considered during the adoption of the El Segundo General Plan and the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan. Appendix D of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan includes the Findings of
approval for that plan and they state that "appropriate mitigation measures are
incorporated in the Plan to ensure concerns identified at this level of planning are
resolved as part of the more detailed site plan review which must be completed before
private development may proceed." So, any additional impacts that may arise from new
construction to accommodate the proposed office uses will be addressed and mitigated
during the review process. In conclusion, the proposed uses are not anticipated to have
significant environmental (including traffic) impacts on the surrounding properties.
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
The project area consists of the Small Business (SB) and Medium Manufacturing (MM)
Zones of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area. Smoky Hollow is primarily a light
industrial /manufacturing area located in central El Segundo. Its general boundaries are
Main Street to the west, El Segundo Boulevard to the south, Sepulveda Boulevard to the
east, Holly Avenue to the north. The Small Business Zone generally covers the portion
from Standard Street to Maryland Street, and the Medium Manufacturing Zone generally
covers the portion from Maryland Street to the eastern boundary of the Specific Plan
near Sepulveda Blvd.
The uses to the west of the Specific Plan consist primarily of retail, restaurant, and office
uses. The Chevron refinery is located across El Segundo Boulevard to the east of the
Specific Plan. The uses to the north include retail and restaurant uses along Sepulveda
Boulevard, and corporate office uses east of Sepulveda Boulevard. The uses to the
north of the Specific Plan include primarily single and multi - family residential uses, with
some commercial uses along Grand Avenue. There are residential uses within the
Specific Plan area as well, including a multifamily residential development in the Medium
Density Residential (MDR) Zone of the Specific Plan at the intersection of Grand
Avenue and Kansas Street. In addition, some nonconforming residential uses can be
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 5
(I4
found within the SB and MM Zones of the Specific Plan, however, as mentioned above
the predominant uses found in these zones are light industrial /manufacturing and SOME
limited office uses.
Generally, the project area serves as a transition between the high intensity office anc
manufacturing uses east of Sepulveda Boulevard and south of El Segundo Boulevard
and the residential, civic, and small scale commercial uses in the City's northwesterr
area. The industrial /manufacturing and office uses found in the SB and MM Zones are
of smaller scale and lower intensity than those found east of Sepulveda and south of El
Segundo Boulevard uses.
The Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area encompasses approximately 98.33 net acres,
excluding public right -of -way areas (streets, alleys, sidewalks, and parkways). The
Small Business (SB) Zone covers 28.20 acres and the Medium Manufacturing (MM)
Zone covers 62.69 acres (including the MDR and GAC overlay Zones). The remaining
7.44 acres consists of an area where the MDR overlay zone is activated and residential
development is completed. The table below shows a complete breakdown of the Smoky
Hollow area by Zone and Overlay.
Smoky Hollow Zones
Area acres
Small Business
28.20
Medium Manufacturing
40.61
Medium Manufacturing GAC Overlay)
10.75
Grand Avenue Commercial Activated
4.26
Medium Manufacturing MDR Overlay)
7.07
Medium Density Residential Activated
7.44
Total
98.33
The SB Zone is characterized by small lots that house small industrial businesses. The
majority of lots in the SB Zone are below 6,500 square feet in size. The MM Zone is
characterized by larger lots that are designed to support medium -sized developments.
Approximately 12.25 acres of land are vacant, including parcels being used to provide
required parking for other developed properties. Some properties in the area appear to
be used for residential purposes. Those properties are nonconforming in that residential
uses are not permitted in the SB and MM Zones, except for caretaker units that are
accessory to other permitted uses.
Access to the project area is obtained primarily via Sepulveda Boulevard, Grand
Avenue, and El Segundo Boulevard. Figure 1 depicts the City of El Segundo and the
project area boundaries.
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement):
None.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City Of E/ $Pgypdo
Page Jij
Figure 1. City of El Segundo and Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment Page 7 City of El Segundo
j L
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages:
❑ Aesthetics
❑ Biological Resources
❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions
❑ Land Use / Planning
❑ Population / Housing
❑ Transportation /Traffic
• Agriculture Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
❑ Mineral Resources
• Public Services
• Utilities / Service Systems
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
• Air Quality
• Geology/ Soils
• Hydrology/ Water
Quality
• Noise
• Recreation
• Mandatory Findings
of Significance
0 1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to
by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an EIR is
required.
❑ 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed
in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been address by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An EIR is required, but it
must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
❑ 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon tie proposed project, nothing further is required.
ature
Kimberly Christensen. AICP. Planning Manager
Printed Name
Da
City of El Segundo
For
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of E/ Segundo
Page 8
05
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
a. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should
be explained where it is based on project- specific factor as well as general standards
(e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -
specific screening analysis.)
b. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as
on -site, cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as
well as operational impacts.
Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then
the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than
significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is
appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are
one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an
EIR is required.
d. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where
the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially
Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe
the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than
significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross -
referenced).
e. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiring, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
(1) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
(2) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
(3) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were
incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they
address site - specific conditions for the project.
f. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to
information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances).
Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate,
include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo � J
Page 9
g. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources
used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
h. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats;
however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that
are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
i. The explanation of each issue should identify:
(1) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
(2) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than
significant.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION:
City of El Segundo General Plan, adopted April 4, 1994.
EIR for the El Segundo General Plan, February 1992.
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan, adopted November 1985.
EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan November 1985.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of B Segundo 0 1� 4
Page 10
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST:
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
I(a) No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a substantial
adverse effect on a scenic vista. The proposed amendments will not change the
development standards in the SB and MM Zones or the Design Guidelines and
Standards in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. Any impacts on scenic vistas resulting
from the anticipated future growth and development in Smoky Hollow were addressed
in the EIRs for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan.
Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the General Plan in the
form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all potentially
significant impacts on scenic vistas to a level of less than significant.
I(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a substantial
adverse effect on a scenic vista. No scenic resources such as trees, rock
outcroppings, or historic buildings are identified within the project area that would be
damaged by the proposed amendments. The proposed amendments will not alter the
F.A.R, height requirements, or other standards that would affect scenic such
resources. Any impacts on scenic resources resulting from the anticipated future
growth and development of the City have been addressed in the EIR for the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures
integrated into the various elements of the General Plan in the form of goals, policies,
and implementation measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts on scenic
resources to a level of less than significant.
l(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of the City and its surroundings. The proposed
amendments will not change the development standards in the SB and MM Zones or
the Design Guidelines and Standards in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. Any new
development that results from the project will be constructed according to the existing
standards and guidelines. Effects on the visual character of the City resulting from the
anticipated future growth and development in the Specific Plan were addressed in the
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 11
Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
AESTHETICS
Significant
with Mitigation
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Impact
p
Incorporation
p
Would the project:
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
a
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
historic buildings
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
within a state scenic highway?
❑
❑
❑
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
❑
❑
❑
a
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
I(a) No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a substantial
adverse effect on a scenic vista. The proposed amendments will not change the
development standards in the SB and MM Zones or the Design Guidelines and
Standards in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. Any impacts on scenic vistas resulting
from the anticipated future growth and development in Smoky Hollow were addressed
in the EIRs for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan.
Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the General Plan in the
form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all potentially
significant impacts on scenic vistas to a level of less than significant.
I(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a substantial
adverse effect on a scenic vista. No scenic resources such as trees, rock
outcroppings, or historic buildings are identified within the project area that would be
damaged by the proposed amendments. The proposed amendments will not alter the
F.A.R, height requirements, or other standards that would affect scenic such
resources. Any impacts on scenic resources resulting from the anticipated future
growth and development of the City have been addressed in the EIR for the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures
integrated into the various elements of the General Plan in the form of goals, policies,
and implementation measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts on scenic
resources to a level of less than significant.
l(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of the City and its surroundings. The proposed
amendments will not change the development standards in the SB and MM Zones or
the Design Guidelines and Standards in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. Any new
development that results from the project will be constructed according to the existing
standards and guidelines. Effects on the visual character of the City resulting from the
anticipated future growth and development in the Specific Plan were addressed in the
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 11
EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation
measures integrated into the various elements of the General Plan in the form of
goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all potentially significant
impacts to a level of less than significant.
I(d). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not create a new source of
substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area. The proposed amendments will not change the development standards in the
SIB and MM Zones or the Design Guidelines and Standards in the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan. Any new development that results from the project will be constructed
according to the existing standards and guidelines. Any issues related to substantial
light and glare resulting from the anticipated future growth and development of the City
have been addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El
Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of
the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will
reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
II(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not convert Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non - agricultural use. The
project will simply allow a wider range of office uses in the Smoky Hollow area. There
are no farmland or agricultural uses in El Segundo.
II(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not conflict with existing
zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. The project will simply allow a
wider range of office uses in the Smoky Hollow area. There are no zones intended for
agricultural use, and no farmland or agricultural uses in El Segundo.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo ('15,
Page 12
Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
II AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
Significant
With Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
I act
p
Incorporation
Impact
p
in determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment
Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation
as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture
and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
to the Farmland Mapping and
�]
prepared pursuant
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to
non - agricultural use?
❑
El
El M
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of
❑
[]
E
Farmland, to non - agricultural use?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
II(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not convert Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non - agricultural use. The
project will simply allow a wider range of office uses in the Smoky Hollow area. There
are no farmland or agricultural uses in El Segundo.
II(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not conflict with existing
zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. The project will simply allow a
wider range of office uses in the Smoky Hollow area. There are no zones intended for
agricultural use, and no farmland or agricultural uses in El Segundo.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo ('15,
Page 12
II(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not involve changes in the
existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in the
conversion of farmland, to non - agricultural use. There are no farmland or agricultural
uses in El Segundo.
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
III(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin. Air
quality impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development in the project
area were addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan and the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the
General Plan and the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan EIR in the form of goals, policies,
and implementation measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of
less than significant.
III(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not violate any air quality
standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Air
quality impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were
addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan and the Smoky Hollow Specific
Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the General Plan
and the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan EIR in the form of goals, policies, and
implementation measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of
less than significant.
III(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in a cumulatively
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 13
Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
III AIR QUALITY
Significant
With Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Incorporation
Impact
Where available, the significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air pollution control district
may be relief upon to make the following determinations. Would
the project:
❑
❑
❑
a
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
❑
❑
❑
a
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially
to an existing or projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
❑
❑
❑
X
quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
❑
❑
❑
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
❑
❑
❑
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
III(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin. Air
quality impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development in the project
area were addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan and the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the
General Plan and the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan EIR in the form of goals, policies,
and implementation measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of
less than significant.
III(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not violate any air quality
standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Air
quality impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were
addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan and the Smoky Hollow Specific
Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the General Plan
and the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan EIR in the form of goals, policies, and
implementation measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of
less than significant.
III(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in a cumulatively
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 13
considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. Impacts associated with criteria
pollutants resulting from the anticipated growth and development of the City were
addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan and the Smoky Hollow Specific
Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the General Plan
and the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan EIR in the form of goals, policies, and
implementation measures will reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than
significant. Furthermore, depending on the nature of each individual future residential
project, cumulative air quality impacts may be addressed in supplemental
environmental documentation.
III(d). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. No significant impacts associated
with exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations have been
identified in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan and the Smoky Hollow Specific
Plan. The level and significance of impacts associated exposure of sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations will be further assessed through a
Negative Declaration or an EIR that will be prepared for site - specific developments.
III(e). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not create objectionable
odors affecting a substantial number of people. No significant impacts associated with
the creation of objectionable odors resulting from the anticipated development on
vacant or underutilized land in the project area have been identified in the EIR for the
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. The level and
significance of impacts associated with the creation of objectionable odors that could
affect a substantial number of people will be further assessed through a Negative
Declaration or an EIR that will be prepared for site - specific developments.
City of El Segundo `
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment h' 9 ! I J
Page 14
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
IV(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a substantial
adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive or special status species. Impacts on such species either
directly or through habitat modifications resulting from the anticipated growth and
development of the City were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various
elements of the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation
measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
IV(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a substantial effect
on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. Impacts on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community resulting from the anticipated growth and
development of the City were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various
elements of the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation
measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
IV(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a substantial
Se
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment Page 15 City of El Segundo
Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
IV
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Significant
mpact
With Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Incorporation
Impact
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or
❑
❑ ❑
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or
by the California
❑
❑ ❑
regional plans, policies, regulations or
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
to, vernal coastal,
❑
❑ ❑
Lai
(including, but not limited marsh, pool,
etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
❑
El ❑
Q
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
❑
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
❑
❑
ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan,
❑
❑ ❑
or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
IV(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a substantial
adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive or special status species. Impacts on such species either
directly or through habitat modifications resulting from the anticipated growth and
development of the City were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various
elements of the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation
measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
IV(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a substantial effect
on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. Impacts on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community resulting from the anticipated growth and
development of the City were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various
elements of the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation
measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
IV(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a substantial
Se
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment Page 15 City of El Segundo
adverse effect on federally protected wetlands. The habitat nearest to the project area
are the El Segundo Dunes, which are located on the northwest edge of the City and are
a remnant of the greater Ballona Creek Wetland habitat. The El Segundo Dunes are
thus located far enough from the project area that they will not be affected by any new
development in the project area.
IV(d). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not 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 portions of the project area have been identified as migratory
corridors or wildlife nursery sites. The only nesting and /or habitat areas for migratory
birds and other wildlife are located near the coastal areas of the City, outside the project
area. All impacts resulting from the anticipated growth and development in the project
area were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo
General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the General
Plan in the form of goals, policies, conservation plans, and implementation measures
will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
IV(e). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not conflict with any local
policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Local policies and ordinances
designed to protect biological resources were drafted in response to identified
environmental impacts at full build -out as discussed in the EIR for Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. The proposed amendments will not
change nor conflict with any of the existing local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources.
IV(f). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not conflict with the provisions
of the Local Coastal Program, or any other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan. The proposed amendments will not change nor conflict with the
Conservation Plan of the Resource Management Element of the General Plan, which is
the result of environmental impacts identified in the General Plan EIR. Its objective is
the protection of plant and animal habitat from future development impacts. The
development impacts of the proposed amendments are not substantially different from
those contemplated in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the General
Plan, therefore they will not conflict with the provisions of the adopted conservation and
resource management plans.
EA -881; smoky Hollow specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo �± U
Page 16
V
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
with Mitigation
Impact
p
Incorporation
Would the project:
❑
❑
❑
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?
❑
❑
F-1
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
❑
❑
1:1
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal
cemeteries?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
V(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Impacts on historical
resources resulting from the anticipated development in the project area were
addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General
Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the General Plan in
the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all potentially
significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
V(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource. Impacts on
archaeological resources resulting from the anticipated development in the project area
were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo
General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the General
Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all
significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
V(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not disturb any human
remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Impacts on any human
remains resulting from the development in the project area were addressed in the EIR
for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation
measures integrated into the various elements of the General Plan in the form of goals,
policies, and implementation measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a
level of less than significant.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo 0 61
Page 17
VI
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
p
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Impact
p
Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
❑
El
nX
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
❑
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
a
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
in
❑
❑
❑
potentially result on- or off -site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Section
1802.2 of the California Building Code (2007) creating
❑
❑
❑
substantial risk to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of
❑
❑
❑
wastewater?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
VI(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not expose people or
structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking,
seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction and landslides. Impacts (present
and future) on people and property associated with geologic forces and activities were
addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General
Plan. Furthermore, California Building Codes were substantially updated to protect
future building damage due to earthquake faults, seismicity, liquefaction, and
landslides.
VI(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in substantial soil
erosion or the loss of topsoil. Impacts to soils resulting from the development in the
project area were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El
Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of
the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will
reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 18 � 6
VI(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in projects that
would be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or offsite landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. Impacts (present and future)
on people and property associated with such geologic units or soils were addressed in
the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Also,
the City requires soils and geology reports for projects proposed to be located in
geologically unstable areas.
VI (d). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in projects that
would be located on expansive soils, creating substantial risk to life or property.
Impacts (present and future) on people and property associated with expansive soils
were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo
General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of
goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all significant impacts to a
level of less than significant. The level and significance of such impacts will be further
assessed through a detailed soils and geological investigations for site specific
developments.
VI(e). No Impact. None of the new development resulting from the proposed amendments
will be served by septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. The project
area is served adequately by the existing sewer system. Impacts (present and future)
on the existing and future sewer system capacity were addressed in the EIR for the
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures
integrated into the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the General Plan in the form of
goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all significant impacts to a
level of less than significant.
VII GREENOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
p
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Impact
Would Would the project:
—
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
�(
❑
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
)(
❑
greenhouse gases?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
VII(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not generate greenhouse gas
emissions that have a significant impact on the environment. State of California regulations
seek to reduce the effects of global climate change in statutes and Executive Orders: Executive
Order S -3 -05: Heath and Safety Code Section 38500, et seq.: and Health and Safety Code §§
42823 and 43018.5. These regulations recognize global climate change as a significant threat
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo (� V J
Page 19
to California and therefore certain guidelines must be enacted to limit the production of
greenhouse gases. The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Health and Safety
Code §§ 38500, et seq.) became effective on January 1, 2007. It seeks to reduce California's
greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The proposed project is not expected to
create an increase in greenhouse gases, because the proposed amendments will not change
the development standards applicable to the project area. The amendments will only change
the types of office uses that are permitted and allow art studio uses as permitted uses. The
proposed uses operate in a manner and have impacts substantially similar to the existing
permitted uses. Therefore, they are not anticipated to generate more greenhouse gases than
the existing permitted uses. No mitigation is required.
VII(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not conflict with an applicable plan,
policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
State of California regulations seek to reduce the effects of global climate change in statutes
and Executive Orders: Executive Order S -3 -05: Heath and Safety Code Section 38500, et seq.:
and Health and Safety Code §§ 42823 and 43018.5. These regulations recognize global
climate change as a significant threat to California and therefore certain guidelines must be
enacted to limit the production of greenhouse gases. The California Global Warming Solutions
Act of 2006 (Health and Safety Code §§ 38500, et seq.) became effective on January 1, 2007.
It seeks to reduce California's greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The
proposed project is not expected to conflict with any applicable plans, policies or regulations
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases, because the proposed
amendments will not change the development standards applicable to the project area. The
amendments will only change the types of office uses that are permitted and allow art studio
uses as permitted uses. The proposed uses operate in a manner and have impacts
substantially similar to the existing permitted uses. Therefore, they are not anticipated to
generate more greenhouse gases than the existing permitted uses. No mitigation is required.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo o 6
Page 20
VIII HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
p
with Mitigation
Impact
Incorporation
Would the project
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
El
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
❑
involving the release of hazardous materials into
El
E]
the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -
El
11
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would
F
it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
E
working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to
❑
❑
❑
urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
VIII(a). Less than Significant. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific
Plan Land -Use Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not create a
significant hazard involving the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials. The development of 141,961 additional square feet in the SB and MM
Zones would be less than the potential build -out anticipated and studied in the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan EIR. Any impacts from hazardous materials from additional
office development above the amounts contemplated in the Smoky Hollow Specific
Plan EIR will be minimal and limited to typical material (such as cleaning supplies)
found in office environments. Further, issues relative to hazardous materials were
addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General
Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan and the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan EIR in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will
reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
VIII(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Further, issues relative to hazardous materials were addressed in the EIR for the El
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo t � 6 J
Page 21 V
Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in the
form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all potentially
significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
VIII(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have any potential to
emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.
Further, issues relative to hazardous materials were addressed in the EIR for the El
Segundo General Plan.
VIII(d). No Impact. None of the properties in the project area are located on a site which is
included on a list of hazardous materials compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5.
VIII(e). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in issues related
to LAX and related aviation hazards has been addressed in the EIR for the El
Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in the
form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all potentially
significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
VIII(f). No Impact. There are no private airports in the vicinity of the City.
VIII(g). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have the potential to
impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan. Further, issues relative to an emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation plan were addressed in the EIR for the El
Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in the
form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all potentially
significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
VIII(h). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not expose people or
structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. There are
no wild lands in the City. However, fire hazard impacts associated with the anticipated
development in the project area has been addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into
the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will
reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
Fro -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment Page 22 City of E/ Segundo
b t;
IX
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
with Mitigation
Impact
Incorporation
Would the project:
❑
❑
❑
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of
❑
❑
❑
)(
❑
pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would
not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner
❑
❑
❑
a
which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount
❑
❑
❑
X
❑
of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on- or off -site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
systems or substantial
❑
❑
❑
provide additional sources of
polluted runoff.
❑
❑
❑
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
❑
❑
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
❑
map?
El
❑
❑
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
❑
El
❑
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
❑
❑
❑
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
IX(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge requirement. Water quality issues associated with the
anticipated development in the project area were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures
integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation
measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than
significant.
IX(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that
there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater
table level. Groundwater supply issues associated with the anticipated development in
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment 23 City of El Segundo 0 4-% "
Page V
the project area were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and
the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in
the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all potentially
significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
IX(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not substantially alter
existing drainage patterns in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or
siltation on or offsite. Erosion or siltation resulting from the anticipated development in
the project area has been addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General
Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will reduce all
potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
IX(d). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not substantially alter
existing drainage patterns in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off -site.
Potential flooding impacts associated with the anticipated development in the project
area, were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El
Segundo General Plan, and may also be addressed in future environmental
documentation prepared for individual projects. Mitigation measures integrated into
the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will
reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
IX(e). Less than Significant. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific
Plan Land -Use Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not create or
contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm
water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
Issues associated with runoff water resulting from the anticipated development in the
project area, were addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation
measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and special
plans will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
Furthermore, the level and significance of future development impacts on water
drainage systems from the increased percentage of office uses in the SB and MM
Zones, will be further assessed through a Negative Declaration or an EIR that will be
prepared for site - specific developments. Finally, through the application of the
erosion control and other NPDES measures, the anticipated new development in the
project area is not expected to substantially increase runoff water in the area and
significantly impact water drainage systems.
IX(f). Less than Significant. Through the application of the erosion control and other
NPDES measures, the anticipated new development in the project area is not
expected to substantially degrade local water quality.
IX(g). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in the placement
of structures within a 100 -year flood hazard area. Issues associated with flood hazard
areas and future construction activity were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment Page 24 City of E/ Segundo
LI � S
the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and special plans will reduce all
potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
IX(h). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in the placement
of structures within a 100 -year flood hazard area that would impede or redirect flood
flows. Issues associated with flood hazard areas and future construction activity were
addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General
Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals,
policies, and special plans will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of
less than significant.
IX(i). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will 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. All potential impacts associated
with flooding resulting from the anticipated growth and development in the project area
were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo
General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of
goals, policies, and special plans will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level
of less than significant.
IX(j). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -
Use Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have a significant
hazard to the public or the environment nor increase the number of persons subject to
the ocean generated hazardous events. Even though the City may be subject to
tsunamis since it is located one half mile from the Pacific Ocean surf, properties are
protected by a half -mile of the El Segundo Sand Dunes with a height of up to g0 plus
feet above sea level. In addition, hazards associated with tsunami were addressed in
the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the
General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and special plans will reduce all potentially
significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
X
LAND USE AND PLANNING
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Impact
Would the project:
❑
❑
❑
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, " or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
❑
❑
a
❑
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
❑
❑
❑
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation
plan?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
X(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not physically divide an
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment Pa a 25 City of El Segundo (i ('
5 J
established community. The project area is largely built out, it has an established
street network that is not expected to change. The amount of vacant land that could
be developed within the project area is limited, and any new development resulting
from the proposed amendments will occur on existing parcels of land with little or no
impact on the street network.
X(b). Less than Significant. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
Land -Use Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones are consistent with all
elements of the General Plan, including its Land Use Designations, its Land Use Plan,
its goals, policies, and objectives. The proposed amendments will allow a wider range
of office uses in the project area maintaining the same FAR, lot coverage, and
maximum development limits contemplated in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the
General Plan. The proposed amendments will also allow artists' studio uses (limited
to art production space only) as permitted uses in the project area, which will operate
in substantially the same manner as low intensity light industrial /manufacturing uses.
The impacts related to potential conflicts with existing land -use regulations and /or
policies were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El
Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan and the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation
measures will reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
General Plan provisions:
The General Plan Land Use designation for the project area is "Smoky Hollow Mixed -
Use." This designation "permits primarily light industrial uses including light
manufacturing, research and development, warehousing, and office uses." The
proposed amendments are consistent with the Land Use Designation for the project
area, because they relate to general and multimedia - related office uses, which are
permitted in the Smoky Hollow Mixed -Use Land Use Designation.
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan provisions:
The Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land Use Plan (ESMC § 15- 11 -2E) in subsection 1.a
states: "... The desire is to maintain a small industrial business environment, but not to
preclude lot consolidation, business expansion and growth. Design guidelines will
allow some flexibility to achieve visual enhancement of the area. The small business
area is a transition between the pedestrian scale downtown and the medium sized
manufacturing area to the east. Uses will basically remain the same as at present, with
an emphasis on the smaller industrial user with ancillary office space." The proposed
Specific Plan Text Amendment would delete "with ancillary office space" and replace it
with "and limited general and multimedia related office space." This proposed
language is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation for the Smoky
Hollow area, which permits office uses.
X(c). No Impact. As previously indicated, the proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan Land -Use Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones do not
conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan
(see explanation for IV(f)).
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 26
XI MINERAL RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
with Mitigation
Impact
p
Impact
Would the project result in:
Incorporation
Would the project:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
E
E a
residents of the state?
b) Result /in the loss of availability of a locally - important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
agencies?
❑
Lai
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
XI(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not substantially result in the
loss of the availability of mineral resources, particularly petroleum resources. Access
to petroleum resources associated with the anticipated growth and development of the
City is not expected to diminish or be affected by future development and will have a
less than significant impact.
XI(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not substantially result in the
loss of the availability of mineral resources, particularly petroleum resources. Access
to petroleum resources associated with the anticipated growth and development of the
City is not expected to diminish.
Al NOISE
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Impact
Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise
❑
❑
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
❑
O
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground
borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
P
r
without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project expose people residing or working in the project
)(
area to excessive noise levels?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment
Page 27
City of El Segundo
XII(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not result in exposure of
persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Impacts
(both current and future) associated with noise were addressed in the EIR for the
Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures
integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation
measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than
significant.
XII(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in exposure of
persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise
levels. Impacts (present and future) associated with noise and vibration were
addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures
integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation
measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than
significant.
XI(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not result in a substantial
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the City above levels existing without
the project. Impacts (present and future) associated with the permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the City were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into
the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will
reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
XII(d). Less than Significant. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
Land -Use Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not result in a
substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the City above
levels existing without the project. Impacts (both present and future) associated with
the temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the City were addressed
in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the
General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures are
designed to reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
XII(e). Less than Significant. The Los Angeles International Airport is located north and
adjacent to the City of El Segundo with runways that are nearly parallel to the City's
northern limits. Flight patterns of airlines arriving and departing on the southern
runways as well as taxi activities around the cargo terminals create excessive noise
impacts on substantial portions of the City's residential neighborhoods. The
development of new industrial and office uses in the City has the potential to expose
future businesses to noise levels, which exceed community - established thresholds.
These impacts were addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan.
Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and
implementation measures are designed to reduce all potentially significant impacts to
a level of less than significant.
XII(f). No Impact. No private airstrip exists within or adjacent to the City.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of E/ Segundo . 7 d)
Page 28
XIII POPULATION AND HOUSING
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
p
Impact
p
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Impact
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
❑X
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
❑
❑
❑
roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
El
❑
El
elsewhere?
❑
❑
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
❑
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
XIII(a). Less than Significant. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
Land -Use Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not induce
substantial population growth in the area. The anticipated amount of new
development in the project area is approximately 141,961 square feet, which is less
than the amount studied in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. Impacts
associated with substantially population growth in the City were addressed in the EIR
for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation
measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and
implementation measures will reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of
less than significant.
XIII(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not result in the
displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The project area is largely built out
primarily with industrial, auto - related, and office uses. Any additional development is
expected to occur within non - residential zones of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan.
XIII(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not result in the
displacement of substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere. The project area is largely built out primarily with
industrial, auto - related, and office uses. Any additional development is expected to
occur within non - residential zones on underutilized or vacant parcels of the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 29
U'7 3
XIV PUBLIC SERVICES
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
Significant
g
Significant
With Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Incorporation
Impact
Would the project: result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services?
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
nX
❑
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other public facilities?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
XIV(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire
protection facilities. Anticipated new development within the project area will be
constructed according to the current Fire and Building Code. Impacts associated with
new fire protection facilities resulting from the anticipated development in the project
area were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the EI
Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan and the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation
measures are designed to reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less
than significant.
XIV(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
police protection facilities. Impacts associated with new police protection facilities
resulting from the anticipated development in the project area were addressed in the
EIR for the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the General
Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures are designed to
reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment
Page 30
City of El Segundo
01
XIV(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with providing new or physically altered school
facilities. Impacts associated with new school facilities resulting from the anticipated
development in the project area were addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo
General Plan, and is planned for by the public school district which serve El Segundo.
Mitigation measures integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and
implementation measures are designed to reduce all potentially significant impacts to
a level of less than significant.
XIV(d). No Impact: The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
park facilities. The anticipated new development within the project area would consist
primarily of industrial and office uses. Thus, the demand for new park facilities will be
limited. Impacts associated with new park facilities resulting from the anticipated
development in the project area were addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo
General Plan. Mitigation measures were integrated into the General Plan in the form
of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all potentially significant
impacts to a level of less than significant. Furthermore, new nonresidential
development in the project area will be subject to development impact fees. Finally,
the level and significance of future development impacts on park facilities from the
increased percentage of office uses in the SB and MM Zones, will be further assessed
through a Negative Declaration or an EIR that will be prepared for site - specific
developments.
XIV(e). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with providing new or physically altered public
facilities. Impacts associated with new public facilities resulting from the anticipated
development in the project area, were addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo
General Plan. In addition, public facility impacts of any new development will be
addressed in separate site - specific studies. Mitigation measures have been integrated
into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to
reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
XV RECREATION
Potentially
Significant
9
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
With Mitigation
Impact
Incorporation
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
❑
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
El
❑
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
❑
❑
❑
environment?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
XV(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in an increase of
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of E/ Segundo r
Page 31 U 7 J
the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities
such that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be
accelerated. Impacts to existing recreational facilities resulting from population growth
were addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures
have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and
implementation measures to reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less
than significant. Furthermore, new nonresidential development in the project area will
be subject to development impact fees. Finally, the level and significance of future
development impacts on park facilities from the increased percentage of office uses in
the SB and MM Zones, will be further assessed through a Negative Declaration or an
EIR that will be prepared for site - specific developments.
XV(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones do not have provisions or
requirements for the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. However,
impacts associated with the construction or expansion of recreational facilities in
response to population growth has been addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo
General Plan. Mitigation measures were integrated into the General Plan in the form
of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all potentially significant
impacts to levels of less than significant.
XVI TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
with Mitigation
Incorporation
Impact
Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation
to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system
(i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of
El
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or
congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results
�(
❑
in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
❑
X
❑
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
El
El
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
X
❑
bicycle racks)?
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
XVI(a). Less than Significant. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific
Plan Land -Use Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not cause an
increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo i '
Page 32 1 I 7 U
capacity of the street system. Increase in traffic resulting from the anticipated growth
and development in the project area has been addressed in the EIR for the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. The anticipated new
development within the project would be approximately 141,961 square feet, which is
less than that studied in the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan EIR. Mitigation measures
have been integrated into the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the General Plan in the
form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all potentially
significant impacts to a level of less than significant. In addition the level and
significance of future traffic impacts from the increased percentage of office uses in
the SB and MM Zones, will be further assessed through a Negative Declaration or an
EIR that will be prepared for site - specific developments. Finally, any new
development in the project area will be subject to the City's traffic impact fees.
XVI(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not cause to exceed, either
individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. Impacts resulting
from the anticipated development in the project area on the level of service for roads
or highways were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El
Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan and the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and
implementation measures to reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less
than significant.
XVI(c). No Impact The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have any impact on air
traffic patterns, given the nature and location of the anticipated development outside of
the established airport flight pattern.
XVI(d). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not increase hazards due to
a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment). The project area is urban in nature and largely built out. It has
an established grid - patterned street network, which would not be altered by the
proposed project. Impacts resulting from the anticipated development in the project
area on the street network and the circulation patterns were addressed in the EIR for
the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation
measures have been integrated into the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the General
Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all
potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
XVI(e). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in inadequate
emergency access. The project area is urban in nature and largely built out. It has an
established grid - patterned street network, which would not be altered by the proposed
project. Thus, emergency access throughout the project area will not be impacted by
the project. Impacts to emergency access on specific sites will be addressed during
the site plan review process for each development. During the site plan review
process, individual development projects will be required to meet all applicable
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of EI Segundo,
Page 33 0 � �
Building and Fire Codes, including emergency access requirements
XVI(f). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in inadequate
parking capacity, because the development standards applicable to any future
development in the project area will not be affected. Impacts to parking capacity on
specific sites will be addressed during the site plan review process for each
development. During the site plan review process, individual development projects,
including additions to existing buildings and conversions of space from one use to
another will be required to meet all applicable parking requirements.
XVI(g). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not conflict with adopted
policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative modes of transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks). Impacts resulting from the anticipated development in the
project area on adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative modes of
transportation were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the
El Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General
Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all
potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
XVII UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
Impact
p
With Mitigation
Impact
Incorporation
Would the project:
❑
❑
i(
❑
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
❑
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction
❑
❑
❑
of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could
❑
❑
❑
cause significant
environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
❑
❑
❑
new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand
❑
❑
❑
in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
❑
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
i(
❑
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Seguniq '7
Page 34
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
XVII(a). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not cause to exceed in
wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board. The impact of full buildout on wastewater treatment requirements was
addressed in the EIR for Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General
Plan. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of
goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all potentially significant
impacts to a level of less than significant.
XVII(b). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not require or result in the
construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
Issues relative to environmental effects resulting from the construction of new facilities
or expansion of existing facilities were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan and the El Segundo General Plan. In addition, the need for expanded
wastewater treatment and sewer facilities for any new development will be analyzed
and addressed in separate site - specific studies that may include requirements to
expand said facilities. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan and the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and
implementation measures to reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less
than significant. As required by State law and the General Plan, environmental
impacts related to the construction of new facilities will be addressed through the EIRs
or Negative Declarations that will be prepared for site specific projects.
XVII(c). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not require or result in the
construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Issues relative
to environmental effects resulting from the construction of new facilities or expansion
of existing facilities were addressed in the EIR for the El Segundo General Plan. In
addition, the need for expanded storm water drainage facilities for any new residential
development will be analyzed and addressed in separate site - specific studies that may
include requirements to expand said facilities. As required by State law and the
General Plan, environmental impacts related to the construction of new facilities will be
addressed through the EIRs or Negative Declarations that will be prepared for site
specific projects.
XVII(d). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not require or result in the
construction of water facilities or expansion of existing facilities, to provide water to the
project area. Any anticipated development in the project area will be adequately
served by existing facilities. Impacts related to future water supplies were addressed
in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the General Plan. Mitigation
measures have been integrated into the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the General
Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to reduce all
significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
uu 11 --puny nunuw oNccmc rian Amenoment Pa a 35 City of El Segundo 0 7 9
9
XVII(e). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will not require a determination
by the wastewater treatment provider regarding the adequate capacity of the facility to
serve the projected demand of the project area. Impacts related to the adequacy or
capacity of wastewater treatment providers to serve the anticipated development were
addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the General Plan.
Mitigation measures have been integrated into the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and
the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures to
reduce all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
XVII(f). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SIB and MM Zones will be served by a landfill with
sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs.
Impacts related to landfill capacity and solid waste disposal needs resulting from the
anticipated population growth of the City were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan General Plan. Mitigation measures have been integrated into the
General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and potentially implementation measures
to reduce all significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
XVII(g). No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will comply with federal, state,
and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Impacts related to solid waste
were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the General Plan.
Mitigation measures have been integrated into the General Plan in the form of goals,
policies, and implementation measures to reduce all potentially significant impacts to a
level of less than significant.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo Ll V
Page 36
Less Than
XVIII MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
SIGNIFICANCE
Significant
With
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporation
Does the project:
a) Have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the
❑
❑
❑
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that
the incremental effects of a project are considerable when
a
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the
❑
❑
❑
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
c) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
❑
❑
❑
indirectly?
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo Ll V
Page 36
Explanation of Checklist Judgments:
XVIII(a).No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -Use
Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory. All aforementioned environmental
impacts that could result from the anticipated development in the project area were
addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General
Plan. Specific environmental impacts related to new development would be also be
addressed in separate environmental documentation prepared for the particular project.
Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the General Plan in the
form of goals, policies, and implementation measures, plus supplemental measures
included in subsequent environmental documentation for individual projects, will reduce
all potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
XVIII(b). Less than Significant. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
Land -Use Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not result in
impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. All cumulative
environmental impacts that could result from the anticipated development in the project
area were addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El
Segundo General Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of
the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation measures will
reduce all cumulatively significant impacts to a level of less than significant.
XVIII(c).No Impact. The proposed amendments to the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land -
Use Plan and the permitted uses in the SB and MM Zones will not cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Impacts on human
beings that could result from the anticipated development in the project area were
addressed in the EIR for the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan and the El Segundo General
Plan. Mitigation measures integrated into the various elements of the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan and the General Plan in the form of goals, policies, and implementation
measures will reduce all cumulatively significant impacts to a level of less than
significant.
EA -881; Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Amendment City of El Segundo
Page 37 k-1 8 'L
11maqh
Construction Inc.
GENERAL CONTRACTORS
December 1, 2010
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
City Council Chambers
350 Main Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
Construction Management
General Contracting
Design /Bulld
Re: NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
NO. 881, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. SPA 10-01 AND ZONE TEXT
TEXT AMENDMENT NO. ZI'A 10 -04.
Members of the planning commission,
As a long time business and property owner In the Smokey Hollow area, I would like to express my
support for the above specific plan amendment. I feel that its approval will bring a positive change to
the Smokey Hollow area, by attracting new and creative business to our city. Smokey Hollow has long
been somewhat undefined therefore not accessible, to new and creative business and ideas. I believe
approval of the amendment will help change that and transform Smokey Hollow into a new and exciting
part of El Segundo.
Thank you
®r—
(!
Tom Georgouses
Jim Pickett
Owners of
150 Sierra Street
El Segundo
December 1, 2010
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
City Council Chambers
350 Main Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
Re: NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
NO. 881, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. SPA 10-01 AND ZONE TEXT
TEXT AMENDMENT NO. ZTA 10-04.
Members of the planning commission,
As a longtime business and property owner in the Smokey Hollow area, I would like to express my
support for the above specific plan amendment. I feel that its approval will bring a positive change to
the Smokey Hollow area, by attracting new and creative business to our city. Smokey Hollow has long
been somewhat undefined therefore not accessible, to new and creative business and ideas. I believe
approval of the amendment will help change that and transform Smokey Hollow Into a new and exciting
part of El Segundo.
Thank you
Tom N. Georgouses
�.i�J
December 1, 2010
TO: Matt Crabbs
FROM: Lyle Maul
RE: Smoky Hollow Rezoning
I am a developer, commercial property owner, and business owner in El Segundo. I understand
that Matt Crabbs has submitted an application to the City of El Segundo that would expand the
acceptable zoning uses for the Smoky Hollow area. I would like to state my support for his
efforts to expand the zoning to include a wider range of uses. The Smoky Hollow area is lagging
behind in development and needs additional incentives to attract business development and
expanding zoning uses is the easiest and fastest way to expedite business development in the
area.
The Smoky Hollow area is plagued with old and poorly maintained structures, inadequate
parking, and aging infrastructure — all of which inhibit new development. Expanding the zoning
to possibly include more retail, some form of live /work, medical, and a more flexible mix of
office and light industrial would definitely help spur development.
Dave Furano, The Studio 149 Standard St El Segundo CA 90245 Phone 310 - 951 -9994
Dec 1, 2010
City of El Segundo
City Council Chambers
350 Main St
El Segundo, CA 90245
Members of the E1 Segundo planning commission I am a property owner
in the small business district area and want to express my support in
favor of the specific plan amendment and zone text amendment.
I would like to further express my support for Matt Crabbs efforts to
include a wider range of uses which will allow for additional incentives
to attract business development.
Thanks and Cheers
Respectfully
Dave Furano
0 8J
December 2, 2010
To the members of the Planning Commission:
As the owners of 128 Sierra Street in El Segundo, we fully support the amendment of the Smokey
Hollow City specific plan to allow general office uses. We have been extremely pleased with the support
of the city and look forward to maintaining a long presence and growing our business.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at (310) 322 -7767.
Thank you.
Dan Levin
Premiere Props
128 Sierra Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
t,��U
I
I, 1
J t� 20 0
U0
PLANNING DIVISION
City of El Segundo
Planning and Building Safety
350 Main Street
El Segundo CA 90245
(310) 524 -2344; FAX (310) 524 -4167
www.elsequndo.oro
APPLICATION FOR A SPECIFIC PLAN OR SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT
Environmental Assessment No.: �'� Specific Plan No.: 0 -- 'o�r /
Date: / U S 'Z 0 10
Applican
Q A,4
Name rant or type)
2Lo - (- -a' S f (c,i-
Address
L% ii cAk , C 910 y0S
City /St2ip
'3)o 764- 4! 0 3�z -Z�Sj
Phone Fax
4 C- ate-- --
Em I
1
ignature
Check One: Owner 0 Lessee ❑
Property Owner: Q
R / s m
Name (print or type) Phone
2/ S 7
Ad* e s G Emig -(
�ox�s
City /St/Zip J, i to
Agent 0
Representative of applicant; (i.e., attorney, expeditor, etc.)
Name (print or type)
Address
City /SVZip
7�t —Z 8S(
Fax
Phone Fax
Email
Signature
.rchitect/Engineer:
Name (print or type)
Address
City /St2ip
Property situated atAi"e I, v, A,,_ „ �o,-
Phone
Email
(Exact legal description. Provide a
General location: G !�o- ----t� between
Address (Street/Avenue) W c�54-
Existing Zoning: H rl 4- Y
Signature
ttachmme-nt if necessary.)
tre t/Ave e
t -G�.G� ��J C�
General Plan Land Use Designation: Jam( —" y- S 1073l
El Segundo Municipal Code Section(s) Relating To Request:
Fax
Request: Under the provisions of Title 15 of the Municipal Code, application for consideration of a Specific
Plan for the above described property.
1. Describe in detail the entire proposed project (type of construction, materials to be used, uses
involved (e.g., bank, general office, industrial, restaurant, etc.) including buildings and other
equipment necessary to the project.
2. Describe the existing development on the site. Include square footages and uses of each building on
the site.
Of
2
3. Explain in detail why this particular site is especially suited for the proposed development.
4. Describe how the proposed project will compare /contrast to the development of adjacent properties and
the immediate area and will not have detrimental effects to the adjacent properties or neighborhood.
How will potential impacts be mitigated?
5. Describe the technological processes and equipment employed on -site and their compatibility with
existing and potential land uses within the general area.
08
91
NOTE: Separate Affidavits must be submitted if there are multiple owners.
" OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT
1, We �.. &A being duly sworn depose and say that I /we am
the OW R of the property involved in this application and that I /we have familiarized myself (ourselves)
with the rules and regulation of the City of El Segundo with respect to preparing and filing this application
and that the foregoing s tements herein co fined pnd the information documents and all plans attached
hereto are in all respec 6 true co r ect t e blqKt of /our knowledge and belief.
/0 6 A 0/ 4 20/-0
Signature Date
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )
County of Los Angeles )ss.
On this day of �cl�© 20 or me, the r ally appearePublic in and for said County and State, person
known to me to be the person whose name 1"5 subscribe to the
within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he /fte executed ame.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
4 '_ ') V
AGENT AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize to act for me /us in all matters relevant to this application.
I understand that this person will be the exclusive contact on the project and will be sent all information
and correspondence.
Owner's Signature
AGENT AFFIDAVIT
20
I, We being duly sworn depose and say that I /we am
the AGENT of the property involved in this application and that I /we have familiarized myself (ourselves)
with the rules and regulation of the City of El Segundo with respect to preparing and filing this application
and that the foregoing statements herein contained and the information documents and all plans attached
hereto are in all respects true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and belief.
Signature
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )
County of Los Angeles )ss.
Date
20
On this day of 20 before me, the undersigned Notary
Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared _
known to me to be the person whose name
within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he /she executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
subscribe to the
Notary Public in and for said County and State
s (191
RESPONSES TO SPECIFIC PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION
The application form does not have relevant questions.
1. Project description.
The proposed amendment involves modifying the Land Use Plan of the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan. The amendment is intended to allow more types of office uses in the
Smoky Hollow area, specifically in the SB and MM Zones. The Land Use Plan would be
amended as follows:
§ 15- 11 -2E. The Land Use Plan
Subsection La. Small business area: ... The desire is to maintain a small industrial
business environment... Uses will basically remain the same as at present, with an
emphasis on the smaller industrial user with aneiliffy and limited general and multimedia
related office space.
2. Consistency with Specific Plan Goals, Policies and Objectives
Goal 1 (Pattern of Uses), Objective 1.3 — Maximum possible responsiveness to market
opportunities within the desired development intensification as defined by the Specific
Plan Development Regulations, Standards and Design Guidelines. The proposed
amendment is consistent with this objective in that purpose of the proposed amendment is
to respond to the current market conditions, which demonstrate a shift away from the
traditional industrial uses, to toward more creative office uses.
Goal 1, Policy 7 to "Encourage limited office, commercial, and warehousing uses within"
prescribed percentage limits. The proposed amendment intends to expand the types of
office uses permitted in the Smoky Hollow SP, without changing the prescribed area
percentage limits.
Goal 3 (Visual Improvement), Objective 3.4 — Achievement of an overall positive
identity for the area. The proposed amendment is intended to increase the types of office
uses permitted in the Smoky Hollow SP, which will improve the marketability and the
value of properties in Smoky Hollow. As a result, property owners would be able to
investment in improvements to improve the appearance their properties.
Goal 5 (New Uses and Use Intensification), Objective 5.2 The most effective possible use
of each parcel of land without changing the intended character of each land use district in
the Plan. The proposed amendment is intended to add variety to the choice of uses within
the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. At the same time the additional uses a similar and
compatible with existing permitted uses in the Specific Plan. As a result, property
owners will be better able to select the "right" use for their property, without jeopardizing
the character of the neighborhood and zone.
Goal 5, Objective 5.3 Location of new uses in areas which contribute most to overall
improvement of the area. The proposed amendment and expansion of the permitted uses
t�y�
will help stimulate new business activity and development in the Smoky Hollow area.
This will lead to a physical improvement in the area and a fiscal improvement for the
City.
§ 15- 11 -2E. The Land Use Plan
The Land Use Plan states in Subsection La. regarding the Small business area that "[t]he
desire is to maintain a small industrial business environment..." The proposed
amendment does not intend to change that small business industrial character. The
proposed uses will basically remain the same. The proposed change will simply result in
a change in the types of office uses permitted, but not the amount. The Smoky Hollow
SP and the SB and MM Zones set specific numerical and percentage limits to the area
that office uses can occupy on a site. This limit is not affected by the proposed
amendment.
§ 15- 11 -217. The Circulation Plan
The plan states: "Because the basic character of proposed land uses is not expected to
change in the near future, the recently adopted City -wide General Plan Circulation
Element (1984) remains adequate in its designation of arterial highways and truck
routes." The proposed amendment is consistent with the Circulation Plan of the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan and the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The proposed
amendment will not change the basic character of the uses in Smoky Hollow and will not
result in increased development, beyond the amount considered in the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan and the Circulation Element of the General Plan.
SHSP Appendix D. Specific Plan Findings. Finding E states that "appropriate mitigation
measures are incorporated in the Plan to ensure concerns identified at this level of
planning are resolved as part of the more detailed site plan review which must be
completed before private development may proceed." Consequently, any impacts from
new construction activity generated by the proposed amendment will be addressed during
the site plan review process outlined in the Specific Plan.
In conclusion, the proposed amendment is generally consistent with the goals, objectives
and policies and other provisions of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan.
093
t
f Inning end Building Safety De, i.
El City of
Planning and Building Safety Dept.
350 Main Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
(310)524 -2344; FAX (310)322 -4167
www.elsegundo.oLg
APPLICATION FOR A ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT
Environmental Assessment No: 721 ZTA No:
Applicant: PP
0 C�-tk c
Name (print or type)
2i 0S 6k S°fjee'+
Address
Via.,..-�e� �-te Vn I` Ir_ A . S o 4 o
City /St2ip
Check One: Owner ❑
Property Owner:
Name (print or type)
Address
City /St2ip
Go -oil
Date: 7 ZA o / 6
`3i0 'F 64 �2 z8 -r 1
Phone j Fax
b � M ; • c��. -cam
Email
Signature
Lessee ❑
:A -881; GPA 10.02; ZTA 10 -04; SPA 10.01 1
MOKY HOLLOW SPECIFIC PLAN SB 8 MM ZONES
Phone
Email
Agent ❑
Signature
Fax
Representative of applicant: (i.e., attorney, expeditor, etc.)
sc, - � a s /cOie /'
Name (print or type) V V Phone
Address
City /St/Zip
Architect/Engineer:
vAk
Name (print or type
Address
City /St/Zip
Property Situated at:
Aft
A0
(Exact legal description
Fax
Email
Signature
Phone Fax
Email
Signature
General Location:
/ /
Address between Street, Avenue and Street/Avenue
Zoning: "A ¢ S 6 General Plan Land Use Designation:
r-
Proposed Zone Text Amendment: (cite Municipal Code sections and list specific proposed changes)
Request: Under the provisions of Title 15, Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code, application for
consideration of a Zone Text Amendment for the above described property.
1.
Does the public necessity require the proposed amendment? Describe the nature of the proposed
amendment, including the secti�on(s) of the Municipal Code to be amended.
See- A /4
ti M
a C� e -It 7O CC Von Ir C-4j B Zone
�E'_]�T C' M eNtJ►M Q rf
i
2. Would the changes proposed by the amendment be detrimental in any way to the surrounding
property? (Explain reasons supporting your answers.)
�)! 4-
198
OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT
I, We MATT CRABBS being duly sworn depose and say that I /we am
the OWNERS) of the property involved in this application and that I /we have familiarized myself
(ourselves) with the rules and regulation of the City of El Segundo with respect to preparing and filing
this application and that the foregoing statements herein contained and the information documents
and all plans attached hereto are in all respects true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and
belief.
q
July �B, 2010 20 _
Signature Date
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )
County of Los Angeles )ss.
On this - }f3Lt-f' day of July ,2010 before me, the undersigned Notary
Public in and for said 06unty and State, personally appeared MATT CRABBS
known to me to be the person whose name is
within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/ executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
ELIZABETH C. SROUR
• ' NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA
COMMISSION # 1734936
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
My Comm. Exp. April 26, 2011
subscribe to the
Notary 15%blid4r and fo sald C + n nd State
C>e
4
09 r
AGENT AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize to act for me /us in all
matters relevant to this applicati on. I understand that this person wil I be the exclusive contact on the
project and will be sent all information and correspondence.
20
Owner's Signature
AGENT AFFIDAVIT
I, We MATT CRABBS being duly sworn depose and say that I/we am
the AGENT of the property involved in this application and that I/we have familiarized myself
(ourselves) with the rules and regulation of the City of El Segundo with respect to preparing and filing
this application and that the foregoing statements herein contained and the Information documents
and all plans attached hereto are in all respects true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and
belief.
July 9, 2010 20 10
Signature Date
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )
County of Los Angeles )ss.
On this 9th day of July ,2010 , before me, the undersigned Notary
Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared MATT CRABBS
known to me to be the person whose name t5 subscribe to the
within Instrument, and acknowledged to me that hats executed the sam e.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
NOTgRy PUBLIC . SROUR Notary Pu In and for said County and State
s' COMMISSION #CAUFOR
LOS ANGELES 1734836NIA vi
MY Comm, Ex , COUNTY E
P Aprll 26, 2011
5 098
RESPONSES TO ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION
The proposed amendment involves the addition of new office uses to the Small
Business (SB) and Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zones. Specifically, the SB
and MM Zones would be amended as follows:
Small Business
15 -6C -2: PERMITTED USES: The following uses are permitted in the SB zone:
A. General offices in conjunction with any other permitted use as long as the office
use does not occupy in excess of forty percent (40 %) of the total building square
footage.
B. General and/or multimedia related offices, up to fifteen thousand (15,000) square
feet per site, invelved in industrial related aetivifies sueh as , industfial
,
light industrial or- warehousing I I I I the size may be greater-.
I. Art studios (Production space only).
Medium Manufacturing
15 -6D -2: PERMITTED USES: The following uses are permitted in the MM zone:
A. General offices in conjunction with any other permitted use as long as the office
does not occupy in excess of sixty percent (60 %) of the total building square
footage.
B. General and/or multimedia related offices, up to fifteen thousand (15,000) square
feet per site, itivelved in industfial related aefivifies sueh as , ifidostfial
,
light industr-ial, warehousing, distribution, light assemb! 21 er- mi*ed
use, in "ieh the size maybe gf:eatff.
M. Art studios (Production space only).
Public Necessity. The proposed amendment and the inclusion of more types of office
uses in the Smoky Hollow area (the SB and MM Zones) is necessary to help provide a
supportive and economically profitable environment as the foundation of a strong local
business community. The proposed office uses, while limited, will diversify the types of
services available in the area. As a result, the existing light industrial, storage, office, and
limited residential tenants /occupants will interact with the proposed office uses in a
mutually beneficial manner.
�?92
The addition of the proposed office uses is also necessary to help improve the physical
condition and appearance of properties in the Smoky Hollow area. The additional
permitted uses will increase the property owners' ability to lease or sell their property
thereby increasing the value of the property and the rent amounts. As a result, property
owners will be able to investment more money in tenant improvements, which
consequently will improve the overall welfare of the area and the City. The limited
nature of the proposed office uses will not create substantial competition with existing
office uses outside the Smoky Hollow area.
2. The proposed amendment intends to increase the types of office uses permitted in
the Smoky Hollow area, but not the amount of floor area they will occupy. The
proposed uses have the same impacts as other permitted office uses, which were
considered during the adoption of the El Segundo General Plan and the Smoky
Hollow Specific Plan. Appendix D of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan includes
the Findings of approval for that plan and they state that "Appropriate mitigation
measures are incorporated in the Plan to ensure concerns identified at this level of
planning are resolved as part of the more detailed site plan review which must be
completed before private development may proceed." In other words, any
additional impacts that may arise from new construction to accommodate the
proposed office uses will be addressed and mitigated during the review process.
So, the proposed uses are not anticipated to have significant environmental
(including traffic and parking) impacts on the surrounding properties.
No noise impacts are anticipated. Uses falling under the General Office and
multimedia related office definitions will be limited strictly indoors as currently
stated in the SB and MM Zones. Thus, there would be no noise impacts on
surrounding properties.
Hazardous materials. No hazardous materials impacts are anticipated. The
proposed office uses are similar to uses currently permitted in the Smoky Hollow
Mixed -Use Land Use designation and no hazardous materials are expected to be
used, stored or transported, other than typical materials associated with office
uses.
Economic impacts on surrounding uses. The proposal is not anticipated to other
detrimental effects on surrounding properties and will not compete with the
Downtown or other uses outside the Smoky Hollow area. The proposed office
uses will remain secondary and are expected to interact primarily with other
existing uses in the Smoky Hollow area. The industrial character of the area is
not anticipated to change. Furthermore, due to the limited size of the properties
and buildings in the Smoky Hollow area and the limitations on office sizes, the
proposed uses will not compete with large office tenants located east of Sepulveda
Boulevard.
PVC
P 1 t
City Segundo of EI
Planning and Building Safety
350 Main Street
-- El Segundo; `CA 90245 `
(310) 524 -2344; Fax (310) 322 -4167
www.elsegundo.org
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 1 of 17
' 1 4
1'
MO KiHOLLOW OPEECI"C PLAN 58 B�MM SPA ZONIS
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Environmental Assessment No:
Date:
'
� 0 J U
I.
BACKGROUND
1.
1 Pro ect Title:
m u Z, 710 7to,,j e .► �'.-,
2. 1 Project Location: 1 `3v i- F x ,-►, <
Z C. j e -5 -
3. 1 Angftw-t
Name (print or ty
Phone
Fax
r- f
1/0 Uq-g03q 10 5 5 7 - S
Address 1,q .5' r, eJ
Email
n k,, C
OYo
CI /St/ZI
Signature
4.
Name (print or type)
Phone
Fax
Address
Email
City/St/Zip _
Signature
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 1 of 17
' 1 4
1'
MO KiHOLLOW OPEECI"C PLAN 58 B�MM SPA ZONIS
5. Representative of applicant: (i.e., attorney, expeditor, etc.)
Name (print or type)
Address
Phone Fax
Email
Signature
Name (print or type) Phone Fax
Address Email
City/St/Zip Signature
property situated at: A a r c e A � ~ ^ � � e /`� -o e �
(Exact bgal description including Assessor Parcel Information. Pro
attachment, If necessary).
General location: S13O_J4 4 ZQnFs �..AJ asea.between
Address (Street/Avenue) (Street/Avenue)
Existing Zoning: H±j_1==d S a General Plan Land Use Designation: fn u c do,. :fl i Wd
use
II. PROJECT INFORMATION Adli4
1. Site Area: N A Bldg Area: ^' & Bldg. Height: "' /'- No. Floors: N A-
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): N
coverage by structures:_
ercent of lot
2. Total no. employees: N �" Max. per shift: Days/Hours of operation: w
3. Number of on -site parking spaces provided: A'' /4
4. Proposed construction schedul
5. Will any permits (including a Hazardous Materials
other than the City? (please explain) A
usiness Plan) be required from agencies
6. Will the project use, store, or dispose of potentially hazardous chemicals, materials, toxic
substances, flammables or explosives? (please explain) O
If yes to either 5 or 6 please describe in detail on a separate sheet.
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 2 of 17
1 U �.
7. Existing land uses of the subject site and surrounding properties:
Subject property: 3 ¢ s
North: z
East:
South:
�i►i��a. 't"7 _ .. - -� - - -- � 4� _ ` t .� n rte..._ '�- >`2rs r`ri{C,�s..`��
8. Physical Site:
Will the project modify existing natural features? A/ n
Estimated cubic yards of grading involved in the project: Cut= Fill=
9. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
participation agreement, etc.)
III. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
(e.g., financing, approval or
1. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography,
soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Describe any
existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Aft h and label photograph of
the site and surrounding area. '* e
E /_ _ ._�
& f . '7'-% e.
Jf
S r' ' �.+c .^ ' y r e n o
cJ� Tr►� Ci v -e,c S C1 �.
ea - 2 'Z 2 K a » s rr-t 'C ! v., el- G u k s fr (/ i 4.^
2. uescribe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any
cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial,
etc.), intensity of land use (one- family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and
scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.). JJ 1
11-C cx !` e c 1 �` S ..S� u k. /A 0 T
;S / e1 C3�L �✓"� c../iP/Cr 'f !i"
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 1 U j 3 of 17
IV. EN RONMENTAL IMPACTS
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a
"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics
❑ Biological Resources
❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials
❑ Mineral Resources
❑ Agricultural Resources ❑ Air Quality
• Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils
• Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning
❑ Noise
❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation
❑ Utilities/Service Systems
EVALUATION OF IMPACTS
❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance
❑ Population/Housing
❑ Transportation/Traffic
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except " No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information
sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the
referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project
outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project - specific factors as well
general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project - specific screening anal;
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as projec
level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. The checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less
than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If
are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." You must describe
mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequat
analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the
following:
a. Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the
mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address s
specific conditions for the project.
6. Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages %
the statement is substantiated.
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 4 of 17
iU4
7. Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited
in the discussion.
8. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
ISSUES
_.... A brief-written explanation is required for all of your responses to the following questions except tnose cnecxea -140 itttpacr': - Your
responses must be keyed to the corresponding question (e.g. a response to the fast question should begin with "I a" followed by your
narrative response).
iI)J
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 5 of 17
Issues:
Less than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
al. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑
b). Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
❑
c). Substantially degrade the existing visual character
or quality of the_ site and surroundings?
d). Create a new source of substantial light or glare
that would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
❑
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether
Impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental
Effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural
Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared
By the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model
To use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.
Would the project:
a). Convert Prime Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
Pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
Agricultural use?
❑
b). Conflict with existing zoning or agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
❑
c). Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use?
❑
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria
Established by the applicable air quality management or air
Pollution control district may be relied upon to make the
Following determinations. Would the project:
a). Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
❑
b). Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑ lg
E31 E3
❑ ❑
❑ ❑
❑ ❑ C�
❑ ❑ Cd
❑ ❑ M
a ❑ r�l
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 6 of 17
Issues:
Less than
Significant
Potentially With
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
c). Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region
nonattainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds
for ozone precursors)?
d). Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e).' Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people? 0 O
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a). Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
0
13 f3'
O
o �
b).
Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish
/
and Wildlife Service?
❑ ❑ Li
c).
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
Interruption, or other means?
O 0 0
d).
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?
0 O O CB'
e).
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy
/
or ordinance?
0 O p'
f).
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
Conservation plan?
1
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 7 of 17
wo
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 8 of 17
Less than
Issues:
Significant
Potentially With
Less Than
Significant Mitigation
Significant No
Impact Incorporated
Impact Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a).
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of
❑ ❑
❑ �/
the Public Resources Code?
b).
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of
❑ ❑
❑
the Public Resources Code?
-—�
c)
paleontological
resource ors site unique geologic feature?
❑ ❑
❑
d).
Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
C3 ❑
❑ [�
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a).
Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
i). Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as defined
on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist
for the area or based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
[3 ❑
(3 Q
ii). Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑ ❑
(3
iii). Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑
❑ IQ
iv). Landslides?
❑ (3
❑
0
b).
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
O ❑
c).
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on-or off -site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
13 ❑
❑
d).
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B
/
of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
❑ (3
❑
e).
Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
❑ ❑
❑
wo
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 8 of 17
Issues: Less than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the
project:
a). Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous
materials? ❑ CI ❑
VIII.
b). Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the vrelease of hazardous material into
the environment?
c). Emit hazardous emissions or handle or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school?
d). Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e). For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people working in the project
area?
f). For a project within the vicinity of a private air strip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g). Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h). Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a). Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b). Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate
of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which
would not support existing land use or planned uses for
which permits have been granted?
b 13 13
❑ ❑ ❑
No
Impact
!12
F6. a
❑ ❑ ❑ 01
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑.
❑ ❑ ❑ Ekl
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ r3'
❑ ❑ ❑ C�' n
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 9 of 17
Issues:
IA
0
Less than
Significant
Potentially With
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
c).
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would result in
❑
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site?
❑
d).
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or off -site?
❑ ❑
Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage
system or provide substantial additional sources or
❑
polluted runoff?
❑
fl,
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
❑ ❑
g).
Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
❑ ❑
h).
Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which
❑
would impede or redirect flood water?
❑
i).
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as
❑
a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
❑
j).
Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
❑ ❑
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a).
Physically divide an established community?
❑ ❑
b).
Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
[3 ❑
environmental effect?
c).
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
❑ ❑
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a).
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
❑ ❑
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
D e�
❑ MX
❑
13 211/
o U/
a �
❑ Q
❑ 0/
o �
o 12r/
o erl
o a/
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 10 of 17
b). Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? 13 ❑ ❑
c). Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ❑ ❑ ❑
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 11 of 17
Less than
Issues:
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
b).
Result in the loss of availability of locally - important
/
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
❑
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
C3 ❑
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a).
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan
�
� � -- � _ � �
ordinance, br applicable standard of other
or noagencies?
b).
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
❑ ❑ M"'
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
❑
c).
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in vicinity above levels existing without the
the project
13
project?
d).
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
❑ 13
without the project?
13
e).
For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to
❑
excessive noise levels?
C3 ❑
f).
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in
❑ ❑
the project area to excessive noise levels?
13
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a).
Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension
0/111"
[3
of road or other infrastructure)?
13 ❑
b). Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? 13 ❑ ❑
c). Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ❑ ❑ ❑
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 11 of 17
Issues:
Less than
Significant
Potentially With
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a). Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any of the
_Public services:..,
Fire protection?
❑
Police protection?
❑
Schools?
❑
Parks?
❑
Other public facilities?
❑
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a). Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
[3
b). Does the project include recreation facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
❑
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a). Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections?
❑
b). Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
❑
c). Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
❑
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
❑
Fl
0
❑
o �
a �
❑ t ❑
❑ ❑ i3
❑ ❑
�1
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant 0uestionnaire 12 of 17
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 13 of 17
Less than
Issues:
Significant
Potentially
With
Less Than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
d).
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
0
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e).
Result in inadequate emergency access?
l7
fl.
Result in inade q uate parking capacity?
0
g).
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
alternative transportation (e.g., bus
supporting
�
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a).
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
0
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
O
b).
Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
0
significant environmental effects?
c).
Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant
E3
0
environmental effects?
d).
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
C3�
new or expanded entitlements needed?
e).
Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
C�
commitments?
f).
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity
d"I"
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
13
g).
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
z
regulations related to solid waste?
D
0
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 13 of 17
Issues:
Less than
Significant
Potentially With
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a). Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or �.
prehistory? 13 E3
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
od /-- ---1 --
b). Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future ❑ 0 0
projects.)
c). Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, 0
either directly or indirectly? O O
Ps' IVA
mr,
i i i A
City of El Segundo initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 14 of 17
OWNER'S AFFIDAVIT
I, We ---NM (BABBS _ being duly sworn depose and say that I/We am the OWNER of the
property involved in this application and that I/We have familiarized myself (ourselves) with the rules and
regulation of the City of El Segundo with respect to preparing and filing this application and that the foregoing
statements herein contained and the information on documents and all plans attached hereto are in all respects
true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and belief.
Signature Date
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )
County of Los Angeles )ss.
On this day of July 20 10 before me, the undersigned Notary Public
in and for said County and State, personally appeared ?MATT CMS known to me to be the
person whose name i 5 subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me
that he /executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
ELIZABETH C. SRS R
NOTARY PUBLIC - CAUFORNIA
COMMISSION # 1734836 e
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
My Comm. Exp. April 26, 2011
9,
C FLA-,
Notary Publild in and for said County and State
i
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 15 of 17
I hereby authorize _
understand that this
correspondence.
—Owner's Signature
AGENT AUTHORIZATION
to act for me /us in all matters relevant to this application. I
person will be the exclusive contact on the project and will be sent all information and
AGENT AFFIDAVIT
1, We MATT CRABBS being duly sworn depose and say that I/We am the AGENT of the
property involved in this application and that i/We have familiarized myself (ourselves) with the rules and
regulation of the City of El Segundo with respect to preparing and filing this application and that the foregoing
statements herein contained and the information on documents and all plans attached hereto are in all respects
true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and belief.
July 1 2010
Signature Date
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )
County of Los Angeles )ss.
On this day of July 2010 , before me, the undersigned Notary Public
in and for said County nd State, personally appeared 'ITT S known to me to be the
person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me
that he /od executed the same. .
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
ELIZABETH C. SROUR
NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA
COMMISSION # 1734835 E
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
My Comm. Exp. April 25, 2011
City of El Segundo Initial Study Applicant Questionnaire 16 of 17
/8
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
,& FNDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Special Orders of Business
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding a public hearing related to the Proposition
218 majority protest ballot process for Residential Trash Collection. (Fiscal Impact: Up
to $560,700 in annual savings if the fee is imposed. )
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Open the Public Hearing.
2. Receive all written and verbal testimony regarding the proposed fee increases,
including receiving written protest ballots.
3. Close the public hearing;
4. Take no further action until the Council is presented with the protest ballot results at
the February 1, 2011 Regular City Council Meeting.
Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
October 5, 2010 Staff Report
October 19, 2010 Staff Report, including Resolution No. 4689 for Proposition 218
Procedures
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: $
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s):
ORIGINATED BY: Stephanie Katsouleas, Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY: Mark Hensley, City
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City Ma
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
Proposition 218 Process
On October, 5, 2010, the City Council directed staff to initiate the Proposition 218 ballot protest
procedure regarding establishing fees for residential trash collection. On October 19, 2010, the
City Council adopted Resolution 4689 amending the City's existing procedures for the mailing,
handling and counting of Proposition 218 ballot protests to include residential trash collection
services fees. As highlighted in prior staff reports, Proposition 218 requires that property owners
and customers be provide notice and an opportunity to protest the imposition of trash fees, or
11"1 )
increases thereof, at least 45 days prior to the time that the City Council holds a public hearing to
consider the imposition of the fee. If a protest is lodged on behalf of a majority of the properties
for which the fee is proposed, the City cannot impose the fee.
On November 5, 2010 the City mailed notices to more than 3700 parcel owners and renters
(where appropriate) of one and two unit residential properties that the City may impose fees for
residential trash services and the basis for such fees. Due to the omission of the word "monthly"
in the original materials mailed out, an additional postcard was mailed on December 3, 2010
clarifying that the rates presented were in fact monthly proposed rates. The postcard also
identified the new hearing date and clarified that the protest process only applied to one (1) and
two (2) unit residential properties. The public hearing was noticed for 7:00 p.m., January 18,
2011.
There are 2876 one and two unit residential properties in the City. Accordingly, to successfully
protest the establishment of residential trash collection fees, 1439 property owners must return
their ballots as instructed and prior to the close of the public hearing.
Tabulating of the Ballots
Given the number of ballots that have been received, the Clerk's Office estimates that it will take
approximately 7 days to tabulate the ballots. The Clerk's Office intends to tabulate the ballots
generally between the hours of 8 A.M. and 4 P.M. commencing on January 19, 2011 and
continuing until such time as the process is completed. Based upon staffing limitations and
unforeseeable circumstances (staff absences, other priority requests made of the Clerk's Office,
etc.), the schedule and timing of the tabulation may be altered. The Clerk's Office will use its
best efforts to post any changes to the tabulation schedule on the door of the City Clerk's Office
and on the exterior glass wall located directly South of the Council Chambers and adjacent to
Main Street.
February 1, 2011 Council Meeting
At the February 1, 2011 Council Meeting, the Council will be presented with a resolution
certifying the results of the protest ballot process. If there is not a majority protest, the Council
will then consider whether or not to impose fees for residential trash service. Staff also
anticipates presenting the recommendations of the Trash Subcommittee and seeking Council
direction regarding future trash collection options, whether to bid or renegotiate the current trash
agreement and whether to continue providing free trash service to three and four unit residential
properties.
11�
ITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: October 5, 2010
EL SEGUNDO C
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to approve the preliminary Proposition 218 documents
and direct staff to commence the Proposition 218 protest procedures regarding
implementation of residential trash (solid waste) collection fees. (Fiscal Impact: $20,000
for ballot mailing; Potential Fiscal Impact = Approximately $560,700 annual trash
collection revenue.)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Approve notice to residents regarding proposed residential trash collection fees and
protest ballot language.
2. Determine and approve a schedule for mailing proposed notices and protest ballots
and public hearing date to tabulate protest ballot results and consider imposing
residential trash collection fees.
3. Adopt a resolution amending the procedures for mailing, handling and counting of
Proposition 218 protest ballots to include trash (solid waste) fees.
4. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
Proposed Resolution
Draft Notice to Parcel Owners and Protest Ballot for Proposed Residential Trash
FISCAL IMPACT: Budget Adjustment Required
Amount Budgeted: $
Additional Appropriation: Yes $20,000
Account Number(s):
ORIGINATED BY: Stephanie Katsouleas, Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY: Mark Hensley, City Attorney
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City Manager
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
The City of El Segundo currently provides weekly residential trash collection services free of
charge to approximately 4475 residential properties (residential properties with four or less
units). These services are currently funded using General Fund monies at an annual cost of
$560,700 (or about $10.44 per property per month per unit). Residential properties with more
than four units and commercial /industrial properties coordinate and pay for their own refuse
collection but can participate in City- sponsored waste collection events and services (e.g., e-
waste, recycled tires, document shredding, green waste drop off) at no charge.
1 1 �1
On September 7, 2010, Council directed staff to prepare Proposition 218 rate notices and protest
ballot materials regarding recovering fees associated with trash collection for residential
properties. In order for the City to consider passing through residential trash collection fees, a
Prop 218 ballot protest process must be undertaken. This process includes, at a minimum:
• Identifying the monthly amount(s) that would charged to residents for weekly trash
collection services for a period not to exceed five years from the date that rates are first
imposed;
• Adopting a resolution amending the procedures for mailing, handling and counting Prop
218 protest ballots to include solid waste fees;
• Conducting a public hearing to tabulate protest ballot and take public testimony regarding
the potential collection of residential trash fees; and
• Consideration of adopting trash fees if a majority of the property owners do not protest
the proposed trash rates.
Once all the necessary ballot materials are approved and mailing commences, the protest ballot
period must run a minimum of 45 days before the council can hold the public hearing. City
Council will then conduct a public hearing to tabulate the protest ballots received and determine
whether to implement a trash collection fee. Because the City's current contract with
Consolidated Disposal Services will expire on July 31, 2011, the fee structure proposed
incorporates current rates as well as anticipated increases based on the new contract to be
awarded next year. Actual fees passed on to residents after August 1, 2011 will depend on the
contract rate obtained ugh when hee protest ballot effect, but will not exceed the maximum the actual cost of providing the service.
amount approved through p
Proposed Rate Structure
The proposed fee structure identified below is structured into two phases. The first phase will
recuperate approximately $46,719 monthly in General Fund expenditures for residential trash
collection services through July 31, 2011 (under the existing trash contract).
Current Rate (effective through July 31, 2011)
$560,700 Annual Residential Collection Contracted Amount:
4475 Total Number of Homes Served:
$10.44 Total Monthly per Service Address (flat rate):
The second phase will recuperate General Fund expenditures based on a new trash contract,
which becomes effective August 1, 2011. For the notice to residents, staff recommends that
Council determine and approve a future "not to exceed" fee for residential trash collection
services that fully or partially covers expenditures incurred after August 1, 2011. Actual annual
fees would be based on the rate(s) secured in the upcoming five year contract, but would not
exceed the proposed cap set by City Council for the five year duration of this protest ballot
process. In setting these future rates, staff recommends City Council consider two alternative fee
structures, as follows:
i�.0
Anticipated Future Rate (effective August 1, 2011)
Alternative 1: Set collection fees equally for all residents served. Some cities charge a
basic flat rate for residential trash collection services regardless of the amount generated,
whether the service is manual or automated. For example:
Hermosa Beach $11.57
Torrance $28.16
Lawndale $15.19 (2010 rate)
Manhattan Beach $13.74 (through May, 2011)
Alternative 2: Establish a tiered rate structure according to amount of waste generated.
To encourage recycling and thereby minimize the amount of residential waste going to
landfills, some cities have implemented a tiered rate structure, effectively charging each
residential account a trash collection fee based on the size and number of carts used. For
example:
Hawthorne $18.86 for a 65 -gal cart
$22.06 for 95 -gal cart
Santa Monica $31.61 for a 68- gallon cart
$40.82 for a 95- gallon
Lawndale (2011) $9.35 for a 35- gallon cart
$13.35 for a 60- gallon cart
$17.35 for a 90- gallon
Manhattan Beach New trash RFP includes a tiered rate structure for
(June 2011) 35 -, 64- and 96- gallon containers, effective
Current Fee: Through $10.44 N/A N/A N/A
July 1, 2011
Proposed "Not to
Exceed" Fee: August 1, $16.00 $12.00 $16.00 $20.00
2011-2016
*Additional trash carts would be at an additional cost. For example, a second 65- gallon cart could be an
additional $4.00.
Proposition 218
In November 1995, the California electorate approved Proposition 218 that requires certain
procedures be followed with regard to "property- related" fee increases imposed by governmental
agencies. Trash collection fees are subject to a Proposition 218 "majority protest" ballot process
��l
that provides that if a majority of the residents in the City protest the proposed rate increase the
City cannot impose the increase.
Just as there initially was some disagreement between lawyers and court decisions regarding
which fees were subject to Proposition 218, there is currently a disagreement with respect to the
protest ballot process. Specifically, there is a disagreement amongst attorneys that represent
public agencies (and potentially between the language approved by the voters and some recent
legislation) as to whether tenants that pay for fees covered by Proposition 218 must be afforded
the opportunity to protest proposed fee increases. A couple of years ago the state legislature
attempted to clarify this issue by passing legislation that on its face requires that tenant
customers be afforded the opportunity to protest such fee increases. The City Attorney's Office
believes the legislation is not consistent with Proposition 218 and believes it is potentially invalid
since the language in Proposition 218 stated that the notice regarding the protest process must be
sent to the "record owner" and the owner was the person that had the right to file the protest. In
this particular case where neither record owners nor tenants are currently paying for the service,
it is not possible for the City to know whether the property owner or tenant will be paying for the
service.
Despite the City Attorney's Office opinion on this matter, staff and the City Attorney agree that
the most conservative approach is to send the protest ballots to property owners and to the extent
the property owner's mailing address (as identified on the County Assessor's tax rolls) is
different from the actual property address that will be receiving the trash service, that a ballot
also be mailed to the parcel address receiving the service. The City is only required to count one
protest per parcel. Accordingly, even if both the owner and tenant file a protest, only one protest
shall be counted for purposes of determining whether there is a "majority protest" as described
below.
Proposition 218 requires that the City provide all properties receiving the service for which the
fee is charged (in this case, trash collection services) with a minimum of 45 days written notice
prior to Council holding a public hearing on a proposed rate increase. The property owners (and
now tenants) have the ability to "protest" the proposed rate increase until the close of the public
hearing. If a majority of the parcels file written protests with the City prior to the close of the
public hearing, Proposition 218 states that the City cannot implement the proposed fee. If a
majority of the parcels do not protest the proposed increase, the Council has the authority to
implement the proposed rate increase.
In accordance with Proposition 218 requirements, several steps have been taken to comply with
the law, including the preparation of a draft Notice to Parcel Owners of a Proposed Rate
Increase, Notice of a Public Hearing (date to be determined), and a Schedule of Proposed Trash
Collection Service Fees. Staff will be prepared to produce the required notices and mail them
out to all property owners by November 8, 2010.
Finally, staff recommends that Council adopt the attached resolution for purposes of amending
the current rules and regulations regarding the process for distributing, processing and counting
protest ballots for purposes of including solid waste fees. The current rules and regulations only
apply to water and wastewater fees as the City did not collect trash fees when the rules and
regulations were adopted. The rules and regulations are consistent with Proposition 218
legislation relating to Proposition 218 and the process outlined above. For example, it states
who will be sent notices and ballots, which department at the City is responsible for receiving
i4 ) C)
and storing the ballots, the process for counting the ballots, and a process by which replacement
ballots may be requested.
Potential Fiscal Impact
Staff believes that the proposed rates will result in full or nearly full recovery of costs associated
with providing residential trash collection services, thereby reducing the General Fund liability
by more than $550,000 annually.
��3
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to adopt a resolution amending the City's exisiting
procedures for mailing, handling and counting of Proposition 218 protest ballots to
include residential (solid waste) trash collection service fees. (Fiscal Impact: None)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Adopt a resolution amending the City's' existing procedures for mailing, handling and
counting of Proposition 218 protest ballots to incude residential trash collection
service fees.
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
Proposed Resolution
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: $
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s):
ORIGINATED BY: Stephanie Katsouleas, Director of Public Works
REVIEWED BY: Mark Hensley, City Attorney
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City Manager
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
The attached resolution proposes to amend the existing the procedures for mailing, handling and
counting Proposition 218 protest ballots to include residential trash collection services. When
the procedures were originally adopted by the Council the City did not charge for trash collection
services, so the procedures were only applicable to water and wastewater fees.
The procedures are intended to implement the intent of Proposition 218 with regard to allowing
property owners, and pursuant to legislation utility customers, the opportunity to file written
protests with regard to proposed utility fee increases. The procedures set forth, among other
things, the process by which ballots are to be sent out and processed when they are returned.
A key part of the procedures is that property owners or customers must utilize the ballot that is
provided by the City. Unlike traditional elections, there is no process by which the City can
verify signatures with regard to those casting protest ballots. Thus, in order to provide some
controls in to the process and some degree of confidence that those actually protesting the
proposed fees are either qualified property owners or customers the City requires that the forms
provided by the City be used. These protest ballots are marked with Los Angeles County
Assessor Parcel Numbers ( "APN ") based upon the latest information available from the County
and are mailed to the property owner and the customers. Since the ballots are mailed directly to
addresses identified on the Assessor's tax rolls and /or to the property itself there is a degree of
confidence that the person that signs and returns the protest ballot is actually qualified to do so.
Without this control process the Clerk's office would have to spend potentially excessive
resources to determine whether protests were validly filed. Additionally, since it is possible that
the property owner and customer are not the same individual but only one protest is counted per
parcel, and given that both ballots would contain the same APN, the Clerk's office can
electronically determine very quickly whether a protest has already been filed for the property
and not improperly include a protest vote in the tabulation. It should be noted that in the event a
property owner or customer requests a replacement protest ballot, one willed be mailed so long
as a protest has not already been received for the property.
Ballot materials for residential trash fees were previously approved by City Council on October
5, 2010 and will be mailed to property owners on November 5, 2010. Once mailing commences,
the protest ballot period must run a minimum of 45 days. City Council will then conduct a
public hearing on December 21, 2010 to count all protest ballots received and determine whether
to implement a trash collection fee.
��J
RESOLUTION NO. 4189
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL
SEGUNDO ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR INCREASING
WATER, SOLID WASTE AND WASTEWATER FEES IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF PROPOSITION 218
The Council of the City of El Segundo does, resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. On July 24, 2006, the California Supreme Court confirmed that charges for
water, solid waste and wastewater services are subject to Proposition 218
procedures (Bighorn- Desert View Water Agency v. Verjil (2006) 39 Cal.0
205);
B. The City Council anticipates that there will be potential future imposition of
fees or increases in water, solid waste, and wastewater rates. Adopting the
policies and procedures set forth in this Resolution will help implement the
requirements set forth in Article XIIID of the California Constitution and
help ensure that the rights of those persons that are authorized to protest
service charges are preserved;
C. Elections Code § 4000(c)(9) provides that any protest ballot proceeding
required or authorized by California Constitution Articles XIIIC or XIIID
may be conducted wholly by mail. In the event a protest ballot process is
required, the City Council seeks to achieve higher awareness of those
affected by the proposed increase, provide an orderly protest process for both
those receiving the ballots and the City, insure to the extent practicable that
there is some verification process regarding the protests received, and to
reduce the costs of the protest ballot process; and
D. Adopting this Resolution is in the public interest for the reasons set forth
above and as further stated within Article XIIID and the Proposition 218 and
state legislation relating to the implementation of Proposition 218.
SECTION 2: The City Council adopts the procedures set forth in this Resolution for
conducting all proceedings required by California Constitution Article XIIID for utility
fee (as defined below) increases. Where no specific procedures are imposed by Article
XIIID or the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act (Government Code §§ 53750,
et seq.), the procedures set forth in this Resolution apply. This Resolution may be
referred to as the "Proposition 218 Protest Proceedings Resolution" and shall amend and
supersede Resolution No. 4613
SECTION 3: Definitions. Unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the
Page 1 of 6
context, the following definitions govern the construction of the words and phrases used
in this Resolution. Words and phrases not defined by this chapter will have the meaning
set forth in California Constitution Article XIIID or the Proposition 218 Omnibus
Implementation Act.
A. "Act" means the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act found at
Government Code §§ 53750, et seq.;
B. "Article 131)" means California Constitution Article XIIID, § 6;
C. "Manager" means the City Manager or designee;
D. "Property owner" has the same meaning set forth in Article 13D and also
pursuant to the Act includes tenancies of real property where tenants are
directly liable to pay the proposed water, solid waste, or wastewater fee or
charge;
E. "Protest" means a written protest filed with the City Clerk in accordance with
Article 13D, the Act, and this Resolution as described in Article 13D, §
6(a)(2);
F. "Utility fee" means a fee or charge imposed for water, solid waste, or
wastewater services provided to customers in accordance with the El
Segundo Municipal Code ( "ESMC "), and other applicable law, by the City of
El Segundo;
SECTION 4. Administration of Proceedings. The City Manager, or designee, is
authorized to implement this Resolution in a manner consistent with the California
Constitution and other applicable law.
SECTION 5. Notice. Notice of a proposed utility fee increase is provided as follows:
A. In general, the City will identify the record property owner(s) of each parcel
to which the utility fee would be applied from it's billing system database
and/or the latest equalized tax roll produced by Los Angeles County. The
City's Utility Billing database and the equalized tax roll is presumptive
evidence of ownership of the land for voting purposes.
B. If either the City's Utility Billing Database or Los Angeles County
Recorder's website shows that more than one property owner has an interest
in a parcel, all property owners (each property owner) must receive notice at
the address shown for the property owner. Both property owners and parties
financially responsible for paying the fee will be provided notice. In the
event that a notice is being sent for a service that the City is not currently
charging any fee for, the notices shall be sent to the property owner based
upon the Los Angeles County Recorder's website and to the street address to
Page 2 of 6
i�t
which the service will be provided if the address is different than the address
designated for the property owner on the Los Angeles County Recorder's
website.
C. The notice must be sent by first class mail at least forty -five (45) days before
the date set for the public hearing on the utility fee.
D. The form of the notice of hearing will be approved by the City Council and
be on file with the City Clerk.
E. The notice provided by these procedures, in accordance with Article 13D,
supersedes and is in lieu of notice required by any other statutes to levy or
increase a utility fee.
F. The City Clerk, or designee, may certify the proper mailing of notices by an
affidavit which constitutes conclusive proof of mailing in the absence of
fraud.
G. Failure of any person to receive notice does not invalidate the proceedings.
SECTION 6. Protests against Utility Fee Increases.
A. The property owner(s) of parcels subject to the proposed fee increase are entitled
to a single protest for each parcel. When a parcel is held as community property
or in joint tenancy or as a tenancy in common, any spouse or joint tenant or tenant
in common is presumed to have authority to cast a protest on behalf of such
parcel.
B. if the owner(s) of the property desire to designate a particular owner as the person
authorized to cast the protest for such parcel, they may file with the City Clerk, at
any time before the commencement of the public hearing or the date of the
election, as the case may be, a written authorization of such designation, signed
by all the owners of record, and acknowledged in the manner that deeds of real
property are required to be acknowledged to entitle such deeds to be recorded in
the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office.
C. Executors, administrators, and guardians may cast a protest on behalf of the estate
represented by them. If such representatives are shown on the latest assessment
roll as paying taxes and assessments on behalf of the property owner(s), that fact
establishes the right of such representative(s) to cast a protest. If such
representatives are not shown on the latest assessment roll, the representatives
may file with the City Clerk, at any time before the commencement of the public
hearing, or the date of the election, as the case may be, certified copies of the
written documentation establishing the legal representation.
D. The protest of any public or quasi- public corporation, private corporation, or
Page 3 of 6
unincorporated association may be signed by any person so authorized in writing
by the board of directors or trustees or other managing body thereof.
E. The Manager is designated as the voting representative with respect to City -
owned property.
F. In any case where the documentation provided to the City Clerk in is
ambiguous or unclear, the City Attorney will determine whether the
documentation is adequate for the purpose provided.
G. In the event a property owner loses or misplaces a protest ballot, upon
request by the property owner the City will send by first class mail a
replacement protest ballot unless a properly filled out protest ballot has
already been received for the parcel of property.
SECTION 7. Public Hearing.
A. Only protest ballots that (i) were provided by the City to the property owner
in the form approved by the Council and (ii) are properly filled out and
legibly signed by an eligible property owner is made will be counted as a
valid protest. Only one protest shall be counted for each parcel of property
regardless of the number of protests filed by property owners for the parcel.
B. The City Clerk must stamp each written protest the date and time it is filed
with the City Clerk for purposes of establishing whether the protest was filed
before the close of the public testimony portion of the public hearing. No
protest received after the close of the public testimony portion of the public
hearing can be counted in determining the amount of protest, but the Council
may, in its discretion, consider such protests in making its decision. Written
protests may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the conclusion of the
public testimony portion of the public hearing.
C. At the time and place fixed for the hearing, or at any time to which the
hearing is adjourned, the Council must:
1. Hear all persons interested in the matter of the proposed fee
increase;
Hear all objections, protests or other written communications from
any owner of property subject to the proposed utility fee; and
3. Take and receive oral and documentary evidence pertaining to the
proposed fee increase.
Page 4 of 6
4. The hearing may be continued from time to time, as the Council
determines necessary to complete its consideration of the proposed
fee increase.
If the Council determines, at the close of the public testimony
portion of the public hearing, that votes were received from
property owners representing a majority of the parcels subject to
the proposed fee increase, the Council shall adopt a resolution
setting forth the results of the protest ballot process and the
proceedings shall then be closed and the utility fee cannot be
approved by the City Council.
6. If the Council determines at the close of the public testimony
portion of the public hearing that written protests were not received
from property owners representing a majority of the parcels subject
to the proposed utility fee, the Council shall adopt a resolution
setting forth the results of the protest ballot process and then may
by Ordinance change the utility fee so long as in an amount that
does exceed the amount and methodology set forth in the public
notices sent to the property owners.
SECTION 8. Environmental Review. This Resolution is exempt from review under the
California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et
seq., "CEQA ") and CEQA regulations (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et
seq.) because it establishes rules and procedures to implement government funding
mechanisms; does not involve any commitment to a specific project which could result in
a potentially significant physical impact on the environment; and constitutes an
organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical
changes in the environment. Accordingly, this Resolution does not constitute a "project"
that requires environmental review (.see specifically 14 CCR § 15378(b)(4 -5)).
SECTION 9. If any part of this Resolution 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 Resolution are severable.
SECTION 10. Repeal of any provision of the El Segundo Municipal Code, or other
Resolution, does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude
prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this
Resolution'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
Resolution.
SECTION 11. The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this
Page 5 of 6
Resolution; and cause it to be entered into the City of El Segundo's book of original
Resolutions.
This Resolution will take effect immediately day following its final passage and
adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of October 2010 .
BfiEi usch, ayor
ATTEST:
Cindy Mort en, City Clerk
�
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Mark ftensley, City Attorney
Page 6 of 6
iJ�
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding Adoption of the Resolutions updating the employer's
contribution under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act for the El Segundo Fire
Fighters' Association, the El Segundo Police Officers' Association, the El Segundo City
Employees' Association, the El Segundo Police Support Services Association, and the El Segundo
Supervisory and Professional Employees' Association. Fiscal Impact: Active Employees:
$31,600; Retirees $32,600.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Adopt the Resolutions
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. Proposed Resolutions
FISCAL IMPACT: $64,200
Amount Budgeted: $4.571 million
Additional Appropriation:
Account Number(s):
ORIGINATED BY: Marth ijkstra, Human Resources Manager
REVIEWED BY: Deborah Cullen, Director o
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City Manager
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
The City files with the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) the annual Resolutions reflecting
changes in the City's contribution for employees and annuitants under the Public Employees Medical and
Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA).
Pursuant to Government Code Section 7507, employers are required to obtain the services of an actuary to
prepare future annual cost impact results and make these results available at a public meeting at least two
weeks before implementation of benefit changes. The fiscal impact for this agenda item was disclosed at the
December 21, 2010 Council meeting. Staff is now bringing the Resolutions to Council for adoption.
The City of El Segundo contracts the services of Actuary John Bartel of Bartel Associates, LLP. Mr. Bartel
has provided the City with actuarial analyses and valuation reports for a number of years. In accordance
with Government Code 7507, Mr. Bartel previously conducted an actuarial analysis for the City which
included a health insurance component.
Changes in the contribution amounts are as follows:
Employee Group
City Employees Association
Firefighters Association
Police Officers Association
Police Support Services Emp. Assoc
Supervisory & Professional Association
2010 Contribution
$970.77 /month
$1045.13 /month
$1045.13 /month
$970.77 /month
$1070.25 /month
2011 Contribution
$1096.36 /month
$1177.3 8 /month
$1177.3 8 /month
$1096.36 /month 13
$1136.27 /month
The City's maximum contribution for the retirees in all of these groups is the same as for active, represented
employees.
The budgeted amounts for Fiscal Year 2010 -2011 are $2.0 million for retiree health and $2.571 million for
active employees and the incremental cost increase was included in the adopted FY 2010 -2011 budget.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION
UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL
CARE ACT FOR THE EL SEGUNDO FIREFIGHTERS'
ASSOCIATION
The City Council of the City of El Segundo does resolve as follows:
Section 1: The City Council finds as follows:
A. Government Code § 22892(a) provides that a local agency contracting under the
Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act shall fix the amount of the
employer's contribution at an amount not less than the amount required under
Section 22892 (b)(1) of the Act, and
B. The City of El Segundo, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency is local agency
contracting under the Act for participation by members of the El Segundo
Firefighters' Association.
Section 2: The employer's contribution for each employee or annuitant shall be the
amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of
his /her family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $1177.38 per
month, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund Assessments.
Section 3: The City of El Segundo has fully complied with any and all applicable
provisions of Government Code Section 7507 in electing the benefits set forth above.
Section 4: The City Clerk is directed to certify the Passage and Adoption of this
Resolution, enter same in the Book of Original Resolutions, and make a Minute of its
adoption in the City's records and in the Minutes of the meeting when it was adopted.
Section 5: The Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption, and
will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January , 2011.
Eric K. Busch,
Mayor
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify
that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the
foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed and adopted by said City Council,
approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, all at a regular
meeting of said Council held on the 18`h day of January, 2011, and the same was so
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this day
of 92011.
Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
of the City of El Segundo,
California
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
Karl H. Berger
Assistant City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION
UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL
CARE ACT FOR THE EL SEGUNDO POLICE OFFICERS'
ASSOCIATION
The City Council of the City of El Segundo does resolve as follows:
Section 1: The City Council finds as follows:
A. Government Code § 22892(a) provides that a local agency contracting under the
Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act shall fix the amount of the
employer's contribution at an amount not less than the amount required under
Section 22892 (b)(1) of the Act, and
B. The City of El Segundo, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency is local agency
contracting under the Act for participation by members of the El Segundo Police
Officers' Association.
Section 2: The employer's contribution for each employee or annuitant shall be the
amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of
his /her family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $1177.38 per
month, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund Assessments.
Section 3: The City of El Segundo has fully complied with any and all applicable
provisions of Government Code Section 7507 in electing the benefits set forth above.
Section 4: The City Clerk is directed to certify the Passage and Adoption of this
Resolution, enter same in the Book of Original Resolutions, and make a Minute of its
adoption in the City's records and in the Minutes of the meeting when it was adopted.
Section 5: The Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption, and
will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January , 2011.
Eric K. Busch,
Mayor
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify
that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the
foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed and adopted by said City Council,
approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, all at a regular
meeting of said Council held on the 18th day of January, 2011, and the same was so
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this day
of , 2011.
Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
of the City of El Segundo,
California
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
By:
Karl H. Berger
Assistant City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION
UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL
CARE ACT FOR THE EL SEGUNDO CITY EMPLOYEES'
ASSOCIATION
The City Council of the City of El Segundo does resolve as follows:
Section 1: The City Council finds as follows:
A. Government Code § 22892(a) provides that a local agency contracting under the
Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act shall fix the amount of the
employer's contribution at an amount not less than the amount required under
Section 22892(b)(1) of the Act, and
B. The City of El Segundo, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency is local agency
Contracting under the Act for participation by members of the City Employees'
Association.
Section 2: The employer's contribution for each employee or annuitant shall be the
amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of
his /her family members in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $1096.36 per
month, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund Assessments.
Section 3: The City of El Segundo has fully complied with any and all applicable
provisions of Government Code Section 7507 in electing the benefits set forth above.
Section 4: The City Clerk is directed to certify the Passage and Adoption of this
Resolution, enter same in the Book of Original Resolutions, and make a Minute of its
adoption in the City's records and in the Minutes of the meeting when it was adopted.
Section 5: The Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption, and
will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January , 2011.
Eric K. Busch,
Mayor
J- JS
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify
that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the
foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed and adopted by said City Council,
approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, all at a regular
meeting of said Council held on the 18t" day of January, 2011, and the same was so
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this day
of , 2011.
Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
of the City of El Segundo,
California
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
an
Karl H. Berger
Assistant City Attorney
1��1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION
UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL
CARE ACT FOR THE EL SEGUNDO POLICE SUPPORT
SERVICES EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION
The City Council of the City of El Segundo does resolve as follows:
Section 1: The City Council finds as follows:
A. Government Code § 22892(a) provides that a local agency contracting under the
Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act shall fix the amount of the
employer's contribution at an amount not less than the amount required under
Section 22892(b)(1) of the Act, and
B. The City of El Segundo, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency is local agency
contracting under the Act for participation by members of the El Segundo Police
Support Services Employees' Association.
Section 2: The employer's contribution for each employee or annuitant shall be the
amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of
his/her family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $1096.36 per
month, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund Assessments.
Section 3: The City of El Segundo has fully complied with any and all applicable
provisions of Government Code Section 7507 in electing the benefits set forth above.
Section 4: The City Clerk is directed to certify the Passage and Adoption of this
Resolution, enter same in the Book of Original Resolutions, and make a Minute of its
adoption in the City's records and in the Minutes of the meeting when it was adopted.
Section 5: The Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption, and
will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January , 2011.
Eric K. Busch,
Mayor
i(;
i L ',-;
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify
that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the
foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed and adopted by said City Council,
approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, all at a regular
meeting of said Council held on the 18th day of January, 2011, and the same was so
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this day
of , 2011.
Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
of the City of El Segundo,
California
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
Karl H. Berger
Assistant City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION FIXING THE EMPLOYER'S CONTRIBUTION
UNDER THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL
CARE ACT FOR THE EL SEGUNDO SUPERVISORY AND
PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION
The City Council of the City of El Segundo does resolve as follows:
Section 1: The City Council finds as follows:
A. Government Code § 22892(a) provides that a local agency contracting under the
Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act shall fix the amount of the
employer's contribution at an amount not less than the amount required under
Section 22892(b)(1) of the Act, and
B. The City of El Segundo, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency is a local agency
contracting under the Act for participation by members of the El Segundo
Supervisory and Professional Employees' Association.
Section 2: The employer's contribution for each employee or annuitant shall be the
amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of
his /her family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $1136.27 per
month, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund Assessments.
Section 3: The City of El Segundo has fully complied with any and all applicable
provisions of Government Code Section 7507 in electing the benefits set forth above.
Section 4: The City Clerk is directed to certify the Passage and Adoption of this
Resolution, enter same in the Book of Original Resolutions, and make a Minute of its
adoption in the City's records and in the Minutes of the meeting when it was adopted.
Section 5: The Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption, and
will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, 2011.
Eric K. Busch,
Mayor
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify
that the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the
foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed and adopted by said City Council,
approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, all at a regular
meeting of said Council held on the 18th day of January, 2011, and the same was so
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this day
of , 2011.
Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
of the City of El Segundo,
California
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
an
Karl H. Berger
Assistant City Attorney
x
N
C7
W
K
LL
O
N
Q
J
Q
O
cr
IL
I
a
LL
O
O �
Z
O IOi
0 }
Z m
� N
O J
W ¢
N �
W
LL
Oz
Z
¢
U Cc
¢
N
O
N
co
N
M
N
M
m
r
rn
en
N N
N m n N n m m N N
01 a r n M N t° m
VN 01 .- N N N N
r
❑
Z
U)
W
W
LL
W Z
❑ W Q
a
LL a 0¢
Q Z Y
H ¢ W W
z Ix
p R a
a Z 2 Z¢ Z❑ W
❑ L Z O O In
Z W K
ZO Z 2 0 Z O LL m
c7 aw
LL J V W W U Z Z cn ,
IL) i wz»
Z N¢ LL LL Q Z
z Z W w U Y
Q 2 Q O
-,Fm
E= w a❑ W W
EE
Www - z ZU Z Q ui (r xv~i N W 2
ws¢¢OOO
F - wUxJaaw�n a In
z r ¢ w m¢¢?❑ m
m >¢I- LL »gaaZct¢U ¢
❑❑ ¢ a ¢ ¢� O a w w¢ 3
❑LLf - ❑LLw ¢ Q�zi JH
LL W z Z U Z
ZZZaU§ JF¢ FUU2JJ W J
7 O W ❑ m _ Q p Z? fn W m N ¢
N
O
Uw
WILLi.HO ri.l�o.apo¢¢�aa3
w¢¢cnm�00 ¢¢i
W1- ��hwo°- '¢¢?LuU
u7a U pm ruXX�
a. LL¢ a¢ p O a O
¢ I- U rn O¢¢ O❑ F- w
c7Frna¢UaaaxxF -iLLUJ
m¢
a0?u.��c7w�3 ¢LU
0 0 0 0 0 N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
� � - .-
I
W
2
U
0l3
w
O
N
Y
U
w
x
U
O
t
C
U
�
N
m
°
N
U
a
�
N
O
Q
N
a
N
d
�
O
C
N
N
a
O
U
O
O
a
Q N
T
C
❑
v �
O1
c
o c
aci
N
«
m
E
_T
U
U N
mc
.0 p
O
_
- O
C
N
A U
�O
y a
C
N «
y O
CC U
oc U
J C U L
O
O
D
t
m
5 L
a
LU CO
�O Y
a
m y
a w °
,°y 'L
C
Z U'dw
0 °
o
Q € ° v
E
J 0 c U
N
¢
U y ..
¢
J
U LL
LL O
E
o
y 0
O
U
O r
j
m a
..E Q w
0
w
m
¢
Q O
v O p
E v E c m
i 411
W
O
Q
N
a
d
�
rn
U m c E
m
a
- m
_T
U
U N
a)
O 0 L_
IL
R o 3 v y
n
y C
N O
J C U L
y
C L U V C
N
o
E
cm T y «
a i a U
N
v
`o
aa., n
c
E v E c m
a _ co a'�
E
� a � ° E c
m
L O D y 2-2
U 'x-13 a�
D
_N
N 1E N
Q C
V
C T d
N N 3
m LL N Q N'0
w
U
N
L
a tCp
UI
_O i2 O O
T
° L «
N
W
w
mN E g
co d v N
5 E c E
m.
c
m
a U
p
U
L
Z
Z a
4
a m
=
IL ❑
i 411
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER
12/09/10 THROUGH 12/22/10
Date
Payee
Amount
Description
11/20/2010
La Salle
43,725.00
ABAG (correct prior memo)
12/9/2010
Employment Development
3,414.22
State Taxes
12/9/2010
Employment Development
48,913.16
State Taxes
12/9/2010
IRS
207,450.97
Federal Taxes
12/10/2010
State of CA EFT
1,253.07
Child support payment
12/10/2010
Nationwide EFT
67,565.55
EFT 457 payment
12/10/2010
UB
3,734.49
PARS payment
12/10/2010
Manufacturers & Traders
34,614.76
457 payment Vantagepoint
12/15/2010
Lane Donovan Golf Ptr
0.00
Payroll Transfer
12/16/2010
Cal Pers
547,199.55
Retirement
12/15/2010
Health Comp
3,157.55
Weekly claims
12/15/2010
Lane Donovan Golf Ptr
19,159.31
Payroll Transfer
12/16/2010
Cal Pers
547,199.55
Retirement
12/20/2010
La Salle
43,725.00
ABAG
12/22/2010
Health Comp
360.47
Weekly claims
12/09- 12/22/10
Workers Comp Activity
53,480.73
SCRMA checks issued
1,624,953.38
DATE OF RATIFICATION: 01/04/11
TOTAL PAYMENTS BY WIRE:
Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by:
, n
i-1-4z-L,/t0
Date
1%,111110
Date
/�J), 0
Date
1,624,953.38
Information on actual expenditures is available in the City Treasurer's Office of the City of El Segundo.
P: \City Treasurer \Wire Transfers\2010 \wire 2010 4th Qtr \Wire Transfers 12- 22.xis j' 4 `�
to
U
W
2
LL
O
cn
Q
n
N
m
N
W
N
N
N
r�
m
m
a
M O I m V w O O
� i0 tD V a 0 0 0 N
Oi t0 Oi a0 M O ui a0
m N M m t0 0) a m 0
r;c4 cd mro Nod
J
p
Z
D
LL p
LL
p w ¢
Z U w
W
LL Q ¢
Q
Z 7 > 2
y
O LL Q
Z Z z Z a p z y
w p z 0 0
^ j U Z j w 0 p I'-
p F- O
0 J LL m
Q
O
z Q W
? z w W U¢¢ Q O m
r
L) LLJ
¢¢ Z °z Z z U U¢ M F-N
LLp¢¢OOONV -rm
J LL d W fn Q (n
m 2
Z
I- wwp gz y »w ¢
L,
N ¢ F- LL= Q LL U ¢
p O W f Z Q Q Q
¢
F¢ ¢ W
OU
3
W¢¢ T Z J !-
W H H J Z U ZQ
J N F
Z Z Z d U J F ¢¢ U J J W
Z LL, ED
Q W Q
LL ¢ W_
Q O o
QU(7 <LLpQUQU7o ¢¢
FE Er
IL
IL
Wur O rii� ao.owaQ Qia3wa¢Ur<
z¢Q0 o I-
7m¢¢aa�
6 LL Q Q O
Q OOQ �xx
W< f- fn t7 O¢¢¢ O Y p W�
cr
(� F- U Q Q U a a Q 2 2 1- LL
to Q
U J Q U? LL 3 3 0 w J 3¢ W W O
Q
LL
O
W
C
F
Q
N
0
Q
Z
OD it
o
n
Y
U y c c
c
Z
7 m
ii J
a
W <
U F
N a
W P
g
LL W
U
O
ZQ
O
m O N 0
M
W O
ro
0
E
U¢ CC
a 3 y
M
m ` uq u'
m m
Q
ttl
� a
3
N
N
y
n
N
m
N
W
N
N
N
r�
m
m
a
M O I m V w O O
� i0 tD V a 0 0 0 N
Oi t0 Oi a0 M O ui a0
m N M m t0 0) a m 0
r;c4 cd mro Nod
O- l ^ - -! -- N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0
� �—NMMa�n in u�c���ornnr�
I
W
6
03
W
7
O
to
Y
U
W
x
U
O_
0
7
w
w
p
Z
D
LL p
LL
p w ¢
Z U w
W
LL Q ¢
¢ Z
Z 7 > 2
y
O LL Q
Z Z z Z a p z y
w p z 0 0
^ j U Z j w 0 p I'-
p F- O
0 J LL m
Q
aLLQQ W W ¢UZ ZN
H a Z W Z» R (w
z Q W
? z w W U¢¢ Q O m
r
L) LLJ
¢¢ Z °z Z z U U¢ M F-N
LLp¢¢OOONV -rm
J LL d W fn Q (n
m 2
Z
I- wwp gz y »w ¢
L,
N ¢ F- LL= Q LL U ¢
p O W f Z Q Q Q
��(( Z Z? M
Z� Q¢ t
F¢ ¢ W
OU
3
W¢¢ T Z J !-
W H H J Z U ZQ
J N F
Z Z Z d U J F ¢¢ U J J W
Z LL, ED
Q W Q
LL ¢ W_
Q O o
QU(7 <LLpQUQU7o ¢¢
FE Er
LL 2 o W > ¢ p Q Q
ujQ V7 QtoH¢UiF W w0O0 O
Wur O rii� ao.owaQ Qia3wa¢Ur<
z¢Q0 o I-
7m¢¢aa�
6 LL Q Q O
Q OOQ �xx
W< f- fn t7 O¢¢¢ O Y p W�
cr
(� F- U Q Q U a a Q 2 2 1- LL
to Q
U J Q U? LL 3 3 0 w J 3¢ W W O
O- l ^ - -! -- N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0
� �—NMMa�n in u�c���ornnr�
I
W
6
03
W
7
O
to
Y
U
W
x
U
O_
0
7
V
Q
W
Q
Q
C
N
co
C
Q
t
0
o
n
U y c c
c
a
N a
U)
g
!3o
o
U
m
o
i
ro
0
E
a 3 y
a
C
N
y
y O d C 0
r
C Q y
n
O
¢
d
E m o m
o
F
S•
n
j C O N
a� m c m
c
O
m
a
T
N L U U C
O
N
O
o
D
21
I
C N
o
O
ca N O
O
EvEcm
c
—
N
CD D O
A
E
m
Rt L
m
>>�
C
oy
y
v =oa,�
E
W.
O
y U E C
N
N
U
O
L
O y 22
,
'O
a JO
ca U
«
y C
¢ C w 'y
y
V
y
N
1
p
X
U
V
N
m
j N
N
d
E
L
w
v a°
m
o
p
�i
a°1i
UL
m vi S° 3
¢
o
U 'O
N
.°C
% O
oT
o
ca
C
0/
L
y
o n
C
E
w
m O 0
W
OI
wom
0
my
mU)E y
c
Q W
L
N C
ca
d y N 61
N
_
��
ncmi
o
amn' Ea
0��
�Z, € o
O a
`m
o s
E '�
5.
E c E c
v
m
H
o«
J Q E U
N N
T
U N
0.
U N U
2
W
Q J
L
O
Q
U LL
o
S
0
W O
y o
O
m a tii
W Z
.Z` p W
DO
N
¢o
II
Z Ijj
Z Q
i5
cn U
u o
II
p
u
V
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
PAYMENTS BY WIRE TRANSFER
12/23/10 THROUGH 01/06/11
Date
Payee
Amount
Description
12/16/2010
Cal Pers
(547,199.55)
Retirement correct prior memo entered 2X
12/23/2010
Nationwide EFT
62,037.06
EFT 457 payment
12/23/2010
Employment Development
3,530.55
State Taxes
12/23/2010
Employment Development
52,520.28
State Taxes
12/23/2010
IRS
217,983.80
Federal Taxes
12/24/2010
State of CA EFT
1,253.07
Child support payment
12/24/2010
LIB
3,746.17
PARS payment
12/24/2010
Manufacturers & Traders
24,824.33
457 payment Vantagepoint
12/28/2010
Lane Donovan Golf Ptr
16,248.12
Payroll Transfer
12/29/2010
Health Comp
1,180.25
Weekly claims
12/29/2010
Unum
457.80
LTD
12/29/2010
Health Comp
6,813.00
Weekly claims (SCRMA issuing ck)
12/29/2010
Employment Development
39.03
State Taxes
12/29/2010
Employment Development
515.37
State Taxes
12/29/2010
IRS
1,412.90
Federal Taxes
12/30/2010
Cal Pers
293,925.21
Retirement
12/30/2010
Nationwide EFT
3,904.27
EFT 401 payment
12/30/2010
Manufacturers & Traders
6,813.00
401 payment Vantagepoint
1/5/2011
Pitney Bowes
1,000.00
Library Postage
1/5/2011
Health Comp
2,572.44
Weekly claims
1/6/2011
Manufacturers & Traders
15,638.67
457 payment Vantagepoint
1/6/2011
Cal Pers
439,523.39
Health
12/23 - 1/06/11
Workers Comp Activity
10,877.26
SCRMA checks issued
619,616.42
DATE OF RATIFICATION: 01/18/11
TOTAL PAYMENTS
BY WIRE:
619,616.42
Certified as to the accuracy of the wire transfers by:
_h-.. 11 U I f I
Deput City easurer Date
bj&j !�q
I/10/1/
Director of 7n&L-- Date
City Mana / Date
Information on actual expenditures is available in the City Treasurer's Office of the City of El Segundo.
P: \City Treasurer \Wire Transfers\201 1 \Wire 2011 1st Qtr \Wire Transfers 01- 06.xls
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 21, 2010, 6:00 P.M.
6:00 P.M. SESSION
CALL TO ORDER- Mayor Busch at 6:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Busch
- Present
Mayor Pro Tern Fisher
- Present
Council Member Brann
- Present
Council Member Fuentes
- 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:
Mark Hensley, City Attorney, announced that Council would be meeting in closed
session pursuant to the items listed on the agenda and that the Government Code
§54956.9(b) item had been deleted from the Agenda.
CLOSED SESSION:
The City Council may move 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) -1- matter
City of El Segundo vs. City of Los Angeles, et. al. LASC Case No. BS094279
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(b): -1-
Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(c): -0- matter.
APPOINTMENT OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEE (Gov't. Code § 54957) -0- matter
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 21, 2010
PAGE NO. 1
4G
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT (Gov't Code Section 54957) — 1- matter (Request for unpaid
leave pursuant to El Segundo Municipal Code Chapter 1 -6 -20)
Position/Title: Construction Coordinator
CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54957.6): -0-
matters
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8): -0-
matters
ADJOURNMENT at 6:51 p.m.
Cathy Domann, Deputy City Clerk
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 21, 2010
PAGE NO. 2
l�� i/
REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 21, 2010 — 5:00 P.M.
5:00 P.M. SESSION CANCELLED — NO ITEMS OF BUSINESS
(REGULAR MEETING TO BE ADJOURNED TO 7:00 P.M.)
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.
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
CLOSED SESSION:
The City Council may move 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) -0- matter
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(b): -0-
Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(c): -0- matter.
APPOINTMENT OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEE (Gov't. Code § 54957) -0- matter
CONFERENCE WITH CITY'S LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54957.6): -0-
matters
CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR (Gov't Code §54956.8): -0-
matters
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 21, 2010
PAGE NO. 1
REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 21, 2010 - 7:00 P.M.
7:00 P.M. SESSION
CALL TO ORDER — Mayor Busch at 7:00 p.m.
INVOCATION — City Clerk, Cindy Mortesen
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Council Member Don Brann
PRESENTATIONS
a. Council Member Fisher presented a Commendation thanking sponsors,
supporters and volunteers for their community service and participation in the
Annual Community Christmas Dinner.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Busch
- Present
Mayor Pro Tern Fisher
- Present
Council Member Brann
- Present
Council Member Fuentes
- 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.
Herr McNuver; Resident; Spoke regarding the City budget and parking tickets.
A. PROCEDURAL MOTIONS
Consideration of a motion to read all ordinances and resolutions on the Agenda
by title only.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 21, 2010
PAGE NO. 2
MOTION by Mayor Pro Tern Fisher, SECOND by Council Member Jacobson to read all
ordinances and resolutions on the agenda by title only. MOTION PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0
B. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS (PUBLIC HEARING)
Consideration and possible action regarding (Public Hearing) the proposed
exchange of FY 2011/12 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds
totaling approximately $97,765 with another CDBG participating city within the
Los Angeles Urban County. (Fiscal Impact: $97,765).
Mayor Busch stated that this was the time and place to conduct a public hearing
regarding the proposed exchange of FY 2011/12 Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funds totaling approximately $97,765 with another CDBG participating city
within the Los Angeles Urban County.
City Clerk Mortesen stated that proper notice had been given in a timely manner and
that no communications had been received in the City Clerk's Office.
Tina Gall, CDBG Consultant, gave a report.
MOTION by Council Member Jacobson, SECONDED by Mayor Pro Tern Fisher to close
the public hearing. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE: 5/0
MOTION by Council Member Fuentes, SECONDED by Council Member Jacobson to
authorize staff to proceed with identifying an interested participating city to begin
negotiations for the exchange of FY 2011/12 CDBG funds, establish an exchange rate;
return to the City Council with a resolution authorizing the exchange of CDBG funds
with another City; and authorize the City Manager to execute the contracts, as to form
approved by the City Attorney, with the Los Angeles County Community Development
Commission, and with all sub - recipients receiving CDBG funds. MOTION PASSED BY
UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
D. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS
2. Consideration and possible action to open the recruitment process for the
positions on the Committees, Commissions and Boards ( "CCBs ") that will expire
in the year 2011. (Fiscal Impact: None)
Council consensus to direct staff to open the recruitment process for the positions on
the CCBs, as listed.
E. CONSENT AGENDA
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 21, 2010
PAGE NO. 3
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.
3. Approved Warrant Numbers 2580178 to 2580365 on Register No. 5 in the total
amount of $795,032.91 and Wire Transfers from 11/25/10 through 12/09/10 in
the total amount of $1,264,028.20. 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.
4. Approved Regular City Council Meeting Minutes of December 7, 2010.
5. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBER JACOBSON
6. Received and filed report without objecting to a new Alcoholic Beverage Control
(ABC) license for on -site sale and consumption of alcohol (Type 41 Alcoholic
Beverage Control License) at Sammy's Woodfired Pizza located at 780 South
Sepulveda Boulevard # B. (Fiscal Impact: N /A)
7. PULLED FROM THE AGENDA BY THE CITY ATTORNEY
8. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBER FUENTES
9. PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBER FUENTES
10. Waived second reading and adopted Ordinance No. 1457 amending Title 6 of the
El Segundo Municipal Code in its entirety regarding Animal Control. (Fiscal
Impact: None)
MOTION by Mayor Pro Tern Fisher, SECONDED by Council Member Brann to approve
Consent Agenda Items 3, 4, 6, and 10. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE
VOTE. 5/0
CALL ITEMS FROM CONSENT AGENDA
5. Consideration and possible action to receive and file report without objecting to a
new Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license for on -site sale and off -site
consumption of beer and wine at an existing Walgreens store, (Type 20 — Off -
sale Beer and Wine) located at 331 North Sepulveda Boulevard. Applicant:
Robert M. Silverman, Walgreens Co. (Fiscal Impact: N /A)
MOTION by Mayor Busch, SECONDED by Council Member Brann to not object to an
alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license for on -site sale and off -site consumption of
beer and wine at an existing Walgreens store, (Type 20 — Off -sale Beer and Wine)
located at 331 North Sepulveda Boulevard. MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING
VOICE VOTE: AYES: BUSCH, FISHER, BRANN, FUENTES; NOES: JACOBSON. 4/1
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 21, 2010
PAGE NO. 4
8. Consideration and possible action to approve Professional Services Agreement
No. 4110 with PBS &J, to provide environmental review services pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the 540 East Imperial Avenue -
Imperial School Site Project. (Fiscal Impact: up to $142,859 Developer
Reimbursed Trust Fund); approved a budget appropriation of up to $142,859 to
provide environmental review services; authorized the City Manager to execute a
Professional Service Agreement for environmental review services approved as
to form by the City Attorney in an amount not to exceed $142,859.
MOTION by Council Member Fuentes, SECONDED by Council Member Brann to
approve Professional Services Agreement No. 4110 with PBS &J, to provide
environmental review services pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) for the 540 East Imperial Avenue - Imperial School Site Project. MOTION
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0
9. Consideration and possible action to approve an amendment to an existing
Professional Services Agreement with Willdan to increase the amount of the
agreement by $50,000 for developer reimbursed planning services for the 540
East Imperial Avenue School Site Project for the El Segundo Unified School
District. (Fiscal Impact: $50,000) Authorized the City Manager to execute the
amendment approved as to form by the City Attorney.
MOTION by Council Member Fuentes, SECONDED by Council Member Brann to
Approve an amendment to an existing Professional Services Agreement with Willdan to
increase the amount of the agreement by $50,000 for developer reimbursed planning
services for the 540 East Imperial Avenue School Site Project for the El Segundo
Unified School District. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0
F. NEW BUSINESS
11. Consideration and possible action regarding the annual Resolutions updating the
employer's contribution under the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care
Act for the El Segundo Fire Fighters' Association, the El Segundo Police Officers'
Association, the El Segundo City Employees' Association, the El Segundo Police
Support Services Association, and the El Segundo Supervisory and Professional
Employees' Association. (Fiscal Impact: Active Employees: $31,600; Retirees
$32,600.)
Bob Hyland, Human Resources Director, gave a report.
Adoption of resolutions scheduled for January 18 2011.
G. REPORTS — CITY MANAGER
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 21, 2010
PAGE NO. 5
J ' -t
12. Consideration and possible action regarding approval of a Senior Management
Analyst position in the Human Resources Department. Budgeted savings
realized from a realignment of Department Head responsibilities to fund the new
position. (Fiscal Impact: Annual salary and benefit cost for Senior Management
Analyst $125,000. Estimated cost for FY 2010 -2011 (calculated @ 7 months) is
$87,500. Savings from Department realignment (calculated @ 9 months) is
$385,243. The net savings for FY 2010 -2011 is $ 297,743.
MOTION by Mayor Pro Tern Fisher, SECONDED by Council Member Jacobson to
approve a Senior Management Analyst position in the Human Resources Department
and approve the proposed Examination Plan. MOTION PASSED BY UNANIMOUS
VOICE VOTE. 5/0
Also thanked retiring Directors Bill Crowe and Bob Hyland for their service to the City.
H. REPORTS — CITY ATTORNEY - NONE
I. REPORTS — CITY CLERK —
Clerk Mortesen reported that she attended the League of California Cities New Law and
Elections Seminar in Monterey California.
Reminder that the January 4, 2011 Council Meeting is cancelled.
J. REPORTS — CITY TREASURER - NONE
K. REPORTS — CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Council Member Fuentes — Spoke on the retirements and the successful Holiday
Parade.
Council Member Brann — Spoke on the retirements and the cooperation of the
employees and staff during these budgetary times.
Council Member Jacobson — Spoke on the retirements throughout the City and thanked
employees for their years of service.
Mayor Pro Tern Fisher — Thanked all the retirees and the employees for all their hard
work.
Mayor Busch — Spoke on the parade and the opening of Candy Cane Lane. He also
reported on the RSI Program, and updates to the program. Thanked the retirees and
the employees.
13. Consideration and possible action regarding the annual request of Mr. S. Claus
for variances from the Municipal Code.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 21, 2010
PAGE NO. 6
Approve the request by Mr. S. Claus for a waiver of the permits required for doing
business within the City of El Segundo as follows:
1. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit and waiver of regulations in ESMC Section
15 -23 -4;
2. The use of air rights and waiver of the Santa Monica Radial 160 R procedure
(FAA should be contacted);
3. Grant a free business license for a non - profit organization (ESMC 4 -1 -7);
4. Waiver of ESMC 8 -4 -11 B (Driveway Permits Required) and ESMC 8 -5 -11
(Parking on Grades);
5. Waiver of the Noise Ordinance to permit the sound of bells (ESMC 7 -2 -3);
6. Waiver of the Trespass Ordinance (ESMC 7 -6 -3) including 6 -5 -11 dealing with
trespassing animals; and
7. Waiver of the ordinance on Animal Regulations (ESMC 6 -2 -1).
MOTION by Council Member Jacobson, SECNDED by Mayor Busch to approve the
request. MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE. 5/0
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 — NONE
CLOSED SESSION — NONE
ADJOURNMENT at 8:00 pm.
Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 21, 2010
PAGE NO. 7
i�U
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding approval of revised Class Specifications for the
classifications of Police Officer Trainee and Construction Coordinator (At- Will). Fiscal Impact:
None.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Approve the proposed Class Specifications for Police Officer Trainee and Construction
Coordinator (At- Will).
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. Class Specifications for Police Officer Trainee and Construction Coordinator (At- Will).
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: $ N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s):
ORIGINATED BY: Marthijkstra, Human Resources Manager
REVIEWED BY: Deborah Cullen, Director onance
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
In anticipation of the recruitment, testing and selection process to fill vacancies in the Police
Department and Planning and Building Safety (Residential Sound Insulation Program), staff has
determined the need to revise the class specifications for Police Officer Trainee and Construction
Coordinator (At- Will). Revisions are necessary to more accurately reflect position requirements
and assigned duties and responsibilities.
a
5i
City of El Segundo, CA
Job Description
POLICE OFFICER TRAINEE
Definition: Under close supervision, incumbents in this non - sworn, entry-level position
complete a formal, comprehensive California Peace Officer Standards and Training
(P.O.S.T.) Certified Basic Academy training program of about 26 -weeks duration and
perform other related work as required. Upon successful completion of the mandatory
policy academy, trainees may be elevated to the rank of sworn Police Officer at the
discretion of the Chief of Police.
Essential Functions: Essential functions, as defined under the Americans with
Disabilities Act, may include the following duties and responsibilities, knowledge, skills
and other characteristics. This list of duties and responsibilities is ILLUSTRATIVE
ONLY, and is not a comprehensive listing of all functions and tasks performed by
positions in this class.
Characteristic Duties and Responsibilities:
Attend scheduled training sessions; participate in physical fitness regimen as required
by Academy; learn principles, practices and theory of criminal and civil law enforcement;
learn basic criminal investigation processes and techniques, including the identification,
collection, and preservation of evidence, courtroom testimony, and witness
interrogation; learn to prepare various reports, including but not limited to vehicle
reports, crime reports, suspect information reports, and missing persons reports; learn
to respond to radio and computer messages and calls for service; learn techniques to
make arrests as necessary; learn to investigate crimes, traffic collisions, and suspicious
activities; learn to interview victims, complainants and witnesses; learn to detain and
interrogate suspects; learn to analyze situations and make decisions appropriately
under stressful situations; learn to collect and preserve evidence; learn to testify and
present evidence in court; learn to direct traffic, including regulation of vehicle flow at
times of emergency or congestion; learn to stop drivers who are operating vehicles in
violation of laws and issue citations as necessary. May be required to work shifts,
weekends or holidays.
Knowledge, Skills and Other Characteristics:
Ability to communicate effectively, orally and in writing; ability to read and interpret
complex technical documents; ability to understand and carry out oral and written
instructions; ability to observe, record, and recall pertinent facts and details; ability to
adopt quick, effective and reasonable courses of action, giving due regard to
surrounding hazards and circumstances; ability to learn and apply proper and
appropriate use of force techniques; ability to perform strenuous physical activities; Skill
in establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with the members of the
public, the community, co- workers and superiors; Skill in using a personal computer.
5s
Police Officer Trainee
Minimum Qualifications:
High School Diploma, pass the General Education Development test indicating high
school graduation level, pass the California High School Proficiency Examination, or
have attained a two -year, four -year, or advanced degree from an accredited college or
university.
Candidates who have successfully completed a full -time California P.O.S.T Certified
Basic Police Academy or currently attending an Academy (with a ranking within the top
25 percentile of their class) May be allowed to substitute their academy training in lieu of
having to attend the City's mandatory academy. The decision is at the sole discretion of
the Chief of Police.
Licensing /Certification Requirements: Must possess a valid California Class "C"
Driver's License.
Age: Must be a minimum of 20'2 years of age at the time of the written test.
Special Requirements:
• Be a citizen of the United States or a permanent resident alien who is eligible for
and has applied for citizenship.
• Must be of proportional height to weight, be physically able to handle the rigorous
duties of police work; possess normal hearing and color perception, minimum
vision of 20/100 in each eye, correctable to 20/20;
• Prior to appointment, candidates must successfully complete a polygraph test,
psychological and medical examination, and an extensive background
investigation process.
• Smoking and /or the use of tobacco products on or off duty are prohibited as a
condition of employment.
• Any visible tattoo(s), body art and /or body piercings are prohibited while
performing department duties.
01/18/11
F?
City of El Segundo, CA
CONSTRUCTION COORDINATOR
(At -Will)
Job Description
Definition: Under general supervision, oversees and coordinates work performed by internal
and external staff, consultants, and contractors related to the City's Residential Sound Insulation
Program (RSI) and provides professional management and administrative support.
Essential Functions: Essential functions, as defined under the Americans with Disabilities Act,
may include the following duties and responsibilities, knowledge, skills and other characteristics.
This list of duties and responsibilities is ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY, and is not a comprehensive
listing of all functions and tasks performed by positions in this class.
Characteristic Duties and Responsibilities:
Positions in this classification typically perform a full range of duties at a level of complexity
represented by the following types of responsibilities:
• Monitors, coordinates and facilitates work of external consultants and contractors.
Manages and administers construction contracts including reporting on performance of
contractors and consultants.
• Inspects and reviews project sites, construction schedules, change orders, and
construction quality of occupied homes participating in the Residential Sound Insulation
Program.
• Coordinates and facilitates administrative and /or management functions including
accounting, purchasing and related activities for the RSI Program. Administers
designated contract and grant- funded program activities. Participates in the
development of program, grant and /or contract goals and objectives.
• Participates in budget development and preparation for federal grants. Monitors and
analyzes budget related activities.
• Leads or participates in committee activities; represents the City and /or a department
and coordinates activities among City departments, agencies and organizations, and the
community; may serve as coordinator, facilitator and point of contact. Conducts research
and statistical analyses; prepares and presents reports of findings and
recommendations.
• Responds to inquiries from contractors, other City employees and the public regarding
the City's RSI program. Provides public and media relations for programs and advisory
committees, including developing and producing promotional and information materials.
• May provide administrative and management assistance to City executives,
management, other City personnel and the public regarding administrative, fiscal or
operational issues, and other policies and procedures.
(continued on reverse side)
1/18/11 U
Construction Coordinator (At -Will)
May provide professional -level staff support to City committees, boards and other
groups, including coordinating meeting schedules and agendas, facilitating meetings
with contractors, sub - contractors, consultants and /or the public; represents the City at
meetings and commits the department to a course of action; may coordinate and
facilitate Citywide functions and events.
Knowledae Skills and Other Characteristics:
• Knowledge of principles of municipal organization and administration.
• Knowledge of organization and functions of the assigned department.
• Knowledge of computer applications in administrative functions.
• Knowledge of laws, ordinances and regulations governing residential construction and
funding of the Residential Sound Insulation Program.
• Knowledge of principles of research, statistical analysis and report preparation.
• Knowledge of construction management.
• Skill in performing complex professional administrative and analytical work.
• Skill in interpreting and applying laws, ordinances and policies governing residential
construction and funding of the Residential Sound Insulation Program.
• Skill in conducting research, analyzing statistical and other data, and preparing and
presenting reports.
• Skill in providing information and explaining laws, policies and procedures to others.
• Skill in communicating effectively orally and in writing.
• Skill in establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with other City
employees and the public.
Licensina /Certification Requirements:
A valid California Driver's license is required.
Workina Conditions:
Typical office environment and exposure to environmental conditions presented at community
businesses, homes and other locations. Field work includes inspection of construction sites,
warehouses, storage facilities, and occupied homes under construction. Regularly requires
climbing ladders (and possibly scaffolding), walking on roofs, crawling under houses and into
attic spaces.
Qualifications:
A Bachelors degree in Construction Management or a closely related field, and four (4) years of
increasingly responsible program administration and /or management experience; or an
equivalent combination of education and experience. Experience managing, supervising and /or
inspecting residential construction is highly desirable.
1/18/11
�l
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to adopt a resolution approving a list of capital projects
recommended for Measure R Highway Program funding and authorize the City Manager
to execute all documents necessary for the administration of projects funded through
Measure R.
(Fiscal Impact: Approximately $4.4 million reimbursement of Measure R grant funds
under Phase 1.)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Adopt the attached resolution.
2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
Resolution
City of El Segundo Project list for Phase 1 and 2
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Requested: $
Additional Appropriation: No
Account Number(s):
ORIGINATED BY: Maryam M. Jonas, Principal Engineer
V
REVIEWED BY: Stephanie Katsoleas, Public Works Director%
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City Manage6i
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
Measure R and the South Bay Highway Program
Measure R is a one -half cent sales tax approved by Los Angeles County voters in November,
2008 to meet the transportation needs of Los Angeles County. One component of Measure R is
the South Bay Highway Program (SBHP), which will provide approximately $906 million (in
2008 dollars) over 30 years for much needed investments to improve the operation of I -405, 1-
110, 1 -105 and SR -91 corridors in the South Bay. The scope of eligible investments also
includes local arterial, signal synchronization and park- and -ride projects that can demonstrate a
significant operational improvement (nexus) to the state's highway systems identified above.
The South Bay Measure R Highway Program is a cost - reimbursement program and has no
matching fund requirements. Staff time in project development and construction oversight is also
reimbursable
;612
Measure R Funded Capital Projects
The SBCCOG, in conjunction with its Infrastructure Working Group, developed a list of projects
eligible for SBHP funds and categorized them into two phases based on readiness and cost
considerations., The Phase 1 "Early Action Program" (EAP) list includes 40 projects and totals
approximately $145 million in requests for the first five years of the SBHP. The City of El
Segundo submitted three (3) projects for consideration under Phase 1 for a total of $4.4 million
and one (1) project for Phase 2 consideration for total $37 million. Additionally, El Segundo
along with Los Angeles County, Hawthorne and the City of Los Angeles submitted a multi -
jurisdiction capacity improvement project for Aviation Boulevard for an estimated cost of $61.8
million. Projects have up to five years to be completed once funds are awarded in any particular
fiscal year.
The SBCCOG has requested that the City Council of each city with projects on the EAP confirm
its commitment to the projects by approving the attached resolution. The resolution
demonstrates to Metro that each project's lead agency concurs in the funding application and is
committed to implementing the project in a timely manner. Metro will oversee distribution of
Measure R funds and as such will enter into a project - specific Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) with each participating lead agency that will establish project schedules and cost
estimates. As required by Metro, each project will be entered into the SBCCOG's Measure R
Program/Project Management System (PPMS) for tracking during the course of project
development and construction. The Measure R Highway Program is a cost - reimbursement
program subject to annual audit requirements by Metro.
�b3
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SOUTH BAY MEASURE R HIGHWAY
PROGRAM EARLY ACTION PROJECT LIST.
The City Council of the city of El Segundo does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. The Measure R Expenditure Plan as approved by the voters of Los Angeles
County in November 2008 will provide approximately $906 million (in 2008
dollars), or roughly $1.4 billion in inflated dollars, over 30 years for much needed
ramp and interchange investments to improve the operation of I -405, I -110, I -105
and SR -91 in the South Bay;
B. As a result of collaborative efforts involving the South Bay Cities Council of
Governments ( SBCCOG), its member jurisdictions, the Infrastructure Working
Group (IWG), Caltrans and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation
Authority (L.A. Metro), the scope of eligible investments also includes local
arterial, signal synchronization and park- and -ride projects that can be
demonstrated to have a significant operational nexus to the state highway system;
C. That same collaborative effort has resulted in the identification of an "Early
Action Program" of over 40 projects totaling approximately $145 million to be
implemented in the first five years of the South Bay Measure R Highway
Program, as listed in Attachment 1 to this resolution;
D. The City is identified as being the Lead Agency for implementation for a number
of the Early Action Program projects, as listed in Attachment 2 to this resolution;
and
E. Additional projects listed in Attachment 3 to this Resolution, and incorporated by
reference, are included so that they are eligible to be considered by the SBCCOG
for Measure R funding in the future on a case -by -base basis in the event a
funding shortfall develops.
SECTION 2: The City Council supports and endorses the Early Action Program of projects to
be implemented in the first five years of the South Bay Measure R Highway Program. The City
Manager, or designee, is authorized to take such reasonable actions as may be required to
implement the intent of this Resolution.
SECTION 3: The City Council takes this action with the understanding that, for each Measure
R funded project for which the City is the lead agency, it will be required by L.A. Metro to enter
into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with L.A. Metro which will establish the project
schedule, cost estimate and budget and that each project will be entered into the SBCCOG's
Measure R Program/Project Management System (PPMS) for tracking.
1 fJ 'Y
SECTION 4: The City Council endorses and commits to making every good faith effort to
complete each project for which it is the Lead Agency pursuant to the schedule as set forth in the
MOU, but in any event within the period ending five years after a MOU for the project is
executed. The City Council understands that the Measure R Highway Program is a cost -
reimbursement program subject to annual audit requirements by L.A. Metro.
SECTION 5: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will
remain effective unless superseded or repealed.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2011.
Eric Busch, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Karl H. Berger,
City Attorney
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
1, , City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, California, do hereby certify that the whole
number of members of the City Council of said City is five; that the foregoing Resolution No.
was duly passed and adopted by said City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor 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 2010, and the same was so passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
City Clerk
O
r rt
CD S
to
CD
n
L N
C C
y fD
n
O =
O �
m �
N �
CD
C
a o
O ca
3
_a
m
v
a.
s
a
3
m
m
N
Q
N
N
N
d
3
O
SU
O
0
N
n
C
N
O
7
O
N
O
O
I
-1
CA
O
�T
W
3
CD
N
C
1
N
rF
1
O
N
O�
M
1
O
1
Q1
3
n
as
c�
co
O
N
v
bs
m o
n�
3 N
3
cr
CD
a
m
v
co
:i
g
N_
N
N_
3
m
m
N
Q
N
N
N
N
3
0
0
(1)•
0
c
W
0
R
0
P
N
0
LM
,1
N
0
POL
W
I<
N
C
m
X
r-
0
ca
3
M
1I0^
Vi
wnw,
i)
rIlL
,(D
W
0
N
i i7
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding approval of a an agreement between the City
of El Segundo, West Basin Municipal Water District ( WBMWD), and El Segundo
Energy Center (ESEC) for construction of a recycled water pipeline (RW) and a potable
water pipeline (PW) for additional water services to ESEC.
(Fiscal Impact: None)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
Approve an agreement between the City, WBMWD and ESEC.
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement, in a form approved by the
City Attorney, related to the design, permit, finance, and construction of the water
pipelines by WBMWD for water services to ESEC.
3. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
Agreement with WBMWD
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Requested: $
Additional Appropriation: No
Account Number(s):
ORIGINATED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
APPROVED BY:
Maryam M. Jonas, Principal Engineer
Stephanie Katsoleas, Pub Works Director
Jack Wayt, City Manag i
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
The use of recycle water (RW) is an essential water conservation measure which reduces the
amount of potable water usage. The City of El Segundo and WBMWD work together to promote
the delivery and use of recycle water (RW) which now accounts for almost half of the City's
water usage.
The use of recycle water was implemented into the California Energy Commission (CEC) permit
for the new highly efficient replacement power plant at ESEC. The CEC permit requires that
both potable and recycle water pipelines be constructed as part of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) review for such lines. WBMWD will design and construct the plant, the
PW pipeline and the RW pipeline in accordance with the Agreement to be completed by
December of 2012. The new system will make available up to 520 acre -feet of recycle water per
��V
year to ESEC. The El Segundo Energy Center will pay for the cost associated with the design
and construction of the proposed work. The City will provide the metering facilities for the
potable and recycle water. The project management team will coordinate the construction
activities to minimize impact to the City residents and businesses.
The Assistant City Attorney reviewed and approved the proposed Agreement. Staff recommends
the approval of the agreement allowing WBMWD to design and construct the facilities to
provide both recycle and potable water to ESEC.
M
CONTRACT RELATING TO
DELIVERY OF RECYCLED WATER
TO CITY OF EL SEGUNDO AND ESEC
This Contract (the "Agreement ") is entered into as of January 24, 2011 by and
among West Basin Municipal Water District, a California Municipal Water District
(hereinafter "West Basin "), El Segundo Energy Center LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company ( "ESEC ") and the City of El Segundo, a general law city and municipal
corporation (hereafter "CITY "). Where any of the aforementioned parties is referred to
in the context of this Agreement, it will also refer to any and all agents, subsidiaries or
subdivisions of that party related to the performance of this Agreement.
RECITALS
A. Whereas, ESEC proposes to construct and operate an electric power generation
facility in CITY's jurisdiction; and
B. Whereas, the use of recycled water in Southern California is desirable to reduce the
dependency upon imported supplies, and to increase the overall reliability of water
supplies to the region and, more specifically, CITY; and
c. Whereas, the CITY and WEST BASIN desire to reduce the demand for imported
water and substantially increase the usage of recycled water; and
D. Whereas, West Basin is the producer / wholesaler of recycled water; and
E. Whereas, the CITY purchases recycled water from West Basin for resale to retail
customers such as ESEC; and
F. Whereas, CEC License requires ESEC to use recycled water for process water use
for its new repowering project as described in CEC docket AFC- 00 -14; and
G. Whereas, ESEC (or its affiliates owning the El Segundo Generating Station) must
purchase recycled water from CITY for use at the El Segundo Generating Station in
compliance with CEC docket 00- AFC -14; and
H. Whereas, the CEC License requires that both recycled and potable water pipelines
be constructed as part of this project (the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) review for such lines is included in the CEC License); and
Whereas, West Basin intends to provide additional recycled water service to ESEC
according to the specifications within this Agreement; and
J. Whereas, West Basin will design, permit, finance, construct, own and operate the
Plant -and the recycled water pipeline ( "RW Pipeline ") in accordance with the
requirements of the CEC License, to enable ESEC to use a significant quantity of
recycled water; and
K. Whereas, West Basin will design, permit, finance, and construct a potable water
pipeline ( "PW Pipeline ") to allow for additional potable water service to ESEC from
CITY; and
L. Whereas all parties agree to cooperate fully with one another to pursue completion
of the project contained within this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, West Basin, CITY, and ESEC agree as follows:
1) AGREEMENT
A) West Basin shall design and construct the Plant, the PW Pipeline, the RW
Pipeline and the Discharge System in accordance with this Agreement. CITY
shall provide the RW Metering Facilities and the PW Metering Facilities which will
be installed by West Basin as part of the construction of pipelines. ESEC will
repay West Basin for the design, permitting, and construction of the Plant, the
PW Pipeline, the RW Pipeline and the Discharge System as a monthly Capital
Recovery payment.
2) DEFINITIONS
A) Capital Costs — the actual cost to plan, design, construct and permit the Capital
Facilities.
B) Capital Facilities —the Plant, the RW Pipeline, the PW Pipeline and the Discharge
System, each as more fully described on Exhibit 2.
C) CEC License — collectively, (i) the Commission Decision approving construction
and operation of the El Segundo Power Redevelopment Project dated as of
February 2, 2005, and (ii) the Commission Decision approving the Petition to
Amend the El Segundo Power Redevelopment Project dated as of June 30,
2010. See CEC Docket 00- AFC -14.
D) Commencement Date — the date upon which West Basin is first available for
commercial delivery to ESEC of recycled water from the Plant.
E) Discharge System — piping system and appurtenances constructed for the
disposal of waste water streams from the Plant.
F) Fixed Monthly Capital Recovery Charge — fixed payments made monthly from
ESEC to West Basin to reimburse West Basin for Capital Costs, as set forth on
Exhibit 5.
G) Improvements — the Capital Facilities, the RW Metering Facilities, the PW
Metering Facilities and the On -Site Piping.
H) On -Site Piping - a piping system and associated control equipment and
instrumentation within ESEC's site as necessary and required to receive and
permit use of the recycled water from West Basin and potable water from the
CITY.
1) Plant — expansion of West Basin's Edward C. Little Water Treatment Facility to
include water treatment facilities and appurtenances to supply microfiltration and
to produce reverse osmosis recycled water to ESEC.
J) PW Metering Facilities — metering facilities for the PW Pipeline, shut -off valves
on both ends of the meter, and the meter vault located at ESEC's east property
line at 301 Vista Del Mar, El Segundo, CA 90245, as shown on Exhibit 3, or at
such other location mutually agreed by the parties.
K) Project Management Team — a committee comprised of representatives from the
CITY, ESEC and West Basin as described in Section 13.
L) PW Pipeline — pipeline and appurtenances constructed to convey potable water
from CITY facilities to the customer (ESEC) site.
M) RW Metering Facilities — metering facilities for the RW Pipeline, shut -off valves
on both ends of the meter, and the meter vault, located at ESEC's east property
line at 301 Vista Del Mar, El Segundo, CA 90245, as shown on Exhibit 3, or at
such other location mutually agreed by the parties.
N) RW Pipeline — pipeline and appurtenances constructed to convey recycled water
from existing West Basin recycled water distribution facilities to the customer
(ESEC) site.
O) Term — shall have the meaning set forth in Section 12(A).
3) PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTIES
A) West Basin agrees to:
i) Secure capital funding for the design, permitting and construction of the
Capital Facilities;
i�4
ii) Design, permit and construct the Capital Facilities as listed in Exhibit 1
(Schedule and Alignment) by November 30, 2012;
iii) Produce and make available recycled water to CITY for resale to ESEC by
November 30, 2012 (or alternative water supply); and
iv) Cooperate with CITY and ESEC toward completion of their respective
responsibilities within this Agreement including inspection and approval by
Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (LA DPH).
B) CITY agrees to:
i) Design, permit and construct RW Metering Facilities and the PW Metering
Facilities as listed in Exhibit 1 (Schedule and Alignment) of this Agreement by
November 30, 2012;
ii) Approve alignment of RW Pipeline and PW Pipeline to be constructed by
West Basin;
iii) Purchase recycled water from West Basin for resale to ESEC, read meters,
report recycled water meter readings to West Basin, and invoice ESEC for
potable and recycled water;; and
iv) Cooperate with West Basin and ESEC toward completion of their respective
responsibilities within this Agreement.
C) ESEC agrees to:
i) Design, permit and construct On -Site Piping as listed in Exhibit 1 (Schedule
and Alignment) of this Agreement by November 30, 2012;
ii) Design, permit and construct potable water pipelines within the ESEC
property to distribute potable water delivered by the CITY as listed in Exhibit
1(Schedule and Alignment) by November 30, 2012;
iii) Configure and construct infrastructure to create and implement a back -up
supply of water in case of unscheduled disruption or reduction to recycled
water supplies;;
iv) Purchase recycled water from CITY for use in production of electrical power;;
v) Pay Fixed Monthly Capital Recovery Charge to West Basin;
vi) Secure any required approvals from Los Angeles County Dept of Public
Health relating to the use of recycled water; and
vii) Cooperate with West Basin and CITY toward completion of their respective
responsibilities within this Agreement.
4) IMPROVEMENTS
A) Pipelines
i) West Basin will design, permit and construct the RW Pipeline by November
30, 2012. Such construction is a prerequisite to delivery of recycled water
under this Agreement. West Basin shall design and construct the RW
Pipeline in accordance with Exhibit 1 (Schedule and Alignment) and West
Basin's Pipeline Construction Standards and other requirements identified in
the CEC License.
ii) West Basin will design, permit and construct the PW Pipeline by November
30, 2012. West Basin shall design and construct PW Pipeline in accordance
with City of El Segundo Potable Pipeline Standards, and other requirements
identified in the CEC license.
B) Reverse Osmosis Recycled Water Facilities - West Basin will design permit, and
construct the Plant and the Discharge System in accordance with plans,
specifications, applicable regulations (including CEC license), codes and
ordinances, and commonly accepted water supply industry standards.
C) On -site Piping - ESEC will design the On -Site Piping as necessary and required
to receive and permit use of the recycled water from West Basin. ESEC will
construct the On -Site Piping in accordance with plans, specifications, applicable
regulations (including the CEC License), codes, and ordinances and ESEC's
engineering standards and specifications.
D) CITY will provide the RW Metering Facilities and the PW Metering Facilities in
accordance with applicable laws and regulations for installation by West Basin
during pipeline construction.
E) Permitting Responsibility. West Basin will obtain permits and environmental
approvals (not otherwise covered by the CEC License) for design, construction
and operation of the Capital Facilities. CITY will obtain permits and
environmental approvals (not otherwise covered by the CEC License) for design,
construction and operation of the RW Metering Facilities and the PW Metering
Facilities. ESEC will obtain permits and environmental approvals for design,
construction and operation of the On -Site Piping.
F) Progress Reports - From time to time during the design; and on a monthly basis
once construction starts, West Basin shall deliver project progress reports to the
ESEC and CITY Project Managers. The project progress report shall include a
cost control report that shall state the actual expenditures to date and projections
for future expenditures. Reports shall include updates or proposals for any
scope change of the project. ESEC shall have right to agree or approve
milestone dates and costs for Capital Facilities listed in Exhibit 2 and will provide
monthly updates on On -Site Piping progress, to be incorporated into West
Basin's monthly report.
G) Additional Facilities. ESEC may wish to construct additional facilities
appurtenant to, or in addition to the On -Site Piping or may wish to substitute for
equipment and materials of greater value. ESEC shall pay for the costs of such
additional facilities or substitutions prior to purchase and installation of the
Capital Facilities.
5) EASEMENT FOR METERING FACILITIES
A) ESEC will provide CITY an easement for the RW Metering Facilities and the PW
Metering Facilities asreasonably requested and identified by the Public Works
Director or designee.
6) SCHEDULE AND COMMENCEMENT DATE
A) Obligation to Timely Complete Piping in Public Right -of -Way
i) West Basin shall exercise commercially reasonable efforts to complete
construction of, and place into operation, the Capital Facilities in compliance
with the schedule in Exhibit 1 (Schedule and Alignment). The parties
mutually agree to cooperate and to provide reasonable support for each other
in order to minimize delay in the performance of their respective obligations.
B) Obligation to Timely Complete On -Site Piping
i) ESEC shall exercise commercially reasonable efforts to complete
construction of the On -Site Piping and receive necessary regulatory
approvals in order to take delivery of treated recycled water for use in the
energy generation process by November 30, 2012. However, any delay by
West Basin in placing the Capital Facilities into operation in compliance with
the schedule specified in Exhibit 1 (Schedule and Alignment), shall extend
ESEC's obligation to complete construction of the On -Site Piping beyond
November 30, 2012 on a day for day basis, and shall similarly extend West
r� i�
Basin's ability to declare the Commencement Date pursuant to Section 6(C)
below on a day for day basis.
C) Commencement Date - within 30 days after the Commencement Date, West
Basin will deliver a written notice to ESEC and CITY specifying the
Commencement Date.
D) In the event of ESEC discontinuing recycled water use for any reason, with
resulting increase of potable water consumption by ESEC, then;
i) ESEC must notify City of termination as soon as practicable,
ii) City will invoice ESEC for any penalties, fees, or other costs associated with
increased potable water use, and
iii) ESEC must pay invoices from City within 30 days.
7) OPERATION
A) Operation of Improvements
i) West Basin shall own, maintain and operate the Plant, Discharge System,
and RW Pipeline. West Basin shall obtain permits necessary and bear the
cost, expense and responsibility for the disposal of the Plant's waste water
streams. West Basin may contract with CITY or third parties to provide such
maintenance and operation, but shall be responsible for the work. West
Basin shall maintain such Improvements in good working condition.
ii) CITY shall own, maintain and operate the PW, the PW Metering Facilities,
and RW Metering Facilities. CITY shall maintain such Improvements in good
working condition.
iii) ESEC shall own, maintain and operate the On -Site Piping. ESEC shall
maintain such Improvements in good working condition.
iv) Maintenance and Operations Communications - Following the
Commencement Date, the Project Management Team shall confer at least
quarterly, or more often as needed, for purpose of scheduling maintenance
and planned shutdowns of the Plant, the Discharge System, the On -Site
Piping, the PW Pipelines, the RW Pipeline, the PW Metering Facilities or the
RW Metering Facilities. The Project Management Team shall coordinate
maintenance and operating activities and minimize disruption of the other
parties' operations.
B) Damage or Destruction or Loss of Plant and Other Improvements.
i) Plant, Discharge System and Pipelines - West Basin shall repair or replace
any damage to, or destruction of the Plant, Discharge System or Pipelines
arising from West Basin's negligence or of the negligence of the operator of
the Capital Facilities. West Basin shall also carry insurance or provide self
insurance covering such losses. In the event of casualty or loss, damage or
destruction of any of the Capital Facilities, West Basin shall apply any
insurance proceeds received (after first consulting with ESEC) solely for the
purposes of either reducing the unamortized amount of the Fixed Capital
Charges, or for reconstructing and repairing the damaged or destroyed
portion of the Capital Facilities.
ii) On -Site Piping. ESEC shall repair or replace any damage to or destruction
of the On -Site Piping arising from ESEC's negligence or of the negligence of
the operator acting on behalf of ESEC. ESEC shall also carry insurance or
provide self insurance covering such losses. In the event of casualty loss,
damage or destruction of the On -Site Piping, ESEC shall apply insurance
proceeds received to reconstruct and repair the damaged portion of the On-
Site Piping System, or to construct a functional equivalent.
iii) Metering Facilities. CITY shall repair or replace any damage to or destruction
of the PW Metering Facilities or the RW Metering Facilities arising from
CITY's negligence or of the negligence of the operator acting on behalf of
CITY. CITY shall also carry insurance or provide self insurance covering
such losses.
C) Maintenance. At all times, West Basin shall, operate the system and perform
maintenance in a manner to minimize the negative impact upon deliveries to
ESEC. If any such operational change or maintenance practice is to be
implemented that will have even temporary impact on delivery of recycled water
quantity, or quality, West Basin shall provide sufficient advance notify to ESEC
such that it can anticipate and prepared for the disruption.
D) Metering and Calibration Rights. The quantities of recycled water sold and
delivered hereunder shall be determined by measurements taken by meters
installed at the RW Metering Facilities. Such meters shall be maintained and
calibrated by CITY in accordance with AWWA standards, and shall be tested and
calibrated at least annually. The results of such calibrations shall be furnished to
the parties. If there is a dispute about the accuracy of any meter, a party may
request that the meter be calibrated by an independent engineer or consultant
experienced in such calibrations. The parties may have representatives present
and observing at the time of recalibration. If the meter is in error by more than
two per cent (2 %), CITY shall pay for its recalibration. If the meter is in error by
more than five per cent (5 %), then charges paid on the basis of that meter's
readings back to the date of the most recent recalibration shall be adjusted to
correct the erroneous billings due to meter error.
8) WATER SUPPLY AND QUALITY
A) Quality. West Basin shall construct and operate the Capital Facilities to
produce recycled water meeting or exceeding the standards set forth within
Exhibit 4, Water Quality.
B) Supply.
i) West Basin shall construct and operate Capital Facilities to produce and
deliver up to 525 acre -feet (AF) of recycled water annually and a peak
demand of up to 325 gallons per minute (GPM). The supply of recycled water
may be interrupted on occasion due to scheduled maintenance by West
Basin, failure of facilities, interruption of electrical power, or by force of nature.
ii) ESEC shall arrange with either the City of Manhattan Beach or the City of El
Segundo to provide a back up supply of potable water to supplement /
replace recycled water in case of disruption to the recycled water supply. Any
facilities required to implement this supplemental supply shall be contracted,
funded, and constructed by ESEC separate from this Agreement.
iii) Should the flow of recycled water to ESEC be interrupted by planned
maintenance by West Basin or failure of West Basin facilities, West Basin will
use its best efforts to restore service as quickly as possible and will reimburse
ESEC for the difference in water commodity expense incurred to replace the
interrupted flow.
iv) Should the flow of recycled water be interrupted through no fault of West
Basin, West Basin will use its best efforts to restore service as quickly as
possible but suffer no liability for the difference in water commodity expense
1-L U
incurred to replace the interrupted flow.
v) If West Basin has recycled water available in excess of the amounts
described in Section 8(B)(i) above, West Basin shall promptly notify ESEC,
and ESEC shall have the right to purchase all or any portion of such excess
available recycled water at the applicable commodity rate.
vi) If West Basin wishes to further expand its reverse osmosis water treatment
facilities, West Basin shall promptly notify ESEC, and ESEC shall have the
right to purchase all or any portion of the incremental recycled water
produced on terms substantially similar to those set forth herein.
9) PURCHASE OF OUTPUT
A) General. West Basin shall make available up to 524.2 acre -feet per year of
recycled water meeting the standards and specifications set forth in Exhibit 4,
(Water Quantity and Quality Specifications). Failure to take or purchase the full
quantity of recycled water within this Agreement shall not relieve ESEC of the
obligation to pay the Fixed Monthly Capital Recovery Charge in addition to the
variable commodity charges associated with any partial amount of recycled water
taken. ESEC may, but shall not be obligated to, purchase any output of the Plant
not meeting the standards and specifications set forth on Exhibit 4 hereof.
B) Deficient Quality & Quantity. West Basin shall immediately undertake remedial
measures if the Plant output contains quantities of minerals in excess of the
maximum amounts listed on Exhibit 4 (a "Water Quality Deficiency ") or the Plant
output falls below 325 GPM (a "Water Quantity Deficiency "). The following
remedies are available to ESEC:
i) Compensation for a Water Quality Deficiency or Water Quantity Deficiency. If
a Water Quality Deficiency or Water Quantity Deficiency is not corrected
within 30 days from the date of ESEC's notice to West Basin, West Basin
shall compensate ESEC to the extent ESEC can demonstrate direct operating
cost impacts as a result of such Water Quality Deficiency or Water Quantity
Deficiency. The resulting compensation will be retroactive to the date of
ESEC's notice to West Basin and will continue until the Water Quality
Deficiency or Water Quantity Deficiency is remedied. ESEC may continue to
purchase recycled water from the Plant.
ii) Termination of Agreement - If a Water Quality Deficiency or Water Quantity
1 1
Deficiency has not been corrected within a period ending 24 months from the
date of ESEC's notice to West Basin, ESEC may either: (a) continue to
purchase recycled water from the Plant with compensation from West Basin
in accordance with Subsection 9 (B)(i); or (b) give written notice to West
Basin declaring ESEC's intent to terminate this Agreement. Effective upon
receipt of such notice, this Agreement shall be terminated, and ESEC shall
have no further obligation to West Basin, other than that set forth in
Subsection 9(C).
C) West Basin Opportunity to Cure and Reinstate Agreement Following
Termination. Notwithstanding ESEC's exercise of its option to terminate
pursuant to Subsection 9(B)(ii) above, this Agreement may be reinstated at
ESEC's option, if West Basin can modify or alter the Plant to such configuration
that the Plant can deliver the contracted for quantities of water meeting the
quality specifications set forth in Exhibit 4, (Water Quantity and Quality
Specifications) to ESEC within a period of not more than 48 months following
ESEC's notice of termination. If ESEC so elects, then upon the completion of
such modification or alteration, each party shall perform its obligations under this
Agreement for the remainder of the Term, so long as the Plant continues to
deliver water meeting the quality and quantity specifications of this Agreement.
10)CAPITAL COSTS
A) General. West Basin shall pay for the actual cost of design and construction of
the Capital Facilities, the PW Metering Facilities, and the RW Metering Facilites,
including permits necessary for construction. ESEC shall pay for the cost of
design and construction of the On -Site Piping.
B) Payment of Fixed Monthly Capital Recovery Charge by ESEC to West Basin
i) Fixed Monthly Capital Recovery Charge — the Fixed Monthly Capital
Recovery Charge shall amortize the Capital Costs at West Basin's weighted
cost of capital by applying West Basin's average cost of capital factor
(0.008673525) to such Capital Costs as set forth in Exhibit 5 (Fixed Capital
Charges). Example: For a Capital Cost of $10,000,000 the Fixed Monthly
Capital Recovery Charge would be ($10,000,000) times [(0.008673525)]
which equals [$86,735.25] per month.
ii) Fixed Monthly Capital Recovery Charge Invoice - West Basin shall invoice
ESEC on the 1 0th of each month following the Commencement Date
(regardless of whether ESEC has completed construction of the On -Site
Piping) for the Fixed Monthly Capital Recovery Charge. ESEC shall pay such
invoices on or before the 10th of the following month.
C) Purchase Option for Plant Capacity Rights. ESEC may prepay the Fixed
Capital Charges in accordance with this Sectionat any time. For purposes of
calculating the remaining portion of Fixed Capital Charges under this Agreement,
the remaining portion of the Fixed Capital Charges shall be equal to the amount
shown in Exhibit 6 (Early Termination and Payment). Upon such prepayment of
the remaining portion of the Fixed Capital Charges, ESEC shall own the capacity
rights associated with the Plant.
11)COMMODITY CHARGES
A) West Basin Charges to CITY - CITY will pay West Basin a commodity charge for
recycled water using current rates as adopted at least annually by West Basin
Board of Directors and published by West Basin. West Basin's policy is to price
recycled water so that it is economical to the customer when compared to
alternate supplies and the costs of using other water of poorer quality, including
increased chemical costs and life of equipment. West Basin shall not increase
the effective commodity rate for recycled water sold to CITY for resale to ESEC
by an amount greater than the increase in the West Basin effective commodity
rate for potable water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
during the same preceding period.
B) CITY Resale to ESEC - CITY shall bill ESEC for recycled water based upon the
quantity delivered by West Basin to the Metering Fae+l+tyFacilities pursuant to
rates established by CITY.
12)TERM
A) Term. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, the Term of this Agreement shall
begin as of the date hereof and shall expire on that that date which is 30 years
following the Commencement Date unless the parties agree to extend the Term
of this Agreement.
B) Early Termination and Payment if ESEC Ceases Operations. If ESEC
permanently ceases operation at any time, upon notice to West Basin, ESEC
shall either 1) pay West Basin the difference between the remaining unamortized
portion of the Fixed Capital Charges as shown in the buyout schedule set forth
QQ�
1 U �I
on Exhibit 6 (Early Termination and Payment), and the salvage value of the
Plant, within 180 days of cessation of operations, or 2) pay West Basin the
remaining unamortized portion of the Fixed Capital Charges as shown in the
buyout schedule Exhibit 6 (Early Termination and Payment) plus One Hundred
Dollars ($100.00) and invoke the purchase option for Plant capacity rights as
provided for in 10(C) within 180 days of cessation of operations. In either case,
obligation for further fixed monthly payment by ESEC shall cease.
C) Prepayment of Fixed Capital Charges. Notwithstanding any prepayment of Fixed
Capital Charges by ESEC or purchase of capacity rights, the Plant, the RW
Pipeline and the Discharge System shall continue to be operated by West Basin,
for the Term of this Agreement. Unless ESEC and West Basin expressly agree
to the contrary, maintenance, operation, pricing and supply of recycled water
shall continue in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
D) Obligation to Take Recycled Water Ceases on Termination. If this Agreement
expires or is terminated pursuant to any provision hereof, ESEC's obligation to
take recycled water and make payments hereunder shall cease effective upon
the date of termination or expiration.
13) PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM
A) ESEC, CITY and West Basin shall each designate one or more individuals as-ato
the Project Management Team to: coordinate design and construction of the
Improvements; avoid disruption in ESEC, WEST BASIN, and CITY operations;
protect ESEC, WEST BASIN and CITY property; review and approve Capital
Costs; and conduct an annual review of operating costs for recycled water
production.
i) ESEC and CITY will support West Basin, as required, through the Project
Management Team, during design and construction of the Capital Facilities
to: (1) maintain schedule; (2) avoid disruption in ESEC, West Basin, and CITY
operations; and (3) protect ESEC, West Basin and CITY property. Exhibits 2
(Capital Facilities) and 3 (Metering Facilities) are the final pre- construction
reports, which have been approved by West Basin and ESEC. Responsibility
for any ancillary items to be constructed as part of the Capital Facilities, shall
be as determined by the Project Management Team.
ii) During design and construction of the Capital Facilities, the Project
Management Team shall meet at least monthly. It shall review and provide
input to consultant and contractor selections, design issues, designs,
regulatory permits, construction bids, schedules, change orders and quarterly
reports. West Basin shall administer all contracts and prepare quarterly
reports. Quarterly reports will be presented to the Boards of Director of West
Basin, City Manager of CITY, and ESEC management.
14) AUDIT OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS
A) West Basin shall maintain accurate records of the cost of any design, permitting
and construction for which it is to be reimbursed by ESEC under this Agreement.
Those records shall be maintained for at least two years after completion of the
work, and shall be available for inspection and copying on reasonable notice
during normal business hours at the offices of the party maintaining the records.
15) ENVIRONMENTAL AND REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
A) West Basin as the constructor, owner, and operator of the Plant and Discharge
System shall comply with applicable environmental and other laws, rules and
regulations governing the Plant and Discharge System whether such laws relate
to design, construction, operation or maintenance of the Plant and Discharge
System. In particular, West Basin shall be responsible for obtaining, and for
complying with the terms and conditions of, any necessary permits for discharge
of wastewater from the Plant. ESEC as constructor and operator of the On -Site
Piping shall comply with applicable environmental and other laws, rules and
regulations governing the On -Site Piping whether such laws relate to design,
construction, operation or maintenance of the On -Site Piping. Each party shall
indemnify and hold the other harmless for any breach of an obligation to comply
with the requirements of this Section 15. This obligation to comply with laws,
rules, and regulations shall be included in any contract with any contractor or
subcontractor of the parties which may be engaged to construct, operate or
maintain the Plant, Discharge System and On -Site Piping.
16) TITLE TO WATER
A) Recycled Water
i) Title and Ownership of Water from Plant. West Basin will sell recycled water
85
based upon flow to the RW Metering Facilities. West Basin will hold title to
and risk of loss of the recycled water and effluent until it reaches the RW
Metering Facilities.
ii) Title and Ownership of Water at Metering Facilities. Title to and ownership of
recycled water will pass to CITY immediately upstream of the RW Metering
Facilities. Title to and risk of loss of recycled water will pass to ESEC
immediately downstream of the RW Metering Facilities.
B) Potable Water
i) CITY will sell potable water based upon flow to the PW Metering Facilities.
Title to and ownership of potable water is held by the CITY up to and through
the PW Metering Facilities.
ii) Title to and risk of loss of potable water will pass to ESEC immediately
downstream of the PW Metering €asili Facilities.
17) CHANGES IN TECHNOLOGY /BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT
A) Opportunities to Reduce Costs. The parties recognize new opportunities may
develop to better manage the Plant and on -site water systems. The parties will
work in good faith to cooperate with each other to take advantage of these
opportunities.
B) Relief for a Severely Disadvantaged Party. If any party believes changes in the
business environment have put it in a severe disadvantage in performing this
Agreement, it may approach the other parties and ask for relief. The parties will
discuss such request in commercial good faith, recognizing each party is entitled
to the benefit of its bargain, but no party should suffer extreme detriment.
18) TAXES
A) Payment by ESEC. ESEC shall pay taxes, assessments, fees or charges
applicable to the On -Site Piping.
B) Payment by West Basin. West Basin shall pay taxes, assessments, fees or
charges applicable to the Plant, the RW Pipeline and the Discharge System.
C) Investment Tax Credit. At its own option, ESEC may claim the California
Manufacturers Investment Credit and the amount of such qualified cost upon
which sales or use tax has been paid or deemed paid under the regulation of the
Franchise Tax Board. West Basin does not warrant that ESEC will be found
J. 0 F
eligible for such credits.
19) MISCELLANEOUS
A) Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be construed, interpreted and enforced in
accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to conflicts of
law provisions.
20)This Agreement includes attached Exhibits 1 -6, which are incorporated by reference.
In the event of a conflict between the language of this Agreement and the attached
Exhibits, this Agreement prevails. [Move to sec 19D]
A) Binding on Successors and Assigns. This Agreement, and its terms, covenants
and conditions apply to and are binding upon the successors and assigns of the
parties hereto.
B) Notices. Notices given pursuant to the terms of this Agreement or necessary to
carry out its provisions, shall be in writing and delivered personally to the person
to whom the notice is to be given, or when deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage
prepaid, addressed to such person, or when sent by facsimile to the phone
number listed below, with a confirming copy sent by U.S. Mail. The addresses
and phone numbers of the parties for this purpose shall be:
ESEC: El Segundo Energy Center LLC
5790 Fleet Street, Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Attention: Asset Manager
Fax Number 760- 918 -0310
West Basin: West Basin Municipal Water District
17140 South Avalon Boulevard, Suite 210
Carson, CA 90746 -1296
Attention: Rich Nagel
Fax Number 310 - 217 -2414
CITY: City of El Segundo Public Works Department
350 MAIN STREET
EL SEGUNDO, CA 90245 -3895
��i
Each party may change its address or fax number for purposes of notices under this
Agreement by giving the other parties notice of the change in writing.
C) Integration Clause. With the exception of attached Exhibits 1 to 6, there are no
other written or oral agreements between the parties concerning the subject
matter hereof.
D) Benefits of this Agreement to Respective Parties. Nothing contained in this
Agreement, expressed or implied, is intended to give any person other than West
Basin, ESEC and CITY any right, remedy, or claim under or pursuant hereto or
thereto, and any agreement or covenant required in this Agreement to be
performed by or on behalf of West Basin, ESEC or CITY shall be for the sole and
exclusive benefit of the other party or parties to this Agreement.
E) Confidentiality. During the course of performance of this Agreement, the parties
may become aware of the business plans and operations of the other parties to
this Agreement and operating and performance data of the Plant ( "Information ").
To the extent permitted by law the parties and their employees agree to keep
such information confidential, and to guard it with the same methods and concern
as they guard their own confidential information. Except as otherwise required
by law, the parties and their employees will not disclose such Information to third
parties without first obtaining the consent of the other parties to this Agreement.
Further the parties agree to use such Information within their organizations only
for the purposes of performing this Agreement.
F) Indemnification.
i) Personal Injury and Property Damage. Each party hereto agrees to
indemnify, and save harmless and defend the other parties hereto, their
subsidiaries and affiliates, their directors, officers, agents and employees from
and against losses, costs, damage, injuries, liabilities, claims, and demands
or causes of action of any nature whatsoever, arising or resulting from
damage to or destruction of property, or death of or injury to persons, whether
they be third persons, or the employees of the party or the party's contractors
or subcontractors, to the extent of the indemnifying party's negligence. It is
the intention of the parties hereto that liability for any such claims be
apportioned among the parties on the basis of the respective party's
comparative negligence.
ii) Patent and Intellectual Property Indemnification. No party shall use any
X88
information in the design, fabrication or construction of Improvements, or
install or use any equipment in the Improvements, which involves any
infringement of a patent or copyright or unauthorized use of a trade secret of
another in any manner. Any party using such infringing data or information
shall hold the other parties harmless and defend them from and against any
such claim of infringement. Further, the party so indemnifying the others shall
obtain a non - infringing right to use such information equipment or data at its
own sole expense, or shall replace the infringing information, equipment, or
data with its functional equivalent at no expense to the other parties.
G) Insurance. During the term of this Agreement each party shall maintain and
provide the following types of insurance:
i) Worker's Compensation Insurance, including Occupational Disease, in
accordance with the laws of California and Employer's Liability Insurance in
the limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per person per
accident. If applicable, each party shall maintain coverage for U.S.
Longshoremen & Harborworkers (USL &H), Jones Act, Federal Employer's
Liability Act (FELA), and Maritime Employer's Liability (MEL). The coverage
shall also extend to any leased and /or temporary employees.
ii) Commercial General Liability Insurance, including contractual liability, insuring
the indemnity agreements set forth in this Agreement, and products -
completed operations coverage, with limits of not less than One Million
Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence, and Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) in
the aggregate, applicable to bodily injury, sickness or death in any one
occurrence, broad form property damage, personal injury, premises &
operations, independent contractors, mobile equipment, and no exclusions for
X.C. & U., operations within 50 feet of a railroad, or rigging, lifting or boom
overload.
iii) Automobile Liability Insurance covering owned, non -owned and hired vehicles
used by the party with limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000)
applicable to bodily injury, sickness or death of any one person and One
Million Dollars ($1,000,000) for more than one person in any one occurrence,
and One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) for loss of or damage to property in any
one occurrence.
i0
iv) Excess Liability Insurance coverage with limits of $5,000,000 that shall 64be
in excess of the underlying Employer's Liability, General Liability and
Automobile Liability coverages, with no exclusions broader than those
contained in the underlying insurance policies.
v) If an applicable Marine exposure exists within the services being rendered,
the party with the exposure shall maintain a $5,000,000 Marine Liability policy
that will insure for Protection & Indemnity; Chartered Vessel liability; Members
of the Crew; Wharfinger's / Stevedore's; Marine Contractual Liability; Tower's
Liability; "In Rem" Liability; Collision Liability; Waiver of Subrogation; Removal
of "other than Owner" limitation clauses as respects the other party and its
affiliates; Removal of the "as Owner of the vessel named herein" clauses as
respects Owner, and its affiliates, and Marine Pollution Liability Coverage.
The party with the Marine liability exposure shall include the other party and
its affiliates on its Marine policy as additional insureds.
vi)
vii) West Basin shall self insure or provide Builder's Risk Insurance on an "All
Risk" basis insuring the Plant and Discharge System on behalf of ESEC,
West Basin, and its subcontractors of all tiers in the course of construction,
including all materials intended to become a part of the completed Plant and
Discharge System while in transit to the premises, while in fabrication or
awaiting transit and during mechanical testing and until West Basin accepts
the Plant and Discharge System. West Basin owned or rented construction
tools and equipment are excluded. Further ESEC shall self insure or provide
Builder's Risk Insurance on an "All Risk" basis insuring the On -Site Piping on
behalf of West Basin, ESEC and its subcontractors of all tiers in the course of
construction including all materials intended to become part of the On -Site
Piping and during mechanical testing and until ESEC accepts the On -Site
Piping.
viii)lf any party or its contractors or subcontractors will be on the other party's
property, then the party who will be on the other party's property shall waive
all rights of recovery against the other party and all subsidiaries, affiliates,
officers, directors, members, managers, agents, employees, invitees,
servants, subcontractors of all tiers, insurers, underwriters and such other
parties as each may designate whether arising from insured or self- insured
loss. Each party, if applicable, shall arrange for all insurance policies
provided by that respective party to be endorsed to waive all right of
subrogation in accordance with this provision.
ix) If any party or its contractors or subcontractors will be on the other party's
property, then the party who will be on the other party's property shall include
the other party and their respective subsidiaries and affiliates, as well as each
of their respective officers, directors, managers, members and employees as
additional insured's on their general liability, automobile liability, and umbrella
liability insurance policies for injury or damage arising out of, resulting from, or
in connection with the performance of this Agreement. The additional
insured status noted in this section shall be specifically endorsed to the
appropriate party's policy or policies, or can be provided through one or more
blanket additional insured endorsements, or provided pursuant to specific
policy language. If one party self insures one or more of its insurance
exposures, it shall defend and indemnify the other party as if the applicable
policy or policies had been procured and maintained. Each Party hereto shall
each furnish Certificates of Insurance to the other evidencing the insurance,
and including language reflecting the additional insured status, if applicable
hereunder. Each Certificate shall provide that a thirty (30) day prior written
notice of cancellation shall be provided to the Certificate Holder, to include
notification of any material policy change that adversely affects the Certificate
Holder. The Certificates shall be provided prior to date when services are first
rendered.
x) The insurance provided by each party shall be shall be primary, without right
of contribution, with respect to any similar insurance maintained by the other
party, with respect to claims made by the other party.
A) Each Party hereto shall require all of its contractors and subcontractors to
obtain, maintain and keep in force during the time in which they are engaged
in performing work hereunder, similar insurance coverage required in H) i)
through v), above. With respect to the Excess Liability requirement noted in
H) iv), above, either party can accept a lower limit of coverage from a
contractor or subcontractor, but in no event less than $2,000,000 per
occurrence. Each party shall require such contractors and subcontractors of
all tiers to furnish acceptable evidence of such insurance, and to add both
West Basin, ESEC and their respective affiliates as additional insured in a
manner identical to that noted in subsection H(viii) of this insurance provision.
9 IL
Each party shall also require each of its contractors and subcontractors of all
tiers to provide a Waiver of Subrogation on their Workers' Compensation
policies in favor of both West Basin and ESEC. All of the foregoing evidence
shall be maintained by each party and shall make such evidence available at
a convenient site for inspection and review.
xii) Mechanic's Liens. Each of the parties hereto covenants and agrees to keep
the land upon which any Improvements are to be constructed, and the
materials and equipment to be included in the Improvements free from any
and all claims, liens, charges or encumbrances in the nature of mechanic's,
labor or material liens or otherwise arising out of that portion of the
construction or work to be performed by the particular party, or the particular
party's contractors, agents or subcontractors.
xiii)Drawings and Documents. At the close of construction, each party will deliver
to each of the other parties to this Agreement "as built" drawings of that
portion of the Improvements constructed by that party upon ESEC property.
ESEC shall deliver "as built" drawings on all items generated during the
design and construction of the On -Site Piping to West Basin.
xiv) Future Pricing. By executing this Agreement ESEC shall not prejudice its
rights to purchase recycled water at a lower price in the future. If a change in
policy by West Basin or the CITY, including execution of future agreements
with other industrial customers would otherwise offer recycled water to such
industrial customers at a lower price, this Agreement shall be amended to
give ESEC such a lower price.
Wherefore, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first set forth
above.
APPROVED:
WEST BASIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
in
Rich Nagel, General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Steve O'Neill, District Counsel
EL SEGUNDO ENERGY CENTER LLC
By:
Name, Title
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Counsel
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
By:
Jack Wayt, City Manager
ATTEST:
By:
Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
in
Karl H. Berger, Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit 1 — Schedule and Alignment
Exhibit 2 — Capital Facilities
Exhibit 3 — Metering Facilities
Exhibit 4 — Water Quantity and Quality Specifications
Exhibit 5 — Fixed Capital Charges
Exhibit 6 — Early Termination and Payment Schedule
.1 � J
1
L
A
a
-1.
ti
44, ° •
4
_
x
GIW] f#
Jc
11 �.
-
OAS
}� ti
v � �
1
,' •� Oki
` '1
EXHIBIT 4: Water Quantity and Quality Specifications
First -Pass RO Water Quantity: 325 gal /min
or equivalent to: 0.468 mgd
or equivalent to: 524 AFY
19
Exhibit 5 — Fixed Capital Charges
ESEC Project
Recycled Water Pipeline
$3.1 million
Potable Water Pipeline
$3.4 million
Treatment Facilities
$3.9 million
Total Capital Facilities $10.4 million
West Basin's cost of capital factor 0.008673525
Monthly Fixed Capital Charge $90,204.66
96
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding: 1) approval of an updated list of pre- approved
consultants that provide environmental review services pursuant to California Environmental
Quality Act guidelines (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations to
assist the City in the processing of entitlement projects; and 2) to authorize the City Manager to
execute Professional Services Agreements in an amount not to exceed $200,000 (increased from
$125,000 currently), in a form approved by the City Attorney, for developer reimbursed
environmental review services pursuant to CEQA and NEPA regulations from the pre- approved
list of consultants (Fiscal Impact: None)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Approve the attached list of consultants to provide environmental review and traffic
consultant services;
2. Authorize the City Manager to sign Professional Service Agreements for developer
reimbursed environmental review services approved as to form by the City Attorney in an
amount not to exceed $200,000; and /or,
3. Alternatively, discuss and take other possible action related to this item.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. List of qualified environmental planning consultants and traffic consultants
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Kimberly Christensen, AICP, Planning Manager
REVIEWED BY: Greg Carpenter, Director of Panning and Building Safety
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
The Planning Division provides administration and review of all entitlement projects concerning
environmental review pursuant to CEQA and NEPA regulations. Due to the size, scope, and
complexity of projects and the specialized technical areas of expertise needed to prepare CEQA
and NEPA documents, the City utilizes environmental consultants, traffic consultants and
various other technical sub - consultants to prepare the necessary documents as prescribed by
State and Federal regulations respectively.
The cost of these environmental documents and associated consultant services are paid for by
developers using reimbursement agreements. No direct cost is borne by the City. In fact, since
the City went to a cost recovery approach to its Planning fees, deposit based fees are charged to
cover the costs of planning staff to provide project and contract administration, review of the
consultant's work, the preparation of staff reports, and all other project related tasks separate
from the cost the developer incurs for environmental review services by an outside consulting
firm.
On September 4, 2007, the City Council approved the use of a pre- approved list of consultants to
provide environmental review services and authorization for the City Manager to approve
Professional Services for developer reimbursed environmental review services in the amount of
$75,000 or less. On July 15, 2008, the City Council approved an increase in the amount that the
City Manager is authorized to approve Professional Service Agreements for developer
reimbursed environmental review services. The amount increased to $125,000 to cover the cost
of a larger range of projects including most Mitigated Negative Declarations and some less
complicated focused EIR's.
The Planning Division has updated the list of firms by adding two firms and deleting two firms
from the list Council last approved. Planning staff removed Chris Joseph & Associates and P &
D Consultants. Chris Joseph & Associates is no longer in business and staff does not
recommend using the services of P & D Consultants. Planning staff has added five firms to the
list, namely EcoTierra, CAJA Environmental Services, LLC, Kimley -Horn and Associates,
Willdan, and Sapphos Environmental, Inc.
EcoTierra is a new firm comprised of a few of the staff members from Chris Joseph &
Associates, including one of the former Principals of the firm, who provided consultant services
to the City for numerous projects including Plaza El Segundo and the Air Force Base. CAJA
Environmental Services, LLC is a new firm comprised of some of the former staff members and
the other former Principal Chris Joseph from Chris Joseph & Associates who have not directly
performed work in the City in the past. Kimley -Horn and Associates regularly provides service
to the City by preparing traffic studies, traffic impact analysis, parking demand studies and
providing peer review of traffic analysis both directly and as a sub - consultant to environmental
consultants on the City's pre- approved list. Kimley -Horn and Associates has provided traffic
consultant services for the City for the Circulation Element and Plaza El Segundo and is
currently working on the Aquatics Study. Willdan has provided planning consultant services and
engineering services to the City. Sapphos Environmental, Inc. is a new firm for the City that
requested an opportunity to conduct environmental review services for the City. The Planning
Division requests that the City Council approve the attached updated list of consulting firms.
Additionally, in an effort to continue to streamline the development process for major projects
where projects are developer funded with no expenditure of City funds involved, City staff is
requesting that the amount the City Manager is authorized to approve is increased from $125,000
to $200,000 for professional services agreements for environmental review services and
associated traffic services. This will facilitate most projects except for the most complicated
projects requiring EIR's. Typically this will eliminate approximately 4 to 6 weeks in additional
start up time for projects. All City funded projects would still require approval from the City
Council.
Recommendation
The Planning and Building Safety Department requests that the Council: 1) approve an updated
pre- approved list of consultants that provide environmental review services pursuant to
California Environmental Quality Act guidelines (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) regulations to assist the City in the processing of entitlement projects; and 2)
authorize the City Manager to execute Professional Services Agreements in an amount not to
exceed $200,000, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for developer reimbursed
environmental review services pursuant to CEQA and NEPA regulations with consultants from
the list of firms pre- approved by Council.
PAPlanning & Building Safety\Planning- Old \Consultant Plug Services\Environmental Consultants\Environmental Consultant Services.CC
Report. 1.18.11.doc
Environmental /Planning Consultants
Contact Information List
Updated Date: 1/4/11
Craig Fajnor, Principal
EcoTierra Consulting
3520 Overland Avenue, Suite A10
Los Angeles, CA 90034
Direct: (213) 235 -4771
Main: (213) 235 -4771
craig. @ecotierraconsulting.com
2. Terri Vitar, Regional Vice - President
Ruta Thomas, Senior Group Manager, CEQA/NEPA
EIP Associates (A Division of PBS &J)
12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Phone: (310) 268 -8132
Fax: (310) 268 -8175
RKThomas@pbsi.com
3. Glenn LaJoie, AICP, Vice President, Planning /Environmental
Collette Morse, AICP, Senior Associate
RBF Consulting
14725 Alton Parkway
Irvine, CA 92618 -2027
Phone: (949) 472 - 3505/(949) 855 -3653
Fax: (949) 837 -4122
cial@rbf.com
cmorse@rbf.com
4. Steve Svete, AICP, President
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
172 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, CA 93003
Phone: (805) 644 -4455
Fax: (805) 644 -4240
svete@rinconconsultants.com
5. Tony Locacciato, AICP, Managing Principal
Impact Sciences
803 Camarillo Springs Road, Suite A
Camarillo, CA 93012
Phone: (805) 437 -1900
Fax: (805) 437 -1901
tocacciato@ impactsciences.com
6. John Bridges, FAICP, Principal
AECOM
1420 Kettner Boulevard, Suite 500
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: (619) 233 -1454 Ext. 764 -6898
Fax: (619) 233 -0952
4ohn.bridges @ aecom.com
Jay Ziff, Principal, Director of Environ. Planning
PCR Services Corporation
233 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 130
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Phone: (310) 451 -4488
Fax: (310) 451 -5279
8. Laura Stetson, AICP, Vice President
Hogle- Ireland
201 South Lake Avenue, Suite 308
Pasadena, CA 91101
Phone: (626) 356 -4460 Ext. 23
Fax: (626) 356 -4464
9. Al Warot, Vice President
Willdan
13191 Crossroads Parkway North, Suite 405
Industry, CA 91746 -3497
Phone: (562) 908 -6209
Fax: (562) 695 -2120
Awarot @willdan.com
10. Marie C. Campbell, Principal
Sapphos Environmental, Inc.
430 North Halstead Street
Pasadena, CA 91107
Phone: (626) 683 -3547
Fax: (626) 683 -3548
MCampbell@sapphosenvironmental.com
11. Chris Joseph, Principal
CAJA Environmental Services, LLC
11990 San Vicente Boulevard, Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90049
Phone: (310) 469 -6700
Fax: (310) 806 -9801
Alternate Office:
Anne Doehne
Impact Sciences
234 East Colorado Boulevard, Suite 205
Pasadena, CA 91101
Phone: (626) 564 -1500
Fax: (626) 564 -1501
Traffic Consultant
Serine Ciandella, Senior Vice President
Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc.
2100 W. Orangewood Avenue, Suite 140
Orange, CA 92868
Phone: (714) 939 -1030
Fax: (714) 938 -9488
li �;
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding adoption of Plans and Specifications for the
2010 -2011 annual contract for curb, gutter, sidewalk and other minor improvements at
various locations citywide. Approved Capital Improvement Program.
Project No.: PW 11 -01 (Fiscal Impact: $50,000 Gas Tax funds)
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.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
Location Map
List of addresses
FISCAL IMPACT: Included in Adopted Budget
Amount Requested: $50,000
Additional Appropriation: No
Account Number(s): 106 - 400 - 8203 -8603 $50,000 Gas Tax CIP
ORIGINATED BY: Maryam M. Jonas, Principal Engineer
REVIEWED BY: Stephanie Katsoleas, Pub ' orks Director
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City Mana W
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
On an annual basis, the City contracts for the repair of displaced sidewalks, curbs, gutters and
driveway approaches that are in need of repair due to age, maturing trees, water intrusion and
traffic loads. The City's annual concrete repair program is funded to repair as many of these
damaged areas as possible eliminating the potential liability associated with aging parkways.
A list of locations to be improved under this project is attached.This year, funding in the amount
of $50,000 is available from Gas Tax.
The scope of work under this contract consists of localized reconstruction of curb, sidewalk,
driveway /driveway approaches, and other work needed to complete the project in accordance
with the contract documents.
Plans and Specifications are available for review at the Public Works counter and City Clerks
Office.
10
�Ui
CITY MAP 2010 Annual Curb, Gutter
And Sidewalk improvements _
City or El seg,IIIaN
PW 11-01
a a
� > 5
q ¢ z �a a w ¢ > z
W ; 0 g a ¢ a o a a z
Y < w w Q Q F, w� z w
�n O w a x ui
U]
'OAl9 V03AINRS w w W w ui w w 'OA19 WgAind3S
"ll VNVIONI '1S VNVIONI
Q 'dJ SIONIIII`
W '15 SIONIIII
a
'1S NOlONIHSVM x '1S NOlONIHSVM
w
0
1 1 '15 SVSNVJI
'15 VINHOM1tl '1S VINN O
OdIltl
J
ri
'1S NO`J3N0
t0
�1 N '15 tlOtlA3N
'IS 1131N3J 841 , '1S N31N3J
MOIVONOB 'NO MOltl9Nf19
W
'IS ONVIAUVW - '1S ONVIAUVW
M ..Ls V13WOI M
'17 AHINVJJW '1S VJJWOI
M
'Id VIN31S '1S VdN91S
N M
.-1
01
'15 NN3d
IS NOOl3H5 '15 N0013H5
N
'IS SSMAJ, 15 tlN3tiV
•NO srudAlVJf13 ^ '1:10 SflldAlvon3
rI
'1S N3dd3d I '15 O1IVONVIS
rl
'1S NIVW N '1S NIVW
'1S NVO3J
'1S ONOWHJIU
�N
Id OUOONOJ N \ " / 'IS OIIOJNOJ
V ..z
'IS VINI!)'dlA '1S VINIOUTA
w
�+ 15 ONIlIHM
M
'1S 3NNOAV9 I '1S V1SIA VWOI
M
'IS tllsln tlwol � a
Q
W C
Q w
'1S A3l1VA
O
�
2 Z
'1S 1SM OIlIH
3
Z
a
3
Us IS31011M
�
W
'3Atl OOOM0311 ".
'1S IOJnA
�+
< 2
�
'1S 3Nna
Q Q
Q
Q
O
W
Y
Q
0
Q
1
.pi
F
> z O
3
� Q ;
s 3
3
�
E
k
CL
0
�
V
�
\
»
2
U.
Zl
U
\
\
IL
AwUo
co
ca
co
5
� \
& a
% a
a
%
C
e a
/
CL
% # a
� a
§
-
® c
§ °
2 �
® °
2 «
2
a
«
ƒ
}i
2 §
§J
/
/i
/
/J
f / §
-/J
t
2
\
00
\
/
/
\
k
a
«
kkU
S
$
%
f
LO
9
o E
�
LL
zk
o
m
i
9
co
k §
�
8
« �
�
/
F
/
>
E
em
<
�
a�
$
�
as
\
k
m
w
%
O
«
7
g
g
u
g
k
r
§
¥
f
o
}
It
/
~
G
LO
G
&
2
\
6
. §
\
\
\
\
§
m
\
\
§
2
E
E
E
<
E
2
2
@
a
p
0
2
as
co
o
o
e
e
m
I
7
I
u
cc
ui
�
�
z
\
\
IL
AwUo
r
C
4)
E
d
V
!0
a
Y
l0
d
.0
�C
3
v
V
C
LL
V
41 104 4.
d'
O
V
CV
tm
d
L
co U
O
L
w
0
n
Cl)
Y
Q
CL
n
{ m
O T
U as
a
T
U 3
W
�
C0 >
.c
>
•c
,
0
C)
N
V
Q a
m ^,
W
CU,)
r
o
>
oE
N
d
C:
U.
J
J CD
Z
O C'
an d
cn
co
�t
r
r
00
N
7
vE
d
V
a a
Wa�
LL
Q N
� v
r
O
co
co
co
Cn
't
00
0
r
N
cD
N C
- E
� d
C:
c 55
C
L
U
O
C
_
C/)
w
O
pQ
W
co
W
It
W
O
Q
W
co
0
W
c0
c
O
N
0
N
W
co
co
LO
N
r
N
N
r
N
co
r
N
T
N
c0
O
CC)
'.
u j
00
uLj
O
Ln
u j
r
�
N_
0)
O
Q
U)
n
Q
ch
°a n
Q
co
Q
En
U
L
U
T
O
r
O
Y
>
f`
C
n
co
n
co
%
ca
i
m
•C
C
2
O
O
a
o_
LU
O
0
0
0
O
0
O
O
N
0
N
Z
41 104 4.
d'
O
V
CV
tm
d
r
c
d
E
a►
0
CL
d
2
Y
!0
Y
3
0
V
C
LL.
I Irj
V v
0)
rn
co
CL
M
0
s
ca
U-
U)
0
N
U
Y
Y
3 °
co
7 T
;0
Y_ T O C
R g a
3 3 co
Y
0 L T
_Y T
co
3 -E (D
U •r_
r
+I
>
�
o
CL
Q CL
Y
co
'0O_ U
W
N U 3
N Q
N d 3
N
fA 'd
Y
3
T
co
fA 1
n 'r-
CO N 'C
TJ
It O
U
a)
>
M
N
co
a�
v
Q a
Wm LL.
(v
LO
0)
co
r
0
ao
CD
o E
(D
LL
J
z�
a
m d
Oo
N
r
UE
d
U
a a
m
W N
T
T
O O
.�-
M
N
0'
Fn 0
r
r
r
N
r
- E
� d
c
c
co
W
O
Q
c
O
cn
LO
rn
co
LLj
uj
o
r
LO
N
LO
1
C7
LO
1
M
LO
n
C7
CD
(D
r-
I�
r
I
r
�-
in
U)
U)
U)
rrI
Vl
c
cz
c
Q
N
Q
c
E
c
E
c
E
c
E
Cn
fn
(n
c
N
c
N
N
c
a)
c
L
U_
L
U_
L
U
i
U
L
a)
L
L
_N
co
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
C�7
0
M
M
Z
I Irj
V v
0)
rn
co
CL
c
m
E
m
V
!0
a
d
Y
3
4I
N
.�C
O
.o
c
LL
U
d
v
Q a
o
> % U
v
r
_ >
o E
d
(D
J �
Z 41
0
to
co
N
m J
ct
Lo
to
O
v E
N
v
Y �
a
3 °'
LL
-
c
o
G
W
p >
00
co
co
CD
T
co
N O
- E
a 4)
R
0
F
co
ai
Q
CO)
m
cc
c
G
2
�p
W
W
W
j
N
Q
0)
�
O
O
>
N
T
Cr
d'
LO
N
T
N
00
0
N
—
IT
f�
(0
N
N
�
'.
.
-o
o
a
Q
Q
Q
iA
as
U)
iC
ca
'00
E
>
c
>
c
>
>
m
c
0)
c
c
c
ca
cz
co
co
L
CD
cn
m
W
z
1. J 6
d
O
N
rn
N
EL
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to allow banners from the El Segundo High School
Band to be hung over Main Street at no cost. (Fiscal Impact: $178)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Approve the request from the El Segundo High School Band regarding its banners;
2. Alternatively, take such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
Letter from the El Segundo High School Band.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Amount Budgeted: $178
Additional Appropriation: No
Account Number(s):
ORIGINATED BY: Maryam Jonas, Principal Engineer
REVIEWED BY: Stephanie Katsouleas:e*ral)
ec r of Public Work
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City Man
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
Ms. Edie R. Rice, representing the El Segundo High School Band, asked the City to hang a
banner at no cost to The Band. The banner would advertise the 2nd Annual Comedy Night and
Silent Auction on February 5, 2011, at 6:00 p.m. at St. Anthony's O'Grady Hall.
While the City does not have a formal banner policy, banners (and their location) are generally
approved by the Public Works Department in accordance with El Segundo Municipal Code § 15-
18-12. Persons placing such banners must pay the City $178 for hanging and removing each
banner. Here, The Band requests that the City waive the fee as the event benefits so many
families in our community. Waiving such fees would be consistent with the City Council's past
actions for nonprofit groups conducting events that benefit the community (e.g., "Keep LA
Running," and the "American Heart Association ").
Dear Honorable Mayor Bush and Council Members,
Steve Fox
Director of Bands
eshsdirectorahotmail.com
Edie Rice
Assistant Director of Bands
ericemusicOA sn.com
El Segundo High School
640 Main Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
310 - 615 -2662 x316
January 3, 2011
The El Segundo High School Band is proud to present the 2nd Annual Comedy Night and
Silent Auction to benefit the Band program on February 5th, 2011 at 6:OOpm at St.
Anthony's o'Grady Hall.
Each year the band of 50 -60 includes some of the highest ranking students of the school
including valedictorians, salutatorians and "academic top ten," in addition to a number of
varsity and JV athletes.
The ESHS Band boasts many 1st place trophies and 3rd in the State Marching Band
Championships two years in a row. The Band has received the top rating of "Gold" in the
Forum Festival of Gold for the past two years and hopes to "threepeat" this spring.
The program is primarily funded through fundraising and donations of family, friends and
community including SCROC and the El Segundo Community Band. The El Segundo
Band Parents have taken on the challenge of creating new and innovative fundraising
events to raise the $50,000+ each year it takes to run the program.
Due to construction at the El Segundo High School auditorium, we will be paying a rental
fee for an alternate venue (St. Anthony's School) to hold our event in this year. Therefore,
we respectfully request the city waive the $178.00 banner - hanging fee to offset the
additional cost of the alternate venue.
Since this event benefits so many families in our community, we propose that the request
be considered for approval on an on -going basis.
Thank you for your consideration.
Edie H. Rice
ESHS Band (El Segundo Unified School District) Tax ID #95 -svv1 its
Donations are tax deductable as law allows.
4-
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Agenda
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action to receive the proceeds from the sale of Fire Station #2. Net
proceeds: $1,539,685.65
Fiscal Impact: $1,539,685.65 Proceeds from Sale deposited to the Economic Uncertainty Fund.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
1. Receive proceeds from the sale of Fire Station #2.
2. Alternatively discuss and take other action related to this item
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
None
FISCAL IMPACT: $1,539,685.65 Proceeds from Sale deposited to the Economic Uncertainty
Fund.
ORIGINATED BY: Angelina Garcia, Fiscal Services Manager
REVIEWED BY: Deborah Cullen, Director of Finance
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City Manage 0
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
On August 17th, 2010, City Council directed the City Manager to enter into a purchase agreement
to sell City property located at 2161 E. El Segundo Boulevard (former Fire Station Number 2) for
an amount not less than $1,575,000.
The total sale price of the property was $1,627,988. On December 30th, 2010, the City received
$1,539,685.65 for the sale of this property. This amount was for the total sale price of the property
less $88,302.85 in commissions paid to brokers and other fees.
Staff has recorded these funds in the Economic Uncertainty Fund and will recommend use of these
funds as part of the Fiscal Year 2011 -2012 Strategic Planning Session.
12
EL SEGUNDO CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 18, 2011
AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA HEADING: City Clerk
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration and possible action regarding an initiative (the "Initiative ") amending the El
Segundo Municipal Code to transfer all functions of the El Segundo Fire Department to the
Consolidated Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County (aka the Los Angeles County Fire
Department). (Fiscal Impact: Unknown)
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
Adopt a resolution certifying the Initiative as qualifying for the ballot.
2. OPTION ONE: Adopt Resolutions calling for a special election regarding the Initiative,
and consider adoption of Resolutions regarding ballot arguments, City Attorney impartial
analysis and rebuttal arguments;
3. OPTION TWO: Adopt Resolutions calling for a regular election and consider adoption of
Resolutions regarding ballot arguments, City Attorney impartial analysis and rebuttal arguments;
4. OPTION THREE: Adopt the Ordinance or schedule a Council Meeting within 10 days
and consider Adoption of the Ordinance at that meeting;
5. OPTION FOUR: Continue consideration of the actions set forth in 2, 3 and 4 above, for a
period not to exceed 30 calendar days, to a regular Council Meeting and request Staff to prepare
a report pursuant to Elections Code § 9212.
6. Take such additional, related, action that may be desirable.
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
1. Certification of the results of signature verification
2. Los Angeles County letter of verification
3. Resolution certifying the Initiative as qualifying for the ballot
4. Resolution giving notice of a Special or Regular Municipal Election
5. Resolution directing the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis
6. Resolution setting priorities for filing written arguments
7. Resolution requesting services from the Board of Supervisors
8. Ordinance amending the Municipal Code
FISCAL IMPACT: Undetermined
Amount Budgeted: $
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s):
ORIGINATED BY: Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Mark Hensley, City Attorney _
APPROVED BY: Jack Wayt, City Manager
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
The Initiative Process
On May 13, 2010, Mr. Bryan Partlow requested a title and summary for a proposed
initiative and a Notice of Intent to Circulate a Petition. The Notice was subsequently
published in the El Segundo Herald on May 27, 2010. The City Attorney prepared the
Title and Summary and it was provided to Mr. Partlow on May 20, 2010. Mr. Partlow
began the collection of signatures. Elections Code Sections 9207 and 9208 address the
time frame for collecting of signatures. The petitions were filed with the City Clerk's
office on November 10, 2010.
The City Clerk, as the elections official, determined on April 9, 2010 the number of
registered voters in the City of El Segundo was 10,749. Upon examination of the
petitions when filed it was determined that a total of 2260 signatures were gathered.
The Los Angeles County Registrar Recorder performed a random sampling of the
petitions as authorized by Elections Code § 8084 and on December 13, 2010 reported
to the City Clerk that of the number of signatures filed, the projected number of valid
signatures is 2,039. This number is in excess of the required 15% (1,612). This number
is reached by sampling 500 signatures, of that 500, 451 were determined sufficient 451
divided by 500 equals 90.2 %. 90.2% of 2260 projects to 2,039 valid signatures.
Elections Code § 9214 allows for a Special Election to be called by the Council if the
proponents have collected not less than 15% of the voters of the city and the initiative
contains a request that the ordinance be submitted immediately to a vote of the people
at a special election. The Initiative does not contain such a request for a special
election. Consequently, the City is not required to hold a special election. However, the
City Council may (if it chooses) call for a special election and place the matter on the
ballot. Alternatively, the City Council may place the Initiative on the ballot for the next
regular election.
Election Process /Decisions
Pursuant to Elections Code § 9214 Council may potentially set the Initiative for a special
election within 88 to 103 days from the date that the Council decides to set the matter
for election. Accordingly, should the Council take action on this item tonight, a Special
Election could be held on the following dates: April 19, 2011 or April 26, 2011. In
accordance with Elections Code § 1405, a special election could also be consolidated
with the countywide primary election scheduled for June 7, 2011. The cost of a Stand
Alone Special Election is approximately $60,000, a cost for a consolidated election is
not available at this time. The next regular municipal election is scheduled for April 10,
2012.
In the event the Council desires to set the Initiative for an election, Staff has prepared
the necessary Resolutions relating to the calling of the election, ordering the City
Attorney to prepare the Impartial City Attorney's Analysis, and allowing for rebuttal
arguments. Additionally, a Resolution has been prepared which allows for the Council
to designate Council Members to prepare arguments against the Initiative.
Elections Code § 9219 allows the Council to designate Council Members to submit
argument against the Initiative. The Council does not have to make such a designation.
The Council may, but is not obligated to, provide for; (1) the filing of rebuttal arguments
to the initial arguments in favor of and against the Initiative; and, (2) the preparation of
an Impartial City Attorney Analysis of the Initiative.
Adoption of the Initiative as an Ordinance
Elections Code § 9214 allows the Council to adopt the Initiative as an Ordinance at this
meeting or within 10 calendar days of this meeting. If the Council adopts the Initiative
as an Ordinance it will have the same effect as though it were adopted by the voters.
The Council will not be able amend or repeal the Ordinance. Rather, such could only
be accomplished by another properly certified initiative petition adopted by the Council
or the voters.
Report Ordered by the Council
Elections Code § 9212, allows for Council to refer the proposed initiative measure to
any city agency or agencies for a report on any or all of the following:
1. Its fiscal impact;
2. Its effect on the internal consistency of the city's general and specific plans;
3. Its effect on the use of land;
4. Its impact on funding for infrastructure of all types;
5. Its impact on the community's ability to attract and retain business and
employment;
6. Its impact on the uses of vacant parcel of land;
7. Its impact on agricultural lands; open space, traffic congestion, existing business
district, and developed areas designated for revitalization;
8. Any other matters the legislative body requests to be in the report.
The report shall be presented to the legislative body within the time prescribed by the
Council, but no later than 30 days after the elections official certifies to the legislative
body the sufficient of the petition.
CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY OF INTITATIVE PETITION
I, Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk of the City of El Segundo, County of Los Angeles,
State of California, hereby certify that:
The petition entitled "AN INITITAIVE AMENDING THE EL SEGUNDO
MUNICIPAL CODE TO TRANSFER ALL FUNCTIONS OF THE EL SEGUNDO
FIRE DEPARTMENT TO THE CONSOLIDATED FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY (AKA THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE
DEPARTMENT)" was filed with the City Clerk's Department on November 10,
2010.
That said petition consists of 409 pages with 2246 prima facie signatures;
That attached to this petition at the time it was filed, was affidavits purporting to
be the affidavit of the persons who solicited the signatures, and containing the
dates between which the purported qualified electors signed this petition;
That the affiant stated his or her own qualifications, that he or she had solicited
the signatures upon that page, that all of the signatures were made in his or her
presence, and that to the best of his or her own information and belief, each
signature to that section was the genuine signature of the person whose name it
purports to be;
That after the proponent filed this petition and based on the County of Los
Angeles Registrar of Voters' Signature Verification Certificate have determined
the following facts regarding this petition:
Number of signatures filed
2,260
Number of signatures verified
500
Number of signatures qualified
451
Number of signatures not - qualified
49
Number of signatures required to qualify
1,612
A sufficiency of 90.2% was determined in the random sampling of 500 signatures
which resulted in a projection of 2,039 valid signatures.
Based on the above, the petition is deemed to be sufficient.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official
seal of the City of El Segundo, this 29th day of December, 2010.
4
. -Ci y MQ s n C
C' y Cler
Los Angeles County REGISTRAR- RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK
1 MW
E 7 y Y 5
B
DEAN C. LOGAN
Registrar- Recorder /County Clerk
December 13, 2010
Ms. Cindy Mortesen, City Clerk
City of El Segundo
350 Main Street
El Segundo, California 90245 -3895
Dear Ms. Mortesen:
We have completed the signature verification submitted on November 15, 2010 for An Initiative
Amending The El Segundo Municipal Code To Transfer All Functions Of The El Segundo Fire
Department To The Consolidated Fire Protection District Of Los Angeles County (AKA The Los
Angeles County Fire Department).
As requested a random sampling petition verification was conducted by this office. The random
sampling results are as follows:
Number of signatures filed
2,260
Number of signatures verified
500
Number of signatures found sufficient
451
Number of signatures found not sufficient
49
Not Sufficient because duplicate
0
Projected number of valid signatures
based upon random sample
2,039
Please call Raymond Q. Oliande, Head, Data Entry and Signature Verification Section at
(562) 462 -2376 if you have any questions regarding the signature verification of this petition.
Sincerely,
DEAN C. LOGA
Registrar- Recorder /County Clerk
4
�.�
12400 Imperial Highway, Norwalk, California 90650 - (562) 462 -2720 - www.lavote.net
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THAT AN INITIATIVE ENTITLED
AN INITIATIVE AMENDING THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL
CODE TO TRANSFER ALL FUNCTIONS OF THE EL SEGUNDO
FIRE DEPARTMENT TO THE CONSOLIDATED FIRE
PROTECTION DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY (AKA
THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT) QUALIFIES
FOR THE BALLOT.
The City Council of the city of El Segundo resolves as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds as follows:
A. On November 15, 2010, proponents of an initiative entitled "AN
INITIATIVE AMENDING THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE TO
TRANSFER ALL FUNCTIONS OF THE EL SEGUNDO FIRE
DEPARTMENT TO THE CONSOLIDATED FIRE PROTECTION
DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY (AKA THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT)" ( "Initiative ") submitted petitions to the
City Clerk for signature verification;
B. On or about December 29, 2010, the City Clerk certified the Initiative
as qualifying for the ballot including, without limitation, having signatures
from not less than fifteen percent (15 %) of the City's voters;
C. In accordance with Elections Code § 9214, the Initiative has sufficient
signatures for a special election. However, the Initiative did not request a
special election as required by Elections Code § 9214; and
D. Elections Code § 9214 requires (1) that the City Council, if it chooses,
adopt an ordinance proposed by a qualified initiative; (2) place the
proposed ordinance on the ballot; or (3) ask for a report on the effects of
the proposed ordinance.
SECTION 2: Based upon the foregoing, the Initiative qualifies for an election. If
approved by a separately adopted City Council resolution, the City Clerk is
directed to place the Initiative on the ballot for the [special or regular]
municipal election.
SECTION I This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of January, 2011.
Eric Busch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Cindy Mortesen, Ci
APPROVED
MARK D. HE
By:
i v*
Ka NHe r ger, Assi nt City Attorney
2 �' t,
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION CALLING A [SPECIAL OR REGULAR] MUNICIPAL
ELECTION ON PURSUANT TO ELECTIONS
CODE § 1410.
The City Council of the city of El Segundo resolves as follows:
SECTION 1: Pursuant to Elections Code § 1410, the City Council calls for a [special or
regular] municipal election to be held in the City of El Segundo on for the
purpose of voting on an initiative.
SECTION 2: Pursuant to Elections Code § 13120 the exact form of the questions to be voted on
at the election as they should appear on the ballot are as follows:
MEASURE P
SHALL THE ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL Yes ❑
CODE TO TRANSFER ALL FUNCTIONS OF THE EL SEGUNDO FIRE
DEPARTMENT TO THE CONSOLIDATED FIRE PROTECTION No ❑
DISWTRICT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY (AKA THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT) BE ADOPTED?
SECTION 3: The polls will open at 7 a.m. on election day and remain open until 8 p.m.
SECTION 4: El Segundo City Hall, located at 350 Main Street in El Segundo, is designated the
Central Counting Place where all ballots of the election will be tallied.
SECTION 5: The City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to procure and furnish any
and all official ballots, notices, printed matter and all supplies, equipment and paraphernalia that
may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election.
-I-
1
SECTION 6: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of January, 2011
ATTEST:
Cindy Mortesen, City
APPROVED A
Mark D. Hensk
C
Karl Berger, Assistq t/City Attorney
-2-
Eric Busch, Mayor
�.'l�
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF THE BALLOT MEASURE REGARDING
AMENDING THE EL SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE TO TRANSFER
ALL FUNCTIONS OF THE EL SEGUNDO FIRE DEPARTMENT TO THE
CONSOLIDATED FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES
COUNTY (AKA THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT).
The City Council of the city of El Segundo resolves as follows:
SECTION 1: Pursuant to Elections Code § 9280, the City Clerk is directed to transmit a
copy of the ballot measure regarding amending the El Segundo Municipal Code to
transfer all functions of the El Segundo fire Department to the Consolidated Fire
Protection District of Los Angels County (AKA the Los Angeles County Fire Department)
to the City Attorney for an impartial analysis.
SECTION 2: Upon receiving the ballot measure, the City Attorney is directed to prepare
an impartial analysis of the measure showing its effect, if any, on existing law and the
operation of the measures. Such analysis must not be more than 500 words.
SECTION 3: The City Clerk is directed to have the City Attorney's analysis printed
before the arguments for and against the measures. Immediately below the impartial
analysis, in not less than 10 point bold type, the City Clerk should have the fo
language printed: "The above statement is an impartial analysis of M owing
easure ll ll If you
desire a copy of the legislation affected by this measure, please call the City Clerk's
office at (310) 524 -2307 and a copy will be mailed at no cost to you.,,
SECTION 4: This Resolution will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent
resolution.
r� �,
SECTION 5: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of January, 2011.
ATTEST:
Cindy Mortesen, City Cork
Approved as to
Mark D. HensW
in
Kaif Berbdyr'Assist City Attorney
Eric Busch, Mayor
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENTS FOR BALLOT
ARGUMENTS FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK TO BE INCLUDED WITH
VOTER INFORMATION FOR AN ELECTION ON
The City Council of the city of El Segundo resolves as follows:
SECTION 1: Pursuant to Elections Code § 9281, qualified voters may submit arguments for
and against the ballot measures, in addition to rebuttal arguments, for the
election on forms provided by the City Clerk.
SECTION 2: Arguments filed in accordance with this Resolution must comply with the
following requirements in accordance with Elections Code §§ 9282, 9283, 9285, and 9286:
A. Arguments must be in writing and not exceed three hundred (300) words except for
rebuttal argument which may not exceed two hundred and fifty (250) words;
B. Arguments may be submitted by the City Council; any councilmember authorized to
submit an argument by the City Council; any individual voter eligible to vote on the
measures; any bona fide association of citizens; or any combination of voters and
associations;
C. Arguments must be typewritten in at least a 12 point font;
D. Arguments may not include underlining, italics, asterisks, or other, similar, type of
formatting;
E. Arguments must be accompanied by the printed name and signature or printed
names and signatures of the person or persons submitting it, or, if submitted on
behalf of an organization, the name of the organization and the printed name and
signature of at least one of its principal officers.
F. If more than five (5) signatures accompany an argument, only the first five (5) will be
printed.
G. Arguments for or against the ballot measures must be received in the City Clerk's
office not later than Rebuttal arguments must be received
not later than
-1-
SECTION 4: Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1973aa -1 a., the City Clerk will:
A. Translate all ballot arguments into Spanish;
B. Make translated copies of ballot arguments publicly available;
SECTION 5: This Resolution will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent
resolution.
SECTION 6: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption.
ATTEST:
Cindy N
APPRC
Mark D
M
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of January, 2011.
-2-
Eric Busch, Mayor
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THAT THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS PROVIDE ELECTION SERVICES TO THE CITY FOR THE
SPECIAL ELECTION.
The City Council of the city of El Segundo resolves as follows:
SECTION 1: Pursuant to Elections Code § 10002, the City Council requests that the Los
Angeles County Board of Supervisors assist the City with its special election scheduled for
SECTION 2: The services requested by the City include the following:
A. Computer records of the names and addresses of all eligible registered voters in the
City;
B. Provide additional election equipment and assistance to the City in accordance with
California law.
SECTION 3: The City will reimburse Los Angeles County for services performed pursuant to
this request and upon the City's receipt of a County invoice.
SECTION 4: The City Clerk is directed to forward a certified copy of this Resolution to the Los
Angeles Board of Supervisors and the Los Angeles County Clerk's office.
SECTION 5: The City Clerk is directed to certify and adopted of this Resolution; record this
Resolution in the book of the City's original resolutions, and make a minute of this adoption of
the Resolution in the City Council's records and the minutes of this meeting.
SECTION 6: This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and remain
effective unless repealed or superseded.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of January, 2011
Eric Busch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Cindy Mortesen, e
i
APPROVED A
Mark D. Hen y ' tt e
By:
K rl H. Berger, 44istant City Attorney
.1,) /�)
06 r- ')
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AN INITIATIVE AMENDING THE EL
SEGUNDO MUNICIPAL CODE TO TRANSFER ALL FUNCTIONS OF
THE EL SEGUNDO FIRE DEPARTMENT TO THE CONSOLIDATED
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY (AKA THE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT) IN ACCORDANCE
WITH ELECTIONS CODE § 9214(A).
The city council of the city of El Segundo does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: In accordance with Elections Code § 9214(A), the City Council adopts the
initiative attached as Exhibit 'A" and incorporated by reference, submitted by the
people.
SECTION 2: 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 3: 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 4: This Ordinance will become effective on the thirty -first (31st) day following
its passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2011.
Eric Busch, Mayor
December 30, 2010 Page 1 of 2
[C: \Documents and Settings \user1 \Desktop \Fire Petition - EC 9214.doc]
X. 4 4
ATTEST:
Cindy Mortesen, C
APPROVED
Mark D. Hen
By:
Kafi H. Berger, Assiglant City Attorney
December 30, 2010 Page 2 of 2
[C: \Documents and Settings \user1 \Desktop \Fire Petition - EC 9214.doc]
Attachment "N'
INITIATIVE MEASURI dthe following title Dand summary of the chiefpurposes and points of
The El Segundo City Attorney has prepare
the proposed measure:
AN INITIATIVE AMENDING THE El TO HENCON CONSOLIDATED FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
OF THE EL SEGUNDO FIRE DEPARTMENT
OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY (AKA THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
ose of this initiative is to place on the ballot a proposed ordinance that amends the Eli Segundo Municipal
The pure The City's fire department is
Code ( "ESMC ") to transfer all functions of the City's existing flFirdeeD Pmrtme the Consolidated Fire Protection
District of Los Angeles County (aka The Los Ang emergency medical services; and hazardous materials
currently responsible for fire prevention; fire suppression;
regulation.
airs MArEwAIs
ti
This initiative measure is submitted to the people of
EI Segundo in accordance with the provisions of the
California Elections Code Section 9200 et seq.
This initiative measure amends sections of the El
Segundo Municipal Code; therefore, new provisions
proposed to be added are printed in italic type to indicate
that they are new.
PROPOSED LAW
SECTION 1. Title.
This measure shall be known and may be cited as
The El Segundo Fire and Emergency Medical Service
Preservation Ordinance.
SECTION 2. Findings and Declarations.
(2)
Fire prevention, fire protection. Paramedic and
emergency medical service, and hazardous
materials mmagement are currently provided
by be City of El Segundo's own municipal
fire department.
The City of EI Segundo faces a multi - millton
dollar budget deficit in the next fiscal yea"
State law effectively requires the city of El
Segundo to balance its budget each year.
Raising taxes, however, is not the best way
to close the budget deficit facing the City
of El Segundo. Therefore, the City Of El
Segundo must consider all viable cost - cutting
alternatives. To this end, the City Council
directed the City Manager to request a
feasibility study from the Los Angeles County
Fire Department to assess the cost savings and
enhanced emergency services which could be
made available to the City of El Segundo y Ux
the
the fire services pro
El Segundo Fire Department and the City's
firefighters into the Los Angeles County Fire
Projection District.
(3) provides fin, Protection. emergency prov medical
(4)
and related services to 57 cities in Los Angeles
County and one (1) city in Orange County.
Cities that have already adopted the regional
approach to fire and paramedic protection
offered by the Los Angeles County Fite
Department save millions of dollars each year
and benefit from improved service. Moreover,
many cities have reduced their public employee
pension liabilities through eumsation, which
results in even more taxpayer dollars being
saved. El Segundo's Fire Chief issued a report
to the El Segundo City Council concluding
that contracting with the Los Angeles County
Fire Department for fire protection, emergency
medical and hazardous materials management
services would save El Segundo taxpayers
millions of dollars each Year and maintain
quality service.
The voters recognize that contracting with the
Los Angeles County Fire Department for fire
protection, emergency medical and hazardous
materials n easement service would likely
require as o the effective date oribe City of
El Segundo's participation in the Corssolidated
Fire Protection District of Los Angeles County
as determined by the Board of Supervisors
of Los Angeles County, the City Council of
the City of El Segundo to delete Sections
13 -10 -I, 13- 10- 2,13 -10 -3, and 13-10-4 Of
the El Segundo Municipal Code, and, after
such hearings as arc required by law, to add a
new section 13.10 -I adopting the then -latest
version of the Los Angeles County Fire Code
by reference. These changes will not diminish
safety or quality of life of El Segundo residents
and will facilitate the use of regional resources
in those circumstances in which the use of out -
of -area resources are needed to cope with a fire
or other emergency.
SECTION 3. Amendment ee El Segundo
Cod
IC D I L�IN
pARAMEDN EM GENCYMEDICA
SERVICE, AND HAZARD
MANAGEMENT
(1) The nesponsibiliryfor the provislio"" oM and
prevention. fire protection. par
emergency medical service and hazardous
rnarerials management in the city of E)
Segundo is hereby Transferred from the El
Segundo Fire Department to she Las Angeles
Counry Fire Department rubJect to the
provisions of this section.
(2) The El Segundo City Council shall take all
necessary steps to effect she provision offire
prevention, fire protection, paramedic and
emergency medical rervice and hazardous
materials management to the Clry of El
Segundo by the Consolidated Fire Protection
District of Las Angeles County and otherwise
to carry out the provisions ofs"bparagraph
(I) of this section. All actions taken by the El
Segundo City Council shall be in accordance
with California Government Code Sections
55632 and 56855.
(3) The transfer of the fire prevention, fire
protection. paramedic and emergency medical
service and hazardous materials management
from the El Segundo Fire Department to
the Los Angeles County Fire Department
shall take place on the effeclive date of the
City of El Segundo } participation in the
Consolidated Fire protection District orLOs
Angeles County as determined by he Board
of supervisors in coordination with Las City
Angeles C-1111117 Fire Depar / anCity
of El Segundo.
(4) The provisions of this Ordinance are intended
to be acrd are severable. If any provision of
this Ordinance, or pan thereof, is found to
be unconstitutional or invalid, the remaining
provisions shall not be affected, bur shall
remain in full force and eff� f.
. t- I 1
h