CC RESOLUTION 5054 RESOLUTION NO. 5054
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING THE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, MAKING CERTAIN
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE LAKES
SPECIFIC PLAN AND TOPGOLF PROJECT (ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT NO. EA-1135, SPECIFIC PLAN NO. SP 16-02, GENERAL
PLAN-AMENDMENT NO. GPAI_6-01,-ZONE-CHANGE NO. ZC 16-01,
ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT NO. ZTA 16-04, SITE PLAN NO. 16-01, LOT
LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. SUB 16-03, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. CUP 16-05) LOCATED AT 400 SOUTH SEPULVEDA BOULEVARD.
The City Council of the City of EI Segundo does resolve as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds and declares that:
A. On June 20, 2016, CenterCal Properties, LLC, filed an application for
Environmental Assessment No. EA-1135, General Plan Amendment No.
16-01, Zone Change No. ZC 16-01, Specific Plan No. SP 16-02, Zone Text
Amendment No. ZTA 16-04, Site Plan Review No. 16-01, Lot Line
Adjustment No. SUB 16-03, and Conditional Use Permit No. CUP 16-05 for
approval of a specific plan and related discretionary entitlements to facilitate
a development project at the Lakes golf course consisting of replacing an
existing driving range and hitting bays with a three-story golf-themed
commercial recreation and entertainment facility, including hitting bays, a
restaurant/bar, and other supporting accessory uses to be operated under
the "Topgolf" brand. Additional project improvements include demolition of
the existing clubhouse and reconstruction of a smaller clubhouse,
modification of the fairways and layouts of six holes at the existing 9-hole
executive golf course, new golf course lighting, and modification and
expansion of the existing parking to accommodate additional parking to
serve the facility;
B. After submittal of additional information, Staff deemed the project
applications complete on August 31, 2016;
C. Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State's
CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulation, Title 14, Section 15000
et. seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines (City Council Resolution No.
2805, adopted March 1-6-,-1993), and Government Code Section 65962.5(f)
(Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), the City of EI Segundo
prepared an Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse Number
2016091003) (the "EIR");
RESOLUTION NO. 5054
Page 2 of 7
D. The City prepared an Initial Environmental Study (the "Initial Study") for the
Project pursuant to Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, and on
September 1, 2016, the Initial Study (IS) and Notice of Preparation (NOP)
were released to the public and public agencies for a comment period of 33
days (through October 3, 2016). On September 1, 2016, a Public Notice
was mailed to property owners within a 300-foot radius from the subject
property, the Notice was published in the El Segundo Herald, and the Notice
was posted on the City's website. Lastly, a copy of the Initial Study was
made available at the public counter at City Hall and the local library, and
was made available on the City's website for the public to download and
review;
E. On September 8, 2016, the Planning Commission conducted a public
scoping meeting to provide a forum for agencies and members of the
community to provide verbal comments on the IS/NOP;
F, After the NOP comment period ended, the Draft EIR was prepared taking
the comments into account. After completing the Draft EIR, the document
was made available to-the-public on January 26, 2017 for a 47-day public
comment period that concluded on March 13, 2017;
G. On February 2, 2017, City Staff hosted a noticed public commenting session
to provide the public with an opportunity to submit verbal comments, in
addition to the typical written comments, on the Draft EIR. Advertisement
of the public commenting session was provided by a Notice published in the
EI Segundo Herald, a Notice mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot
radius, a Notice posted at The Lakes clubhouse facility, and a Notice was
posted on the City's website;
H. On May 25, 2017, the Final EIR was completed and Notice was provided
via mail to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the subject site,
and on May 25, 2017 a Notice was published in the El Segundo Herald
announcing that a public hearing was scheduled with the Planning
Commission on June 8, 2017 to review the Final EIR and the entitlement
applications for the proposed project;
L On June 8, 2017, the Planning Commission conducted 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 the applicant;
J. On June 8, 2017, at the request of the Applicant, the Planning Commission
continued the public hearing to June 22, 2017;
RESOLUTION NO. 5054
Page 3 of 7
K. On June 22, 2017, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing
to July 13, 2017;
L. On July 13, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of EI Segundo
adopted Resolution No. 2820, recommending that the City Council certify
the EIR, make certain environmental findings of fact, and adopt a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program for The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf
Project;
M. The City Council of the City of EI Segundo held a duly noticed public hearing
on September 5, 2017, to review and consider the staff report prepared for
the project, receive public testimony, and review all correspondence
received on the project; and,
N. This Resolution, and its findings, are made, in part, based upon the
evidence presented to the Planning Commission at its June 8, and July 13,
2017 public hearings and upon the evidence presented to the City Council
at its September 5, 2017 public hearing including, without limitation, the staff
reports, Initial Study, Draft EIR and Final EIR submitted by the Planning and
Building Safety Department.
SECTION 2: Environmental Assessment. The City Council makes the following
environmental findings:
A. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064 and 15081, and based upon
information contained in the Initial Study, the City ordered the preparation
of an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Project. The City
contracted with independent consultants for the preparation of the technical
studies for the EIR and on September 1, 2016, prepared and sent a Notice
of Preparation of the EIR to responsible, trustee, and other interested
agencies and persons in accordance with Guidelines Section 15082(a).
Comments on the Notice of Preparation were accepted during the 33-day
comment period ending on October 3, 2016. During the scoping period, the
City held an advertised public meeting on September 8, 2016, to facilitate
public input regarding the scope of the EIR.
B. The City completed the Draft EIR, together with those certain technical
studies (the "Appendices"), on January 26, 2017. The City circulated the
Draft EIR and the Appendices to the public and other interested parties from
January 26, 2017 through March 13, 2017, for a 47-day comment period.
In addition to receiving written comments submitted during this time, public
comments were received at an advertised public commenting session on
February 2, 2017. Advertisement of the public commenting session was
provided by a Notice published in the El Segundo Herald, a Notice mailed
to all property owners within a 300-foot radius, a Notice posted at The Lakes
clubhouse facility, and a Notice posted on the City's website.
RESOLUTION NO. 5054
Page 4 of 7
C. During the Draft EIR public comment period, including at the February 2,
2017 public commenting session, the City received numerous letters and
comments. Responses to each of the individual comments were prepared
and made available on May 25, 2017. The comments and responses are
part of section 11.3 of the Final EIR, and are incorporated herein by
reference. The written responses to comments were made available for
public review in the Planning and Building Safety Department, at the EI
Segundo Public Library and on the City's website. After reviewing the
responses to comments, the revisions to the Draft EIR, and the Final EIR,
the City Council finds that the information and issues raised by the
comments and the responses thereto do not constitute significant new
information requiring recirculation of the EIR.
D. The Final EIR is comprised of the Draft EIR, an errata thereto, comments
and recommendations received on the Draft EIR, a list of persons,
organizations and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR, the City's
Responses to Comments, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
E. The City Council has independently reviewed and considered the content
of the Final EIR, all written and oral public communications, and all other
evidence in the administrative record. The City Council hereby finds that the
Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and reflects the
independent judgment of the City. Although minor revisions have been
made to the Draft EIR in response to comments received during the public
process, no significant new information has been added to the EIR since
public notice was given of the availability of the Draft EIR for public review.
Consequently, recirculation of the EIR is not required pursuant to Section
15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
F. The comments regarding the Draft EIR and the responses to those
comments were received by the City Council; that the City Council received
documents and public testimony regarding the adequacy of the EIR; and
the City Council has reviewed and considered all such documents,
testimony and the Final EIR prior to making its decision. In accordance with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the City Council hereby finds that the
Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and reflects the
independent judgment and analysis of the City.
G. Based upon the Final EIR and the record before the City Council, the
Council finds the Project will not cause any significant environmental
impacts after mitigation. Detailed explanations for why the impacts were
found to be less than significant are contained in the Environmental
Findings of Fact attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution and incorporated
herein by this reference.
RESOLUTION NO. 5054
Page 5 of 7
H The EIR describes, and the City Council fully considered, a reasonable
range of alternatives to the Project. On the whole, the proposed Project is
environmentally superior to other feasible alternatives. Thus, all other
alternatives and variations are infeasible or not environmentally preferable
for the reasons set forth in the Environmental Findings of Fact attached as
Exhibit A to this Resolution and incorporated herein.
I. On the basis of the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter, the
Council finds that the proposed Project would not result in temporary or
permanent significant and unavoidable effects for any of the environmental
issue areas identified in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Therefore, no Statement of Overriding Considerations is necessary.
SECTION 3: Based on the foregoing findings and on substantial evidence in the
administrative record as a whole, the City Council adopts the Environmental Findings of
Fact attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, certifies the
Final Environmental Impact Report, and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein, for The Lakes Specific
Plan and Topgolf Project.
SECTION 4: Reliance on Record. Each and every one of the findings and determinations
in this Resolution is based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and
written, contained in the entire administrative 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 5: Limitations. The City Council's analysis and evaluation of the project is
ba-sed 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 6: 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 7: This Resolution will remain effective until superseded by a subsequent
resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 5054
Page 6 of 7
SECTION $_: A copy of this Resolution must be mailed to CenterCal Properties, LLC, and
to any other person requesting a copy.
SECTION 9: This Resolution is the City Council's final decision and will become effective
immediately upon adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 5054 this 5th day of
September, 2017.
uzann Fuentes, Mayor
ATTEST:
Tracy We�..�...�.,..._u. ... .__... ...u.�_.._... �w._.__.
aver ""ity Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
P�
Mark e
nsley, Ci °torney
RESOLUTION NO. 5054
Page 7 of 7
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF EL SEGUNDO )
I, Tracy Weaver, City Clerk of the City of EI 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. 5054 was duly passed, approved and adopted by said City Council at a
regular meeting held on the 5th day of September, 2017, approved and signed by the
Mayor, and attested to by the City Clerk, by the following vote:
AYES: Mayor Pro Tem Boyles, Council Member Brann, and Council Member
Pirsztuk
NOES: Mayor Fuentes and Council Member Dugan,
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
WITNESS MY HAND THE OFFICIAL SEAL OF SAID CITY this ill± day of October,
2017.
Tr Weaver, City Clerk
of the City of EI Segundo,
California
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 5054
Exhibit A
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT
After receiving, reviewing, and considering all the information in the administrative record for
Environmental Assessment (EA) No. 1135, including, without limitation, the factual information
and conclusions set forth in this Resolution and its attachment, the City Council finds, determines,
and declares as follows:
I. FINDINGS REQUIRED BY CEQA.
Pursuant to Section 15090 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council finds that::
1. The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been completed in compliance
with CEQA;
2. The FEIR was presented to the City Council and the Council reviewed and
considered the information contained in the FEIR before approving the Project;
and
3. The FEIR reflects the City Council's independent judgment and analysis.
II. FINDINGS REGARDING THE PROJECT'S POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS.
A. Environmental Effects with No Impacts.
The Initial Study for The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project, dated September 2016,
concluded that the Project had no potential to result in significant impacts in several areas.
Having reviewed and considered the entire administrative record of proceedings, the City
Council finds that substantial evidence in the record supports the conclusion that the
Project has no potential to result in significant environmental impacts in the following
areas:
1. Aesthetics (Scenic Vistas; Scenic Resources).
2. Agriculture and Forest Resources.
3. Biological Resources (Riparian Habitat; Federally Protected Wetlands; Movement
of Species; Conflict with Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological
Resources; and Conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Other Plan).
4. Geology and Soils (Rupture of Earthquake Fault; Landslides; and Septic Tanks).
5. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Safety Hazard from a Private Airstrip; and
Exposure of People or Structures to Wildland Fires).
6. Hydrology and Water Quality (Place Housing or Structures Within a 100-Year
Flood Hazard; Expose People or Structures to a Significant Risk Involving
Flooding).
1
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
7. Land Use and Planning (Physically Divide an Established Community; Conflict
With a Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan).
8. Mineral Resources,
9. Noise (Excessive Noise Levels in the Vicinity of a Private Airstrip).
10. Population and Housing (Displace Substantial Numbers of People or Existing
Housing).
B. Irnnacts Identified as Less Than Significant.
The Initial Study concluded that the Project's potential for environmental effects in several
areas would be less than significant. Having reviewed and considered the entire
administrative record of proceedings, the City Council finds that substantial evidence in
the record supports the conclusion that the Project will have less than significant
environmental impacts in the following areas:
1. Aesthetics (Visual Character/Quality; Light and Glare).
2. Air Quality (Objectionable Odors).
3. Biological Resources (Candidate, Sensitive or Special Status Species),
4. Cultural Resources (Historical, Archaeological and Paleontological Resources;
Disturbance of Human Remains).
5. Geology and Soils (Strong Seismic Ground Shaking; Seismic-Related Ground
Failure; Substantial Soil Erosion; Unstable Geologic Unit; Expansive Soils).
6. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Safety Hazard within an Airport Land Use Plan
or Within Two Miles of a Public or Public Use Airport).
7. Hydrology and Water Quality (Inundation by Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow).
8. Noise (Excessive Noise Levels for a Project Located Within an Airport Land Use
Plan, or Within Two Miles of a Public or Public Use Airport).
9. Public Services (Library Facilities).
10. Transportation/Traffic (Change in Air Traffic Patterns; Increased Hazards Due to
Design Feature or Incompatible Use).
C. Impacts Identified as Potentially Significant in the Initial Studv But Which Did
riot Exceed Siclnificance Thresholds in the DEIR.
The following environmental effects were identified as Potentially Significant in the Initial
Study. However, after further analysis, it was determined that the effects would not be
significant, since they would not exceed thresholds of significance and no mitigation is
required. Consequently, the City Council finds, based on the evidence in the record as a
whole, that the Project will have less than significant environmental impacts in the
following areas:
2
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
1. Air Quality
a) Facts/Effects:
(1) Air Quality Standards -- Lone-Term. Project operations will not violate an
air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation. The Project's total unmitigated operational (mobile, area,
and energy source) emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds.
Further, the Project will be required to comply with EI Segundo Municipal
Code (ESMC) Chapter 15-16 and the proposed Lakes Specific Plan sets
forth goals and objectives for sustainability practices that will further reduce
area and mobile source emissions, such as using sustainable building
materials, water conservation, energy efficient lighting, reclaimed
landscape water, and bicycle parking. Consequently, the Project's long-
term impacts on air quality will be less than significant.
(2) Localized Emissions. The Project will not result in significant localized
emissions impacts or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations. The Project's unmitigated on-site construction emissions
will not exceed the localized significance thresholds (LSTs); therefore, the
Project's construction-related localized significance impacts will be less
than significant. Additionally, the Project's unmitigated operational area
source emissions will be negligible and will not exceed the LSTs for
Sensitive Receptor Area (SRA) 3. Therefore, the Project's operational
localized significance impacts for Project operations will be less than
significant.
(3) CURIUNMive Impacts. The proposed Project, combined with other related
cumulative projects, will not result in significant air pollutant emission
impacts. The proposed Project will not result in long-term air quality
impacts, as emissions will not exceed applicable operational thresholds.
Development associated with the proposed Project will be consistent with
what is anticipated in the General Plan. Additionally, adherence to
SCAQMD rules and regulations will alleviate potential impacts related to
cumulative conditions on a project-by-project basis. Emission reduction
technology, strategies, and plans are constantly being developed. As a
result, the proposed Project will not contribute a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any nonattainment criteria pollutant. Therefore, cumulative
operational impacts associated with Project implementation will be less
than significant.
b) iac-Lmg'.:
Based on the whole of the administrative record, the City Council finds that the
Project will not result in significant impacts, either individually or cumulatively, on
long-term air quality standards or on localized emissions. Consequently, no
mitigation is required.
3
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project (EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
a) facts/Effects.
(1) Gr enhOUse Gas Emissions,. Greenhouse gas emissions resulting from
the Project will not have a significant impact on global climate change. The
total amount of Project-related "business as usual" GHG emissions from
direct and indirect sources combined will total 1,683.19 MTCO2eq/year,
which is below the 3,000 MTCO2eq/year threshold. Therefore, the
proposed Project will result in a less than significant impact with regards to
GHG emissions.
(2) Compliance with Applicable Plan/Policv/Regulation. The proposed Project
will be consistent with the City of EI Segundo's EECAP, which is the
applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of GHGs. In addition, the Project will incorporate design
features that will reduce GHG emissions. The Project will not conflict with
or impede implementation of reduction goals identified in AB 32 and other
strategies to help reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, the Project will not
conflict with an applicable GHG reduction plan, policy, or regulation.
Impacts will be less than significant in this regard.
(3) Cumulative Impacts. The additive effect of the Project's GHG emissions
will not result in a reasonably foreseeable cumulatively considerable
contribution to global climate change. In addition, the Project, as well as
other cumulative related projects, will be subject to all applicable regulatory
requirements, which will further reduce GHG emissions. As stated in the
FEIR, the Project will not result in a significant impact regarding GHG
emissions, as the Project will result in 1,683.19 MTCO2eq/year under
buildout "business as usual" conditions. Therefore, Project related GHG
impacts were determined to be less than significant as they were below the
3,000 MTCO2eq threshold. Therefore, the Project's cumulative GHG
emissions will be considered less than significant.
b) 1aindfh2gc
Based on the whole of the administrative record, the City Council finds that the
Project will not result in significant impacts, either individually or cumulatively, with
respect to greenhouse gas emissions thresholds or consistency with applicable
greenhouse gas plans, policies or regulations. Consequently, no mitigation is
required.
3. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
a) Facts/Effects:
(1) Operations. Project operations will not create a significant hazard to the
public or environment through the handling, storage, and/or use of
hazardous materials, as well as accident conditions involving the release
of hazardous materials. Due to the nature of the proposed land uses, the
Project is not anticipated to involve facilities or activities that would produce
or use substantial quantities of hazardous materials or require the routine
4
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project (EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
transport of hazardous materials to and from the site that may adversely
affect the public or the environment. Long-term operation of the proposed
facilities will be subject to applicable federal, State, and local regulations
intended to manage the transport, use, storage, manufacture, and disposal
of hazardous materials to ensure that these materials do not adversely
impact the public or the environment. Project conformance with such
standard regulations will ensure impacts remain less than significant.
(2) t reit or Handle Hazardous Materials Near a School. The closest school to
the Project site is Wondertree Kids, located 0.25-mile southeast from the
Project site. However, Project operations will not involve the use of
hazardous materials or substances, and thus will not emit hazardous
emissions. Additionally, buffers in the form of roadways and intervening
structures will separate the proposed commercial uses from the existing
school. Compliance with measures established by Federal, State and local
regulatory agencies is considered adequate to offset any potential impacts
related to the use, handling, or storage of hazardous.
(3) HazardOUS Materials Requlatory Site. A Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment was conducted to identify, to the extent feasible, recognized
environmental conditions ("RECs") at the Property. As part of the Phase I
ESA, a regulatory agency database (federal, state, and tribal
environmental records) search report was obtained from Environmental
Data Resources Inc. (EDR), a third-party environmental database search
firm. The Property (Project site) was not identified in the environmental
database report.
(4) Emergency Response or Evaluation Plan. The Specific Plan area will
continue to be accessed via two existing driveways along Sepulveda
Boulevard and Hughes Way. No modifications to the existing driveways,
and no new curb cuts are proposed as part of the project. Therefore, the
Project site will remain accessible to emergency vehicles during both
Project construction and operations. The Project has been review by the
EI Segundo Fire Department (ESFD) and teh ESFD has verified that
adequate emergency vehicle access is provided. Additionally, evacuation
plans and procedures are incorporated into building and site design per
ESFD regulations. Therefore, given the nature and scope of the proposed
improvements, Project implementation will not impair implementation of or
physically interfere with the City's Emergency Operations Plan, evacuation
plan, or site access by emergency personnel, and for that reason, impacts
will be less than significant impact.
(5) Cumulative Impacts. As concluded in the FEIR, the Project's potential
impacts through accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials will be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation
of the recommended mitigation and compliance with applicable regulatory
requirements. Therefore, the Project's incremental effects involving
potential RECs and ACMs/LBPs in structures are not cumulatively
considerable. Potential hazardous conditions adjacent to the Project site
will be addressed in accordance with the respective applicable regulations,
laws, programs, and policies. As a result, the Project will not be expected
to contribute to new cumulative adverse impacts as a result of Project
5
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
implementation. With implementation of the specified mitigation measure,
the Project will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts concerning
hazards and hazardous materials.
b) I irtct�r� :
Based on the administrative record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
Project will not result in significant impacts with respect to the handling, storage,
and/or use of hazardous materials during project operations and will not result in
cumulatively considerable impacts with respect to hazards and hazardous
materials. Consequently, no mitigation is required.
4. HVdrologV and Water Quality
a) Facts/Effect :
(1) Water Qualitv — Short-Term. The Project applicant will be required to
prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) pursuant to the California Construction General Permit (CGP).
The SWPPP establishes procedures, including Best Management
Practices (BMPs), to control common pollutants such as suspended soil
in storm water runoff from leaving the Project area and negatively affecting
downstream water bodies. The SWPPP will include an Erosion Control
Plan and will identify appropriate BMPs to reduce potential degradation of
storm water quality. Further, the Project will also be subject to ESMC
Chapter 5-4-9 and will be subject to inspection by the City's Department
of Public Works. With implementation of the NPDES and ESMC
requirements, the Project's construction activities will have a less than
significant impact on surface water quality and will not significantly impact
the beneficial uses of receiving waters. Consequently, short-term water
quality impacts will be less than significant.
(2) Loriq-TerMn Operations. As indicated in the FEIR, the Project will be
required to install an underground storage system, which will reduce the
unmitigated 25-year flow rate of 18.19 cubic feet per second (cfs) to 6.0
cfs, reducing the discharge to below the existing condition of 7.80 cfs. To
ensure that discharge rates with Project implementation remain below that
of existing conditions, prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project
applicant will be required to provide detailed calculations and design
drawings demonstrating the detention/infiltration system adequately
mitigates the 25-year storm event.
The percentage of impervious area for the Project site will increase from
11.7 percent to 37.0 percent. Although the Project would increase the 25-
year peak flow for the Project site beyond existing conditions, an
underground infiltration/detention system will be constructed to detain the
storm water so that the peak flow rate from the completed Project will not
exceed the existing condition peak flow rate, consistent with reduced flow
discharge and SUSMP storage requirements. With implementation of the
underground storage system the 25-year flow rate of 22.90 cfs will be
reduced to 10.50 cfs, which will reduce the discharge to below the 10.72
cfs required. Thus, the peak flow rate from the completed Project site will
6
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
not exceed the existing condition peak flow rate and impacts would be less
than significant in this regard.
The Project will be required to implement post-construction controls in
order to mitigate storm water pollution. Specifically, the MS4 Permit
requires each permittee to implement a Planning and Land Development
Program for all Redevelopment projects before issuance of a grading
permit. The Project will be required to control pollutants, pollutant loads,
and runoff volume from the site by minimizing the impervious surface area
and controlling runoff from impervious surfaces through infiltration, bio-
retention, and/or rainfall harvest and use.
The proposed detention/infiltration system will be designed to allow the
lower portion of the detention/infiltration system to provide the required
storm water quality design volume (SWQDV) and the upper portion for
detention to control the peak outflow. The SWQDV will infiltrate into the
ground and the detention volume will ultimately discharge through the
existing 48-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) to the regional retention
basin and infiltrate into the ground within the retention basin. The re-
contoured areas in the golf course will be covered with vegetation. The
vegetation will function as vegetated buffers to slow down runoff velocity,
allow sediment and pollutants to settle, and provide infiltration into the
underlying soils.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a SUSMP, or functional equivalent,
must be prepared, including BMPs, in accordance with the latest EI
Segundo SUSMP, or functional equivalent template. The proposed
detention/infiltration system will be included in the Construction Drawings
to mitigate impacts of changes in imperviousness, as identified in the Final
Hydrology Study and LID. The LID identifies source control, site design,
and treatment BMPs that will also be required as part of the Project.
As part of the City's discretionary review process, the Project Applicant
will also be required to prepare a Construction Level Hydrology and
Hydraulics Study for review and approval by the Director of Public Works
and Building Official, prior to issuance of a grading permit. The study will
ensure that all drainage improvements and measures implemented for
storm water quality control purposes meet local and county design
requirements and standard engineering practices for the region, including
those identified in the Los Angeles County Manual. Compliance with the
NPDES and ESMC requirements will further ensure that potential impacts
to long-term water quality will be less than significant.
(3) CrOUndwater. With development of the site as proposed, the site's
pervious area is expected to decrease from 24.02 acres to 17.15 acres
with Project implementation, or by approximately 6.87 acres. Although the
Project site is not located within a groundwater recharge area, existing
pervious areas provide approximately 70,632 cubic feet (cf) of maximum
available storm water for groundwater recharge. Development as
proposed would reduce the maximum availability of storm water for
groundwater recharge to approximately 50,422 cf, a reduction of 20,209
cf. As discussed in the FEIR, the proposed underground infiltration
7
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
system will provide a volume of 27,242 cf for the groundwater supply. For
proposed impervious areas, storm water will be conveyed to a proposed
underground detention/infiltration system. The proposed onsite
detention/infiltration system will be designed to allow the lower portion of
the detention/infiltration system to provide the required SWQDV, and the
upper portion (for detention) to control the peak outflow. The proposed
underground infiltration system will provide a volume of 27,242 cf for the
groundwater supply. The SWQDV will infiltrate into the ground and the
detention volume will ultimately discharge through the existing 48-inch
RCP to the regional retention basin, ultimately infiltrating the ground
surface within the retention basin. Thus, the Project will not substantially
interfere with groundwater recharge and impacts would be less than
significant.
Although, the City of EI Segundo maintains rights to 953 acre-feet of water
per year from West Basin, the City does not use groundwater as a potable
water source. Instead, the City leases its yearly water rights to the City of
Manhattan Beach. According to the 2015 UWMP, the City does not
anticipate using groundwater to meet future water demands due to water
quality issues associated with seawater intrusion, and would only rely on
purchased or imported water or recycled water to meet future demands.
Therefore, the Project will not deplete groundwater supplies or
substantially interfere with groundwater recharge such that there will be a
net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level. Impacts will be less than significant in this regard.
(4) Cumulative Irnraacts. Cumulative projects would have the potential to
affect water quality at their respective sites during the construction phase
and long-term operations. As concluded in the FEIR, Project development
would result in increased potential for short- and long-term operational
water quality impacts in the area. Therefore, the Project's incremental
effects to water quality are cumulatively considerable. However, the
Project together with all other past, present and probable future
development projects (cumulative projects) are required to comply with
the NPDES requirements and to implement a SWPPP with specific BMPs
during construction activities. Additionally, the Project and cumulative
projects must adhere to NPDES requirements and implement a SUSMP
with specific BMPs for post-construction conditions. Each project would
also be required to comply with existing water quality standards at the time
of development review and include BMPs, as necessary. Therefore, with
implementation of the NPDES and ESMC requirements, the combined
cumulative short- and long-term impacts on surface water quality
associated with the Project's incremental effects and those of the
cumulative projects will be less than significant.
Implementation of the cumulative projects would result in changes to
drainage patterns and amounts of impervious surfaces on each respective
development site. Higher flows resulting from cumulative development
projects would contribute storm water flows to the local and regional
drainage facilities, which would result in drainage and runoff impacts.
Additionally, runoff from some of the cumulative projects could drain into
the conveyance systems used by the Project. As concluded in the FEIR,
8
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
Project implementation will result in changes in impervious surfaces,
however, proposed drainage improvements will ensure that proposed
condition flows are equal to or less than existing runoff conditions.
Therefore, the Project's incremental effects to drainage are not
cumulatively considerable. Future development will be required to
account for higher flows within the drainage area on a project-by-project
basis. Each cumulative project would be required to submit individual
analyses to their respective jurisdictions for review and approval prior to
issuance of grading or building permits. Each analysis must indicate how
peak flows generated from each related project will be accommodated by
the existing and/or proposed storm drainage facilities. Therefore, the
combined cumulative drainage and runoff impacts associated with the
Project's incremental effects and those of the cumulative projects would
be less than significant.
As concluded in the FEIR, the Project will not deplete groundwater
supplies, since the City does not use groundwater as a potable water
source. Although the Project will reduce pervious area, the proposed
detention/infiltration system would provide for groundwater recharge from
Project site storm water. Therefore, Project implementation will not
substantially interfere with groundwater recharge. The Project's
incremental effects to groundwater supplies and recharge are not
cumulatively considerable. Moreover, cumulative projects will not
interfere with groundwater recharge, since they are not located within a
groundwater recharge area. Although development of the cumulative
projects could result in an overall increase in impervious surfaces, many
of the projects involve redevelopment and not new development on vacant
lands, particularly due to the urbanized nature of the City and its
surroundings. Cumulative projects will not deplete groundwater supplies,
as the City does not use groundwater as a potable water source.
Therefore, cumulative impacts to groundwater supplies would be less than
significant.
b) LsndfiriA:
Based on the administrative record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
Project will not result in significant impacts with respect to short-term (construction)
water quality, long-term operational, groundwater, and cumulative hydrology and
water quality impacts. Consequently, no mitigation is required.
5. Land Use and Planninq
a) Facts/Effects:
(1) SC;AG 2016 RTP/SCS Goals and Adocted Growth Forecasts,. The
Project will be consistent with SCAG's 2016 RTP/SCS Goals and growth
forecasts, resulting in a less than significant impact in this regard.
(2) El Segundo General Plan. Pursuant to California Law, The Lakes Specific
Plan must be consistent with the EI Segundo General Plan. To ensure
consistency between the proposed Specific Plan and the General Plan, the
General Plan Land Use Element is being amended concurrently with the
9
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
adoption of the The Lakes Specific Plan. More specifically, the General
Plan and General Plan Map are being amended via GPA 16-01 to change
the land use designation for the 26.54-acre Specific Plan area from "Parks"
to "The Lakes Specific Plan." The Specific Plan will also establish a link
between the General Plan implementing policies (i.e., strategies) and the
development proposed.
As demonstrated in the FEIR, the Project is compatible with, and will not
frustrate, the goals and policies of the General Plan. Therefore, the Project
is consistent with the General Plan and will result in a less than significant
impact regarding potential conflict with the General Plan. All future
development plans or agreements, and any other development approvals
will be subject to compliance with The Lakes Specific Plan. Compliance
with The Lakes Specific Plan will be verified through the City's established
development review process. Because all future development within the
Specific Plan area must comply with the Specific Plan, which complies with
the General Plan,the development will necessarily comply with the General
Plan.
(3) EI Se Undo MLInicieal Code. To ensure consistency between the Specific
Plan and the ESMC, the Project includes a Zone Change (No. ZC 16-01)
and Zoning Map Change to rezone the 26.54-acre proposed Specific Plan
area as follows: 16.06 acres from "O-S Zone" to"The Lakes Specific Plan"
(Public Recreation/Open Space [PR/OS]); and 10.49 acres from "O-S
Zone" to "The Lakes Specific Plan" (Commercial Recreation/Open Space
[CR/OS]).
The City's Zoning Map and zoning text are being concurrently with the
adoption of the The Lakes Specific Plan. The Zone Change will establish
the Specific Plan area pursuant to the Specific Plan's proposed Land Use
Plan. The Zone Text Amendment will amend ESMC §15-3-2, Specific Plan
Zones,to add The Lakes Specific Plan and will establish the Specific Plan's
purpose, development standards, design guidelines, and administrative
provisions.
All development within the Specific Plan area will be subject to compliance
with the Specific Plan in order regulate and restrict the uses of lands and
buildings; square footage, height and bulk of buildings; and, yards and
other open spaces. Compliance with the Specific Plan will be verified
through the City's established development review process. Because all
future actions and improvements must comply with The Lakes Specific
Plan, once approved, they will comply with the ESMC.
The Project includes features that encourage and accommodate the use of
transit, pedestrian, and bicycle commuting as alternatives to single
occupant motor vehicle trips. The Project has been reviewed by the City
for compliance with ESMC Chapter 15-16, and compliance will be verified
before the City issues a Grading Permit. The Project has provided
applicable TDM and trip reduction measures. Therefore, the Project will be
in compliance with ESMC Chapter 15-16 requirements and a less than
significant impact will result in this regard.
10
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
(4) Cumulative Imoacts. As proposed, the cumulative projects considered
would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis, as they are implemented
within the City of EI Segundo and the other cities/communities. Each
cumulative project would undergo a similar plan review process as the
proposed Project to determine potential land use planning policy and
regulation conflicts. Each cumulative project would be analyzed
independently and within the context of their respective land use and
regulatory settings. As part of the review process, each project would be
required to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of the applicable
land use designation(s) and zoning district(s). It is assumed that
cumulative development would progress in accordance with the General
Plan and municipal code of the respective jurisdictions. Each cumulative
project would be analyzed to ensure that the goals, objectives, and policies
of the respective general plans, and regulations and guidelines of the
respective municipal codes are consistently upheld. Moreover, as
concluded in the FEIR, the Project is consistent with the 2016 RTP/SCS
goals and growth forecasts, and the EI Segundo General Plan and ESMC,
and therefore, would not contribute cumulatively to a conflict with applicable
land use plans, policies, or regulations when considered with other
cumulative projects. For these reasons, the combined cumulative land
use/planning impacts associated with the Project's incremental effects and
those of the cumulative projects will be less than significant.
b) J='indin ;
Based on the administrative record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
Project will not result in significant impacts, either individually or cumulatively, with
respect to land use and planning. Consequently, no mitigation is required.
6. Noise
a) Facts/Effects;
(1) Vibration'. Vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment
operations that will be used during Project construction range from 0.003
to 0.644 inch-per-second PPV at 25 feet from the activity source. The
structures located nearest any proposed construction activity area (e.g.,
the southern extent of Topgolf development site) involve a light industrial
land use (West Basin Municipal Water District (WBMWD) Edward C. Little
Water Recycling Facility (ECLWRF)) located approximately 75 feet to the
south. Project-related ground-borne vibration will be generated primarily
during site clearing and grading activities on-site and by off-site haul-truck
travel. At 75 feet from the activity source, vibration velocities range from
0.001 to 0.124 inch-per-second PPV. Additionally, the closest sensitive
receptor to the Project site (Oceanside Christian Fellowship) is located
approximately 2,150 feet to the east and vibratory levels will be below the
0.2 inch-per-second PPV significance threshold at the nearest structure
and sensitive receptors. Thus, vibration impacts associated with Project
construction will be less than significant.
(2) jmgn Olaerational Noise. As indicated in the FEIR, the maximum
traffic noise level increase caused by the Project will be 2.9 dBA and would
11
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
occur along the Project Site Access, east of Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1).
Noise levels under future with Project conditions are expected to exceed
the City's allowable maximum exterior noise standard of 65 dBA along
three roadway segments. However , when compared to future without
Project conditions, no increase in traffic noise levels would occur at these
three segments under future with Project conditions. Therefore, as both
significance criteria (increase of 3.0 dBA or more and exceedance of the
City's 65 dBA noise standard) are not met, Project operational traffic
volumes will not significantly contribute to existing traffic noise in the area.
Project-related future traffic noise impacts along these roadway segments
will be less than significant.
(3) Lonci-Term Stationary Noise. The nearest sensitive receptors that will be
subject to noise generated from delivery trucks on the Project site are
Oceanside Christian Fellowship Church (located approximately 2,150 feet
to the east) and single-family residences (located approximately 2,325 feet
to the southwest). At these distances, these receptors will be subject to
noise levels of 42.3 dBA and 41.7 dBA, respectively. These projected
noise levels are within the City's allowable exterior noise level thresholds
(75 dBA for churches and 65 dBA for single-family residences).
Additionally, noise from occasional truck deliveries currently exist on the
Project site associated with the existing golf course facilities. As such,
these sensitive receptors will not be directly exposed to excessive noise
levels from delivery trucks associated with the Project. Impacts will be less
than significant in this regard.
Future uses within the Project area would use heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning units (HVAC). HVAC systems typically result in noise levels
that average between 40 and 50 dBA Leq at 50 feet from the equipment.
As the nearest sensitive receptor (Oceanside Christian Fellowship) is
located approximately 2,150 feet east of the Project site's eastern
boundary, and are further from the closest potential location of the HVAC
equipment, potential noise levels would be well below the City's limits of 75
dBA for churches. Further, the Metro Green Line railway and Raytheon
Space and Airborne Systems are located between the Project site and the
nearest sensitive receptor (Oceanside Christian Fellowship Church)
located to the east. As such, the Green Line and Raytheon will buffer the
Project's mechanical equipment from the church. Therefore, impacts will
be less than significant in this regard.
The facility will also include an approximately 3,000 square foot outdoor
terrace on the third floor that provides entertainment involving live music
from a band or disc jockey (DJ). All DJ's and bands will be required to
connect to the facility's in-house sound system and speakers, allowing the
ability to control the volume and other sound levels. All overhead speakers
would be oriented inward and down to the facility's floors. Previous noise
assessments conducted at Topgolf facilities provided measured sound
levels resulting from typical weekend activities. The surveys consisted of
both short and long-term sound level measurements collected at 17
locations in and around the Gilbert Topgolf facility. It was determined that
predicted Topgolf noise levels ranged from 27 dBA to 47 dBA at the nearest
sensitive receptors (interior of library and school classrooms and
12
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
residences located 400 to 580 feet away from the Gilbert Topgolf facility)
and the Gilbert Topgolf Project-related increase (Project noise levels added
to the existing baseline noise levels) in ambient noise levels would be zero
dB. The nearest sensitive receptor(Oceanside Christian Fellowship)to the
Project site is located approximately 2,150 feet east of the Project site's
eastern boundary. Given that point sources of noise emissions are
atmospherically attenuated by a factor of 6 dBA per doubling of distance,
noise levels would be approximately 36 dBA at the Church. As the
proposed Project is expected to result in similar noise impacts associated
with the Gilbert Topgolf facility operations, a less than significant impact will
occur in this regard.
As under existing conditions, outdoor dining and weekly and monthly
events, as well as occasional special events would continue to occur with
implementation of the Project. Noise generated by groups of people (i.e.,
crowds) is dependent on several factors including vocal effort,
impulsiveness, and the random orientation of the crowd members. Crowd
noise is estimated at 60 dBA at one meter (3.28 feet) away for raised
normal speaking. This noise level would have a +5 dBA adjustment for the
impulsiveness of the noise source, and a-3 dBA adjustment for the random
orientation of the crowd members. Therefore, crowd noise would be
approximately 62 dBA at one meter from the source (i.e., the outdoor patio
area and events). Noise has a decay rate due to distance attenuation,
which is calculated based on the Inverse Square Law. Based upon the
Inverse Square Law, sound levels decrease by 6 dBA for each doubling of
distance from the source. As a result, crowd noise would be 56.0 dBA at
6.56 feet and 52.3 dBA at 10 feet. As the nearest receptors are
approximately 3,000 feet to the southwest of the proposed outdoor patio,
noise levels would be well below the City's noise standards, and/or the
ambient noise levels in the area immediately surrounding the Project site
of 66.3 dBA (along the south central portion of the Project site). Therefore,
impacts will be less than significant in this regard.
The project proposes to expand the existing surface parking areas to
accommodate a total of 523 spaces. The closest sensitive receptors to the
parking areas would be approximately 2,325 feet to the southwest.
Additionally, parking lot noise currently exists at the Project site from
current golf course and recreational uses. Further, commercial and
manufacturing uses will be located between the parking areas and
sensitive receptors. As the noise generated in the parking areas would be
at a distance of approximately 2,325 feet from the closest sensitive
receptors, noise associated with parking activities will not exceed the City's
exterior standard of 65 dBA for single-family residential uses. As such,
impacts will be less than significant in this regard.
(4) Lona-Term Curnulative Noise. Although related cumulative projects have
been identified within the study area, the noise generated by stationary
equipment on-site cannot be quantified given the conceptual nature of each
development and since speculation would be involved. Each cumulative
project would require separate discretionary approval and CEQA
assessment, which would address potential noise impacts and identify
necessary attenuation measures, where appropriate. The Project will not
13
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project (EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
result in stationary long-term equipment that would significantly affect
surrounding sensitive receptors. Thus, the Project and identified
cumulative projects are not anticipated to result in a significant cumulative
impact. Less than significant impacts will occur in this regard.
A significant impact would result only if both the combined and incremental
effects criteria have been met for long-term cumulative mobile noise. Noise
levels along EI Segundo Boulevard between SR-1 and Continental
Boulevard roadways would range from 55.7 dBA to 69.7 dBA, which are
within the City's land use compatibility criteria for the land uses along the
roadways. Therefore, a significant impact regarding combined effects will
not occur in this regard. The roadway segment along the Project Site
Access, east of Sepulveda Boulevard, is expected to have an incremental
noise level increase of 2.9 dBA, which is over the 1.0 dBA criteria.
However, the combined noise level increase would be 2.9, which is below
3.0 dBA threshold of perception. The resultant noise level is expected be
54.0 dBA, which is within the City's noise standard for land uses along this
roadway segment. As also indicated in the FEIR, the resultant noise level
for the roadway segment of Manhattan Boulevard (east of SR-1) is
expected be 65.5 dBA, which exceeds the 65 dBA noise standard.
However, there would be no incremental increase in vehicular noise levels
along this segment and the 1.0 dBA criteria would not be exceeded.
Additionally, the combined noise level increase would be 0.6 dBA, which is
below the 3.0 dBA threshold of perception. Therefore, no significant mobile
noise impacts will occur on study area roadway segments, as mobile noise
levels will not exceed either the combined or incremental effects criteria,
and will comply with the City's noise standards.
b) Finding:
Based on the administrative record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
Project will not result in significant impacts with respect to vibration, long-term
mobile noise, long-term stationary noise, and cumulative long-term noise impacts.
Consequently, no mitigation is required.
7. Population and Housing
a) Facts/Effects:
(1) Displacement of Housing and/or People. No housing units currently exist
on the Project site. Therefore, Project implementation will not displace
housing or people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere.
b) ff
Based on the administrative record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
Project will not result in significant impacts, either individually or cumulatively, with
respect to population and housing. Consequently, no mitigation is required.
14
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
8. Public Services and Recreation
a) .acts/Effects:
(1) f=ire Police, Schools, andNarks/Recreation. The Project will create an
increase in demand for fire and police protection services, as well as for
schools and parks. Payment of the mitigation fees set forth in EI Segundo
Municipal Code (ESMC) Chapter 15-57A will ensure that the Project result
in less than significant impacts related to fire and police protection services.
Project implementation will generate indirect student population growth in
the Wiseburn School District (WSD). However, the Project will not warrant
construction of new or physically altered school facilities. Therefore, the
Project will not result in substantial environmental impacts in this regard.
WSD charges developer fees for residential and commercial development
for the purpose of funding the construction or reconstruction of school
facilities. This mitigation fee will be imposed on the Project and will reduce
potential impacts to a less than significant level.
The proposed development includes replacing the existing driving range
with a three-story approximately 67,170 gross square-foot Topgolf
commercial recreation and entertainment facility. To accommodate the
Topgolf facility, the proposed Project includes modifying the fairways and
layouts of three holes at the existing golf course. The modified 9-hole
public golf course and associated clubhouse amenities will continue to
operate. The 3.58 acre SCE easement will continue to be developed as
the eastern portion of the nine-hole golf course. Additional modifications
include installing new lighting and screening poles, and replacing existing
net poles and driving range grass with high density fiber turf. Although the
26.54 Project site will provide both public recreation and commercial
recreation facilities, it will continue to contribute to the City's overall open
space and recreational facilities acreage of 213.46 acres, as the City
considers both public and private space to meet its parkland to population
requirements.
Project implementation will not involve residential development, thus,
would not induce substantial population growth through new residential
development. Therefore,the Project will not generate a significant demand
for park facilities or increase the use of existing recreational facilities
through new residential development. The Project will continue to provide
a 9-hole public golf course, as well as a commercial recreation and
entertainment facility. Moreover, in compliance with ESMC Chapter 15-
27A, mitigation fees will be imposed which would minimize, to the greatest
extent practicable, the new development's impact on the City's existing
parks and recreational facilities. ESMC Chapter 15-27A fees will be
imposed by the City to finance public facilities attributable to new
development, including parks/open space and recreation facilities and
public use (community centers) facilities. Therefore, the Project will not
result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the need for
new or physically altered park or recreational facilities.
15
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
(2) Cugiulative In, acts. The Project will result in increased demands on the
City's fire and police protection services, and parks/recreational services
and facilities. However, the Project is subject to compliance with ESMC
Chapter 15-27A through which the City imposes development impact fees
to finance public facilities attributable to new development, including fire
suppression and law enforcement facilities, vehicles, and equipment, and
parks/open space and recreation facilities and public use (community
centers)facilities. Therefore, because the Project is required to pay ESMC
Chapter 15-27A mitigation fees, which are designed to alleviate cumulative
impacts to the City, the Project's incremental effects to fire and police
protection services, and parks/recreational services and facilities are not
cumulatively considerable. Further, although cumulative development
would similarly result in increased demands on existing fire and police
protection services, and parks/recreational services and facilities, each
cumulative project would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by various
City departments for compliance with minimum standards. Additionally,
each cumulative project would be subject to compliance with ESMC
Chapter 15-27A and payment of development impact fees to finance public
facilities attributable to the new development, including fire suppression
and law enforcement facilities, vehicles, and equipment, and parks/open
space and recreation facilities and public use(community centers)facilities.
Such fees would minimize, to the greatest extent practicable, the
cumulative development's impact on the EI Segundo's public services and
public facilities. Thus, cumulative development projects would pay their fair
share of the costs of providing such public services and public facilities.
Therefore, the combined cumulative impacts to fire and police protection
services, and parks/recreational services and facilities associated with the
Project's incremental effects and those of the cumulative projects would be
less than significant.
The Project could indirectly generate student population growth in the
WSD. However, the Project is subject to compliance with Education Code
§§ 17620, et seq., which allows school districts to collect impact fees from
developers of new commercial/industrial building space. Therefore,
because the Project is required to pay developer impacts fees, which are
deemed to be full mitigation, the Project's incremental effects to school
facilities are not cumulatively considerable. Further, although cumulative
development would similarly generate student population growth in the
WSD, each cumulative Project would be subject to compliance with
Education Code § 17620 and payment of development impact fees to
school districts. Therefore, the combined cumulative impacts to school
districts associated with the Project's incremental effects and those of the
cumulative projects would be less than significant.
b) Ea 1—drte:
Based on the administrative record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
Project will not result in significant impacts, either individually or cumulatively, with
respect to public services and parks/recreation. Consequently, no mitigation is
required.
16
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project (EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
9. a C"raSP
orWalira and Traffic
a) Facts/Effects:
1 Intersection Levey of Service Oncludinq Cumulative impacts).
Forecast Near-Term With Project Conditions
With the addition of Project-generated trips, the study intersections are
forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS (LOS D or better)
according to agency performance criteria for forecast near-term with
Project conditions, except the following:
• Intersection 16 - Douglas Road/EI Segundo Boulevard (weekday
PM peak hour only);
• Intersection 17 - Aviation Boulevard/EI Segundo Boulevard
(weekday PM peak hour only);
• Intersection 18 - Isis Avenue/EI Segundo Boulevard (weekday PM
peak hour only); and
• Intersection 21 - La Cienega Boulevard/EI Segundo Boulevard
(weekday PM peak hour only).
As demonstrated in the FEIR, the addition of Project-generated trips will
not result in a significant traffic impact at the Local Agency study
intersections based on agency-established thresholds of significance for
forecast near-term with Project conditions. Therefore, no mitigation is
required.
With the addition of Project-generated trips, the State Highway study
intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS
(LOS C or better) according to Caltrans performance criteria for forecast
near-term with Project conditions with the exception of the following study
intersections:
• Intersection 1 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/EI Segundo Boulevard
(weekday PM peak hour only);
• Intersection 4 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/Rosecrans Avenue
(weekday PM peak hour only);
• Intersection 7- Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/Marine Way(weekday
PM peak hour only); and
• Intersection 9 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/Manhattan Beach
Boulevard (weekday PM peak hour only).
As demonstrated in the FEIR, based on agency-established thresholds of
significance, the Project will not result in a significant traffic impact on any
State Highway study intersections for the forecast near-term with Project
conditions. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
17
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
Forecast Long-Range (Cumulative) Without Project Conditions
With the addition of Project-generated trips, the Local Agency study
intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS
(LOS D or better) according to agency performance criteria for forecast
long-range with Project conditions with the exception of the following study
intersections:
• Intersection 15 - Nash Street/EI Segundo Boulevard (weekday PM
peak hour only);
• Intersection 16 - Douglas Road/EI Segundo Boulevard (weekday
PM peak hour only;
• Intersection 17 - Aviation Boulevard/EI Segundo Boulevard
(weekday PM peak hour only;
• Intersection 18 - Isis Avenue/EI Segundo Boulevard (weekday PM
peak hour only; and
• Intersection 21 - La Cienega Boulevard/EI Segundo Boulevard
(weekday PM peak hour only.
With the addition of Project-generated trips, the State Highway study
intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS
(LOS C or better) according to Caltrans performance criteria for forecast
long-range with Project conditions, except the following:
• Intersection 1 -Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/EI Segundo Boulevard
(both weekday PM peak hour and weekend mid-day peak hour);
• Intersection 4 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/Rosecrans Avenue
(both weekday PM peak hour and weekend mid-day peak hour);
• Intersection 5 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/33rd Street (both
weekday PM peak hour and weekend mid-day peak hour);
• Intersection 6 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/30th Street (weekday
PM peak hour only);
• Intersection 7 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/Marine Way (both
weekday PM peak hour and weekend mid-day peak hour);
• Intersection 9 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/Manhattan Beach
Boulevard (both weekday PM peak hour and weekend mid-day
peak hour);
• Intersection 13 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/Artesia Boulevard
(both weekday PM peak hour and weekend mid-day peak hour);
• Intersection 19 - 1-405 Southbound Ramps/EI Segundo Boulevard
(weekday PM peak hour only); and
• Intersection 22 - 1-405 Northbound Ramps/EI Segundo Boulevard
(weekday PM peak hour only.
As demonstrated in the FEIR, based on the thresholds of significance, the
Project is forecast to result in no significant traffic impacts at the State
Highway study intersections for forecast long-range with Project conditions.
18
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
(2) Cornoliance with Congestion Management Program (CMP).
Forecast Near-Term With Project Conditions
With the addition of Project-generated trips, the CMP study intersections
are forecast to operate at an acceptable LOS (LOS F) according to CMP
performance criteria for forecast near-term with Project conditions, except
the following:
• Intersection 1 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1) / EI Segundo
Boulevard (weekday PM peak hour only); and
• Intersection 4 - Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1) / Rosecrans Avenue
(weekday PM peak hour only).
As demonstrated in the FEIR, based on CMP thresholds of significance,
the addition of Project-generated trips is forecast to result in no significant
impact at the CMP study intersections for forecast near-term with Project
conditions. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
Forecast Long-Range With Project Conditions
The CMP study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at an
acceptable LOS (LOS F) according to CMP performance criteria for
forecast long-range without Project conditions, except the following:
• intersection 1 - (Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/EI Segundo
Boulevard, CMP) weekday p.m. and weekend mid-day peak hours;
• Intersection 4 - (Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/Rosecrans Avenue,
CMP) weekday p.m. and weekend mid-day peak hours; and
• Intersection 13 - (Sepulveda Boulevard (SR-1)/Artesia Boulevard,
CMP) weekday p.m. and weekend mid-day peak hours.
As demonstrated in the FEIR, based on CMP thresholds of significance,
the addition of Project-generated trips is forecast to result in no significant
impact at the CMP study intersections for forecast long-range with Project
conditions. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
(3) CMP Transit Irrinacts. Project implementation will increase the demand for
public transit use in the Project vicinity. Based on the CMP guidelines, and
the proximity of the various Project land uses in relation to available transit
in the vicinity, the Project is forecast to generate approximately two
weekday AM peak hour transit trips, approximately 12 weekday PM peak
hour transit trips, and approximately 110 weekday daily transit trips.
Further, the Project is forecast to generate approximately nine weekend
mid-day peak hour transit trips, and approximately 185 weekend mid-day
daily transit trips. As the Project transit trips can be accommodated by
existing transit service in the Project vicinity, no significant CMP transit
impacts are expected to occur.
(4) Cumulative Imoacts. The forecast long-range without Project traffic
volumes are derived by adding trips associated with 93 cumulative projects
19
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project (EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
expected to be constructed and generating trips by Project buildout. As
demonstrated in the FEIR, the Project will not result in a significant impact
at study intersections for forecast long-range with Project buildout
conditions. Therefore, the combined cumulative traffic and circulation
impacts associated with the Project's incremental effects and those of the
cumulative projects will be less than significant for the identified
intersections.
Notwithstanding, all cumulative projects would be evaluated on a project-
by-project basis as they are implemented within the City of EI Segundo and
the other cities/communities. Each cumulative project would undergo a
similar plan review process as the proposed Project, to determine whether
preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis is warranted, and the potential
traffic and circulation impacts. Each cumulative project would be analyzed
within the context of their respective traffic study areas.
b) f��ing;
Based on the administrative record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
Project will not result in significant impacts, either individually or cumulatively, with
respect to transportation/traffic, and CMP facilities and CMP transit.
Consequently, no mitigation is required.
10. Ulilities and Service Svsterns
a) Facts/Effects:
(1) Wastewater Treatment Requirements. Project implementation will not alter
the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant's (JWPCP's) design capacities or
cause the plant (i.e., discharger)to violate the effluent limitations, receiving
water limitations, or standard provisions. Development associated with
Project will be required to comply with NPDES requirements for any uses
that plan to discharge wastewater to the City's sewage system, which
ultimately flows to the JWPCP. Additionally, Project implementation will
not require increases in the JWPCP's design capacities. Therefore, Project
implementation will not cause the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality
Control Board (LARWQCB) wastewater treatment requirements to be
exceeded and a less than significant impact will occur in this regard.
(2) Water SuDoHes and f=acilities. The West Basin Municipal Water District
(WBMWD) 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) considers
population projections through the year 2040 based on land uses
anticipated by the General Plan. Although the Project includes
amendments to the General Plan with adoption of The Lakes Specific Plan,
the Topgolf development will be developed at a floor area ratio (FAR) of
0.147, which is less than the development anticipated by the General Plan.
Thus, the proposed development potential is accounted for in WBMWD's
2015 UWMP. According to the WBMWD 2015 UWMP, although
WBMWD's service area population is projected to increase, the overall
baseline potable demand is expected to decrease given further water use
efficiency and recycled water program implementation. Further, WBMWD
does not anticipate any shortages and would be able to provide reliable
water supplies under normal, single-dry year, and multiple-dry year
20
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project (EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
conditions. Any shortfall in supplies would be met through imported water
so long as MWD manages its supply and demand balance through its
Water Surplus and Drought Management Plan (WSDM) and Water Supply
Allocation Plan (WSAP). Therefore, there will be sufficient water supplies
available to serve the Project from existing entitlement and resources, and
no new or expanded entitlement would be needed. A less than significant
impact will occur in this regard.
The Project site is currently served by existing water lines. Due to proposed
grading for the Project, some portions of the existing eight-inch water line
may require reconstruction to maintain proper depth of the pipe. Two new
PVC water laterals would connect the existing 8 inch ductile iron water line
to the proposed development to supply water and fire water. The water
facilities' environmental impacts would occur within the Project site
boundaries and would be less than significant.
Water for fire suppression is provided by on-site building sprinklers and
from two off-site fire hydrants located on Sepulveda Boulevard. Fire flows
for the proposed development will be subject to County of Los Angeles Fire
Department Land Development Unit Standards. Therefore, impacts in
regard to fire flows will be less than significant.
Increased demand for recycled water beyond existing conditions is not
anticipated. The Topgolf facility will replace the natural grass at the existing
driving range with synthetic turf, thereby reducing the demand for
recycled/reclaimed water. Reclaimed water service is anticipated to be
provided through the existing point of connection on Hughes Way. Thus,
expansion of facilities is not anticipated. A less than significant impact will
occur in regard to demand and/or expansion of recycled water facilities.
(3) Wastewater Facilities and Treatment. The Project will construct two new
laterals to serve the proposed development. As detailed in the FEIR, the
wastewater facilities' environmental impacts will occur within the Project
site boundaries and will be less than significant.
According to the Districts, the Project's projected increase in average daily
wastewater generation beyond existing conditions is estimated at 7,705
gallons per day (gpd), which will be served by the Districts' existing 24-inch
diameter trunk sewer. The increase in wastewater generated by the
Project (approximately 7,705 gpd) represents approximately 0.0004
percent of the remaining Districts' capacity. Thus, the proposed
development will not exceed the available capacity at the JWPCP.
Therefore, adequate capacity exists to serve the Project's projected
demand and Project implementation will not require increases to the
Districts truck sewer or in the JWPCP's design capacities. Project
implementation will not require or result in the construction of new
wastewater facilities or expansion of existing facilities beyond the
construction of the new sewer laterals located onsite. A less than
significant impact will occur in this regard.
(4) Solid Waste. The Project will be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the Project's solid waste disposal needs.
21
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
Further, the Project will be required to comply with the City's Source
Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE)for diverting solid waste. Some
of the source reduction programs that will be available to the commercial
uses are: Commercial On-Site Greenwaste Pick-Up; Electronic Waste;
Commercial On-site Pick-Up; and Business Waste Reduction Program.
Compliance with the SRRE will reduce the volume of solid waste ultimately
disposed of at a landfill. Additionally, compliance with the SRRE will be in
furtherance of meeting the City's disposal rate targets and exceeding AB
939's 50 percent diversion requirement. Continued compliance with the
SRRE will ensure that the Project will comply with the statutes and
regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, the Project will not conflict
with federal, state, or local statutes and regulations related to solid waste,
and a less than significant impact will occur in this regard.
(5) Dry Utilities. The Project will involve minor improvements, including a new
underground utility conduit system, new gas line, and connections for the
telecommunications systems. Proposed improvements to dry utilities are
minor and will not cause significant environmental effects. Thus, a less
than significant impact will occur in this regard.
(6) Cumulative Impacts. The Project and cumulative projects would increase
demand for water associated with new development. As with the Project,
all future cumulative development would undergo environmental review on
a project-by-project basis in order to evaluate potential impacts to the local
water system and ensure compliance with the established regulatory
framework. Cumulative impacts to the local water system within the City
of EI Segundo would be mitigated on a project-by-project basis. WBMWD
does not anticipate any shortages in water supply associated with the
Project and will be able to provide reliable water supplies under normal,
single-dry year, and multiple-dry year conditions. Therefore, Project
implementation will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to the
water system.
The Project and cumulative projects will result in increased demands on
the local sewer system. As with the Project, all future cumulative
development would undergo environmental review on a project-by-project
basis, in order to evaluate potential impacts to the local wastewater system
and ensure compliance with the established regulatory framework.
Cumulative impacts to the local water system within the City of EI Segundo
would be mitigated on a project-by-project basis. Construction of new
sewer facilities associated with the Project will not result in a significant
environmental effect. Further, it was determined based on existing
capacity, that the Districts' local trunk sewer and the JWPCP treatment
facility will have capacity to serve the Project. The Project will also be
responsible for paying a fee to the Districts in an amount sufficient to
construct an incremental expansion of the sewerage system to
accommodate the Project. Payment of the fees will ensure adequate
capacity to serve the development being proposed at that time. Therefore,
project implementation will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts
to the sewer system.
22
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
The cumulative projects involve new developments, which would increase
solid waste generation, impacting capacities of the landfills receiving their
wastes. The Project will similarly increase solid waste generation and
impact capacities at landfills. Therefore, the Project's incremental effects
to landfill capacities are cumulatively considerable. However, compliance
with the EI Segundo and respective cities' SRREs will reduce the volume
of solid waste ultimately disposed of at a landfill. Additionally, compliance
with the SRRE will be in furtherance of meeting each jurisdiction's disposal
rate targets and exceeding AB 939's 50 percent diversion requirement.
Therefore, the combined cumulative impacts to landfill capacities
associated with the Project's incremental effects and those of the
cumulative projects will be less than significant.
The dry utilities would not provide service to the Project (or any new
development), if there were not adequate supplies and infrastructure to
maintain existing service levels and meet the anticipated demands of the
specific development requesting service. Therefore, the Project's
incremental effects to dry utilities are not cumulatively considerable.
b) DrncL111 :
Based on the administrative record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
Project will not result in significant impacts with respect to wastewater facilities and
treatment, water supplies and facilities, solid waste, dry utilities, or cumulative
impacts to public utilities and service systems. Consequently, no mitigation is
required.
D. Impacts Identified as Potentially Sictnificant in the Initial Study But Which Can
Be Reduced to Less-Than-Sianificant Levels with Mitictation Measures,,.
Based on the evidence in the record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
implementation of specified mitigation measures will ensure that the Project will have less
than significant environmental effects in the following areas:
1. Ak, duality
a) Facts/Effects:
(1) Air Quality Standards Short-Term. Temporary impacts could result from
Project construction activities. Short-term air emissions would result from
particulate (fugitive dust) emissions from grading and building construction
and exhaust emissions from the construction equipment and the motor
vehicles of the construction crew. Maximum particulate matter emissions
will occur during the initial stages of construction, when grading activities
will occur. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 requires that construction activities
comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, such that excessive fugitive dust
emissions shall be controlled by regular watering or other dust prevention
measures. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 is required for implementation
of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a
nuisance off-site and after implementation will reduce short-term fugitive
dust impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. With adherence to Mitigation
Measure AQ-1, and other dust control techniques, the maximum mitigated
23
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
particulate matter concentration will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds.
Further, ROG emissions and construction equipment and worker vehicle
exhaust emissions will not exceed the emissions thresholds. A less than
significant impact will occur in this regard. The Project is not located in an
area where naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) is likely to be present.
Therefore impacts will be less than significant.
In accordance with the SCAQMD Guidelines, CaIEEMod was utilized to
model construction emissions for ROG, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, and PM2.5.
Unmitigated construction-related emissions are not expected to exceed
SCAQMD construction thresholds, thus, emissions from construction-
related activities will be less than significant. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure AQ-1 is recommended to further lessen construction-related
impacts by requiring measures to reduce air pollutant emissions from
construction activities. Additionally, compliance with standard regulations
and SCAQMD rules are included in these mitigation measures in order to
ensure compliance and provide a verification method through the CEQA
process (i.e., the Mitigation Monitoring Program). Therefore, construction
emissions will be at less than significant levels.
(2) Air Quality Mann ernent Ran. The determination of 2012 AQMP
consistency is primarily concerned with a project's long-term influence on
the Basin's air quality. The Project will not result in a long-term impact on
the region's ability to meet State and Federal air quality standards. Also,
the Project will be consistent with the AQMP's goals and policies for control
of fugitive dust. As discussed in the FEIR, the Project's long-term influence
will also be consistent with the SCAQMD and SCAG's goals and policies
and is, therefore, considered consistent with the 2012 AQMP. The Project
will be required to comply with applicable emission reduction measures
identified by the SCAQMD. These measures have been included as
Mitigation Measure AQ-1. The Project thus meets this AQMP consistency
criterion. Impacts associated with compliance with the 2012 AQMP will be
less than significant.
(3) CWTILlIative Short-Term Construction Air Emissions. Of the cumulative
projects that have been identified within the Project study area, there are a
number of related projects that have not been built or are currently under
construction. Since the Project Applicant has no control over the timing or
sequencing of the related projects, any quantitative analysis to ascertain
the daily construction emissions that assumes multiple, concurrent
construction would be speculative.
The Project is required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements
and implement all feasible mitigation measures. In addition, the Project will
comply with adopted 2012 AQMP emissions control measures. Per
SCAQMD rules and mandates, as well as the CEQA requirement that
significant impacts be mitigated to the extent feasible, these same
requirements (i.e., Rule 403 compliance, the implementation of all feasible
mitigation measures, and compliance with adopted 2012 AQMP emissions
control measures)will also be imposed on construction projects throughout
the Basin, which will include each of the related cumulative projects.
24
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project (EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
Compliance with SCAQMD rules and regulations and Mitigation Measure
AQ-1 will reduce construction-related impacts to a less than significant level
during construction. Thus, it can be reasonably inferred that the Project-
related construction activities, in combination with those from other projects
in the area, will not significantly deteriorate the local air quality. Cumulative
construction-related impacts will be less than significant.
(4) Cumulative Consisten with Re ional Plans. The City of EI Segundo is
subject to the SCAQMD's 2012 AQMP. Additionally, the City is located
within the Los Angeles County subregion of the SCAG RTP/SCS, which
governs population growth. The General Plan is consistent with the
RTP/SCS, and since the RTP/SCS is consistent with the 2012 AQMP,
growth under the General Plan is consistent with the 2012 AQMP. In
addition, as Project operational emissions will not exceed SCAQMD
thresholds, the Project will not conflict or obstruct the 2012 AQMP. As
such, the Project will not cumulatively contribute to impacts in this regard,
and a less than significant impact will occur. It is noted that all applicable
construction emission reduction measures will be required for the Project
to ensure impacts are minimized (refer to Mitigation Measure AQ-1).
b) Mitia adorn
AQ-1 In accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403, excessive fugitive dust
emissions must be controlled by regular watering or other dust
prevention measures, and with Rule 402, which requires
implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive
dust from creating a nuisance off-site as specified in the SCAQMD's
Rules and Regulations, the following shall be implemented during
construction:
a. All active portions of the construction site must be watered
every three hours during daily construction activities and when
dust is observed migrating from the Project site to prevent
excessive amounts of dust.
b. Appoint a construction relations officer to act as a community
liaison concerning on-site construction activity including
resolution of issues related to particulate matter generation.
c. Pave or apply water every three hours during daily construction
activities or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved
access roads, parking areas, and staging areas. More frequent
watering must occur if dust is observed migrating from the site
during site disturbance.
d. Any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt, or other dusty material
must be enclosed, covered, watered twice daily, or non-toxic
soil binders shall be applied.
e. All grading and excavation operations must be suspended when
wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour.
f. Disturbed areas must be replaced with ground cover or paved
immediately after construction is completed in the affected area.
g. Track-out devices such as gravel bed track-out aprons (3 inches
deep, 25 feet long, 12 feet wide per lane and edged by rock
berm or row of stakes) are required to reduce mud/dirt trackout
25
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
from unpaved truck exit routes. Alternatively a wheel washer
must be used at truck exit routes.
h. On-site vehicle speed must be limited to 15 miles per hour.
i. All material transported off-site must be either sufficiently
watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of
dust before departing the job site.
j. Reroute construction trucks away from congested streets or
sensitive receptor areas.
c) Finlirj(
Based on the evidence in the record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
identified mitigation measures, together with the Project's conditions of approval,
will avoid or decrease to a level of insignificance the potential air quality impacts
as identified in the FEIR.
2. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
a) Facts/Effects:
(1) Construction-Related Accidental Release of Hazardous Materials. The
completed Phase II ESA addressed the identified Recognized
Environmental Conditions (RECs) and no concerns that would warrant
further assessment or action were identified. Based on this data no further
assessment of the site was recommended. Therefore, short-term
construction activities will not create a significant hazard to the public or
environment through accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials associated with these known RECs.
There is the potential for asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) or lead-
based paints (LBPs) due to the ages of the structures and the time period
which ACMs and LBPs were phased out of building materials. Demolition
of onsite structures could expose construction personnel and the public to
ACMs or LBPs are present. All demolition that could result in the release
of ACMs or LBPs must be conducted according to Federal and State
standards. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, and
compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulatory
requirements, potential impacts through accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials (ACMs/LBPs) will be reduced to less than
significant levels.
Other means by which accidental spills could result during construction of
future development involve the use of construction equipment that may
result in petroleum-based fuel spills. The level of risk associated with this
type of spill is not considered significant due to the small volume and low
concentration of hazardous materials utilized during construction.
Standard construction practices will be observed such that any materials
released would be appropriately contained and remediated as required by
local, State, and Federal law. Project impacts in this regard will be less
than significant.
26
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
b) °Iiti ation:
HAZ-1 Before a Demolition Permit is issued, an environmental
professional with Phase II/site characterization experience must
conduct an inspection of existing onsite structures. The inspection
must determine whether or not testing is required to confirm the
presence or absence of hazardous substances in building materials
(e.g., sinks, drains, piping, flooring, walls, ceiling tiles). Should
testing be required and results determine that hazardous
substances are present in onsite building materials, the Phase
II/site characterization specialist must determine appropriate
prevention/remediation measures that are required and/or the
methods for proper disposal of hazardous waste at an approved
landfill facility, if required.
c) fjndin :
Based on the evidence in the record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
identified mitigation measures, together with the Project's conditions of approval,
will avoid or decrease to a level of insignificance the potential hazards and
hazardous materials impacts identified in the FEIR.
3. Noise
a) Facts/Effects:
(1) Short-Term Construction Noise lmr)act . Project-related grading and
construction activities could generate significant amounts of noise and
vibration. Project construction activities could expose sensitive receptors
in the surrounding area to sporadic high noise and vibration levels (as a
result of power tools, jack-hammers, truck noise, etc.). The sensitive
receptors located nearest the Project site are the Christian Fellowship
Church (including a child day care facility) located approximately 2,150 feet
to the east, and the single-family residences located approximately 2,325
to the southwest. Given these distances and the noise attenuation
achieved with each doubling of distance (approximately 6 dB), Project
construction noise will be approximately 63.3 dBA and 62.7 dBA at the
Church and residences property lines, respectively. It is noted that these
noise levels do not account for additional attenuation that will occur from
intervening topography or structures. Project construction noise will not
interfere with normal activities at these offsite sensitive receptors and will
not exceed the City's noise standard for residential properties (five (5) dBA
above the ambient noise level or 65 dBA). Therefore, Project grading and
construction will not result in significant temporary noise levels at nearby
noise sensitive receptors and a less than significant impact would occur in
this regard. Implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 will further minimize
potential construction noise levels by requiring preparation of a
Construction Noise Management Plan that includes limiting construction to
the less noise sensitive periods of the day (i.e., between the hours of 7:00
AM and 6:00 PM per ESMC §7-2-10) and ensuring that proper operating
procedures are followed during construction so that nearby sensitive
receptors are not adversely affected by noise and vibration (i.e., pursuant
27
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
to the standards set forth in ESMC §7-2-4). Therefore, following
compliance with the ESMC and implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1,
Project construction noise impacts will be less than significant.
(2) Short-Terre CunlUlative Noise Imp cts. Construction activities associated
with the Project and cumulative projects may overlap, resulting in
construction noise in the area. However, as analyzed in the FEIR,
construction noise impacts primarily affect the areas immediately adjacent
to the construction site. Construction noise for the proposed Project was
determined to be less than significant following compliance with the ESMC
and Mitigation Measure N-1. The closest cumulative project is the EI
Segundo South Campus Specific Plan (ESSCSP) within Raytheon that
involves office, retail, warehouse, light industrial uses located directly east
of the Project site. Future development within the ESSCSP area would be
subject to City standards and in accordance with a Construction Noise
Management Plan, which limits construction to the less noise sensitive
periods of the day and ensuring proper operating procedures during
construction, which would reduce construction noise impacts to a less than
significant level. Therefore, this cumulative project combined with the
Project will result in less than significant construction-related cumulative
noise impacts.
fir) h/N'itq tign:
iN-1 Before the City issues grading permits, the Project Applicant must
demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works that
the Project complies with the following:
All construction equipment must be equipped with mufflers and
sound control devices (e.g., intake silencers and noise shrouds)
no less effective than those provided on the original equipment
and no equipment shall have an un-muffled exhaust.
The contractor must maintain and tune-up all construction
equipment to minimize noise emissions.
Stationary equipment must be placed so as to maintain the
greatest possible distance to the sensitive receptors.
* All equipment servicing must be performed so as to maintain
the greatest possible distance to the sensitive receptors.
o Impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, and rock
drills) used for project construction are required to be
hydraulically or electronically powered wherever possible to
avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from
pneumatically powered tools. However, where use of
pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler must be
used; this muffler can lower noise levels from the exhaust by up
to about 10 dBA. External jackets on the tools themselves must
be used where feasible, and this could achieve a reduction of 5
dBA. Quieter procedures must be used, such as drills rather
than impact equipment, whenever feasible.
A qualified "Noise Disturbance Coordinator" will be retained
amongst the construction crew to be responsible for responding
28
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
to any local complaints about construction noise. When a
complaint is received, the Disturbance Coordinator shall notify
the City within 24 hours of the complaint and determine the
cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early,
malfunctioning muffler, etc.) and implement reasonable
measures to resolve the compliant, as deemed acceptable by
the Director of Planning and Building Safety.
Select demolition methods to minimize vibration, where
possible (e.g., sawing masonry into sections rather than
demolishing it by pavement breakers).
c. Finding:
Based on the evidence in the record as a whole, the City Council finds that the
identified mitigation measures, together with the Project's conditions of approval,
will avoid or decrease to a level of insignificance the potential short-term
construction and short-term cumulative construction noise effects.
E. Significant Unavoidable Effects that Cannot be Mitiqated to a Level of
Insignificance.
The City Council finds that no environmental effects were identified as Significant and
Unavoidable in the FEIR.
E. Growth: Inclucinci impacts.
Based on the whole of the administrative record, the City Council finds that the Project will
not result in significant growth inducing impacts.
G. Project Alternatives.
1. Nternahves Considered but Rejected
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(c), an EIR should identify any
alternatives that were considered for analysis but rejected as infeasible and briefly
explain the reasons for their rejection. According to the CEQA Guidelines, among the
factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration are the
alternative's failures to meet most of the basic project objectives, the alternative's
infeasibility, or the alternative's inability to avoid significant environmental impacts.
Two alternatives were considered but rejected, as discussed below.
Alte,roalive Site Alternative. Among the factors that may be taken into account when
addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability and whether the proponent
can reasonably acquire, control, or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or
the site is already owned by the proponent). Only locations that would avoid or
substantially lessen any of the Project's significant effects need be considered for
inclusion. The Applicant does not retain any ownership rights to other properties within
the City limits and there are no other infill sites available that are adequately sized and
environmentally compatible.
✓"Lo Tol)(7olf F cilitvl16-Hole Golf Coarse Alternative. The Lakes at EI Segundo,
including the nine-hole executive golf course, practice facility with driving range
29
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
containing 57 hitting bays and a putting green, a club house and associated facilities,
and water features, encompasses approximately 30 acres. This Alternative involves
expanding the existing golf course from nine to 18 holes and retaining the associated
facilities. This Alternative excludes the proposed Specific Plan and Topgolf facility.
According to the Golfsmith, the sizes of 18-hole golf courses vary, although the
distance hole to hole is generally between 5,000 and 7,000 yards. In order to
accommodate the rough, fairways, tee areas, clubhouse, driving range, and practice
greens, most golf courses encompass between 110 to 190 acres. Concerning urban
courses, the Golf Course Superintendent Association of America reported that an 18-
hole golf facility, which includes bodies of water, hard structures and out-of-play areas,
averages between 150 and 200 acres. Typically, urban golf courses are approximately
110 to 120 acres, while resort area courses are approximately 170 to 190 acres.
The 18-Hole Golf Course Alternative was eliminated from detailed consideration, since
the approximately 30-acre Project site is not large enough to accommodate an 18-hole
golf course, which requires approximately 110 acres. Additionally, although the
degree of environmental impacts associated with this Alternative would likely be less
than with the Project, this Alternative would require mitigation similar to the Project to
ensure impacts remain less than significant. Therefore, this Alternative would not
avoid the Project's environmental impacts. Finally, this Alternative was eliminated
from detailed consideration, since it failed to meet the Project's most basic objective
to provide for superior, more comprehensive site planning of The Lakes Specific Plan
area and development standards that address the needs of the site's unique public
recreation and commercial recreation uses. This Alternative would likely create
additional revenue opportunities for the City, however, to a lesser degree than the
Project. Finally, this Alternative would not reduce the City's deferred maintenance
exposure.
2. No Proiect Alternative
a) DescrOlion:
The 30.79-acre site is generally triangular shaped and level (encompasses
Assessor Parcel Numbers 4138-014-913 and 4138-014-806). The property is
currently developed with the following facilities: The Lakes at EI Segundo (a 26.54-
acre publically owned executive golf course, a two level driving range, putting
green, a club house and associated facilities, and water features); Southern
California Edison Easement (3.58-acre easement to the east); and West Basin
Municipal Water District Property (0.67-acre undeveloped property with ground
cover and perimeter landscaping).
The Lakes at EI Segundo golf course currently operates from 6:00 a.m. to dusk,
and the practice facility operates from 6:00_ a.m. to 11:00 p.m. The clubhouse and
pro shop operate from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The pro shop's restaurant/grill and
bar opens at 7:00 a.m. and closes at dusk.
The "No Project" Alternative would retain the Project site in its current condition
and the land uses would continue to operate "business as usual." With this
Alternative, the site would remain developed with the existing The Lakes at EI
Segundo golf course and associated facilities. Under the "No Project" Alternative,
The Lakes at EI Segundo Specific Plan would not be adopted. New land use types
30
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project(EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
(i.e., commercial), would not be introduced, as proposed by the Project. None of
the proposed amendments to the EI Segundo General Plan (General Plan) or
General Plan Map, or Zoning/EI Segundo Municipal Code (ESMC) would be
implemented. The existing surface parking lots would remain.
The "No Project" Alternative would maintain the existing land use designations, as
detailed in Table 3-3, Existing Land Use Designations and Zoning. As indicated in
Table 3-2, The Lakes at EI Segundo Existing Development, existing development
totals 14,204 square feet and a floor area ratio (FAR) of approximately 0.012.
Under this Alternative, no structures would be demolished, and the existing floor
area and floor area ratios would be retained. The Lakes at EI Segundo executive
golf course, practice facilities, restaurants/bar, pro shop and other event space
would continue to operate similar to existing hours.
b) iij i :
The City Council finds that the "No Project"Alternative would not attain most of the
Project's basic objectives. It would not provide a superior, more comprehensive
site planning of The Lakes Specific Plan area and development standards that
address the needs of the site's unique public recreation and commercial recreation
uses. This Alternative would only meet one Project objective, as the uses within
The Lakes Specific Plan area would be consistent with prior zoning and compatible
with adjacent uses. However, no additional recreational opportunities or additional
revenue opportunities would be generated for the City, nor would the City reduce
deferred maintenance exposure.
3. L,,,g r `p'o,p olt Facility Alternative
a) d escri bLi:
The proposed Project would be the smallest Topgolf facility, with 104 driving bays.
The "Larger Topgolf Facility" Alternative assumes the typical size of a Topgolf
facility, which includes 120 driving bays. The "Larger Topgolf Facility" Alternative
assumes facilities similar to the Project, although an additional of 75,000 square
feet would be developed. Under this Alternative, the existing driving range would
be replaced with a three-story Topgolf commercial recreation and entertainment
facility. The new facility would include an approximately 37,500 square-foot hitting
bay and seating/waiting area, with private suites. To accommodate the larger
Topgolf facility, this Alternative includes modifying the fairways and layout at the
existing golf course, including modifying the existing 9th hole at The Lakes Golf
Course, which is currently a par 4 hole (approximately 260 feet in length).
Under this Alternative, buildout of the Specific Plan area could not exceed the
maximum allowed development under the Specific Plan or the specified FAR,
which compared to the proposed Project would involve an additional approximately
75,000 square feet.
b) IEILr�tinr�:
The "Larger Topgolf Facility" Alternative would attain most of the Project's basic
objectives. It would provide a superior, more comprehensive site planning of The
Lakes Specific Plan area and development standards that address the needs of
31
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project (EA-1135)
Environmental Findings of Fact
the site's unique public recreation and commercial recreation uses. As with this
Project, with this Alternative, the uses within The Lakes Specific Plan area would
be consistent with prior zoning and compatible with adjacent uses. Additional
recreational opportunities and additional revenue opportunities would be
generated for the City, however, to a greater degree than the Project. As with the
Project, the City would reduce deferred maintenance exposure with this
Alternative.
4. Environmentally Superior Alternative
In compliance with PRC§15126.6(d), a matrix displaying the major characteristics and
significant environmental effects of each alternative is included in the FEIR; see Table
7-1, Comparison of Alternatives. The purpose of this matrix is to summarize a
comparison of project alternatives. Pursuant to PRC §15126.6, it is required that one
alternative be identified as the environmentally superior alternative. Furthermore, if
the environmentally superior alternative is the "No Project" alternative, the FEIR must
also identify the environmentally superior alternative from among the other
alternatives. As indicated in FEIR Table 7-1, the "No Project" Alternative is the
environmentally superior alternative, because it would avoid most impacts associated
with development of the proposed Project. Therefore, in compliance with CEQA
requirements, an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives is
identified below. The single other Alternative analyzed, the "Larger Topgolf Facility"
Alternative would result in greater impacts than the Project. Therefore, there are no
other alternatives considered environmentally superior to the Project.
III. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City Council finds on the basis of the FEIR and the record of proceedings in this matter that
the proposed Project would not result in temporary or permanent significant and unavoidable
effects for any of the environmental issue areas identified in Appendix G of the State CEQA
Guidelines. Therefore, no Statement of Overriding Considerations is necessary.
IV. SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
The City Council finds and declares that each and every finding made herein is supported by
substantial evidence in the administrative record.
V. CERTIFICATION OF EIR
The City Council hereby certifies that the Final Environmental Impact Report SCH #2016091003,
dated May 2017, for The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project has been completed in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and reflects the City's independent
judgment and analysis.
32
M
Environmental Impact Report
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 5054
Exhibit B
MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM
Section 1.0, Executive Summarv, and Section 5.0,, Environmental Analvsis, identify the mitigation
measures that will be implemented to avoid or lessen the environmental impacts associated with
The Lakes Specific Plan and Topgolf Project. Public Resources Code §21081.6 requires a public
agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program for assessing and ensuring compliance with
any required mitigation measures applied to the proposed development:
. . . the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the
project which it has adopted, or made a condition of project approval, in order to mitigate
or avoid significant effects on the environment.
Public Resources Code Section § 21081.6 also provides general guidelines for implementing
mitigation monitoring programs and indicates that specific reporting/monitoring requirements
enforced during Project implementation must be defined before Final EIR certification.
The mitigation monitoring table provided below lists mitigation measures that can be included as
conditions of approval for the Project. These measures correspond to those outlined in Section
10 and discussed in Section 5.0. To ensure that the mitigation measures are properly
implemented, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been drafted to identify
the timing and responsibility for each measure. The City of EI Segundo will have the primary
responsibility for monitoring and reporting implementation of the mitigation measures.
City Council Resolution No.5054 10-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
.................... ... ...
xa
cc
CL
E
0
0
cc
cd d0
...........
A=
LY)
C"
0 a 0
(1)
c od
CL cr- Im
I- cm.
LL cz z
0 CL C>
—i 1= E c' - T -�-, a: 8
0 Z5 —0
(L _0
0 F15 -
> 5 2
cl c cm SO
—0 '0 - 0
LU .0
Z 0
> C7 -0 CL
(D Cf)
ZMCC ...............................................................................................................................
cn
ID
U)
=3
C E U)
0 0
LL
0
cc
0 2 =
Lu CL
CL
U) 0 U) ls� (1) -0 -0 CZ ZD- c 0).SQ _0
cd Cl) cdZ5 0 _0
(I co -0 0) (1)
Cl) =41 76 t N C-) F= cz =3 c
El �i -0 -)
cz c
g -cs cn A E CL
LU 0 .2 e CL 5 c 1 a) CKS (n
-101-6 FL Cm co co
- : C-1 =3
Z -5 o n Ic-s
:=; V- 'n = 6 L,) -0
E 'o a) (n co 0 CZ 0 sO 0 =3
CD C Cl- cn (D =3 0
w cm r_ a) 0 0 0 E f
LU �F 0 0
0: CO a)
.9 0 Z5 o 0 .2 -0 0) E CL
O c U) =3 0 U)
rn cc .2 0 0.
C =3
_0 2 o co
L15 CY) CL 3: LD a) E
(1) (6 CZ a 0 aN
C\j
cc > ca-
=3 CZ
0 co -0 -0
-0 CD E m cz (2)
-Or 8 0 E 0 >
u) En 2 cD 0'
0 ca r_ -�5 -C
w 2 (n >
o 00 cc): 0 Cd
0 0 CD cz cKs .22 cn CZ (3)
6' 0
0- x U)
ch 8 -,,e a) cn
(0 0 (D _0
0 as 0 U) _0 a)
Er 0 cz a) 0 0
cz 'a cz
E 0 0 0 (Fnn 'o -SQ >' c 0-
cc -= .-- a) (f) 0- cz
Cp
0 (n _0 0 co (n
.0 _0 OX C's >, 2 C� as E as
E C) 0 > _0
cv > c al CP (1)
C -0
cv N = CL (j) cz
c 0as a) E ui
2 W > > En =3 CKS (D (
X
r) CD > CL 0 CD 0 -0
< E .2
ca < as a- < 0 0) fl- C-) co 0
CL.E
(xi -6 (3 -6 C6
C3
CC
.....
.......... ............
CL•� w ......�......�.......�.�.�...... ...._,..,..,...._..........................................�..., .,................_._.�
U cr+ L
R! o a
� a �
mL o
cc
° R aEi a
ro �
E a b
c E a
s°. G. O p
o o
L 0
�l
v
E� cc
� c
W '
v
c - Y
Q c ami � T .- � a
a Ea `off . o O
J O nR c c =� w o �
i O Ea wvav
ja z ........ ....................................._
0 O L I y C
O a � A �
= d L
Z � _ N c
Q f'� 2 a = C
Z Z
Q M
Q O a
Z _
CL O y
V OLL
C N C
Z O 1
E5 O a 'E m
LV M & a
Z cd Y s c ._............... _ .mm........�... ._
O `o �_ a a' vi x 3 '3 a' " .° .5 vi c m
F- `m c o v °� O c c H a vi - E
co $ a n� do vE ti, off' � S .0VE
01 8 R .&V vi Ln '4= c ¢ O vl O
yLy Co
Im-
W I L N a TO N E -Nr- .0 a '� ,O p
' a O O 0 0 nRi 'n Oy N a
mm E E a'� ° cn •� o .� '9 Cl.
rng' r m rn a ' `n r!i a> -S a' g' t
cc= LD cc
r 0 0 3 E a > rn 0 rC E _ o � `�
LU a� o C. .13 r �' L
c = � c y c 0 gad� 8 0 as L . , rte_ n
rn co cc
y 'o Lo o �i S 2. 0-
CD
$ o
M cd N E 0 R b y c R r a o
m E e' �i' "r �. is L ,0 8 .� p ani `° a p� a Z
-C cc
a °> 'A �1 a of m o M co p p E .4� N tli
3 >E ° a a' L a $ ''i c c w is E I a
o c R � .G .o E a o O a o o o .0 v '=
Ch _ c. E .S 8 0 � Z E $' x
0 ; - ca ea
Z
r cn
cc r
aw =
U
r O ii
bl)
p U)cc
1 r
E - O.
eq cc
cc ai
� I E 06
E c
? ai 0 I
.. 1
W u c . .._._..._,= ................................................................................ .._...._......��w. ..www. ���.. }-
O I..........................
v y C
v V ca O
� i M pip
C" j to 4
V �' _ ._.�..
................................................................
W
U
a ccY
E Q o
Jo Q�
p. 0 a �- o
C7 c�
O � � Y ona o
� o � � ! Q CM
n O) C
a ccs
p U
W "c (dj Q a
Zai 0 0 a) CD
Q d > m n
ZZ c� o `er
a
cz
® ma o
acm_E I c
L) o t i
V O � a I z
W m0-
O. Z !m __ i a) a> C a) o m a a> o a>
� 0 99j � CLS, I s= ue o �
Icna ' � � � = off _ � _ �� � Xo
W C3 a Q o Co a o voi `n Y °' o c�a
H a> co n
` >o —
a) i .!=:
(D
a) oa a) n Q aa) .2 m > ca a> c
LLJ
CL 0
:tf- Y o c c u> a ccs > a v> > i<
c -0 .S n a U) cn -0 -0 m n 2 C a)
C N
d ' -0o a.o in - cd a m a> in 3 E Q
a a c �>- aa) c a> m � -0 m o a o vi ai 0. m
v> y c ° v> E o a) o u> E o > o a
m a) > o Q> a> o � v_> E cn E
E o ca Q c .>_ c c 'O a> o
CL 0) a> U a c E � � n t . a o 0
o'c a >
C - cc a) CLa> m Q aa) %CD w E N v U o a> m c m
oo �3a (w�au> .R. a c c •a .mim` Um . Uo 25 U '=n, E a) -o `aiv o Ea m a> on E E a �, aaO o
m w 2 E iE a-0 0) 0n -> .X
u -2o
o � � oQco� o9 u a> m v > E
-O x cucon E O �
n u)
c c O o
ocvZnoi
o
6 0 o c 0 OU n 0 0 c n a - -o n O
.a U O a) Y
o =3 co CD _ O a) a)
cLmoaa
Z5 ¢ a io f ai a ¢ E E o s > aa �ca a
- o
Wt m E3 • • • • • a
a
N Z a
0 0
U
U
E
............................
awe bn
4-
U)
cc0
E 0.
W
0)
CL
E
Z Y
0
W C
CLI .2
2
..............................
LU
c0
-.p c
c d)
0. 4) tm
'ct
E
LL 'o j;,
0 V_
_J E cc
C) IL
CD a
CL
O
uj
Z =
0 0
IL
Z '<
Z rn
0.
0
LL z 0 Co U)
O C) 2 =
UJ
0. 0 C-)... ................................
0 0 w _7-0 (D C:
= a---' m cz co co = -C
(L) cz
S; co
. -O 'D E cz a) =
-0
.9- Z :5 t= �5 u) E E (D
Q C1
LLI C) m z -Fn cn
ir 0 o E
C7 'I) = c Z5 �5 0 0 c 0 cu
0- 4) -0 0 0 i5 0 a) (D cz
— .2- 0- cn
CD 0 -0 c
_j 2. = 2 = = ,d- c
CZ .22 o CV a)
.—
WT 'a? S E -0 E _�!
cz C: C)
CZ CDU (D
E 0
(D > Z -Z-, .E- a) -,
(D
U
0 a) —
M
0 (L) c 1) 0 0 .—r--
o =3 C-)
(1) LO C) a) F= CZ CD (1) w
12 0
a) t5
U) 0 C_) cD (L) 0 -0
Co 2
c
c = E q) -0 cd C_-
E
0 5 C',
-L 0 E 0
:5 (D CD (D
RS 2 — E Z E ca 0
0 4(� 0 03 >
E LD 0 E cu
_9,) CZ ca_
CO a)M 0 0 = c co tn cc 0 -07 (n 0 cd cz C15 0 o 0
0
> .0 tn
D 0 (n CZ Co
t -2 C 0 Cf)
(D E co C: a) E
cc cm c E (D
U)
'n CZ c o 0
E cm cl Fl) cn -
E w 0 n 0 CD
D F
0 C) 00 E_ co co
E od 2 -c: C/) CD--0
Z
..............