Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
CC RESOLUTION 4779 RESOLUTION NO. 4779
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
(EA) NO. 959 AND ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA)
NO. 12-01 FOR THE 222 KANSAS STREET SPECIFIC PLAN AND A
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AT 222 KANSAS STREET.
The City Council of the City of El Segundo does resolve as follows;
SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares that:
A. On February 26, 2009, the Planning Commission ("Commission")
approved an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for an
Environmental Assessment No. EA-788, Subdivision (SUB) No. 08-01,
and Smoky Hollow Site Plan Review (SHSP) No. 08-01 to allow: a) the
construction of five one and two-story buildings totaling 79,513 square feet
and b) a subdivision into 55 condominium air space units. The project
would have been constructed subject to the requirements of the Medium
Manufacturing (MM) Zone; the proposed uses were light industrial,
general office, and restaurant uses and the proposed floor area ratio
(FAR) was 0.37;
B. On January 19, 2012, Mar Ventures, Inc., filed an application on behalf of
SMPO Lab, LLC, for an Environmental Assessment (EA No. 959), a
General Plan Amendment to re-designate the 4.83-acre project site from
Smoky Hollow Mixed Use to "222 Kansas Street Specific Plan" (222
KSSP); a Specific Plan Amendment to remove the subject property from
the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan boundaries and to establish a new "222
Kansas Street Specific Plan" (222 KSSP) and to establish the
development standards within the Specific Plan; a Zone Change to amend
the Zoning Map to rezone the project site from the Medium Manufacturing
(MM) Zone with a Grand Avenue Commercial (GAC) Overlay District to
the 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan (222 KSSP) Zone; a Zone Text
Amendment; to add a new ESMC § 15-3-2(A)(8) "222 Kansas Street
Specific Plan"; and to modify ESMC Chapter 15-11; a Development
Agreement to provide public benefits in exchange for development rights;
a Subdivision of the "Phase 2" property into four parcels and 20
condominium units; and Site Plan Review for construction of a 45,152
square-foot facility operated by the USDA on the southern portion of the
property (Phase 1), and two office buildings totaling 31,000 square feet in
floor area on the northern portion of the property (Phase 2) ("proposed
project");
-1-
C. The applications from Mar Ventures, Inc. on behalf of SMPO Lab, LLC
were reviewed by the City of El Segundo Planning and Building Safety
Department for, in part, consistency with the General Plan and conformity
with the El Segundo Municipal Code ("ESMC");
D. In addition, the City reviewed the project's environmental impacts under
the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§
21000, et seq., "CEQA"), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal.
Code of Regulations §§15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the
City's Environmental Guidelines (City Council Resolution No. 3805,
adopted March 16, 1993);
E. An Addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for EA
No. 773 (approved by the El Segundo Planning Commission on February
26, 2009) was prepared pursuant to the requirements of CEQA Guidelines
§ 15164. Pursuant to CEQA, the Addendum need not be circulated for
public review (CEQA § 15164(c)) however, an addendum is to be
considered by the decision-making body before to making a decision on
the project (CEQA § 15164(d));
F. The Planning and Building Safety Department completed its review and
scheduled a public hearing regarding the application before the Planning
Commission for July 12, 2012;
G. On July 12, 2012, the Commission held a public hearing to receive public
testimony and other evidence regarding the applications including, without
limitation, information provided to the Commission by City staff and public
testimony, and representatives of Mar Ventures, Inc. and SMPO Lab, LLC;
H. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2721 recommending City Council approval of
Environmental Assessment (Ea) No. 959; Adopt General Plan
Amendment (GPA) No. 12-01, Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) No. 12-
01, Zone Change (ZC) No. 12-01, Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 12-
01; and approve Development Agreement (DA) No, 12-01, Subdivision
(SUB) No. 12-02 (VTM 71903), and Site Plan Review (SPR) No. 12-01;
I. On August 7, 2012, the City Council held a public hearing and considered
the information provided by City staff, public testimony and the applicant,
Mar Ventures, Inc;
J. On August 7, 2012, the City Council introduced and waived first reading of
Ordinance No. 1470 approving Specific Plan Amendment No. 12-01, Zone
Change No. 12-01, Zone Text Amendment No. 12-01, Development
Agreement No. 12-01, Subdivision No. 12-02, and Site Plan Review No.
12-01;
-2-
K. On August 21, 2012, the City Council reintroduced a revised ordinance
and considered the information provided by City staff, public testimony
and the applicant, Mar Ventures, Inc.; and
L. This Resolution and its findings are made based upon the entire
administrative record including, without limitation, testimony and evidence
presented to the Council at its August 7, 2012 and August 21, 2012
hearings including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the
Planning and Building Safety Department.
SECTION 2: Factual Findings and Conclusions. The City Council finds that the
following facts exist:
A. The subject property is located at 222 Kansas Street, between Grand
Avenue and Franklin Avenue, currently in the Medium Manufacturing
(MM) Zone of the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan (SHSP) and proposed in
the 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan (222 KSSP) Zone;
B. The property is comprised of two parcels with a total area of 4.83 acres.
The property is bounded by Grand Avenue to the north, Kansas Street to
the west, Franklin Avenue to the south, and a Military Entrance
Processing Station (MEPS) and light industrial uses to the east;
C. The surrounding land uses are primarily multi-family residential, general
office, light industrial, and auto-repair uses to the north, medical offices,
and light industrial uses to the east, office and light industrial uses to the
south, and light industrial uses to the west;
D. The proposed project involves an Environmental Assessment (EA No.
959), a General Plan Amendment to re-designate the 4.83-acre project
site from Smoky Hollow Mixed Use to "222 Kansas Street Specific Plan"
(222 KSSP); a Specific Plan Amendment to remove the subject property
from the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan boundaries and to establish a new
"222 Kansas Street Specific Plan" (222 KSSP) and to establish the
development standards within the Specific Plan; a Zone Change to amend
the Zoning Map to rezone the project site from the Medium Manufacturing
(MM) Zone with a Grand Avenue Commercial (GAC) Overlay District to
the 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan (222 KSSP) Zone; a Zone Text
Amendment to add a new ESMC § 15-3-2(A)(8) "222 Kansas Street
Specific Plan"; and to modify ESMC Chapter 15-11; a Development
Agreement to provide public benefits in exchange for development rights;
a Subdivision of the "Phase 2" property into four parcels and 20
condominium units; and Site Plan Review for construction of a 45,152
square-foot facility operated by the USDA on the southern portion of the
property (Phase 1), and two office buildings totaling 31,000 square feet in
-3-
floor area on the northern portion of the property (Phase 2) (which site
plan is incorporated into the 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan as Exhibits 2
- 8 ("Approved Site Plan");
E. The subject site is roughly rectangular in shape, relatively flat with
approximately a one percent slope from north to south, with the exception
of a 15 to 25-foot tall stockpile of crushed rock in the southeast corner;
F. The majority of the 4.83-acre site is currently vacant and undeveloped. A
6,593 square-foot portion of the site at the northeast corner is paved and
used as overflow vehicle parking and storage for the Jim and Jack's auto
repair facility across Grand Avenue;
G. Vehicular access to the proposed USDA facility would be provided from
two driveway entrances on Franklin Avenue and a driveway entrance on
Kansas Street. Vehicular access to the office/industrial buildings in the
north portion of the site would be provided from a second driveway
entrance on Kansas Street. The two office/industrial buildings would be
located on separate lots and would share driveway access through a
Reciprocal Access Agreement. Vehicular access to the overflow vehicle
parking and storage lot for Jim and Jack's would be provided from a
driveway entrance on Grand Avenue;
H. One hundred-eight parking spaces would be provided for the USDA facility
in two separate parking areas and six loading spaces. One hundred-three
parking spaces and one loading space would be provided for the two
office/industrial buildings on a separate abutting lot. Twenty-one parking
spaces would be provided on the Jim and Jack's overflow vehicle parking
and storage lot;
I. The proposed General Plan re-designation and rezoning of the Project
Area would change the General Plan Land Use designation from Smoky
Hollow Mixed Use to the 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan designation and
rezone the area from the Medium Manufacturing (MM) Zone with a Grand
Avenue Commercial (GAC) Zone Overlay District to the 222 Kansas
Street Specific Plan (222 KSSP) Zone;
J. The proposed 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan incorporates a list of
permitted uses, development standards, and architectural guidelines to
guide development within the Specific Plan area;
K. The proposed 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan eliminates the Medium
Manufacturing (MM) Zone 15,000 square-foot limit on general
and/multimedia related office uses per site and permits office and other
uses up to a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.60;
-4-
L. The proposed Zone Text Amendment would amend the following: 1)
ESMC § 15-3-2(A) to add the 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan (KSSP); 2)
ESMC § 15-11-1(A)(1) to remove the Project Area from the Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan area; 3) ESMC § 15-11-2(D)(8) to remove the Project Area
from Exhibit 11-2 (Smoky Hollow Block Conditions Survey Map); 4) ESMC
§ 15-11-2(D)(9) to remove the Project Area from Exhibit 11-3 (Smoky
Hollow Target of Opportunity Map); 5) ESMC § 15-11-2(E) to remove the
Project Area from Exhibit 11-4 (Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Base District
Map); 6) ESMC § 15-11-2(F) to remove the Project Area from Exhibit 11-5
(Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Circulation Plan Map); 7) ESMC § 15-11-
2(F)(5) to remove the Project Area from the Exhibit 11-6 (Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan Cooperative Parking Opportunities Map); 8) ESMC § 15-11-
2(G)(3) to remove the Project Area from Exhibit 11-7 (Smoky Hollow
Specific Plan Sewer Master Plan Map); 9) ESMC § 15-11-2(G)(3) to
remove the Project Area from Exhibit 11-8 (Smoky Hollow Specific Plan
Flood Control & Drainage Map); 10) ESMC § 15-11-3(A) to remove the
Project Area from Exhibit III-1 (Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Land Use
Map); 11) ESMC § 15-11-3(D) to remove the Project Area from Exhibit III-
2 (Smoky Hollow Specific Plan Floating Zone Map); and 12) ESMC § 15-
11-5 (Appendix A; Boundary Description) to remove the Project Area from
the Smoky Hollow Specific Plan area;
M. The proposed Subdivision would divide the 1.55-acre parcel in Phase 2
into four separate lots. Lot 1 would be developed with a two-story, 12,655
square-foot office/industrial building; Lot 2 would be developed with a two-
story, 17,051 square-foot office/industrial building; Lot 3 would be
developed with a parking area for 103 parking spaces; and Lot 4 would be
redeveloped into a 21-parking space vehicle parking and storage area for
the Jim and Jack's auto-repair facility. Lots 1 and 2 would each be further
divided into ten condominium air space units. Lots 1, 2, and 3 would be
tied to each other through shared access and parking restrictions on the
property; and
N. The proposed project includes a dedication of 10 feet along Grand
Avenue, 5 feet along Kansas Street, and 5 feet along Franklin Avenue to
be used for public right-of-way improvements. The total area of this
dedication is 7,920 square feet. Further, the project includes an
irrevocable offer to dedicate an additional 9 feet along Grand Avenue.
SECTION 3: Environmental Assessment. The City Council makes the following
environmental findings:
A. Because of the facts identified in Section 2 of this Resolution, the
proposed project was analyzed for its environmental impacts and an
Addendum to the previously adopted Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration (IS/MND) for Environmental Assessment No. 788 (Segundo
-5-
Business Park) was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15164.
Under CEQA, an Addendum to an adopted Negative Declaration or
Mitigated Negative Declaration is needed if minor technical changes or
additions to the proposed project occur (CEQA Guidelines §15164). An
addendum is appropriate only if these minor technical changes or
additions do not result in any new significant impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. The
Addendum need not be circulated for public review (CEQA Guidelines
§15164(c)); however, an addendum must be considered by the decision-
making body before making a decision on the project (CEQA Guidelines
§15164(d)).
B. Before the July 12, 2012 Planning Commission meeting, an Addendum to
the IS/MND was prepared and some of the mitigation measures in the
IS/MND were modified or removed and new measures were added. The
affected measures are listed below and the changes are discussed in
detail in the Addendum to the IS/MND: 1) Mitigation Measure MM AQ-2
regarding Air Quality - VOC emissions (revised mitigation); 2) Mitigation
Measure MM CR-2 regarding Cultural Resources (revised mitigation); 3)
Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-3 regarding Hazards — Oil Wells (deleted and
replaced mitigation); 4) Mitigation Measures MM HAZ-4 and MM HAZ-5
regarding Hazards — Oil Wells (deleted mitigation); 5) Mitigation Measure
MM PS-6 regarding Public Safety — Oil Wells (revised mitigation); 6)
Mitigation Measure PS-9 regarding School Development Impact Fee
(added mitigation); 7) Mitigation Measure PS-9 regarding Library
Mitigation Fee (deleted mitigation); and 8) Mitigation Measure PS-10
regarding Parks Facility Fee (added mitigation). The Addendum makes
minor technical changes and corrections to the adopted Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Checklist, merely adds new information to the
MND and no new significant impacts or increase in impacts are identified.
Further, all of the mitigation measures listed in the IS/MND, including the
revised mitigation measures added by the Addendum that have been
deleted or substituted have been reviewed at a public hearing, and the
new mitigation measures are equivalent or more effective in mitigating or
avoiding potential significant impacts and will not cause any potentially
significant impacts on the environment. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines §§ 15704.1 and 15164(c), recirculation of the document is not
required, and based upon the evidence presented to the City Council, the
City need not prepare an environmental impact report for the project and
need only consider the IS/MND and the Addendum before making a
decision on the project (CEQA Guidelines § 15164).
SECTION 4: General Plan and Specific Plan. The proposed project conforms to the
City's General Plan and the 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan for the reasons identified
in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2721 as adopted on July 12, 2012. The
findings in Resolution No. 2721 are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth below.
-6-
SECTION 5: Approvals.
A. The City Council adopts the attached Findings of Fact as set forth in
Exhibit "A," which are incorporated into this Resolution by reference.
B. The City Council, in accordance with the requirements of Public
Resources Code §§ 21081(a) and 21081.6, adopts a Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (MMRP) as set forth in attached Exhibit "B," which
is incorporated into this Resolution by reference. The City Council adopts
each of the mitigation measures expressly set forth in the MMRP as
conditions of approval of the project. The other project conditions of
approval and compliance with applicable codes, policies, and regulations
will further ensure that the environmental impacts of the proposed project
will not be greater than set forth in the Addendum to the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and these findings.
C. The City Council amends the proposed Land Use Plan ("Land Use
Designations — Commercial Designations" subsection) of the Land Use
Element of the General Plan to reflect the addition of the 222 Kansas
Street Specific Plan, including a description of the allowed uses and the
maximum land use density allowed, to the Commercial Land Use
Designations subsection. The corresponding changes as set forth in
attached Exhibit "C," which is incorporated into this Resolution by
reference.
D. The City Council amends the proposed Land Use Plan ("Northeast
Quadrant" subsection) of the Land Use Element of the General Plan to
reflect the change of the Project area from Smoky Hollow Mixed Use to
222 Kansas Street Specific Plan. The corresponding changes as set forth
in attached Exhibit "D," which is incorporated into this Resolution by
reference.
E. The City Council amends the 1992 General Plan Summary of Existing
Trends Buildout (Exhibit LU-3) of the Land Use Element to reflect the
change of the Project area from Smoky Hollow Mixed Use to 222 Kansas
Street Specific Plan. The corresponding changes to the Land Use
Element as set forth in attached Exhibit "E," which is incorporated into this
Resolution by reference.
F, The City Council amends the General Plan Land Use Map to reflect the
change of the Project area from Smoky Hollow Mixed Use to 222 Kansas
Street Specific Plan. The corresponding changes to the Land Use Map as
set forth in attached Exhibit "F," which is incorporated into this Resolution
by reference.
-7-
G. Subject to the conditions listed on the attached Exhibit "G," which are
incorporated into this Resolution by reference, the City Council adopts the
Addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impacts for Environmental Assessment No. 959, Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program for Environmental Assessment No.
959, General Plan Amendment No. 12-01, and Subdivision No. 12-02.
SECTION 6: Reliance on Record. Each and every one of the findings and
determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence,
both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings
and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City
Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in
the record as a whole.
SECTION 7: Limitations. The City Council's analysis and evaluation of the project is
based on the best information currently available. It is inevitable that in evaluating a
project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the project will not
exist. One of the major limitations on analysis of the project is the City Council's lack of
knowledge of future events. In all instances, best efforts have been made to form
accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are the limitations on the City's ability
to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national problems and issues. The City
must work within the political framework within which it exists and with the limitations
inherent in that framework.
SECTION 8: Summaries of Information. All summaries of information in the findings,
which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The
absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a
particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
SECTION 9: This Resolution will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent
resolution.
SECTION 10: A copy of this Resolution must be mailed to Mar Ventures, Inc., SMPO
Lab, LLC, and to any other person requesting a copy.
-8-
SECTION 11: This Resolution is the City Council's final decision and will become
effective immediately upon adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED th's 4th da .of September 2012.
■Z- 1-'4./
Carl Jacobsof , .yor
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Tracy Weaver, 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. 4779 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 4th day of September 2012, and the same was so passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Jacobson, Fuentes, Fisher, Atkinson, Fellhauer
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
'/(141/'{
Tracy We er, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mark D. Hensley, City Attorney
By: �21-{ e,,,,a H. Berger, Assistant City Attorney
9 ,,, /f Y Y n ,
E I l i i- vii , d. c; a k in ot. 12,-4- t A" ,/
P:\Plannin &Building Safety\O Planning-Old\PROJECTS(Planning)\951-9751A A-959\Cit Council 09042O112Reso and
9 9
Attachments 09042012\EA-959 CC Reso 09042012.doc
-9-
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 4779
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
On February 26, 2009, the City of El Segundo Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
2651 approving an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for Environmental
Assessment No. 788 ("Segundo Business Park'). The project reviewed by the IS/MND
consisted of the construction of five office and light industrial buildings totaling 79,513 square
feet and their subdivision into 55 condominium air space units on a 4.68-acre site. The project
was approved for floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.37.
On January 19, 2012, the applicant filed an application for Environmental Assessment (EA) No.
959, General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 12-01, Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) No. 12-01,
Zone Change (ZC) No. 12-01, Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 12-01, Development
Agreement (DA) No. 12-01, Subdivision (SUB) No. 12-02 (VTM No. 71903), and Site Plan
Review (SPR) No. 12-01 ("222 Kansas Street Specific Plan"). This application modified the
original approval and consists of constructing a 45,152 square-foot USDA facility including
office, warehouse, and laboratory space, and two 2-story buildings totaling approximately
31,000 square feet intended for general/medical office and/or light industrial uses. The
proposed project would not be built under the development standards in the MM Zone. Rather,
a new Specific Plan would modify the permitted uses and development standards to
accommodate the specific needs of the proposed development. The modifications are
summarized in table 1 below:
Table 1
Comparison of Projects
Approved Segundo Proposed 222 Kansas Difference
Business Park Project Street Specific Plan Project
Project Area 88,249 square feet 74,858 square feet -13,391 Square
(Gross) feet
Site Area 4.7 acres 4.83 acres +.13 acres
Number of 5 Buildings 3 Buildings -2 Buildings
Buildings
Floor Area Ratio 0.37 0.34 -0.03 FAR
(FAR)
Number of Lots 1 Lot 5 Lots +4 Lots
Number of Air 55 Units 20 Units -35 Units
Space Units •
Building Height 35 Feet 40 Feet +5 Feet
Uses Light Industrial Office/laboratory/warehouse N/A
General Office General Office
Restaurant Medical Office
Light Industrial
Parking and 289 Parking Spaces, 232 Parking Spaces, -69 parking
Loading Spaces 5 Loading Spaces, and 7 Loading Spaces, and spaces;
Provided 5 Bicycle Spaces 14 Bicycle Spaces +2 loading
spaces; and
1
+9 bicycle
spaces
Landscaping 25,443 Square Feet 29,960 Square Feet +4,517 Square
Area Provided _ Feet
Public Benefit N/A $450,000 In-Lieu Payment for +$400,000 at
USDA Facility for the loss of project
tax revenue ($50,000 total Completion
will be reimbursed to the
developer after project
completion)
As a result of the project modifications, the City prepared an Addendum to the previously
adopted IS/MND, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA
Guidelines § 15164).
On July 12, 2012, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2721 and recommended
that the City Council approve Environmental Assessment (EA) No. 959, General Plan
Amendment (GPA) No. 12-01, Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) No. 12-01, Zone Change (ZC)
No. 12-01, Zone Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 12-01, Development Agreement (DA) No. 12-01,
Subdivision (SUB) No. 12-02 (VTM No. 71903), and Site Plan Review (SPR) No. 12-01 with
conditions.
After receiving, reviewing, and considering all the information in the administrative record
regarding the project, the City Council finds, determines, and declares for the 222 Kansas Street
Specific Plan Project as follows:
I. FINDINGS REQUIRED BY CEQA.
An Addendum was prepared under the authority of Public Resources Code § 21166 and
of 14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq. (the CEQA Guidelines). Specifically,
CEQA Guidelines § 15164(b) allows a lead agency to prepare an addendum to a previously
adopted negative declaration if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none
of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines § 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent
EIR or negative declaration are present. CEQA Guidelines § 15162 states that no subsequent
EIR or negative declaration must be prepared unless the lead agency determines on the basis
of substantial evidence in light of the whole record one or more of the following:
"(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of
the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase n the severity of previously identified significant
effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project
is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due
to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified significant effects; or
(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified
as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous
EIR or negative declaration;
2
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown
in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact
be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the
project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those
analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the
environment, but project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative."
FINDINGS REGARDING THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT.
Based on the impact comparison provided in the Addendum for Environmental Assessment No.
959, the revised project would not result in new significant impacts or a substantial increase in
the severity of impacts under CEQA. Thus, in comparison to the analysis provided in the 2009
IS/MND for Environmental Assessment No. 788, the revised project would not: a) result in
increased impacts related to degradation of the environment or impacts to biological or cultural
resources; b) result in increased cumulative impacts; or c) result in increased substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
A. Impacts Found to be Not Potentially Significant by the Initial Study
The Initial Study identified the following environmental effects as not potentially
significant. Accordingly, the City Council finds that the Initial Study, the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Addendum, and the record of proceedings for the 222
Kansas Street Specific Plan Project do not identify or contain substantial
evidence identifying significant environmental effects of the project with respect
to the areas listed below.
1. Aesthetics
a) Scenic vistas
b) Scenic resources within a State Scenic Highway
2. Agriculture/Forestry Resources (All thresholds)
3. Biological Resources (All thresholds
4. Cultural Resources
a) Historical Resources
5. Geology/Soils
a) Fault Rupture
b) Seismic-related ground failure
c) Landslides
d) Wastewater Disposal Systems
6. Hazards/Hazardous Materials
a) Safety Hazards Associated with a Private Airstrip
b) Wildfires
7. Hydrology/Water Quality
a) Housing within 100-year Flood Hazard Area
3
b) Structures within 100-year Flood Hazard Area
c) Levee or Dam Failure
d) Inundation
8. Land Use/Planning
a) Divide an Established Community
b) Conflict with Conservation Plan
9. Mineral Resources
a) Loss of Delineated Mineral Resource Recovery Site
10. Noise
a) Private Airstrip Noise
11. Population/Housing
a) Displace Housing
b) Displace People
12. Public Services
a) Other Facilities (Library)
13. Utilities/Service Systems
a) Complies with Solid Waste Regulations
B. Impacts Identified as Less Than Significant in the Initial Study (with no
mitigation required).
The Initial Study identified the following environmental effects as less than
significant. Accordingly, the City Council finds that the Initial Study, the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Addendum, and the record of proceedings for the 222 Kansas
Street Specific Plan Project do not identify or contain substantial evidence identifying
significant environmental effects of the project with respect to the areas listed below.
1. Aesthetics
a) Visual Quality and Character of the Site
2. Air Quality
a) Conflict or Obstruction of Applicable Air Quality Plan
b) Objectionable Odors
3. Geology and Soils.
a) Strong Seismic Groundshaking
b) Erosion or Loss of Topsoil
c) Unstable Geologic Unit or Soil
d) Expansive Soils
4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions (All thresholds)
5. Hazards/Hazardous Materials
a) Exposure to Hazardous Materials
b) Safety Hazards Associated with Public Airport
c) Emergency Plans
6. Hydrology/Water Quality
a) Violate Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements
b) Groundwater Supplies or Recharge
c) Alter Existing Drainage Patterns
d) Runoff Water
e) Degrade Water Quality
4
7. Land Use and Planning
a) Conflict with Land Use Plan, Policy, or Regulation
8. Mineral Resources
a) Loss of Valued Mineral Resources
9. Noise
a) Operational Noise
b) Groundborne Vibration and Noise (Operation)
c) Substantial Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels
d) Substantial Temporary Increase in Ambient Noise Levels
e) Public Airport Noise
10. Population and Housing
a) Population Growth
11. Transportation/Traffic (All thresholds)
12. Utilities/Service Systems
a) Exceed Wastewater Treatment Requirements
b) Construction or Expansion of Water or Wastewater Treatment
Facilities
c) Construction or Expansion of Stormwater Drainage facilities
d) Sufficient Water Supplies
e) Determination by Wastewater Treatment Provider of Adequate
Capacity
f) Sufficient Landfill Capacity
g) Construction or Expansion of Energy Production or Transmission
Facilities
C. Impacts Identified as Potentially Significant But Which Can Be Reduced to
Less Than Significant Levels with Mitigation Measures.
The City Council finds that the following environmental effects were identified as Less
Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Addendum, and implementation of the identified mitigation measures would avoid of
lessen the potential environmental effects listed below to a level of significance.
1. Aesthetics.
a) Facts/Effects.
(i) New Sources of Light or Glare. Reflective light or glare is primarily a
daytime phenomenon caused by sunlight reflecting from highly finished
surfaces, such as window glass or other reflective materials, and to a
lesser degree from lightly colored surfaces. Typically, the primary
cause of adverse glare is buildings with exterior façades of highly
reflective glass or mirror-like material from which the sun reflects when
it is at low angles in the periods following sunrise and before sunset.
Building design incorporates the use of glass surfaces through the
proposed buildings' exterior facades. Use of non-reflective textured
surfaces on building exteriors, as well as avoidance of the use of
reflective glass would reduce impacts related to daytime glare.
Additionally, landscaping adjacent to the structures would soften and
diffuse glare from the surfaces and windows of the new structures.
Implementation of mitigation measure MM AES-1 would reduce
5
impacts from daytime glare to a less-than-significant level by
eliminating or minimizing increased glare through the use of
non-reflective glass and non-reflective textured surfaces in the
proposed development.
During the evening and nighttime hours, substantial light or glare can
result from the installation of high-intensity lighting fixtures or the use of
highly reflective glass or other building materials. Headlights from
vehicles can also create light or glare if sensitive uses are affected.
New permanent sources of lighting would be established on the project
site as a result of project development that would increase the level of
light on the site from current levels, due to the low intensity nature of
the existing uses on the site. However, the only light-sensitive use in
the project area is the multifamily residential use located at the
northwestern corner of the intersection of Grand Avenue and Kansas
Street. The proposed project was designed to locate the office portion
of the proposed uses at the northwest corner of the project site, which
are nearest to and most compatible with the nearby multifamily
residential uses. In addition, the lighting proposed would be limited to
the amount required to safely light driveways, public space areas within
the project site, and the sidewalks along Grand Avenue and Kansas
Street. All outdoor lighting would be directed onto driveways, walkways
and public areas and away from adjacent properties and public right-of-
ways to avoid any light or glare impacts from lighting fixtures. Mitigation
measures MM AES-1 and MM AES-2 would ensure that potential
impacts from light and glare during evening hours are less than
significant.
Lighting would be established on-site during construction. Lighting used
during construction would consist primarily of security lights, although
lighting may be used for construction activities occurring during early
morning or evening hours, particularly in the winter. This lighting would
be temporary in nature and would not result in any substantial long-
term light or glare impacts. Mitigation measure MM AES-2 would
ensure that potential impacts from construction lighting are less than
significant.
In summary, project impacts related to a new source of light or glare
would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) Mitigation Measures:
MM AES-1. Expansive areas of highly reflective materials, such
as mirrored glass, are not permitted. Nonreflective building
materials must be used to the maximum extent possible to reduce
potential glare impacts.
MM AES-2. Exterior lighting must be designed to minimize off-site
glare. This may include, without limitation, the use of shielded or
recessed lighting fixtures.
6
c) Finding:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into
the project and the project has been conditioned to avoid or
substantially lessen the potential environmental effect as identified
in the MND.
2. Air Quality.
a)Facts/Effects.
(i) Air Quality Standard Violations (Construction)
The project site is located within the SCAB, which is under the
jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. The proposed project would develop
approximately 74,858 sf of office and laboratory uses in three buildings
(45,152 sf of testing laboratory uses in one building, 29,706 sf of office
uses in two buildings) that would not exceed a total FAR of 0.34. In
addition, approximately 232 parking stalls (plus 7 loading spaces)
would be provided on the project site and approximately 0.69 acre of
the 4.83 acres total would be dedicated to landscaping.
The proposed project would generate air pollutants as a result of
construction and operation-related emissions. The majority of
construction emissions are generated by construction equipment and
from dust resulting from construction activity, whereas operational
emissions are primarily related with vehicle trips associated with the
proposed project. The SCAQMD has developed the CEQA Air Quality
Handbook that establishes suggested significance thresholds based on
the volume of pollution emitted. According to the Handbook, any project
in the SCAB with daily operational emissions that exceed any of the
following thresholds should be considered as having an individually
significant air quality impact; however these thresholds do not apply to
cumulative development:
• 55 pounds per day (lbs/day) of ROG (reactive organic gases)
• 55 lbs/day of NOX (oxides of nitrogen)
• 550 lbs/day of CO (carbon monoxide)
• 150 lbs/day of PM10 (respirable 10-micron diameter particulate
matter)
• 55 lbs/day of PM2.5 (respirable 2.5 micron diameter particulate
matter)
• 150 lbs/day of SOx (oxides of sulfur)
For construction emissions, if a proposed project would exceed the
following thresholds it should be considered as having an individually
and cumulatively significant air quality impact.
• 550 lbs/day of CO
• 75 lbs/day of reactive organic gases (VOC)
• 100 lbs/day of NOX
• 150 lbs/day of SOx
• 150 lbs/day of PM10
• 55 lbs/day of PM2.5
7
Construction Phase
Project related construction activities would include site excavation,
grading and relocation of utility infrastructure; construction of the new
office and laboratory uses; paving of surface parking lots; and
architectural coating. For purposes of this analysis, it is understood that
construction would be completed in approximately 11 months, with
grading beginning in late summer/fall 2012. Building construction is
anticipated to begin in fall 2012, and completed in summer 2013.
Paving would begin in spring 2013 with completion anticipated in
summer 2013. Architectural coatings would also begin in spring 2013,
with completion in summer 2013.
The site is currently cleared and limited demolition would be required.
Construction activities would not involve substantial use of construction
equipment that would typically contribute to air quality impacts. Minimal
earth disturbing activities would occur and diesel equipment associated
with construction of the proposed project would be limited. It is
important to note that the MND prepared for the previous project
identified mitigation measures to limit the amount of PM10 and PM2.5
emissions released into the local area during construction activities,
consistent with SCAQMD Rule 403, as well as mitigation to reduce
VOC emissions during architectural coating. These mitigation
measures and the corresponding reductions in emissions were
accounted for in this analysis and are listed below.
The regional air pollutant emissions resulting from construction of the
proposed project were calculated using the California Emissions
Estimator Model (CaIEEMod), and the results are presented in Table 4
(Estimated Peak Daily Construction Emissions in Pounds per Day).
Further information regarding the modeling of construction-related air
quality emissions is included in the Air Quality Technical Memorandum
prepared for this analysis (Appendix A).
In general, the primary source of CO and NOx emissions would be
generated by construction equipment and off-site vehicle trips, while
the primary source of PM10 and PM25 emissions would be generated by
ground disturbance. As shown, the daily construction emissions are
below the SCAQMD thresholds for all criteria pollutants.
Mitigation measure MM AQ-2 of the 2009 MND required the use of low-
VOC paints and coatings. As the industry standard has changed for the
better since preparation of the 2009 MND, it is now recommended that
the previous mitigation measure MM AQ-2 be modified to require that
all architectural coatings reduce VOC emissions by a minimum of
20 percent below the CaIEEMod default of 250 g/I. This modification of
mitigation measure MM AQ-2 would reduce VOC emissions
accordingly and the proposed project would continue to result in a less-
than-significant construction air quality impact, similar to the finding of
the 2009 MND. This change in mitigation measure MM AQ-2 is
consistent with the current industry standard, which has changed since
preparation of the 2009 MND for the project site, and has the same
intent as the mitigation measure MMAQ-2 incorporated in the previous
8
MND and is equally, if not more, effective that the previous mitigation
measure. Accordingly, it is not considered new or substantially different
mitigation.
Table 4 Estimated Peak Daily Construction Emissions in Pounds per Day
Peak Day Emissions in Pounds per Day
Emission Source ROG NOx I CO Sax 1 PM,o PMu
Site Grading(Month 1,2)
On Site 6.15 48.06 29.04 0.05 5.09 3.89
Off Site 0.09 0.09 1.06 0.00 0.16 0.01
Maximum Daily Emissions 6.24 48.15 30.10 0.05 5.25 3.90
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No
Building(Month 3,4,5,6,7)
On Site 4.60 30.24 18.61 0.03 2.02 2.02
Off Site 0.90 5.64 7.78 0.02 1.10 0.21
Maximum Daily Emissions 5.50 35.88 26.39 0.05 3.12 2.23
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No
Building,Paving,Coating(Month 8,9,10,11)a
On Site 47.63 57.29 37.21 0.06 4.33 4.33
Off Site 1.03 5.37 9.32 0.02 1.46 0.21
Maximum Daily Emissions 48.66 62.66 46.53 0.08 5.79 4.54
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No
Architectural Coating(Month 12)
On Site 39.17 2.96 1.94 0.00 0.27 0.27
Off Site 0.08 0.09 0.83 0.00 0.14 0.01
Maximum Daily Emissions 39.25 3.05 2.77 0.00 0.41 0.28
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No
SOURCE: Atkins(2012) (CaIEEMod data are available in Appendix A).
a. Assumes that activities may occur concurrently and reports worst case emissions from all activities combined.
With incorporation of mitigation measures MM AQ-1 and MM AQ-2, the
proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact to air
quality during construction activities.
(ii) Result in a Cumulative Increase in Pollutant for Which the Region Is
in Nonattainment
9
The project site is located within the SCAB, which is under the
jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. Despite consistent improvements in
pollution levels in the SCAB over the past thirty years, levels of ozone
(for which ROG and NOx are precursors), PM10, and PM2.5 are above
national and state standards. Therefore, projects could cumulatively
exceed an air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected
air quality exceedance. In determining the significance of the proposed
project's contribution, the SCAQMD neither recommends quantified
analyses of cumulative construction or operational emissions, nor
provides separate methodologies or thresholds of significance to be
used to assess cumulative construction or operational impacts. Instead,
the SCAQMD recommends that a project's potential contribution to
cumulative impacts should be assessed using the same significance
criteria as used for project specific impacts; that is, individual
development projects that generate construction-related or operational
emissions that exceed the SCAQMD-recommended daily thresholds for
project-specific impacts would also cause a cumulatively considerable
increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the Basin is in non-
attainment.
The proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD daily
significance threshold and would not result in a cumulatively
considerable impact. Accordingly, with incorporation of mitigation
measures, the proposed project would result in less-than-significant air
quality impact.
(iii) Expose Sensitive Receptors
To determine potential criteria pollutant concentrations during
construction activities, SCAQMD has developed localized significance
thresholds (LST) to determine maximum allowable concentrations for
projects 5 acres or less in total area for on-site emissions of CO, NO2,
PM10, and PM2.5. Off-site emissions would be generated from soil and
debris hauling and vendor/worker trips along area roadways, and would
not be considered localized, and are, therefore, not evaluated for LST
emissions.
LSTs are developed based upon the size or total area of the emissions
source, the ambient air quality in each Source Receptor Area (SRA) in
which the emission source is located, and the distance to the sensitive
receptor. The project is located in Source Receptor Area (SRA) 3. The
sensitive receptor in the proposed project vicinity that has the largest
potential to be affected by construction activities is the multifamily
residential use located approximately 100 feet from the project site, at
the northwest corner of Kansas Street and Grand Avenue. Table 6
(Localized Significance Thresholds for SRA 3) summarizes the LSTs
for construction. The threshold for construction listed in this table is
based on the approximately 5-acre site with a receiver located
approximately 100 feet from the proposed construction site. A project
with daily emission rates below the thresholds during construction is
considered to have a less-than-significant effect on local air quality.
10
Table 6 Localized Significance Thresholds for SRA 3
Pollutant 100 Feet(within 50 meters)
CO 1,984 lbs/day
NO2 189 lbs/day
PM10 46 lbs/day
PM2.5 11 lbs/day
SOURCE: SCAQMD (2012).
The proposed project site is approximately 4.8 acres in size, and
construction emissions are therefore comparable to the LSTs identified
in the look-up table presented as Table 6. Total worst-case
construction emissions for the proposed project with mitigation are
included in Table 7 (Total Construction Emissions with Mitigation and
Localized Significance Thresholds). Table 7 compares the total worst-
case construction emissions to the LSTs for SRA 3.
Table 7 Total Construction Emissions with Mitigation and Localized Significance
Threshold
Maximum On-Site Thresholds of Quantify of Pollutant Significant
Pollutant Construction Emissions Significance° Exceeding Threshold Impact?
CO 37.21 1,984 lbs/day 0 No
NO2 57.29 189 lbs/day 0 No
PMio 5.09 46 lbs/day 0 No
PM2.5 4.33 11 lbs/day 0 No
SOURCE: SCAQMD 12012).
a. Thresholds of Significance are measured at 50 meters from the proposed project site.
Table 7 shows the maximum on-site construction emissions with
mitigation measure MM AQ-1 incorporated. With incorporation of
MM AQ-1, LSTs would not be exceeded and the proposed project
would result in a less-than-significant impact to air quality.
b) Mitigation Measures:
MM AQ-1. The project Applicant's construction contractor must
implement all rules and regulations by the Governing Board of the
SCAQMD that are applicable to the development of the project
(such as Rule 402 [Nuisance] and Rule 403 [Fugitive Dust]) and
that are in effect at the time of development. The following
measures are required to implement Rule 403. These measures
are identified by SCAQMD as reducing PM10 levels generated by
construction activities between 30 and 85 percent depending on
the source of PM10.
11
(a) Water trucks must be utilized on the site and be
available to be used throughout the day during site grading
and excavation to keep the soil damp enough to prevent
PM10 levels being increased by construction activities.
(b) Areas scheduled for grading, or actually being
graded, must be wetted down in the late morning and after
work is completed for the day.
(c) All unpaved parking or staging areas, or unpaved
road surface must be watered three times daily or have
chemical soil stabilizers applied according to
manufacturer's specifications.
(d) Exposed piles (e.g., gravel, sand, and dirt) must be
enclosed, covered, watered twice daily, or approved soil
binders must be applied to exposed piles according to
manufacturer's specifications.
(e) The construction disturbance area must be kept as
small as possible.
(f) All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose
materials must be covered or have water applied to the
exposed surface before leaving the site to prevent PM10
and PM2.5 from reaching the surrounding areas.
(g) Wheel washers must be installed where vehicles
enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads and used
to wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each
trip.
(h) Streets adjacent to the project site must be swept
at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried over
to adjacent roads.
(i) Wind barriers must be installed along the perimeter
of the site.
(j) All excavating and grading operations must be
suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour
over a 3-minute period.
MM AQ-2. The project Applicant's construction contractor must
use low-VOC or ultra-low VOC paints that reduce VOC emissions
of all architectural coatings by a minimum of 20 percent from the
CaIEEMod default, or a maximum of 200 g/I.
12
c) Finding:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into
the project and the project has been conditioned to avoid or
substantially lessen the potential environmental effect as identified in
the MND.
3. Cultural Resources.
a) Facts/Effects.
(i) Archeological Resources. The project site was previously fully
developed and was already subject to extensive disruption, including
the introduction of fill materials. Any archaeological resources which
may have existed at one time have likely been previously disturbed. In
addition, the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC)
records search previously conducted for the project site revealed that
no archaeological resources are located on the project site (included in
Appendix C [Cultural Resources Correspondence]). Nonetheless,
construction activities associated with project implementation would
have the potential to unearth undocumented resources and result in a
potentially significant impact. Therefore, the potential for damage to, or
destruction of, these resources would be a potentially significant
impact. If archaeological resources are discovered during construction,
the Applicant would be required to implement the following mitigation
measure MM CR-1, which would ensure proper evaluation and
treatment of archaeological resources, if found.
Compliance with mitigation measure MM CR-1 would ensure that
implementation of the proposed project would not cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource.
Therefore, potentially significant impacts would be reduced to a less-
than-significant level.
(ii) Paleontological Resources. The project site was previously fully
developed and was already subject to extensive disruption, including
the introduction of fill materials. Any paleontological resources which
may have existed at one time have likely been previously disturbed. In
addition, a records check for paleontological resources was requested
from the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History for the project
site previously. This records search revealed that no paleontological
resources are located on the project site (Los Angeles County Museum
of Natural History Letters, included in Appendix C). Nonetheless,
construction activities associated with project implementation would
have the potential to unearth undocumented resources and result in a
significant impact. Therefore, the potential for damage to, or destruction
of, these resources would be a potentially significant impact. However,
implementation of mitigation measure MM CR-1, as discussed above in
Section V(b), would reduce any potential impacts to a less-than-
significant level.
(iii) Human Remains. A Sacred Lands File records search was
requested from the Native American Heritage Commission previously
for the project site. The records search failed to indicate the presence
13
of Native American cultural resources in the project area (Native
American Heritage Commission Letter, included in Appendix C). In
addition, no formal cemeteries are known to have occupied any portion
of the project site, so any human remains encountered would likely
come from archaeological or historical archaeological contexts. Human
burials, in addition to being potential archaeological resources, have
specific provisions for treatment in §§5097 of the California Public
Resources Code (PRC) and Sections 7050.5, 7051, and 7054 of the
California Health and Safety Code (HSC). Because the area is
underlain by disturbed soils, the presence of human remains is remote.
However, if remains are encountered, disturbing these remains could
violate PRC and HSC provisions, as well as destroy the resource.
Implementation of mitigation measure MM CR-2 would ensure that this
potential impact is less than significant by ensuring appropriate
examination, treatment, and protection of human remains, if any are
discovered.
Compliance with mitigation measure MM CR-1 would ensure that
implementation of the proposed project would not cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource.
Therefore, potentially significant impacts would be reduced to a less-
than-significant level.
b) Mitigation Measures:
MM CR-1. In the event that archaeological/paleontological
resources are unearthed during project subsurface activities, all
earth-disturbing work within a 100-meter radius must be
temporarily suspended or redirected until a qualified archeologist
has been provided the opportunity to assess the significance of
the find and implement appropriate measures to protect or
scientifically remove the find. Construction personnel must be
informed that unauthorized collection of cultural resources is
prohibited.
If the resource is determined to be significant, the archaeologist or
paleontologist, as appropriate, must prepare a research design for
recovery of the resources in consultation with the State Office of
Historic Preservation that satisfies the requirements of Public
Resources Code §21083.2. The archaeologist or paleontologist
must complete a report of the excavations and findings, and must
submit the report for peer review by three County-certified
archaeologists or paleontologists, as appropriate. Upon approval
of the report, the County must submit the report to the Los
Angeles Archeological Information Center and keep the report on
file at the County of Los Angeles. After the find has been
appropriately mitigated, work in the area may resume.
MM CR-2. If human remains are discovered during any
demolition/construction activities, all ground-disturbing activity
within 50 feet of the remains must be halted immediately, and the
Los Angeles County coroner must be notified immediately,
pursuant to Public Resources Code §5097.98 and Health and
14
Safety Code §7050.5. If the remains are determined by the
County coroner to be Native American, the Native American
Heritage Commission (NAHC) must be notified within 24 hours,
and the guidelines of the NAHC must be adhered to in the
treatment and disposition of the remains. The project developer
must also retain a professional archaeologist with Native
American burial experience to conduct a field investigation of the
specific site and consult with the Most Likely Descendant, if any,
identified by the NAHC. As necessary, the archaeologist may
provide professional assistance to the Most Likely Descendant,
including the excavation and removal of the human remains.
(c) Finding:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into
the project and the project has been conditioned to avoid or
substantially lessen the potential environmental effect as identified in
the MND.
4. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
a) Facts/Effects.
(i) Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials Construction
and operation of the proposed project would not require extensive or
on-going use of materials that would create a significant hazard to the
public or environment. Likewise, implementation of the proposed
project would not involve substantial transport or disposal of hazardous
materials. While not anticipated to be substantial, some hazardous
materials common to office and light industrial uses would be used in
varying amounts during construction and operation of the proposed
project. An example of hazardous materials handling during
construction includes fueling and servicing construction equipment on-
site, and the transport of fuels, lubricating fluids, and solvents. These
materials are generally disposed of at non-hazardous Class II and III
landfills (along with solid waste). It should be noted that potential
impacts with respect to the oil well located on the project site are
addressed below.
It is expected that the proposed development would not involve
substantial use of hazardous materials. However, hazardous materials
common to office and light industrial uses can be expected. The use,
transport, and disposal of any hazardous materials during operation of
the proposed project is subject to federal, state, and local health and
safety regulations. The following mitigation measure would ensure that
this impact is less than significant by requiring compliance with
applicable laws and regulations that would reduce the risk of
hazardous materials use, transportation, and disposal through the
implementation of established safety practices, procedures, and
reporting requirements.
Adherence to MM HAZ-1 and federal, state and local regulations would
ensure that potential risks resulting from the routine use of hazardous
15
materials and disposal of hazardous wastes would remain less than
significant.
(ii) Release of Hazardous Materials into the Environment. The
project site was formerly home to International Rectifier Corporation
(IRC), a worldwide supplier of power semiconductors that convert
electrical energy to operate power supplies, lighting ballasts, and motor
drives, but now stands vacant. A series of Environmental Site
Assessments (ESA) have been conducted to evaluate the potential for
hazards and hazardous materials on the project site. These ESAs are
summarized in Appendix D [Peer Review Summary of Hazardous
Materials Reports]) prepared for this analysis, and the conclusions and
recommendations of each ESA are included therein. Most recently, a
Phase I ESA dated October 21, 2011, included an observation of the
project site, a review of the site history (including all previous
assessments), review of available regulatory records and an
environmental assessment of the project site. The Phase I ESA
concluded that as of 2011 there was no evidence of recognized
environmental conditions at the project site, with the exception of the
following:
• Chlorinated solvent petroleum hydrocarbons and metals impacts
exist due to historical industrial operations
• Petroleum hydrocarbon impacts due to former oil production and
oil wells on site
• Soils stockpile on site
• A clarifier on the exterior of the facility located to the west is
equipped with a lock box, but this site is not part of the Tiered Permit
program
In addition, the 2011 Phase I ESA recommended the following:
• Request agency oversight to develop a workplan for the
remediation of the project site to include chlorinated solvents,
petroleum hydrocarbons and metals.
• The project site may require methane mitigation systems be
implemented for former oil producing areas in addition to on-site oil
wells.
• Profile the on-site oil/debris stockpile for all components analyzed,
including asbestos.
• Confirm that the site was not part of the Tiered Permit program
during operation by IRC.
However, since completion of the Phase I ESA, the City determined
that the underground storage tanks previously identified on the project
site were removed. Additionally, the on-site oil well investigated as part
of the previous ESAs was officially abandoned in accordance with
DOGGR guidelines. Recently, a second oil well was thought to exist on
the project site. However, after extensive investigation, this second
well could not be located. In the event that this well is located during
16
construction, the well will be abandoned according to DOGGR
regulations.
Construction Effects
Construction activities for the proposed project could result in the
exposure of construction personnel and the public to previously-
identified hazardous substances in the soil. Exposure to unanticipated
hazardous substances could also occur from previously-unidentified
soil contamination caused by migrating contaminants originating at
nearby listed sites. Exposure to hazardous materials during
construction activities could occur as a result of any of the following:
• Direct dermal contact with hazardous materials
• Incidental ingestion of hazardous materials (usually due to
improper hygiene, when workers fail to wash their hands before eating,
drinking, or smoking)
• Inhalation of airborne dust released from dried hazardous
materials
If any previously unidentified sources of contamination are encountered
during grading or excavation, the construction activities required could
pose health and safety risks capable of resulting in various short-term
or long-term adverse health effects in exposed persons. In order to
address the potential for encountering unknown contamination within
the project area, mitigation measure MM HAZ-2 would minimize the
potential risk of contamination by implementing investigation and
remediation efforts at the project site to a less-than-significant level.
Implementation of mitigation measure MM HAZ-2 and adherence to all
local, State and federal regulations would reduce potentially significant
effects associated with the potential exposure of unknown hazardous
materials through project construction activities to a less-than-
significant level.
Operational Effects
It is anticipated that operation of the proposed project would not create
a significant hazard to the public or the environment involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment. This analysis
reviews the potential possibilities of such a risk.
The proposed project would include the use of common hazardous
materials typical of office and laboratory facilities in addition to paints,
solvents, cleaning product, and similar materials. Additionally, grounds
and landscape maintenance could also include the use a variety of
products formulated with hazardous materials, including fuels,
cleaners, lubricants, adhesives, sealers, and pesticides/herbicides. The
properties and health effects of different chemicals are unique to each
chemical and depend on the extent to which an individual is exposed.
The extent and exposure of individuals to hazardous materials would
be limited by the relatively small quantities of these materials that
would be stored and used on the project site. As common maintenance
17
products and chemicals would be consumed by use and with
adherence to warning labels and storage recommendations from the
individual manufacturers, these hazardous materials would not pose
any greater risk than at any other similar development in the immediate
project area.
The oil well identified on the project site was abandoned in accordance
with DOGGR guidelines, and the City of El Segundo Fire Department
confirmed that all underground storage tanks were removed in
accordance with applicable regulations.' Recently, a second oil well
was thought to exist on the project site. However, after extensive
investigation, this second well could not be located. In the event that
this well is located during construction, the well will be abandoned
according to DOGGR regulations. Therefore, mitigation measures MM
HAZ-4 and MM HAZ-5 associated with operation of the identified oil-
wells adopted as part of the previous MND would no longer be
required. Mitigation measure MM HAZ-3 of the previous MND was
modified to reflect comments received by the Department of
Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources
(DOGGR). However, the modified MM HAZ-3 has the same intent as
that incorporated in the previous MND and is equally, if not more,
effective than the previous mitigation measure. Accordingly, it is not
considered new or substantially different mitigation.
The recognized environmental conditions identified in the 2011 Phase I
ESA and recommendations made to reduce potential impacts related to
these conditions are essentially the same as was identified and
recommended in the previously adopted MND. Therefore,
implementation of MM HAZ-2 would ensure that all recognized
environmental conditions identified in the 2011 Phase I ESA are
properly addressed prior to implementation of the proposed project.
Accordingly, operation of the proposed project would have a less-than-
significant impact regarding potential exposure to hazardous materials
during construction or operation; no new mitigation measures would be
required.
(iii) Emissions or Handling of Hazardous Materials Near Schools. The
closest school to the project site is the El Segundo Middle School,
located at 332 Center Street, located within one-quarter mile of the
project site. Hazardous emissions could occur during construction of
the proposed project. However, these emissions would be within the
acceptable levels as established by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District. Further, emissions related to construction are not
considered acutely hazardous. As required by mitigation measure
MM HAZ-1, the Applicant's construction contractor would be required to
adhere to all regulations pertaining to hazardous materials. Operation
of uses of the proposed project would include the handling and/or
storage of potentially hazardous materials on the project site.
However, the types of hazardous materials anticipated would be limited
to commonly-used types and quantities for similar office and laboratory
facilities. Further, as described above, the oil well known to exist on the
' Steve H. Tsumura, Email communication between Environmental Safety Manager, City of El
Segundo Fire Department, and Carrie Garlett, Senior Project Manager, Atkins (April 16, 2012).
18
project site has been abandoned in accordance with DOGGR
guidelines and therefore, would not be a safety risk to El Segundo
Middle School. Recently, a second oil well was thought to exist on the
project site. However, after extensive investigation, this second well
could not be located. In the event that this well is located during
construction, the well will be abandoned according to DOGGR
regulations. Compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal
laws and regulations would regulate, control, or respond to hazardous
waste, transport, disposal, or clean-up in order to ensure that
hazardous materials do not pose a significant risk to the school. If
ground contamination is found at the project site before or during
construction of future development, implementation of mitigation
measure MM HAZ-2 would ensure the health and safety of all students,
staff, and visitors to El Segundo Middle School. Therefore, the
proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related
to the emissions or handling of hazardous materials within the vicinity
of a school.
b) Mitigation Measures:
MM HAZ-1. The Applicant and construction contractor must
comply with existing hazardous materials regulations, which are
codified in Titles 8, 22, and 26 of the California Code of
Regulations, and their enabling legislation set forth in
Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code. In addition,
the Applicant and construction contractor must comply with
applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations pertaining
to the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous waste, including,
but not limited to, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations and
as implemented by Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations.
MM HAZ-2. In the event that soil or groundwater contamination is
encountered that could present a threat to human health or the
environment during construction in the project area, construction
activities in the immediate vicinity of the contamination must
immediately cease. If contamination is encountered, a Risk
Management Plan must be prepared and implemented after
completion of additional soil investigation to the satisfaction of the
Fire Department and the Planning and Building Safety
Department. The Risk Management Plan must (1) identify the
contaminants of concern and the potential risk each contaminant
would pose to human health and the environment during
construction and post-development and (2) describe measures to
be taken to protect workers and the public from exposure to
potential site hazards. Such measures could include a range of
options, including, without limitation, physical site controls during
construction, remediation, long-term monitoring, post-development
maintenance or access limitations, or some combination thereof.
Depending on the nature of contamination, if any, appropriate
agencies must be notified (e.g., El Segundo Fire Department). If
needed, a Site Health and Safety Plan that meets Occupational
Safety and Health Administration requirements must be prepared
19
and in place before commencement of work in any contaminated
area.
MM HAZ-3. A site plan that identifies the proposed project and
the distance between the proposed buildings and any on-site oil
wells must be submitted to the City of El Segundo for approval.
The buildings of the proposed development must be built "not in
proximity to a well" as defined by DOGGR which includes
development with: 1) two adjacent sides that are free and clear of
structures or property lines for no less than 10 feet, 2) a third side
that is free and clear of structures or property lines for no less than
50 feet, and 3) a fourth side to remain open (no defined distance
from structures or property lines).
(c) Finding:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into
the project and the project has been conditioned to avoid or
substantially lessen the potential environmental effect as identified in
the MND.
5. Noise
a) Facts/Effects.
(i) Construction-Related Temporary Noise. The project site is
currently vacant and located within a fully developed, urban area. The
primary source of noise within the project vicinity is vehicular traffic.
Noise in the City also occurs from various stationary sources, such as
mechanical equipment associated with building structures, the
operation of various types of businesses, and noise sources produced
at residential locations.
The analysis presented below is based on the Noise Technical
Memorandum prepared for the proposed project (Appendix E of the
Initial Study). Existing daytime noise levels were monitored at four
locations around the project site, which are depicted in Figure 9 (Noise
Monitoring Locations), in order to identify representative noise levels at
various areas. The noise levels were measured using a Larson-Davis
Model 814 precision sound level meter, which satisfies the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) for general environmental noise
measurement instrumentation. The noise measurements were taken on
April 18, 2012, starting at 2:12 PM and ending at 3:10 PM; each lasting
for 15 minutes. The average noise level and source measured at each
location is identified in Table 10 (Existing Daytime Noise Levels at
Selected Locations). The existing noise levels ranged from a low of
61.1 dBA Leq to a high of 67.8 dBA Leq. These daytime noise levels are
characteristic of a noisy, urban area.
Implementation of the proposed project could result in increased
ambient noise levels during construction and operation.
20
! '*,__ v .113,3 A� r i. - —- -
4 }i s,
1 _l 1
1 1. 3 ..7 a; z. '
--
... AVE
i
GRAND
{ ' —Z- — „—,. I
I . .�+�c
I 1
I. ' .
■
r
i ,
® o
J
m
W
y
a
1. h
■J •�- �'r�EELL,SEGUNDO BLVD -
V7 t:
n Tiv—i
,s�:�._�r,nK+ae.a�iiaoaRwmims`ai�l`•_-._E • i�-�__;� . . — s��y ,
Figure 9
Noise Monitoring Locations
ATKI NS
Table 10 Existing Daytime Noise Levels at Selected Locations
Sound
Start Duration Level Min Max
Position Time (minutes) (dBA L1) dBA dBA Sources
Location 1:301 Kansas Street(Residential) 2:12 PM 15 65.1 52.3 78.5 Traffic on Grand
Avenue
Location 2:233 Kansas Street(Commercial) 2:30 PM 15 61.1 49.4 79.1 Traffic on Kansas Street
Location 3: 145 Kansas Street(Commercial) 2:48 PM 15 59.5 50.0 74.5 Traffic on Kansas Street
Location 4: North side of Grand Avenue—between Kansas Traffic on Grand
Street and Washington Street(Commercial) 3:09 PM 15 67.8 51.9 79.5 Avenue
SOURCE: Atkins(April 18,2012). ,
Construction Noise
Project-related construction activities would include site excavation,
grading and relocation of utility infrastructure; construction of the new
office and laboratory uses; paving of surface parking lots; and
21
architectural coating. The USEPA has compiled data regarding the
noise generating characteristics of typical construction activities. These
data are presented in Table 11 (Noise Ranges of Typical Construction
Equipment) and Table 12 (Typical Outdoor Construction Noise Levels).
These noise levels would diminish with distance from the construction
site at a rate of approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance. The
nearest sensitive receptors are multifamily residential uses, located at
the northwest corner of Grand Avenue and Kansas Street,
approximately 100 feet from the proposed project site. Based on the
information presented in Table 12, construction activity noise levels at
the residential uses to the northwest would range from approximately
71 to 80 dBA during construction of the proposed project. Most
construction activities associated with the proposed project would not
generate continuously high noise levels, although occasional single-
event disturbances from grading and external building construction are
possible.
Construction-related noise is exempt pursuant to El Segundo Municipal
Code § 7-2-10(D) as long as construction-related activities are limited
to the hours of 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM Monday through Saturday, provided
the noise level does not exceed 65 dBA and the limits established in
Subsection 7-2-4(C) of the El Segundo Municipal Code.
Subsection 7-2-4(C) would allow for a 20 dBA increase above 65 dBA
(to 85 dBA) to occur for no more than one minute and a 15 dBA
increase (to 80 dBA) to occur for a maximum of one minute. As noted
above, construction noise levels are anticipated to reach up to 80 dBA
at the nearest residential receptor and would exceed these standards.
However, the MND prepared for the previously approved project
identified mitigation measures to reduce construction related noise
levels.
22
Table 11 Noise Ranges of Typical Construction Equipment
Construction Equipment Noise Levels in dBA Leg at 50 feefa
Front Loader 73-86
Trucks 82-95
Cranes(moveable) 75-88
Cranes(derrick) 86-89
Vibrator 68-82
Saws 72-82
Pneumatic Impact Equipment 83-88
Jackhammers 81-98
Pumps 68-72
Generators 71-83
Compressors 75-87
Concrete Mixers 75-88
Concrete Pumps 81-85
Back Hoe 73-95
Tractor 77-98
Scraper/Grader 80-93
Paver 85-88
SOURCE: USEPA(1971).
a. Machinery equipped with noise control devices or other noise-reducing design features does
not generate the same level of noise emissions as that shown in this table.
Table 12 Typical Outdoor Construction Noise Levels
Noise Level at 50 Feet Noise Level at 100 Feet
Construction Phase with Mufflers(dBA Leg) with Mufflers(dBA Le,;)
Ground Clearing 82 74
Excavation/Grading 86 80
Foundations 77 71
Structural 83 77
External Finishing 86 80
SOURCE: USEPA (1971).
The noise levels at the off-site sensitive uses were determined with the following equation from the HMMH Transit
Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment,Final Report:Leq=Leq at 50 ff.-20 Log(D/50),where Leq=noise level of noise
source,D=distance from the noise source to the receiver,Leq at 50 rt=noise level of source at 50 feet.
Mitigation measure MM NOI-1 would be required of the currently
proposed project. Implementation of mitigation measure MM NOI-1
would reduce noise-related construction impacts to a less-than-
significant level by requiring BMPs and restricting the time during which
excessive noise-producing construction activities may occur.
23
As a general rule, a sound wall is able to reduce noise by 5 to 10 dBA.
Accordingly, noise levels would be reduced to levels that would be
below the City of El Segundo's 80 dBA limit. With implementation of the
mitigation measures, construction of the proposed project would not
expose noise sensitive receptors to noise levels in excess of the
established standards, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.
The proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact
associated with a temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the proposed project vicinity by complying with the mitigation
incorporated.
Construction Phase
As discussed above, noise generated during construction of the
proposed project could create temporary or periodic increases in
ambient noise levels. However, construction work hours are restricted
by provisions in the El Segundo Municipal Code, and implementation of
mitigation measure MM NOI-1 would reduce this impact to a less-than-
significant level.
(ii) Groundborne Vibration and Noise (Construction).
Certain construction activities that would occur under the proposed
project would have the potential to generate groundborne vibration.
Table 13 (Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment)
identifies various vibration velocity levels for the types of construction
equipment that would operate at the project site during construction.
Equipment utilized during project construction would include dump
trucks, front loaders, excavators, which are similar to small bulldozers,
and concrete mixers, material delivery and soil export trucks, which are
similar to loaded trucks and a crane for building construction.
Table 13 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment
Appmdmate VdB
EgWpment 50 Feet 75 Feeh
Large Bulldozer 81 75
Caisson Drilling 81 75
Loaded Trucks 80 74
Jackhammer 73 67
Small Bulldozer 52 46
SOURCE: U.S.Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration,Transit Noise Impact and
Vibration Assessment(May 2006).
a. The vibration levels at the off-site sensitive uses are determined with the following equation from the
HMMH Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment,Final Report:Lv(D)=Lv(25 ft)—20log(D/25),
where Lv=vibration level of equipment,D=distance from the equipment to the receiver,Lv(25 ft)_
vibration level of equipment at 25 feet.
Based on the information presented in Table 13, vibration levels could
reach a maximum of approximately 81 VdB at 50 feet from the source
24
and 75 VdB at 75 feet. The nearest vibration sensitive receptors
(residential) are located at approximately 100 feet from the project site
and vibration levels would be below 75VdB. Accordingly, sensitive
receptors would not experience vibration levels during construction of
the proposed project that would exceed the Federal Transit
Administration's (FTA) vibration impact threshold of 85 VdB for human
annoyance. Further, mitigation measure MM NOI-1 would ensure that
construction-related vibration impacts do not occur during recognized
sleep hours and that vibration-inducing construction equipment is
staged as far from vibration sensitive receptors as feasible.
Operation of the proposed project would not include any substantial
sources of groundborne vibration. Accordingly, the proposed project
would not expose sensitive receptors on- or off-site to excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. This impact would
be less than significant, and no additional mitigation measures would
be required.
b) Mitigation Measures:
MM NOI-1. The project Applicant's construction contractor must
require by contract specifications that the following construction
best management practices (BMPs) be implemented by
contractors to reduce construction noise levels:
(a) The project's construction contractor must provide
advance notification to adjacent property owners and post
notices around the boundaries of the Proposed Project site
with information detailing the schedule of construction
activities.
(b) All construction equipment with a high noise-
generating potential, including all equipment powered by
internal combustion engines, must be muffled or controlled.
(c) All noise-generating construction equipment and
construction staging areas must be placed away from
noise-sensitive uses, where feasible.
(d) High noise-producing activities must be scheduled
between the hours of 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM to minimize
disruption to sensitive uses and delivery of materials and
equipment must occur between 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM.
(e) Noise attenuation measures must be implemented
to the extent feasible, which may include, without limitation,
noise barriers or noise blankets.
(f) Machinery, including motors, must be turned off
when not in use.
25
c) Finding:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into
the project and the project has been conditioned to avoid or
substantially lessen the potential environmental effect as identified in
the MND.
6. Public Services
(a) Facts/Effects
(i) New or Physically Altered Fire Protection Facilities. The proposed
project would receive fire services from the El Segundo Fire
Department (ESFD). First response service to the proposed project site
would be provided by Fire Station #1 located at 314 Main Street,
approximately one mile east of the project site. The second response
team would be Fire Station #2 located at 2261 East Mariposa Avenue,
approximately 1.3 miles northeast of the proposed project site. On
average, there are 14 to 18 firefighters on duty 24 hours a day,
seven days a week.2 ESFD has 53 sworn personnel and 7 nonsworn
personnel.3 The current person-to-population ratio of sworn positions in
the ESFD per every 1,000 residents is 3.18. The average response
time for ESFD is four to five minutes.4 The ESFD is organized into six
divisions: Administration, Suppression, Paramedic, Prevention,
Environmental Safety, and Emergency Management. ESFD is a
participating agency of the Los Angeles County Fire Department
(LACoFD) CUPA program. LACoFD handles hazardous materials
response for the City of El Segundo.
The proposed project would increase the City's building inventory by
approximately 74,858 sf, would generate new activity on the project
site, and increase traffic, the combination of which could result in
increased emergency response demands for both fire protection and
paramedic services, and fire prevention inspections. The project would
be in compliance with all applicable State and Local Building and Fire
Codes. Compliance with applicable regulations would reduce potential
impacts to the City's fire department. With the implementation of the
following mitigation measures, impacts on fire protection services
would be less than significant. Impacts are not significant enough to
necessitate additional fire personnel or facilities.
Implementation of mitigation measures MM PS-1 through MM PS-6
would ensure that the proposed project would not result in significant
impacts to fire services. The project would install a fire sprinkler
protection system throughout the building and would be in compliance
with all applicable State and Local Building and Fire Codes. Through
2 City of El Segundo website, El Segundo Fire Department Frequently Asked Questions,
http://www.elsegundo.org/depts/fire/faq.asp (accessed May 7, 2012).
3 City of El Segundo website, El Segundo Fire Department Frequently Asked Questions,
http://www.elsegundo.org/depts/fire/faq.asp (accessed May 7, 2012).
4 Lisa LeCates, email correspondence (Re: Staffing and response time information request)
from El Segundo Fire Department to Jennifer Lee, Environmental Specialist, Atkins (May 2,
2011).
26
implementation of the ESFD required mitigation measures and
payment of the Fire Services Mitigation Fee, as required by the City,
impacts on fire protection services would be less than significant. The
on-site oil well that was investigated as part of previous ESAs prepared
for the project site has been officially abandoned in accordance with
DOGGR guidelines and conditions at the site would not increase the
need for fire protection services. In addition, a second oil well was
thought to exist on the project site. However, after extensive
investigation, this second well could not be located. In the event that
this well is located during construction, the well will be abandoned
according to DOGGR regulations and would not increase the need for
fire protection services at the site.
(ii) New or Physically Altered Police Protection Facilities. The
proposed project would receive police protection services from the El
Segundo Police Department (ESPD), which serves the entire City. The
ESPD operates out of one station, located approximately one mile west
of the project site at 348 Main Street. The project site is located at the
intersection of Kansas Street and Grand Avenue, which is included as
part of the City's established patrol route. Patrol officers travel along
these streets regularly. ESPD is staffed with 65 sworn personnel and
32 nonsworn personnels currently protecting 16,664 residents and a
daytime population of approximately 70,000 in the City. The person-to-
population ratio of sworn positions in the ESPD per every 1,000
residents is 3.9 (or 1 sworn officer per 256 residents) and the ratio of
sworn positions for the daytime population is 1.077 (1 sworn officer per
1,077 individuals). The ESPD dispatches all calls from the 348 Main
Street station regardless of the crime location within the City.
Therefore, it is assumed that response times to the project site and the
vicinity would be consistent with the City's average response time
(daytime and nighttime) of 3 minutes and 30 seconds.6
The proposed project would not add new residents to the site.
However, the proposed project would result in the addition of
approximately 147 employees during the day. The addition of 147
employees to the daytime population would result in a change to the
person-to-population ratio for the daytime population would be 1.079 (1
sworn officer per 1,079 individuals). This would not result in an
increase in response time and would therefore not impact public safety.
Additionally, the proposed project would generate fewer employees
than were estimated for the previously approved project. The
previously approved project was estimated to result in 200-225
employees at the project site daily; accordingly, the proposed project
would result in a conservative reduction of approximately 53 employees
at the project site daily. A less than significant impact was identified
with respect to police protection in the previously approved MND. As
s Brian Evanski, Captain, email correspondence (Re: Staffing and Response time information
request) from El Segundo Police Department to Jennifer Lee, Environmental Specialist, Atkins
(May 3, 2011).
6 Brian Evanski, Captain, email correspondence (Re: Staffing and Response time information
request) from El Segundo Police Department to Jennifer Lee, Environmental Specialist, Atkins
(May 3, 2011).
27
described above, conditions have not changed substantially since
preparation of the previously approved MND, and therefore, impacts to
police protection services would not occur beyond the less-than-
significant impact previously identified.
Accordingly, the proposed project would not trigger the need for
expansion of new existing facilities or the need for additional ESPD
staff. Nonetheless, the following mitigation measures would help
reduced impacts to less than significant.
(iii) New or Physically Altered School Facilities. The project site is
served by the El Segundo Unified School District (ESUSD). ESUSD
currently has two elementary schools, one middle school, one high
school, and one continuation school. The current total enrollment for
ESUSD is 3,242 students with a pupil to teacher ratio of 23.1.'
The proposed project would not create a need for new or expanded
public school facilities. Since the project includes office and laboratory
uses and would not substantially induce new residents into the City
(which includes children who would attend schools administered by the
ESUSD), the project would not place an additional burden on the
school district. The proposed project would be required to pay the
School District Development Impact Fee to the El Segundo Unified
School District. This fee is required by State Law. Mitigation measure
MM PS-9 has been incorporated into the Addendum to further reduce
all potential impacts to schools. Impacts to existing schools in the area
are anticipated to be less than significant.
(iv) New or Physically Altered Park Facilities. Currently the City of El
Segundo has a total of 74.26 acres of park space, which equates to
approximately 4.46 acres of parks per 1,000 residents.8 Implementation
of the proposed project would result in new office and laboratory uses
on a currently vacant site. No residential units would be developed as
part of the project, and thus, the project would not induce substantial
population growth in the City. New employees at the proposed project
site may utilize local parks and recreational facilities, including the
nearby public golf course (The Lakes at El Segundo). In addition, the
proposed project could indirectly induce new residents in the City.
Nonetheless, it is not expected that this potential would significantly
exacerbate the existing parks to resident ratio. Finally, with the
incorporation of mitigation measure MM PS-10, the proposed project
would be required to pay the Parks Facility Fee which would reduce all
potential impacts to recreation to a less-than-significant level.
(b) Mitigation Measures:
MM PS-1. The Applicant must pay the City of El Segundo Fire
Service Mitigation Fee at the rates established by City Council
Resolution No. 4687, before the City issues a building permit.
Education Data Partnership, District Profile: El Segundo Unified School District (May 24,
2011).
8 City of El Segundo, El Segundo Public Facilities Impact Fee Study(August 30, 2010), p. 30.
28
MM PS-2. A fire life safety plan, which must include complete
plans and specifications, must be submitted to the El Segundo
Fire Department (ESFD) for review and approval before
commencement of construction of any portion of the proposed
development.
MM PS-3. The Applicant must provide fire access roadways to
and throughout the property and submit a layout plan to the ESFD
for approval before the City issues a building permit.
MM PS-4. The Applicant must provide water flow and on-site fire
hydrants as required by the ESFD.
MM PS-5. The Applicant must submit separate plans for ESFD
approval. The following installations require separate ESFD
approval:
(a) Automatic fire sprinklers.
(b) Fire alarm system.
(c) Underground fire service mains.
(d) Fire pumps.
(e) Emergency generators.
(f) Any aboveground or underground storage tanks
including elevator sumps and condensation tanks.
MM PS-6. When the City issues building permits, if the second oil
well (location currently unidentified on the project site) is not
permanently capped, the project Applicant must comply with the
mitigation measures identified in the letter "Request for Alternative
Method, California Fire Code Section 3406.3.1.3.2 Segundo
Business Park 222 Kansas Street and 1545 East Franklin
Avenue" (dated September 16, 2008).
MM PS-7. The Applicant must pay the City of El Segundo Police
Service Mitigation Fee at the rates established by City Council
Resolution No. 4687 before the City issues a building permit.
MM PS-8. The Applicant must submit a strategic security plan,
which must include definitive plans and specifications, to the El
Segundo Police Department (ESPD) for review and approval
before commencement of construction of any portion of the
proposed project. The strategic security plan must include, without
limitation, the following items:
(a) Depending upon the size of the structure and its
location in relation to the streets, the size of the displayed
address may vary from a minimum of 4" to as much as 24".
29
(b) Building entrances and exits must be limited in
number and located in a manner to increase security and
visibility of the building.
(c) All landscaping must be low profile especially
around perimeter fencing, windows, doors and entryways
taking special care not to limit visibility and provide
climbing access.
(d) Adequate street, walkway, building and parking lot
lighting must be provided to enhance security.
(e) Provisions for on-site security personnel.
MM PS-9. The Applicant must pay the City of El Segundo School
District Development Impact Fee at the rates established by the El
Segundo Unified School District before the City issues a building
permit.
MM PS-10. The Applicant must pay the City of El Segundo Parks
Facility Fee at the rates established by City Council Resolution
No. 4687 before the City issues a building permit.
(c) Finding:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into
the project and the project has been conditioned to avoid or
substantially lessen the potential environmental effect as identified in
the MND.
7. Recreation
a) Facts/Effects.
(i) Increase Use of Parks. Implementation of the proposed project
would not significantly increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational. Physical impacts to recreation
facilities are generally associated with population growth. The proposed
project would result in the construction of office and laboratory uses
that would not result in a direct population increase. As no housing
would be developed under the proposed project, implementation of the
proposed project would not generate substantial population growth that
would increase the use of recreational facilities. Further, a recent
Impact Fee Study prepared by the City established a Parks Facility
Fee. Accordingly, with the incorporation of mitigation measure
MM PS-10, the proposed project would be required to pay the Parks
Facility Fee which would reduce all potential impacts to a less-than-
significant level. Implementation of the proposed project would result in
a less-than-significant impact to recreational facilities.
(ii) Construction or Expansion of Recreational Facilities. The
proposed project does not include the construction of recreational
facilities. Phase 1 would include a small landscaped area along Kansas
Street, adjacent to the USDA building and Phase 2 would include
30
employee patios along Kansas Street and Grand Avenue, adjacent to
the two proposed buildings. However, these facilities do not constitute
recreational facilities. As explained above, the increase in population at
the project site, or the indirect population increase within the City,
would not exacerbate existing park standard ratios. Further, with the
incorporation of mitigation measure MM PS-10, the proposed project
would be required to pay the Parks Facility Fee which would reduce all
potential impacts to a less-than-significant level. Accordingly, the
proposed project would not require construction or expansion of
existing recreational facilities, resulting in a less-than-significant impact.
b) Mitigation Measures:
MM PS-1. The Applicant must pay the City of El Segundo Parks
Facility Fee at the rates established by City Council Resolution No.
4687 before the City issues a building permit.
c) Finding:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into
the project and the project has been conditioned to avoid or
substantially lessen the potential environmental effect as identified in
the MND.
D. Insignificant Cumulative Impacts.
The City Council finds that the Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and the record of proceedings in this matter do not identify or contain substantial
evidence which identifies significant adverse cumulative environmental effects
associated with the 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan Project with respect to the areas
listed below:
1. Aesthetics.
2. Agricultural Resources.
3. Air Quality.
4. Biological Resources.
5. Cultural Resources.
6. Geology and Soils.
7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
8. Hydrology and Water Quality.
9. Land Use and Planning.
10. Mineral Resources.
11. Noise.
12. Population and Housing.
13. Public Services.
14. Recreation.
31
15. Transportation/Traffic.
16. Utilities and Service Systems.
VI. SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.
The City Council finds and declares that substantial evidence for each and every finding
made in these Findings is contained in the Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration,
which are incorporated herein by this reference, and in the record of proceedings in the matter.
To the extent applicable, each of the other findings made by the City Council in connection with
its approval of the entitlement applications listed in Section I above are also incorporated by this
reference.
P:\Planning&Building Safety\O Planning-Old\PROJECTS(Planning)\951-975\EA-959\City Council 09042012\Reso and
Attachments 09042012\EA-959 CC Reso Exhibit A-CEQA findings.doc
32
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 4779
Exhibit B
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO
SEGUNDO BUSINESS PARK
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Addendum
Environmental Assessment EA-959
General Plan Amendment GPA 12-01
Specific Plan Amendment SPA 12-01
Zone Change ZC 12-01
Zone Text Amendment ZTA 12-01
Subdivision SUB 12-02
Site Plan Review SPR 12-01
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Prepared for
City of El Segundo Planning and Building and Safety Department
350 Main Street
El Segundo, California 90245
Prepared by
Atkins
12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430
Los Angeles, California 90025
July 2012
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
INTRODUCTION
The Addendum to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the 222 Kansas Street
Specific Plan Project identified mitigation measures to reduce the adverse effects of the project in the
areas of: aesthetics, air quality, cultural resources, hazards/hazardous materials, noise, and public services.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that agencies adopting MNDs ascertain that
feasible mitigation measures are implemented, subsequent to project approval. Specifically, the lead or
responsible agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring program for mitigation measures incorporated
into a project or imposed as conditions of approval. The program must be designed to ensure
compliance during applicable project timing, such as design, construction, or operation (Public Resource
Code Section 21081.6).
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) shall be used by the City El Segundo staff
responsible for ensuring compliance with mitigation measures associated with the 222 Kansas Street
Specific Plan Project. Monitoring shall consist of review of appropriate documentation, such as plans or
reports prepared by the party responsible for implementation, or by field observation of the mitigation
measure during implementation.
The following table identifies the mitigation measures by environmental resource area. The table also
provides the specific mitigation monitoring requirements, including implementation documentation,
monitoring activity, timing and responsible monitoring party. Verification of compliance with each
measure is to be indicated by signature of the mitigation monitor, together with date of verification. The
Project Applicant and the Applicant's contractor shall be responsible for implementation of all mitigation
measures,unless otherwise noted in the table.
City of El Segundo 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan Project MMRP 1
0
cz
0
a)
y O
0
E c
N
et 0_
0
0
Q)
. a
6 a)
N
U)
CM
0
C
C 0
SZ
N
N
C) 0 0 0) 0 C v) N
ID .0 DI C C C C
.1 2 ac I ° m E ° m E ° m E = m E ° m E
it ex . a) cu N ° cu CO a) C13
m aa) o aa) Q)
(1n �U w 00 w �0 w �0 w Cl en w Cl� N
• p O o cam' o .EZ' o •C .�' o c .- o c w CU
U o L) a t!) 0 a co 0 a U) 0 a 0 CU
v) 0 CL CO
U
U t °,
m
C v) o C
�a) N
co C C 71 O O O cm
O t � -0 _o -0 f° _o
c
�a e p Y O O d •
(1) cc
Z cu U L V 0 L ° _ c
L
'� C O E C E C C O E C C
H co co < (d V=) Zr) O O
C W a .u, a a .N a Cl = a .P a Cl 0 N
a1 H 0 o R' y vi
W o a) a) c v
_
— C °-c
.°c m a a CO c0 'O a) •� °- = ° 0 °C a == 0 c a) c c>
O Of -, as a -
°' o a °_ o o a) '5 o
�� �e Of
O.0 c CO o ° c ' 0 � a �
Oc a c ao) -
°
c c c 5 C a) C .• a) O va) 0 C a)= O > co . a c o C 6
,i 0 Q. E _ o ) um- c -0 c c c
) •a) c cn a) a cn • i o
o cn o — a) O N a
d (° .c L d (a •C 0 OCt CO -0
L a) E a) a, a a)
-, 7 co 7 L a) N L ° 0
C
N E O> C N a7 ° �y X O Q) M n • L Cr ,TD L
La--' w a)
• +
O '2 E c ca N Q E " a) d a) - CU a° —a) ' � � L h
'o ° a ° )E CO i Z - Cl.) ° c w ca u o ca .0 a) a a a) a m a CO
V)
2 p E X ) c ` a a) N ° a>,c a co c - . (o ) a) is w
a c 73 6-o) -
0 C a) O co °C c N V . n▪ 7 a)N O) N▪ ` O o 7 O > ° c E O) Cl.) .-•
O O > a —CO a = 0 C - (
a E > ° = ca ) ° i r °) ' 0 ° .- a) E n 7
c ° a) - _ io C rn .▪ n o -0 co m5 o m 4 Y m o o a a) —
a) i 0 Q 0 a a) 2 -c c . 2 cn E
a o a0 U E C ° C L > v ` a) L E c U >•o -° ° a) (1)i - a) v > 0 o
`
0
°
-0 a) o M , •h xa in ` Y > 0 0 L a c.)i L a) ° 0 ,_ 0 V) 0 _0 a) > c
N y O o a E a) = a) c as > c -g o c ° ° -0 o a)
? a ° ai LL) c E ) a) co n s °ce (n O E E ` m L ° a o � c° o N co - a ' ° m
a co Z E i_ 0 ° a , O c 0_o a) ° c c o 0>".�
a i (° N ~ N U as CO O O ▪ N N L '" L (` a) N O a d a) -0 •o
d) > E E o — `j L a) c co) m y c E E a) a) a: °) a E (cno a E • fl e a) •,a)
• co O o) a g ca co o E E Ms a) a o a) a) ` co > .� ca ° 22 c° O (a — °c E a
`p CCU E '-co aa9 i °)o a a) > •� N a) = a) a) ca in -° .S Q 0 E -o ¢ ° . co
o w CS _o aa)) W 'in = H .E C7 (a � Cl ° rn o`oo • • •
cO
C - N
C Z N v.) a
a C a a
a) U 2 2 2
_
>
>
\
0
o 0
- E
2
\
a
t 2
G
2 U,
%\
\
A §� � £ i7 i � f \
� ` \ m E = G E = 2 E _
2
CL) $ 7 � 17k /
_ d t$ m E3 m_ 2e m 23 -
e2 \ [ ® E � [ � \
() t o ..._>,..ƒ 3 o »
$ \
U >
c : o { \ § \ :as
0
\ / 2 I $ ■ 2C
0 § a 3 ® f ±
a) � ■ _ 0 \ § / m
= g § k
C ƒ $ k k
� ƒ # k n
C
0) . � k = k / I
2 § C C) = \ f
C o8 Q9 ® �\ U m °
o �a a) � § \ � . m �
� � 2= =2 / \ \k
C k -0 / 2 2
ko — \ mf — -
_ Eg
0 IX � � ) 2 " 2
2
CD \ // $k \ \ o \
— — « e = �
a) ° C > m S
2 6 6 m a o \ a � = 7 / - ' etc
k £ \ = G $ E _ § 2 � £ ° 2 f ®
/ � � g = yf £ 7722 .2 \
O. / = Ip
§ q =
b / \ \ \ \ / \ � � � / o \ 0 = W � � \
/ E 7 e _ 2 o o f 2 \ k m - a) •-
§ 77 2 as o_ � ] 2 � = � I�
■ _ 22 � o � = e .v sa 0 0 ° 0C' - oo
at 2 � — 2 C ( tC(3 � ° a) > CU = 2o3c = R
° § f E . ® m � kj ® � � - - -0 \ \ \ �
© > 2 •a5 _ — _ ° / § $ /J ° � �
k \ �I § � � aSa � § m § e \ \ % 2 / � ® E / \ � / C \ 7 \
$ \ 2 8 = 4 m — e § 7 / 2 e c o
0 § � e � g q2 .2= » a " � � / / 2 \ § Gg ® ° ° Mkt
ce . � $ _ � C6 ta — # = 2bmEm = - o � � % @ _
§ G
_ ■ E �\\ a/ / � f2 £ o2a2sv / 72 ( � ® .2\ / a\ \ R / \ c }
� g maa — = a - �� i � �
0 2 \ � = ate — ass a) —
§ = o \ � f ._ = a _ ._ _ $ % 00 ` % 2 = U5
` \ \ EeGq 22 ` 22 $ / 7 \ kEk � E § \ ( � � ƒ E7 § Ea
■ a) o_ » E2cn I0- ® @ § m = a, = e =
■ E 3 = * » m e G a E E£ e $ § E g $ # c \ k ) k 2 Q o •E E ° o q
\ • • • • • • 7 § / / = > E \ _ k \
f �� a
g C'
k � 0
ti
CL
Ce
\
f ./
ot
E c
2 ƒ
g
/
E
v)
% ƒ
G
2 U)
%\
41/ 2 \
) a i32 D2 0
k0� 7 -0f .2 = 0 J
I: ■ 0 7= « co 0)
� d � E° \ \ 0 \
» ' » mm � E
22 � ma / § Ea 0
0k . E2 00_ « 3 x
£ $ 0
U
7 ■■ »
tin 7
a §a $ § §
2 ■ o o § \
.-
2 ct § %
0 Nr
CD
C o / /
G % (A
C 0 \ _ � f =
/ �� � § § / E$ //
2, U) m \ ®=- C
cr)o o o k cu% ƒ2 \ CO
■ m7 $ � £ f
S e o o e \
_0) 2m / S ± § 2 = m
E CL 4- § k - § G ]
Za7 % ® f � ® + @ / $ 2 « «
> � § � k � � � ,a= E 0 �® EEk \
g22 \ 2 \ o_ a, s - c0 \ 4g\ 2 \ ,
E $ 72 ' E � = \ � § ca \E ° e/ t � 2 = $ �
o tE7 ® I / k � � m@Rc « 2 �727 % cc
b e a E 2 a 2 2 a) 3 Ec' ° � k k
° 2 :$ § / f 2 . § E @ g
e § E2
222 � � &/ \ \ :\ , - E _I E
0 oo@ � � r « = 7 $ \ % \ o 0eo $ g0 » �
/ � � \ � � � \ \ k \ k / 2k / /® �2 \ 7k
a mo o % = § � m � - o -g I § � • � 2 r 3 /
2 S = 2 — e § « = G m _ C f o
■ tcr Ea_< m © © en % o to04- 0- a
_ E m G § ° ° & — ° E
c E &•g s E t E C m « c e $ — CD
§ ° Ce § � = 'e � ' r0 ): � # ® 3222
E \ 7 \ � \ % \ % k7E § � � t * f _ " __. 00
` 22u « f £ 2 = a ° g - ƒ t . - 2C ) -
: % $ = $ ` = 2 ° f # § # O as
meG — e § a' o £ a) a) o � otpppE7u
\ E @ &% ao § o CO E23 » as • cooco o < ecc %
�z
\
Ze
c U
0_
sY
U
4)
O
a
O -
E c
U 0
cc
a
U
U
4)
a
V)
IN
co
0
C
0
lz
a N
0 0) m e o) C) N
Uy _ ° o I =- I c•�•C -°o a c a0 0 c U) 0 O c 0 0 O
iD C C 0 c 0 c c a ••� D
y- O X00 E � m E a) E X0=0 E cm E c
i5. Q c C) •t rn a .` E to) -C 0) -C D
�p ope as aai cA ° aai U 0 Cn cca °-
N U b w E 0 w cop < a w �p w 0)C -
Y i ° c ai �> c m- '° o c w
CO is .. ca ca is a`) m Z'' 0
u mg 5 V) 0 aU) Z2 Uaco Udcr) t
U I U
c In m y cv
� �C of d 0 .p -J o O a
ii C c0 Y ~ O. ` _co O)cr,Q) z c 0 a) (D co O a a) O C
ce _a U C C Cl) 0 — O) ) C ca
O C = o E a C E E
C U) 0 = 0 0 0 O U) 0 Zr)
O .� 0 D CO a O) CL .c? o_ o_ LO
_ O O QQ a) a C
. )
L N C > co 0) O C C O C N C 0. C CO
c Gi a m N p a s a y 0 c o a
C O cu Ct CO U > o a a o a o � a) c o
O of aL a) _ a c 2 .6 3 c a) a a ' m 0 'E o Tu h
C °' Ui ° c g ¢ a c ca ddd °' c c c� °' c° c
•
C C m n) ca 'cn z .o a = m ca ° , a a m ca
C f C— c c _ a) v) C 3 c) @ °) C a: Cl) a
p c o .o a) co c 0 a c o)
O O a cu co c8 •°- c co c c°n ca •- > to_c co rn c .o c
i= Z a C is w .o CO a)
U 0 O O O C C f6 N
CD CZ 0
0) C o) a a°i c aa) -°o c .j
0 C 0_ 0_ fa C O C - 0 C@ 0 a) ° 0 C D
0 a
U 0 CO Cl) Q C as J 0 O O_ ` a .0 0 O f� fa
> o a a a) ° c a) >, ° 0 > y ° a . a) m > a a a) C c a) a) >-
C C (6 C •--� 2 •� 0 0 O = .-- 1.,-
_ ¢ Y_ O L6 ... w 0_ (a ca C 0 L--' O E -
C E O _-zt E a (a C a a
°) o) c U = --' - ca z a ca 0- cn ° J U 0_J 2 is N a o o v ° 0 o a) ° c L 0 -O CU
o . _
o rn �' o 0 c in ¢ o E N m rn • ca = o o E 0
Q -0 - E a) a 2 ° c 0 0 0 L a g o ° >.. o c c°`a °O vi co c o a) c v -c E
E Q is E co a a) E '° _c -C I- .c3 0 co ca cn CD c a) E 0 - c _ O ` to •
O C a a) ac T c m Q 0 c a) '� 0 E c o O -Ti c ° Q a 0 ° 0
E d ca U) a) .E c . vi a) E D _a o c) O 1- .O a) o h a A c c N
C 0 N cn CO 00 C .> N O .0 Q > T o - L 0 O a C C O -0 1 co 0 E
O ft ° .q o f 0 E z ° ") a c .S s SU co o N .E CU cm U o 3 c o)-°: E
e v°i .> • _c Ern c 0 ° CO N o 0 a 3 co o o x v aai U o aS 0 a' 0 c vi c Ku' •C > c
_ o
01 p a E o 0 0 a) .> 0 O a) ` `= s ° _ ° w 0 C o= .° •ia
° U ° c coo) o rn 0 is `` c co a) in ao ° a? c 3 E '°- o ca c
mc ca a) N ° o z ° c a o _= ° 1° cn 0'E -o ° o n 5 s aa, o .E
Q .`� o ? o ,ri c a) a = 0 ° :° c y ° cn E U u°)i a E 2 a1 0 E v) o o E m
a c •4 .3 o c 0 o O 2 �_ o •-• c c ( .� c N ° c C w E to 2' o ° p Z o
ce c� a3 b . 0 a) c) 0 3 O c U) 0 C m a) UU)) U fa U E °- �.. CO .� ai N a) c° ..-
v) •> U
-O i E cnn a) -0 ` a E 0 0 w- _c as `) O (a ° a (a c
C 0 a) c ••— E o c0) •o o E o - E c -0 3 = cn ca a 0 F o -a a 0 c°) t 11
01 c c �'� E a°i o O E c Q a o v coca = E 3 U 2 m - cn o o c U c a
c ca O C a fy V U a _m d c a as o a O 0_ C a) CO .Q C O fa > c o
i�. _ o ° Z ° o as . a o -0 rn•- c o ° ca E a)O o is c .� �' 0 a) 0 ° o •C aci v°i aci ° Q a o •
00t130) -0 .= 0 0 c°) -0 v
Z L E 7 L O „ a) - •- In „,-S a > L Q 0 y c0i .—CD u) _c a) E _ ° c�a '— Q L_ O °0_.—°) 0)_ C C 0 c
C '5 _o c°) a V) .o z E o m -o c`a aX) UU)) Ci c a Ci 0 I- c°.) E co a s a)) 0 < 3 � -o = CC 0 E .0 2 C a'S co CO
C C N
� C
Z
O ti t.)
0
0
ce
■' `' 0
g � N
V M.. • L
} d
c
G) o
at
': ' 0
U
,�, N
N
If:i O
to
C
5
:i<.
N cn I O A) O c O
C c. C '� a,
_ _
i8.i cr -0 E 0 m 4 r 7 m E
M a) m a) o s.° m cm as 0
E d c a c!1 a J fn cc° a N
O O) 0)
r. W e LJJ c p `:'. LlJ c
N 0 O c O 'c :Sy O c ' ,�
c a)' c° C a) 0 3 a) cv
U • Uan vacs i.5 5.7 cn
>,t f U c
rf
e v I g x 0,c m
a
L .I c O m (3 _0 a)Q i p C7) A CO
0.c 0 E .21
7 0 o a)
D)� 1.% .,
.O+
o 1� N N e 0 0 •y ,0 C C O '
N
' j O O c y y c O a r=• C N cp
C C.pp N f° a 6 c O Q
ti= .. "I O C C I .G `,O N A y, — a O E Z I c •tie O
.N c0) N.=-. N q!d C
0) O a) c c° '� 0 C
c c° a) a) •0 O c 7
0
5 .c - 2 2 cc a '.,.. . U o
1 Y — a) a) 0 O N N L Cl) .L-.. N '� a) C L U) y a7 y c o
Ca CO y IL d .0 L _c o O O 0 c° W CO L O CO co +...' L •c ,� N a a) g� J N �L
CO 0 cA c O -o N C , .Q p o) U = "- 107= in = aa) V w U p c 3 rn = v_� co c ° f,..: , '3
a. cpca) 0) 0000. - m � ° 0c0c y EE °) ca) a! C � ` •� a l, a o � �
E. c° c a) o 0 a) v
:� •ca, ca cv2 c° 4- c o .0 -0 c) c c `a• =±. rn 0 0 o `o ,`::.,fi1 om
S. E O_-o .,_ - a) a) N O ' w . O O O C 0 C7 N ` a) q•.`:: m cn
E Q a) 7 o c.)) O E "0 ` 0 v' c m c c� �° i6 a) E -0 L 'c L O 0- , 0 y u``
a 'g c a n3 po ° c 3 c c 0 L a) 0 C 'co c " .o a ° O ° c o d
0 0 m 3 rn ° .0 z, E o 0 o E E 0 a) 0 `o w _ :;, ° m
9 0 c E ° c E c 0 c� o ° a) a> >' ° w a) c _0 °
eE o 0 0 _ �n is E a w -0 ),.: c"
et aci c m cv ca ° m E °: m a a�i C c a o _o a z 0 2 l c a
C 0 in C c ca •' a c 0 E a) 0 — O a) u) ~ 0 C `- U O 0 L in 2 .� C
U .cn 53 a c c , 0 ° ) _ a o a) o d E Eo o e -� N c 0 _ aai E 0 _0 . N ° o E c 3 E
E ems, c E E v) 0 c c o a-o o cn c E C E .o rn - m_ 0 ° 3 - o ° 0 ``0 rn 49 O c 0 0 a) d CO C 0 1' C .O ., ••— c f° to E .. c) f° •E C Cl_ a) N 0 ; Cl) CO N a) C
0. N C C .� N Q' L C in Y a, .c E O 0 ° c a) ,cn ca c C 0 E a E _ N 2 ,_ crj 0 c w 0
CD pp c° t c CO f° O a7 O 'V co c a• a) m to n3 a- O O O c 0 E
ce G) E a a) a« y j c) m e c m c E c m a) 0 0 E c v CO 0 0
c Cv o -0L m -0 a) 0 0 2 0 0 o c° a) o 0 3 0 c 2 c 0 Q Ti)
co a) cca ~ Y c -0 x c=°) c a.� co c a Q a co) L 0 ° ° w 0 cO Q.-a'
0
O V N d O C C C L p O ° ' U O) LL a3 T c U �p O N N p N U c•C w E 0 ° E E -E 0 2 n d o) .0' c m o a? m '6 cc° v y `m r. • m
rn E :�' aci :� c 0 0 0 c or)o cn c a c in = 5 0_4-cn c ccnn '�• m a) 14") a) I ° 0 2
O a > aa) a0 -- a) E c 0 .a aa) - •c co o am; -o aa)a) Y`o w 0 >. o.o m e co O m y. ::: aai c
:2 m E c ^ 0 0 0 0 c 0 v a a) c c c c 0 c y v c L 2 o
0 CD o 0 � a L 0 E a_ E . v E c° ci m Cn m w o_ Q c° W a a._ .,2 c° _ � H v
--:z
d M .r
O
%.) M
F
0_
CY
a
U
'w °a: O
a §f: i.
C
d O
ix ti }'
N
I: a
v)
d N
I-
! in
N
4 d 0
p L vs
C
a?:=I 0 sz
bg«';e N
C C c o o 5 ,;� c a)
4b Q ° m E i, _ om E CL
0)
O OC m a) T a) N
cn .� � o .� P'.V:. o .c Z' w
m w:r . m
U Uav) €, UaIA
0) _ h; rn
C vs s
•C c c o
j cti 2
cn an e G Z V 'i'yy L U
U C
-a .S Y ).- c
�1 o o
=
. y p
_
C E C '�, ; O
C C a) 1 ;.
O C ''.i, "-'::.1 Q
C c - c m
Nm •= o .i......c
.�-. y ..O 2 ! .-::. �O Cl)
C f 0 c
• OC > U CD 0 s Cl) O)
a O O T
� CL O).0 E'ft..;ye a CO Jo
O NL _ j V 0 cn cn N .r1:k LL -0 U
' N V) 7 O
v rte+ c E c m C E a) :;' o a) a)
2 y m m a ° a) E t o E <:i Y t w E cif
E 0
• coi ) c _o CD 0 CD a) _ 0 E 0 3 _ o r•'. r,e ci, m o
0 Cl)u) 7 O C
a) 7 OO O a f wk
CU a b. o a) O a)
0 ▪ m a) •0 7 D C C E E cn O arc ,L)0 ._17)(7) O wa'i' W
$ o c m a E
O c d Ica. -.6 . a) c .N o co 8 - 2 m cn c — ° y «CD
o a) O n O c D p 0 a ' E . c 2. o m a o
° U ` v S 0. -- a � o a) ° 'rn �) - = ¢ mm E z
0 o
d o u) — ) c ) a) a)2 o c 0, m o c a: �
o w 2 C = �a m c' a) . c a) E c
'
N S C as O' C u CO U a .N m O g c m Q O
E o ' c ° ti c f m
ce S 8 C a) N m o . ° a� .c uo O •E p C .� 5 ui U 615 gp a f) LL O a
0C _ _ C a)fn C O "0 'U . — 0 = 0 7 . O 0
)C c ; C 2 d � O c3 c c E .a - c
o a .' 9.__.,_65- o ° 2 .rnf, ° E ) -o o aZ a °
a) N O a) m E C 41 2 ° C C O t O E a)_ U .V E
0) c a) 0 E 0 a o o > o a N0 N L c 2 c -0•c m > ` ` v CD c m _a CD .y ? v v a a o m a) a) o ° O c s t ) c) a _a) — ° ° v ° c cn o Z _ E •° d
Q .? U o O a) a) H a o__ c c) Q ) a-o Q ca co 2 ui as . . c
_a.c?
t. a) Z o
o
c° • • • • • • ; Hv) C) .N
c d t i 7
C
_ U
2
0_
Ce
U
4)
4 •o
0 0_
E C
a, 0
U
im-
0
4)
a
v)
N
v)
N
0
Ln
C
SZ
N
N
CV
ty d l a c � a °c) I a _°c) l 0 c 0
!N -0 o -- a)a) -0 0 m _-_ N a0 (, �_ N 0 -00 N -- C
Ii
L. C c c c = c c = c c c c
= , CO E = m E = 503E = N CO m E J
1= w p v) Ca a (I) i
0
ce
U
U)
•O
a
E C
0
U
U)
a
an
U)
N
. O
C
0
Y
N
° 0) o) N
W m C I C c
UJ 'h -o a) 'o aac) C c - 0 0
a o = Oo E = Em E = Oo E = m E D
13 a a°') c a CO a m aa) 0 ca cn a aai (1)
Q a
d o cm_ as ai
a ix N (I >b W E 0 W_ C C"0 W �� W C)0 N
• C ° c ° c ai ° c N ° c a) W
,C C ' «s ° '•o ° CO co m is
O
U a Uaco c) aaco C) E. co 00 CO
N 0
0) > 0) CO
01 d a) 0 a) a) c a) c
i p • O�E Q c. 7 a) 7 N
p . _o - _o - .
-
a Q^ -6 O O _O V _°a
0 4) Z 2 a) a co a) a) ° o
ce
U C U C c
U C t 0
0 C .
C E C E C
co I_ C = E
0_ -N 0
CL .N Q d .u, Q CL .5.12 Q 0)
0
CO a
C a) CU
i O U O c O O
O 44 4 75 W > a°') -o •5 ,_ > >
N 2 O 2
= a a 2 as Et
50 C aL O Cl) CO CO C O CO 0
` OTC O CO N co •fn N N
c C ° C c °- C C U O C O C
O
CO
Q C 0 co O) U '0 C co Q a1
f1 t1 O 0 C
O CI) @ N C > U o a) to) (U CO
= O „, C C
CY) T.D U C S. C T� T�
O C Q a1 N CO O O =
CL CL N 0 0 «) an 0. d _0 d
O co N. C N o) 0 a) O O U)
a) 00 C a) _ C •O C - o a)
c co
ca cc _ O - C C 0
7 V a E = c a) -o a) T O O U - = T y
• N a) ° — ° O C iii d ° •E 2 aa)) o !-' O_ a) N co a)• -o E co -0 Z.
Q s = CO . co E = a) co = U 0- 0 E -o U c a) a) a) a) --
• El c o o-.°= v w E a) .S — U) m c W c az w n a)
0 CO
E .� av oo ° _ . ° v .o o c U o a) a a s °
O C a°) aN) CL co p o a o -. in > N N c _0 o_c E) o) E _ Z. o o 0 as
N 0! C N O- C > O '— ° ° �.., N t x E a) 0 U >,--61) O O U) co O N
O •-C C .0 M O j p) O` •U aa)) -a N p E _ .2 cs '" a) c N .E Og CD w N Cr) _--, (` CO
C U T.0 C .5 :? co 0-«_7.. co .c7) N E E -C 0 -0 .0 'U U Se O` T E Lll rn T a) CO
(s (s p E C f6 N y 0 O O N N O fn Q N (s a as 0 co .CO CO t
O a o)V ° _ W c N an m — ° an 3 ° N a a) w �� °•
ar h = .- = O N .�-+ O U ~ •E d N CO O co —° > c a) Y d 2 = O =Cfl 0 ' = O C •
E m U cn E = o U)) 0 — _ c ate) -.--, -O v •— .- �a E o E a, Eli .o _
U T >, U 5 a) 7 on C T co C C ad C rn U L = E
C C C - -0 •--• C an d O O C p O a) co as U a) y as 0) C C •7 h a, C �> O
O U N 'G U U —) .O a) 0-= C as c6O a) a) __co - m_T = > ._ •y U - O ca a) a
• .a s - 'a = ° 3 a po .2 v m a�i •—_°) '> a�_ a 11 m
a n a) ° _
• N - d Q t -C 0_ E o -0 a -, E o=0 c en ¢ c`v ac) > a o a a Q O en ` a en c
o w
a) .—c) =1 ° (1) - a) w Eo o t C 'n `m o
C Hd a) -0 H 3 CO .... 0 0 .E • • • • • F- 0) C Ha0 Co
p � oo C) o
�Z co co N N
0 C
_ U M
City Council Resolution No. 4779
Exhibit C
El Segundo General Plan Land Use Element Excerpt - Page 3-8
Land Use Designations
Commercial Designations
Add the following text in a separate paragraph immediately below 199 North
Continental Boulevard Specific Plan on page 3-8:
"222 Kansas Street Specific Plan
Permits primarily office, light industrial, manufacturing. and
research and development uses. The southerly portion may be
used for governmental purposes subject to a development
agreement. Commercial retail and restaurant uses are prohibited.
The area is approximately 4.83 gross acres and the maximum FAR
is 0.6. This designation is not intended to be used elsewhere within
the City."
S:\CTYCLRK\Documentcpy\RESOS\2012\4779 EA-959 CC Reso Exhibit C-GP excerpt Land Use Designations.doc
City Council Resolution No. 4779
Exhibit D
El Segundo General Plan Land Use Element Excerpt Pages 3-9 and 3-10
Proposed Land Use Plan
Northwest Quadrant
Modify the following text on pages 3-9 and 3-10:
"The following is a discussion of the 1992 Land Use Plan, which
indicates future land uses for the entire City. For ease of
discussion, the City is divided into four quadrants and the proposed
land use designations within that quadrant are discussed. To know
what is allowed under each designation, please reference the land
use definitions listed above.
Northwest Quadrant
The northwest quadrant of the City has the most varied mix of uses
within the City. All of the City's residential units, the Downtown
area, the Civic Center, and the older industrial area of Smoky
Hollow, are located in this quadrant. The 1992 Plan retains the
three residential designations found on the old Plan: single-family,
two-family, and multi-family, plus a new designation of 540 East
Imperial Avenue Specific Plan.' The Plan shows 357.2 acres of
single-family, 57.4 acres of two-family, 119.3 acres of multi-family
and 5.65 acres of 540 East Imperial Avenue Specific Plan. This
includes the re-designation of Imperial Avenue School, which is no
longer used for educational purposes, from Planned Residential
Development to 540 East Imperial Avenue Specific Plan. The total
number of dwelling units projected by the Plan is 8,0892. One of
the major goals of the 1992 Plan is to preserve the residential
neighborhoods.
The Smoky Hollow area, which houses many of the City's older
industrial uses, has been designated Smoky Hollow Mixed-Use, in
recognition of the existing Smoky Hollow Specific Plan. The
Specific Plan allows a combination of industrial, retail, office, and
residential uses. The Smoky Hollow area is approximately 92.2
93.55 acres.
1 The 540 East Imperial Avenue Specific Plan designation was added via General Plan Amendment 10-03.
2 The new total of 8,089 represents the maximum number of units developed under Option 1 of the 540
East Imperial Avenue Specific Plan. This number will be lower(7,843 units)if Option 2 is developed with
a maximum of 58 units.
The 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan (222 KSSP) consists of 4.83
acres, which were previously a part of the Smoky Hollow area. The
222 Kansas Street Specific Plan permits primarily office, light
industrial, manufacturing, and research and development uses,
The southerly portion may be used for governmental purposes
subiect to a development agreement. Commercial retail and
restaurant uses are prohibited."
All other text in this section will remain unchanged.
P:\Planning&Building Safety\O Planning-Old\PROJECTS(Planning)\951-975\EA-959\City Council 09042012\Reso and
Attachments 09042012\EA-959 CC Reso Exhibit D-General Plan Land Use Element.doc
City Council Resolution No. 4779
Exhibit E
1992 General Plan
Summary of Existing Trends Buildout
Land Use Category Acres Dwelling Square Footage
Units
Single-Family Residential 357.2 2,858 -
Two-Family Residential 57.4 934 -
540 East Imperial Avenue Specific - - -
Plan 5.65 3043 -
Multi-Family Residential 119.7 3,389 -
Neighborhood Commercial 6.6 851 89,110
Downtown Commercial 8.8 181 383,328
General Commercial 37.1 - 1,618,508
Corporate Office 216.6 - 12,539,209
Commercial Center 85.8 - 850,000
Smoky Hollow 94493.55 268 2,019,454 2,445,023
Urban Mixed-Use North 232.5 - 13,166,010
Urban Mixed-Use South 70.6 - 3,997,936
124th Street Specific Plan 3.9 1 73,530
Aviation Specific Plan 5.4 - 66,000
Downtown Specific Plan 26.3 2321 1,145,628
Corporate Campus Specific Plan 46.5 - 2,550,000
199 North Continental Boulevard - - -
Specific Plan 1.75 - 70,132
222 Kansas Street Specific Plan 4.65 - 121,532
Parking 11.8 - -
Light Industrial 356.1 - 18,529,000
Heavy Industrial 1001 - -2
Public Facilities 87.9 - -
Federal Government 90.6 - -
Open Space 78.3 77.0 - -
Parks 50 - -
Street and Railroad R.O.W 442.6 - -
Totals 3,494.25 8,089 57,097,845 57,644,946
3,497
Population Projection 17,287
1 Existing construction and recently constructed,renovated commercial centers and legal non-conforming
residential uses at densities that are currently higher than allowed by the land use designations in this plan will not
realistically be converted to mixed commercial/residential uses and these buildings are expected to remain for the
life of the Plan.
2 The heavy industrial shown on this plan includes the Chevron Refinery and former Southern California Edison
Generation Station. These facilities have processing equipment and tanks rather than buildings and are expected to
remain for the life of the Plan. Therefore,no estimated building square footage is shown.
3 This number represents the maximum number of dwelling units that can be developed in Option 1 of the 540
East Imperial Avenue Specific Plan. If Option 1 is not built,the maximum number of units that can be developed
in Option 2 of the 540 East Imperial Avenue Specific Plan is 58 residential dwelling units.
City Council Resolution No. 4779
Exhibit F
General Plan Land Use Map
►f 4 4 f f f f �4 f f►t v::4:::::::;f 4 4 f 4 f 4 f f f 4 4 4 f f f 4 1 f f i
♦f•f f►!f ..4♦fi
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 4779 EXHIBIT G
CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 1470 EXHIBIT F
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
In addition to all applicable provisions of the El Segundo Municipal Code ("ESMC"),
SMPO Lab, LLC, Mar Canyon Grand, LLC, and Richard Kizirian of the Kizirian Trust
agree to comply with the following provisions as conditions for the City of El Segundo's
approval of an Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental
Assessment No. 959, General Plan Amendment No. 12-01, Specific Plan Amendment
No. 12-01, Zone Change No. 12-01, Zone Text Amendment No. 12-01, Development
Agreement No. 12-01, Subdivision No. 12-02 (VTM 71903), and Site Plan Review No.
12-01 ("Project Conditions").
Planning and Building Safety Department
1. Before building permits are issued, the applicant must submit plans that
demonstrate substantial compliance with the plans and conditions of approval on
file with the Planning and Building Safety Department. Site Plan Review
approval must be granted before building permits may be issued. Any
subsequent modification to the project as approved, including the site plan, floor
plan, elevations, landscaping and materials, must be referred to the Director of
Planning and Building Safety to determine whether the Planning Commission
should review the proposed modification.
2. Before building permits are issued, the applicant must obtain all the necessary
approvals, licenses and permits and pay all the appropriate fees as required by
the City.
3. The applicant must comply with all mitigation measures identified in the
Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts and
the Errata to the Addendum. A Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) was prepared as part of the environmental review for the
project and is attached as Exhibit "I" to this Resolution. All mitigation measures
in the Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts
for the proposed project are incorporated by this reference into these conditions
of approval. All mitigation measures and conditions of approval must be listed on
the plans submitted for plan check and on the plans for which a building permit is
issued.
4. Any changes to the colors and materials of the exterior façade of the buildings
must be in compliance with the 222 Kansas Street Specific Plan Section 4.3(L)
Design Standards and approved to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning
and Building Safety.
5. Before the City issues a building permit, the applicant must submit final
landscaping and irrigation plans to the City of El Segundo Planning and Building
Safety Department and the Parks and Recreation Department for review and
approval to demonstrate compliance with the City's Water Conservation
regulations and Guidelines for Water Conservation in Landscaping (ESMC §§
10-2-1, et seq.). The plant materials used in landscaping must be compatible with
the El Segundo climate pursuant to Sunset Western Garden Book's Zone 24
published by Sunset Books, Inc., Revised and Updated 2001 edition, which is
available for review at the Planning and Building Safety Department.
Additionally, the landscaping and irrigation must be completely installed before
the City issues a final Certificate of Occupancy. Additionally, the final
landscaping and irrigation plans must comply with the following:
A. Reclaimed water must be used as the water source to
irrigate landscaped areas, if feasible. To that end, dual
water connections must be installed to allow for
landscaping to be irrigated by reclaimed water, if feasible.
B. Efficient irrigation systems must be installed which
minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize the water
which will reach plant roots (e.g., drip irrigation, automatic
sprinklers equipped with moisture sensors).
C. Automatic sprinkler systems must be set to irrigate
landscaping during early morning hours or during the
evening to reduce water losses from evaporation.
Sprinklers must also be reset to water less often in cooler
months and during the rainfall season so that water is not
wasted by excessive landscaping irrigation.
D. Selection of drought-tolerant, low-water consuming plant
varieties must be used to reduce irrigation water
consumption, in compliance with ESMC §§ 10-2-1, et seq.
6. Employees must be provided current maps, routes and schedules for public
transit routes serving the site; telephone numbers for referrals on transportation
information including numbers for the regional ridesharing agency and local
transit operators; ridesharing promotional materials; and bicycle route and facility
information.
7. Ground level mechanical equipment, refuse and recycling collectors, storage
tanks, monitoring wells, generators, and other similar facilities must be screened
from view with opaque walls of materials and finishes compatible with the overall
design of the buildings in the project and provide dense landscaping to the
satisfaction of the Planning and Building Safety Department.
8. Trash and recycling enclosures must be provided and shown on the site plan that
are sufficiently large enough to store the necessary bins required for the regular
collection of commercial solid waste and recyclable materials. The site plan with
-2-
the location and dimensions of the trash and recycling enclosure and an
elevation view of the enclosure must be provided to the Planning and Building
Safety Department for review and approval before the City issues building
permits. Separate trash and recycling facilities must be provided for each phase
of the project (Phase 1: USDA Facility; Phase 2: 2 office buildings).
9. Exterior lighting must be designed to minimize off-site glare.
10. The building must be designed to comply with the ESMC standards for the
attenuation of interior noise.
11. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy the applicant must provide the
Planning and Building Safety Department a status report on the Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) that includes the GBCI scorecard
prepared by a qualified professional with a LEED AP credential. The Director of
Planning and Building Safety will determine if the items identified on the
scorecard and report, show a good faith effort to build to LEED standards and
warrant release of this condition. The City can require peer review of the LEED
report and GBCI scorecard by a qualified professional with a LEED AP credential
hired by the City at the applicant's expense to advise the Director of Planning
and Building Safety in his or her determination. Additionally, the City can require
inspections for grading, site improvements, and buildings for the project by a
qualified professional with a LEED AP credential to verify that the project has
been constructed in compliance with the LEED report and GBCI scorecard to
advise the Director of Planning and Building Safety in his or her determination.
12. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy for Phase 2, the applicant must
submit a reciprocal access and parking agreement for joint use of the driveway
entrance, drive aisle, and parking area on Lot 3 with Lots 1 and 2 of the proposed
Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) to the Planning Department for review and
approval by the Director of Planning and Building Safety. The reciprocal access
agreement must be reviewed and approved as to form by the Director of
Planning and Building Safety and City Attorney before recordation. The applicant
must pay for all fees incurred by the City as a result of the City Attorney's review
of the Reciprocal Access Agreement before the City issues a Certificate of
Occupancy. The reciprocal access agreement must be recorded before the City
issues a Certificate of Occupancy.
13. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy for any buildings or site
improvements, the applicant must complete all the conditions of approval of
Environmental Assessment No. 966 and Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA 12-03.
14. Vacation of the existing Edison easements is required before the City issues
building permits for any buildings or structures within the easement area.
-3-
15. The project must meet all the design criteria of the Specific Plan to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building Safety.
16. Before the City issues a building permit, landscaping plans must be reviewed and
approved in compliance with the Site Plan Review criteria of the Specific Plan to
the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building Safety.
17. Before the City issues a building permit, plans for walls, fences, lighting fixtures
and accessory structures must be reviewed and approved in compliance with the
Site Plan Review criteria of the Specific Plan to the satisfaction of the Director of
Planning and Building Safety.
18. Before the City issues any building permits for signs, a Master Sign Program
must be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning and Building Safety.
Building Division Conditions
19_ Before building permits are issued, plans must show conformance with the 2010
California Building Code with El Segundo amendments, the 2010 California
Green Building Code, 2010 California Mechanical Code, 2010 California
Plumbing Code, 2010 California Electrical Code, and the 2010 California Energy
Code, all as adopted by the ESMC.
20. Before building permits are issued, the applicant must submit a
geotechnical/soils report, along with an associated grading plan that addresses
the current code to the Planning and Building Safety Department for review and
approval.
21. Before grading permits are issued, the applicant must submit a soils report to the
Planning and Building Safety Department for review and approval.
22. Before building permits are issued, plans must show compliance with
accessibility requirements per the 2010 California Building Code, as adopted by
the ESMC.
23. A covenant and agreement or equivalent instrument must be recorded to allow
the use of disabled parking spaces on Lot 3 to serve the buildings on Lot 1 and 2.
The covenant and agreement must be reviewed and approved as to form by the
Planning and Building Safety Department and the City Attorney before
recordation. The applicant must pay for all fees incurred by the City as a result of
the City Attorney's review of the covenant before the City issues a final building
permit. The covenant must also be recorded before the City issues a final
building permit.
-4-
24. A minimum slope of 2% must be provided at the north side of the Phase 1
building for drainage away from the building and to the street via a non-erosive
device.
25. A minimum slope of 2% must be provided for drainage away from the Phase 2
buildings and to the street via a non-erosive device. Site drainage from lot 3
must be conducted to the street via a non-erosive device at a minimum 1%
slope.
26. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Standard Urban
Stormwater Mitigation Plan, (SUSMP) for each phase of development must be
provided and approved by the Planning and Building Safety Department.
27. The Phase 1 building must demonstrate that the occupancy group for the S
occupancy is a S-2 occupancy. The building must provide sprinklers in
compliance with the El Segundo Municipal Code. The plans must clearly show
that the maximum 250 foot exit travel distance is not exceeded for rooms P-03,
P-04, P-05, and P-07. The percentage of openings for the Phase 1 building must
comply with table 705.8 of the 2010 California Building Code, as measured from
the north property line.
28. The Phase 2 buildings must comply with Section 1022 of the 2010 California
Building Code for exit enclosures for the stairways. The exit enclosures must
extend to the exterior of the building and must be of 1-hr construction. The
percentage of openings for the Phase 2 buildings must comply with table 705.8
of the 2010 California Building Code, as measured from the interior property
lines. Restroom facilities for men and women are required and the number of
plumbing fixtures must comply with table 4-1 of the 2010 California Plumbing
Code.
29. Both phases of the project require complete structural calculations and details,
along with a civil grading plan, and architectural notes and details to be reviewed
and approved by the Building Division before a building permit is issued.
30. Both phases of the project require a geotechnical report to be reviewed and
approved by the Building Division before a building permit is issued.
31. Separate permit applications are required for accessory structures, such as light
standards, walls, retaining walls, and equipment pad foundations.
32. Separate permit applications are required for each of the following permit types:
signs, grading, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing.
-5-
Fire Department Conditions
33. The project must comply with all applicable requirements of the 2010 California
Building and Fire Codes and the 2009 International Fire Code as adopted by the
ESMC and El Segundo Fire Department Regulations.
34. Before a building permit is issued, the applicant must submit and obtain approval
of a Fire/Life Safety Plan from the Fire Department. The Fire/Life Safety Plan
must identify fire safety precautions during demolition and construction,
emergency site access during construction, permanent fire department site
access, fire water supply, fire hydrant locations, and any existing or proposed fire
sprinkler systems and fire alarm systems.
35. A list of proposed chemicals for laboratory use must be provided to determine the
types of hazards or permits necessary for the safe use or storage of lab
chemicals to the satisfaction of the Fire Department.
36. If a second well is located during construction, the well must be abandoned in
compliance with DOGGR requirements and DOGGR documentation of the
abandonment must be provided to the Fire Department and the Planning
Division.
Public Works Department Conditions
37. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy and records the final map, the
applicant must dedicate 10 feet along the entire Grand Avenue frontage of the
subject property and provide an irrevocable offer to dedicate an additional 9 feet
along the entire Grand Avenue frontage of the subject property to the satisfaction
of the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. The City has the right to
exercise its right to accept the property subject to the offer of dedication on or
after, the earlier of, September 1, 2024, or 15 years following the date on which
the certificate of occupancy was issued for the last building on the property. If
the City amends its Circulation Element such that property that is subject to the
offer of dedication is no longer required for public right-of-way purposes, then the
offer of dedication will automatically expire. The applicant must enter into an
agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, holding the City harmless
and indemnifying it from any hazardous materials or contamination that may
affect the property offered for dedication.
38. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy the applicant must dedicate
five feet along the entire Kansas Street and Franklin Avenue frontage of the
property to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department.
39. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy the applicant must eliminate
the mid-block crossing on Kansas Street to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Department.
-6-
40. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy the applicant must provide a
pedestrian countdown display on the signal pedestrian heads at the intersection
of Grand Avenue and Kansas Street to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Department.
41. The Final Map must be recorded and filed with the City Engineer of the City of El
Segundo and Los Angeles County Recorder's Office.
42. The applicant must ensure that encroachment permits deemed to be required by
the City are secured from the Public Works Department before commencing any
and all work in the public right-of-way.
43. All construction related parking must be accommodated on-site. No construction
related parking will be permitted off-site.
44. Before the City issues any Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant must construct
curb and gutter, sidewalk, and driveway approaches per SPPWC standards
along Franklin Avenue and Kansas Street by an appropriately license contractor
to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Sidewalk must be a
minimum of 5 feet wide on all three street frontages.
45, Before the City issues any Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant must construct
curb ramps per SPPWC standard Type 1 at the corner of Kansas Street and
Grand Avenue as well as at the corner of Kansas Street and Franklin Avenue.
Developer to provide 5-foot wide sidewalk behind the curb ramps.
46. Before the City issues any Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant must resurface
half of the street from the proposed curb and gutter to the centerline of the street
along Kansas Street and Franklin Avenue to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Department.
47. Before the City issues any Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant must install a
minimum 5-foot wide parkway including landscaping and street trees on Grand
Avenue, Kansas Street and Franklin Avenue, in compliance with the General
Plan Circulation Element standards and the Master Street Tree Plan, to the
satisfaction of the Public Works Department, Planning and Building Safety
Department and the Parks and Recreation Department.
48. The applicant must provide a potable water service lateral and water meter for
each new lot. Location and sizes of all proposed water meters must be approved
by Public Works Department Water Division.
49. The applicant must provide sewer lateral with property cleanout on each lot.
-7-
50, Any unused water service lateral and sanitary sewer laterals must be abandoned
at the City main.
51. The project must comply with the latest NPDES requirements and provide Best
Management Practices (BMPs) for sediment control, construction material control
and erosion control.
52. Before the City issues a building permit, the applicant must provide a SUSMP
(Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan):
53. Before the City issues a building permit, the applicant must provide a SWPPP
(Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan).
54. Before the City issues a building permit, a registered civil engineer must provide
storm (hydrologic and hydraulic) calculations for appropriate storm drain facilities
to control on-site drainage and mitigate off-site impacts, as follows, subject to
review and approval from Public Works Department:
a. The design must follow the criteria contained in both the Los Angeles
County Department of Public Works Hydrology Manual 2006 and
Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan or most recent editions.
Flows shall not to impact neighboring properties.
b. New development must not increase the rate of flow (cubic feet per
second) or velocity (feet per second) of site run-off water to any off-site
drainage areas beyond the measured or calculated pre-project rate and
velocity.
55. Location and sizes of existing public utilities (water, sewer, etc.) must be shown
on the plans. Indicate the location of any proposed connection points for the
utility service.
56. All record drawings (As-built drawings) and supporting documentation must be
submitted to the Department of Public Works before scheduling the project's final
inspection.
Police Department Conditions
57. Before the City issues a building permit, the applicant must submit a photometric
light study to the Police Department for review and approval. A site plan must be
provided showing buildings, parking areas, walkways, and the point-by-point
photometric calculation of the required light levels. Foot candles must be
measured on a horizontal plane and conform to a uniformity ratio of 4:1
average/minimum. The photometric study must be point-by-point and include the
light loss factor (.7). Lighting levels must be adjusted to meet the minimum foot
candle requirements within each area of the site. Street lighting shall not be
included in the calculations. All interior or exterior corridors, passageways and
-8-
pedestrian walkways and open parking lot shall be illuminated at all times with a
minimum maintained one foot-candle of light on the walking surface.
58. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy, lighting devices must be
enclosed and protected by weather and vandal resistant covers. The lighting
devices must be shown on plans to the satisfaction of the Police Department.
59, Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy, aisles, passageways and
recesses related to and within all sides of the complex must be illuminated with a
maintained minimum of .25 footcandles on the ground surface during hours of
darkness. Compliance must be shown on plans to the satisfaction of the Police
Department.
60. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy, the addressing, all entry doors,
open parking lots, shipping/loading dock doors, trash dumpsters and guest
parking must be illuminated with a maintained minimum of one footcandle of light
on the ground surface during hours of darkness.
61. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy, street addressing must be a
minimum of 6 inches high and must be visible from the street or driving surface,
of contrasting color to the background and directly illuminated during hours of
darkness. Addressing must also be shown on plan elevations.
62. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy, light standards with lighting
fixtures mounted at 12 to 14 feet in height must be installed for all walkways.
Light standards and lighting fixtures must be shown on plans to the satisfaction of
the Police Department.
63. Before the City issues a building permit, landscaping must be designed and
shown on the plans to minimize obstruction of light fixtures to ensure
maintenance of required lighting levels to the satisfaction of the Police
Department.
64. Before the City issues a building permit, all landscaping must be shown on the
plans to be low profile around perimeter fencing, windows, doors and entryways
so as not to limit visibility or provide climbing access to the satisfaction of the
Police Department. Bushes must be trimmed to 2 to 3 feet and away from
buildings. Dense bushes cannot be clumped together in a manner that provides
easy concealment.
65. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy, all loading dock pedestrian
doors must have a panoramic door viewer (190-200 degrees) installed. Notes
must be provided on the plans demonstrating compliance with this requirement to
the satisfaction of the Police Department.
-9-
66. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy, a latch guard must be placed
over all single swing entry door locks and secondary security astragals must be
installed in all double swing entry doors.
67. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy, bicycle racks must be located
in well-lit highly visible locations. Bicycle rack locations must be shown on the
plans to the satisfaction of the Police Department.
68. Before the City issues a Certificate of Occupancy, the USDA facility bicycle rack
on Kansas Street must be relocated within the visitor parking lot in a secured
area and shown on plans to the satisfaction of the Police Department.
Construction Conditions
69. Before any construction occurs the perimeter of the property must be fenced with
a minimum 6-foot high fence. The fence must be covered with a material
approved by the Planning and Building Safety Department to prevent dust from
leaving the site.
70. All haul trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials must either be
covered or maintain two feet of freeboard.
71. NOx emissions during construction must be reduced by limiting the operation of
heavy-duty construction equipment to no more than 5 pieces of equipment at any
one time.
72. Staging of construction vehicles and vehicle entry and egress to the site must be
approved by the Public Works Department. Temporary construction driveways
must be approved by the Public Works Department. Temporary construction
driveways must be removed before the City issues a certificate of occupancy.
73. Construction vehicles cannot use any route except the City's designated Truck
Routes.
74. The applicant must develop and implement a construction management plan, as
approved by the Public Works Department before a building permit is issued,
which includes the following measures recommended by the SCAQMD:
• Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference.
• Provide temporary traffic controls during all phases of construction
activities to maintain traffic flow (e.g., flag person).
• Re-route construction trucks away from congested streets.
• Maintain equipment and vehicles engines in good condition and in
proper tune as per manufacturer's specifications and per SCAQMD
rules, to minimize dust emissions.
-10-
• Suspend use of all construction equipment during second stage smog
alerts. Contact SCAQMD at (800) 242-4022 for daily forecasts.
• Use electricity from temporary power poles rather than temporary
diesel or gasoline-powered generators.
• Diesel-powered equipment such as booster pumps or generators
should be replaced by electric equipment, if feasible.
• Catalytic converters must be installed, if feasible.
• Equipment must be equipped with two-to-four-degree engine time
retard or pre-combustion chamber engines.
• Use methanol or natural gas powered mobile equipment and pile
drivers instead of diesel if readily available at competitive prices.
• Use propane or butane powered on-site mobile equipment instead of
gasoline if readily available at competitive prices.
75. During construction and operations, all waste must be disposed in accordance
with all applicable laws and regulations. Toxic wastes must be discarded at a
licensed, regulated disposal site by a licensed waste hauler.
76. All leaks, drips and spills occurring during construction must be cleaned up
promptly and in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations to prevent
contaminated soil on paved surfaces that can be washed away into the storm
drains.
77. If materials spills occur, they must be cleaned up in a way that will not affect the
storm drain system.
78. The project must comply with ESMC Chapter 5-4, which establishes storm water
and urban pollution controls.
79. Before anticipated rainfall, construction dumpsters must be covered with tarps or
plastic sheeting.
80. Inspections of the project site before and after storm events must be conducted
to determine whether Best Management Practices have been implemented to
reduce pollutant loadings identified in the Storm Water Prevention Plan.
81. The owner or contractor must conduct daily street sweeping and truck wheel
cleaning to prevent dirt in the storm drain system.
82. Storm drain system must be safeguarded at all times during construction,
83. All diesel equipment must be operated with closed engine doors and must be
equipped with factory-recommended mufflers.
84. Electrical power must be used to run air compressors and similar power tools.
-11-
85. The applicant must provide a telephone number for local residents to call to
submit complaints associated with the construction noise. The number must be
posted on the project site and must be easily viewed from adjacent public areas.
86. During construction, the contractor must store and maintain equipment as far as
possible from adjacent residential property locations northwest of the site.
87. As stated in ESMC Chapter 7-2, construction related noise is restricted to the
hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and prohibited at
anytime on Sunday or a Federal holiday.
Service Fee Conditions
88. Pursuant to ESMC §§ 15-27A-1, et seq., and before building permits are issued,
the applicant must pay a one-time park facilities mitigation fee in accordance with
Section 5.2 of the Development Agreement. The fee amount must be based
upon the adopted fee at the time the building permit is issued.
89. Pursuant to ESMC §§ 15-27A-1, et seq., and before building permits are issued,
the applicant must pay a one-time fire services mitigation fee in accordance with
Section 5.2 of the Development Agreement. The fee amount must be based
upon the adopted fee at the time the building permit is issued.
90. Pursuant to ESMC §§ 15-27A-1, et seq., and before building permits are issued,
the applicant must pay a one-time police services mitigation fee in accordance
with Section 5.2 of the Development Agreement. The fee amount must be based
upon the adopted fee at the time the building permit is issued.
91. Before building permits are issued, the applicant must pay the required sewer
connection fees (as specified in ESMC Title 12-3).
92. Pursuant to ESMC §§ 15-27A-1, et seq., and before the City issues a certificate
of occupancy, the applicant must pay a one time traffic mitigation fee in
accordance with Section 5.2 of the Development Agreement. The fee amount
must be based upon the adopted fee at the time the building permit is issued.
93. Before building permits are issued, the applicant must pay the required School
Fees. This condition does not limit the applicant's ability to appeal or protest the
payment of these fees to the school district(s).
Miscellaneous
94. SMPO Lab, LLC, Mar Canyon Grand, LLC, and Richard Kizirian, on behalf of the
Kizirian Trust, agree to indemnify and hold the City harmless from and against
any claim, action, damages, costs (including, without limitation, attorney's fees),
injuries, or liability, arising from the City's approval of Environmental Assessment
-12-
No. 959, General Plan Amendment No. 12-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. 12-
01, Zone Change No. 12-01, Zone Text Amendment No. 12-01, Subdivision No.
12-02, Site Plan Review No. 12-01, or Development Agreement (DA) No. 12-01.
Should the City be named in any suit, or should any claim be brought against it
by suit or otherwise, whether the same be groundless or not, arising out of the
City approval of Environmental Assessment No. 959, General Plan Amendment
No. 12-01, Specific Plan Amendment No. 12-01, Zone Change No. 12-01, Zone
Text Amendment No. 12-01, Development Agreement (DA) No. 12-01,
Subdivision No. 12-02, Site Plan Review No. 12-01, SMPO Lab, LLC, agrees to
defend the City (at the City's request and with counsel satisfactory to the City)
and will indemnify the City for any judgment rendered against it or any sums paid
out in settlement or otherwise. For purposes of this section "the City" includes
the City of El Segundo's elected officials, appointed officials, officers, and
employees.
By signing this document, Steve Williams on behalf of SMPO Lab, LLC, Allan
Mackenzie on behalf of Mar Canyon Grand, LLC, and Richard Kizirian, on behalf of the
Kizirian Trust, certify that they have read, understood, and agree to the Project
Conditions listed in this document.
.1:Ce_40 6(M16.74(z-44-2_,
Steve Williams,
SMPO Lab, LLC
Allan Mackenzie, President
Mar Canyon Grand, LLC
f-' Richa i Kizirian,
Kizirian Trust
P:\Planning&Building Safety\O Planning-Old\PROJECTS(Planning)\951-975\EA-959\City Council 09042012\Reso and
Attachments 09042012\EA-959 CC Resolution Exhibit G-Conditions.doc
-13-
