City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution re-adopting a mitigated
negative declaration, reserving a utility easement, ordering the vacation of all of
Helms Avenue from Washington Boulevard, towards Venice Boulevard, to the city
limits of the City of Culver City, and rescinding Resolution No. 2002-R015.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant for this vacation is Mr. Walter N. Marks, III, who has acquired all
properties on both sides of Helms Avenue between Washington and Venice
Boulevards. Mr. Marks is in the process of redeveloping the area and wishes to
include the area of Helms Avenue into his plans for development. Mr. Marks is
proceeding with the City of Los Angeles to record a Final Map that will define new lot
lines and eliminate Helms Avenue between the common City Limits line and Venice
Boulevard.
On February 25, 2002, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2002-R-015, which
authorized the vacation of that portion of Helms Avenue from Washington Boulevard
northerly to the City Limits of Culver City (Attachment 1). However, Resolution No.
2002-R015 has not yet been recorded with the County. Prior to its recordation,
certain conditions stated in the Resolution have to be met. First, the applicant must
submit a detailed plan for consideration of approval by the Public Works
Director/City Engineer and Planning Manager illustrating any physical changes
Meeting Date: 08/25/08 Item Number: A-10
AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of a Resolution Re-Adopting a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, Reserving a Utility Easement, Ordering the Vacation of all of Helms
Avenue from Washington Boulevard, Towards Venice Boulevard, to the City
Limits of the City of Culver City and Rescinding Resolution No. 2002-R015.
Contact Person/Dept.: Andy
O’Connell/PW
Phone Number: (310) 253-5606
Fiscal Impact: Yes [] No [X] General Fund: Yes [] No []
Public Hearing: [] Action Item: [X] Attachments: [X]
Public Notification: Master Notification List emailed on August 19, 2008 and Walter N.
Marks III by telephone on August 19, 2008
Department Approval:
Charles D. Herbertson (8/14/08)
City Attorney Approval:
Carol Schwab (by H. Baker) (08/20/08)
Chief Financial Officer Approval:
Jeff Muir (by M. Noller) (08/20/08)
City Manager Approval: City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
proposed to or near the intersection of Washington Boulevard and Helms Avenue.
This plan has been submitted but not approved. Second, the applicant must submit
a traffic signal and striping plan for consideration and approval by the Public Works
Director/City Engineer indicating the required changes to the traffic signal equipment
and other operational details associated with the proposed street vacation. This
plan has been submitted but not approved. Third, the applicant must submit a plan
to the Culver City Fire Department and Culver City Police Department demonstrating
adequate emergency access. This plan has been submitted to the Police
Department.
DISCUSSION:
In preparation for recording Resolution No. 2002-R015 (which would occur when all
conditions have been met and concurrently with the applicant’s Final Map of the City
of Los Angeles portion of the property), it was discovered that the legal description
and plat map of that portion of Helms Avenue to be vacated did not accurately reflect
the intent and physical description of the vacation. Additionally, a field review of
Helms Avenue determined that there are public utilities on both sides of Helms
Avenue. Adoption of the proposed Resolution will correct the legal description and
plat map for the portion of Helms Avenue to be vacated and provide for a 60 foot
wide public utility easement.
The notification and other procedural requirements established by the California
Environmental Quality Act for the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the California
Streets and Highways Code for this vacation have all been satisfied as part of the
noticing provided and proceedings completed for the February 25, 2002 City Council
hearing held on the related street vacation.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
There are no costs associated with the adoption of the proposed Resolution.
However, the vacation of Helms Avenue will relieve the City from the cost of
maintenance and future liability.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. February 25, 2002 staff report
2. Proposed Resolution
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
MOTIONS:
That the City Council:
Adopt a Resolution re-adopting a mitigated negative declaration, reserving a utility
easement, ordering the vacation of all of Helms Avenue from Washington Boulevard,
towards Venice Boulevard, to the city limits of the City of Culver City, and rescinding
Resolution No. 2002-R015.
MEETING DATE: 8/25/08
AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of a Resolution Re-adopting a Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Reserving a Utility Easement, and
Ordering the Vacation of All of Helms Avenue from
Washington Boulevard, towards Venice Boulevard, to the
City Limits of the City of Culver City.
ATTACHMENTS
Pages |109| 2002 Staff Report and Attachments 1-32|109| Resolution 33-37, Pubiic :Fiearjng:
Attachrnents:[
Meetingpate; 2/25/02
Item Number: G-1
AGENDA ITEM: Public Hearing to Consider Vacation of all of Helms Avenue from
Washington
Boulevard toward Venice Boulevard to the City Limits of the City of
Culver
City.
Contact Person: Mike Hawk
Susan Yun
.,Fiscal Impact: Yes :12g.io,
. . ,
Public Notification: The has been :44Osted'With ?NotiCeS.bf the Public Hearing s:(1SIPH)
. , . . .
:and:'scopies: :.cif . the Resolution of intention to Vacate: ,.-.(2002-R010) ,. and with Notices
with the
eles.,pounty:Cfer;k:--a-:.-NPW:008:::beertgibliShedt:1
. - .
P a10000,0i*J74.4.t.Pb.i0Pcsh ::-kentle; •3;elt-utilities-in:the:orea 7, were .rnaited:.4:COpy:pf
y2op?4.:(0.1:9-,0::,04-jk: -,2„0024Rolp.,:a.
- . s . .NPH, and a NOl were
.
-.(east. Culvei.C.ity-NeighbOrhOod Alliance); 100. owneunf:alVprOpertieS-Ort,Helms Aver)
, . .
ue
betWeerlryeniee s.and :::washintnn:13noievards -:(the applicant for the Vacation) has been
given a copy Of.:':2002 .4ROlo.a::NaLr :a:copy:of thetrittiat::ptudyri:,and.a.N01,-.
:
City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council follow the procedure outline below and, after
the public hearing is closed, adopt a resolution approving a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, reserving a portion of the area as a utility easement, and vacating the
entire area described in Resolution 2002-R010 for street purposes. This resolution
is not to be recorded by the City Clerk until that time when the Parcel Map or Final
Map within the City of Los Angeles, which involves the portion of Helms Avenue
between Venice Boulevard and the common City Limits line, will also be recorded.
PROCEDURE:
Mayor:
Announce that this is the time and place for the hearing of protests or objection to
the vacation of Helms Avenue from Washington Boulevard toward Venice Boulevard
to the City Limits of the City of Culver City.City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
City Clerk:
Announce that Notice of this hearing has been given pursuant to the provisions of
the Streets and Highways Code, Section 8300, et seq. of the State of California and
pursuant to the provisions of the City Council's Resolution 2002-R010, and that the
following affidavits are on file in this office:
1. Affidavit of Publication; and
2. Affidavit of Posting
Mayor and Council: Motion to receive and file all affidavits.
City Clerk:
Announce the number of written protests received, if any, and announce that copies
of all such protests have been delivered to the City Council.
OR
Summarize the contents thereof
Mayor:
First, ask to hear from those who have filed a written protest. Next, ask to hear from
those in the audience wishing to speak against the proposed vacation. Then, ask to
hear from anyone who wishes to speak in favor of the proposed vacation.
Mayor: Offer an opportunity for Rebuttal.
Mayor and Council: Discussion. Close the public hearing if ready for a decision.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant, Walter N. Marks Ill, has acquired all properties on both sides of
Helms Avenue between Washington and Venice Boulevards, including the old
Beacon Laundry. Mr. Marks is in the process of redeveloping the area and wishesCity of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
to include the area of Helms Avenue into his plans for development. Mr. Marks is
proceeding with the City of Los Angeles to record a Parcel or Final Map that will
define new lot lines and eliminate Helms Avenue between the common City Limits
line and Venice Boulevard. Mr. Marks initiated a Lot Line Adjustment in Culver City
to reduce the number of lots in the block surrounded by Helms Avenue, Washington
Boulevard, and Hutchinson Avenue and to define the lot lines desired should the Los
Angeles Parcel or Final Map and street vacation procedure be completed_ The
major new lot line will be created at the existing common City Limits line, where the
properties have been divided by the County Assessor for taxing purposes.
DISCUSSION:
Vacation of this section of Helms Avenue, if approved, should be conditioned upon
the City of Los Angeles effectively vacating their section at the same time. There
are also several utility issues that must be handled and several traffic-engineering
concerns that will be negotiated as the procedure progresses. At the time of the
public hearing, all of these matters will be identified and addressed as conditions to
be solved prior to recordation of the Resolution of Vacation.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
If the vacation is approved, the City will no longer be responsible for maintenance or
for liability of the vacated street.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
• Initial Study (Environmental Checklist Form and
Environmental Determination).
+ Resolution of Vacation_|1010|3City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report
MOTION:
That the City Council adopt a Resolution to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Vacate a portion of Helms Avenue from Washington Boulevard, toward Venice
Boulevard, to the City Limits of the City of Culver City, reserving a utility easement
for existing utilities, with the recordation of this Resolution conditioned upon the City
of Los Angeles recording of a Parcel Map or Final Map effectively vacating that
portion of Helms Avenue southerly of Venice Boulevard within the City of Los
Angeles
4PLANNING DIVISION
• CITY OF CULVER CITY
9770 CULVER BOULEVARD, CULVER OW, CALIFORNIA 90232-0507
(310) 253-5710
FAX (310) 253-5721
Susan Yuri, Assoce PlaruFT
/497°
Date
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT
A IvIETIG-ATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
LEAD AGENCY: City of Culver City
Telephone: (310) 253-5710
DATE: January 28, 2002
x Los Angeles County Clerk
Governor's Office of Planning & Research
ATTN: Environmental Filing
1400 Tenth Street, Room 1311
12400 Imperial Highway, Suite 2001
Sacramento, CA 95814
Norwalk, CA 90650
PROJECT:
Helms Avenue Street Vacation
Location: Helmg- Avenue between Venice Boulevard and Washington Boulevard. Approximately 400
feat of Helms Avenue south of Venice Boulevard is located within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City of Los Angeles and approximately 140 feet north of Washington
Boulevard is located within. the City Of Culver City.
Description: The plupOSCA project is to vacate Helms Avenue and modify it from a public through street to
a non-through private driveway and pedestrian area. Motorists will still be able to drive in
and out of Helms Avenue from Venice Boulevard, however the south end Of Herm Avenue
at Washington Boulevard-will be closed to vehicular traffic.
Applicant:
Walter N. Marks
8758 Venice Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90034
COMMENT PERIOD: The review period of the proposed mitigated negative declaration begins on February 1. 2001i
and porig February 20, 2001. Written comments should be received on or before February 20, 2001 Written
comments should refer to the project by name and and be addressed to:
ORIGINAL FILED
Susan Yun
Associate Planner
JAN
al 2oa
City of Culver City Planning Division
P.O. Box 507
1 ne V-!:_ C. 7r-!,
Culver City, CA 90232-0507
The City Council will hold a public hearing to take action on the proposed project and the einVitann:t=tal Ending on
February 25, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. in the Mike Balkman Council Chambers in City Hail. Copies bf the documentation
can be reviewed in the Planning Division Office, City Hall, Second Floor, 9770 Culver Boulevard, Culver City, CA
90232-0507 (handiçap ed accessible location). Please telephone in advance to assure staff' availability at 310/253-5755.
Culver City Employees take pride in effectively providing the highest levels of service to enrich the qualify of life for the community by building on our tradition
of more than seventy-five years of public service, by our present commitment, and by our dedication to meet the challenges of the future.PLANNING DIVIS/ON
CITY OF CULVER CITY
- C310)253-5710
•
FAX (310) 253-5721
9770 cavER BOULEVARD, CULVER -CITY, CALIFORNIA 90232-0507
INITIAL STUDY
Environmental Checklist Form and Environmental Determination
Case Name and No. Helms Avenue Street Vacation
A TO -
Applicant Name: Walter N. Marks
Address: 8758 Venice Boulevard
City, State and Zip Code: Los Angeles, CA 90034
- Phone: (310) 2044865
2. Address of Project Helms Avenue (3200 Block
Nearest Cross Street Washington Boulevard and Venice Boulevard
3. Existing Zonin.g: C-3, Commercial
Existing General Plan Land Use Des/patio= General Corridor Commercial
4. . Redevelopment Project Area ON° NYes, Component Area: 3
5. Overlay Zone or Other Special District: EYes ' ONG-
Describe: East Washington Overly Zone
PROTECT TNFORIVIATION
6. Project DeScrip don and Requested Actiero (Describe the whole action involved, including but not
limited to later phases of the project, and any secondans support, or off-site _features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional shefts if necessary.)
The proposed project and requested action is to vacate a portion of Helms Avenue, approximately
140 feet of Helms Avenue north of Washington Boulevard, in order to remove public vehicular
access on Helms Avenue between the City of Culver City boundary line on the nOrth to
Washington Boulevard on the south. On a separate but related process, the City of Los Angeles is
reviewing a Tentative Tract Map from the applicant to reconfigure several parcels in order to
elminate the current straddling of parcels over the munidpal border with the City of Culver City
and to vacate that portion of Helms Avenue within the boundaries of the City of Los Angeles.
The whole action of the proposed project will ultimately modify Helms Avenue between Venice
Boulevard and Washington Boulevard from a public through street to a non-through private
driveway and pedestrian area. Motorists will still be able to drive in and out of Helms Avenue
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPERfrom Venice Boulevard, however, the south end of HelinsAvenue at Washington Boulevard will be
dosed to vehicular traffic.
Although not a part of this street vacation application, the applicant plans to reconstruct the
sidewalks on both sides of Helms Avenue to match the same grade as the roadway and install
bollards on both sides of Helms Avenue to separate pedestrians from motorists. The applicant also
proposes to construct a cul-de-sac and pedestrian plaza at the southerly end of Helms Avenue
north of Washington Boulevard. Finally, manoRlly controlled bollards that can be raised and
lowered will be installed at the north jurisdiction line of Culver City and another set will be located
at the south end of _Helms Avenue at Washington Boulevard. The set of bollards at the north
jurisdiction line of Culver City will be kept in the lowered mode and raised only in those instances
when the southern half of Helms Avenue will be used for non-parking use, such as a steeet fair.
The manually controlled bollards nearest Washington Boulevard will be set at a raised position,
restricting and closing this section of Hehns Avenue to through traffic on a permanent basis. The
bollards will be lowered only when necessary such as in an emergency or for delivery trucks to
pass through.
Existirtg Conditions of the Project Site:
Helms Avenue is a public-street with one through lane in each 'direction. The portion of Helms
Avenue between Venice Boulevard and Washington Boulevard is approximately 540 feet in length
and 60 feet wide. Approximately 140 feet north of Washington Boulevard is located in the City of
Culver City while approxiMately 400 feet of Helms Avenue south of Venice Boulevard is located in
the City -of Los Angeles. Parking is permitted on either side of the Helms Avenue right-of-way.
8. Surrounding Land Uses and Selling: (Briefly describe the project's surrounding)
•
To the east and west of Helms Avenue is the Helms Bakery Complex which consists of studios and
performing arts venues, retail home furnishing and professional offices, including the historic
Beacon Laundry building.
9. Other public , agencies whose allproval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation
agreement)
City of Los Angeles
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental fact= checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact
that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics
Biological Resources
Hazards Hazardous
Agriculture Resources
Cultural Resources
Hydrology! Water Quality
fl
Air Quality
r.3 Geology /Soils
Land Use / Planning —1
? WM) ON RECYCLED PAPEFr 2II
VrYk-- Name, Title: Susan Yun, Assoeia Planner
fanuary 28, 21302 Signature:
Materials
Mineral Resources
El
Public Service's
0
Utilities / Service Systems
Noise
• Recreation
.
-
Mandatary Findings of Significance
Population / Housing
Transportation/Traffic
DETERMINATION: (TO be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:.
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have -a significant effect on the environment. and a
_ NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
zi
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the env
•
ironment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by
the project proponent A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project . MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" impact on the environmerkt but at least one effect 1)-has been adequately-analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to. applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequatPly in an earlier Elk or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier Elk or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
FISH AND GAME FEE (AB 3158). I find that the proposed project WILL NOT have an impact on fish or
wildlife resources or habitat upon which fish and wildlife depend. I find that the proposed project IS
EXEMPT from the Fish and Game fee. *
FISH AND GAME FEE (AB 3158). I find that the proposed project IS NOT EXEMPT from the Fish and
Game fee.
*Staff will prepare a certificate of Fee Exemption
Attachments:
Ad ditional Explanation Pages
PRitcro ON REGMED PAPER 3EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanaticn is required for all answers except 'No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by
the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact"
answer is adequately supported if the referenced informatiOn sources show that the impact simply does not
apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A 'No Impact"
answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g.,
the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative
as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a pan:lazier physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially signific_ant, less than significant with mitigation, or
less than significant "Potentially Sigdficant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect may be signifiCant If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an ElR is required.
. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an. effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a 'Lees Than
Significant Impact" The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they
reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses,"
may be cross-referenced).
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect
has beenadequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)p). In this case,
a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and aa te where they are available for review.
b) imp-acts Adequakly. Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were. within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
. Incorporated,' describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the
earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. •
6) Lead agendas are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside
document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is
substantiated.
Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individnele
contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies
should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental
effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any used to evaluate each question; and
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 4b) The mitigation measure identifled,if any„ to reduce the impact to li=7s than significance
QUESTION
Issues -
L AESTHETICS. Would the pi uject:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and • historic
• buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
qualitydof the site and its surroundings?-
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which
would adversely affect day or nighttiMe views in the
area?
EL AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. -
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
signxficant environmental eacts„ lead agencies . may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluatior . and Site Assessment
Model 0997) prepared by the Califirria Dept. of Comer-cation as
an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
famland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmiand, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the Clifornia Resources Agency,
to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, Or a
Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Faradand, to non-agricultural use?
ILL AIR OUALITY.
Where available, the significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air pollution control district
may be relied upon. to make the following determinations_ Would
the projezt: •
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
Potentinily Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant with Significant Imp
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
o o 0
o o 0 o|10 9| El 0 0
El 0
LI
LI
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 5Issues
b) Violate • any air quality standard or contribute
subszeiaily to an e,idsting or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a, cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emissions,
which exceed - quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)? •
d) Expose sensitive receptors . to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people?
IV. BIOLOGiCAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect either directly or
Through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive: or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish arid
Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local
or regional plans poliriP and regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, Verna/
pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nurserY
sites? .
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Potentially
Significant
Imp act
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
0 El El E
0 0 N
0 0 0 N
0 0 EZ
0 El
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 6LI
Issues
Potentially Less Than Less Than
Sif,r1-1-Rcant Sid.ficant with Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
1 2.
Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project
a) Ctiie a substantial adverse change in the significance of
LI
a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines
Section 150643?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
LI
an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064_5?
e) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontologiCai
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
LI
outside of formal cemeteries?
'lit GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on bther substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Ivrines and Geology Special Publiration 42.
ii Stung seismic ground shaking?
iii Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv. Landqlides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of
the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
ej Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of
PRiNTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 7
U. 27.4
LI
LI
LI LI
Potentially Less Than Less Than 1Significant Significant with SivTificant
Impact Mitigation Impact
• Incorporation
wastewater?
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS_
Would the project
a)- Create - a significant hazard to the public or the .
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
LI
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
• accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
Issues
LI
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
-
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites - compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 659625 and, as a result, woUld
• it create a significant hazard to the public or the .
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use -airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
For a project within the vicinity of a private woUld the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adapted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation: plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildlancl fires, including where .
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are interrobzed with wRdlands?
WEL HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project
a) Violate any water qual ity standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
LI
LI
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
.13Issues
Potent-W7y
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Signcant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Sivii.Orant
Impact
14,
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production
rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for whiclt permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area; including through the alteration of the course
of a Stream or river, in a manner, which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation or or off-site?
d) SubstantiPlly alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the course
of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner, which • would
result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contaute runoff water, which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned storrawater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
1) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
. Insurance Rate Map or other Hood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within 100-year flood hazard are structures that
would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as
a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? -
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING, Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
El
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
El
ET
El
El
El
9LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
Issues
Potentially -Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant with Significant En
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important
raMeral resource recovery site delineated on a /odd
genera/ plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
XI NO/SE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of nois ' e leVels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or _generation of excessive
ounciborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
e) A. substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use Plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
1) For a project within the. Vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels? •
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. -
Would the project:
Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
PRINTP_D ON RECYCLED PAPER
00 0 0
O 0 0
O 0 0
O 0 0
O 0•0
Issues
Poteutiplly Less Than Less Than
Significant Significant with Significant
Impact 11.6dpi:ion Impact
Incorporation
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
MIL PUBLIC S-BRVICES.
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new
or .physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction - of which could cause significant
environmental_ impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
my. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other-recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of
the fatality would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require
the cons'anciion or expansion of recreational facilities,
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increage in either
the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio
on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either
art increase in traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks?|10 9| 0El
I
PRINTED ON RGC " YCLED PAPER 11Poteniipity
Significant
Impact|10 10 10|El
El
Less Than ,
Sitificant with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant Im]
Impact
z
El
El 0
El
El
Issues
d) Substanti liy ma-ease hazards due to a desigt feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (eg, farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
XVLTJTELuthS AND SERVICE aYSTEM-S.
Would the project
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? -
b) Require or result in the construction. of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of _existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require pr result in the construction of new storm. water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
enviromnental effects?
cl) Have sufficient water supplies aveliAbIe to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
e)- Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider, which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
I) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
XVU. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the qualify
of the environment, substannerty reduce the habitat of a
fish or wile Tie species, cause a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
11
PRINTED ON RECYCI:M PAPER
12Potentially Less Than Less Than
Si tificant Significant with Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporation
a plant or animal community, reduce the number or
resbrict the range of a rare or enciangmed plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or Prehistory?
b) . Does the project have impacts that are indiVidrtally
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
C) Does the project have environmental effects, which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS:
Refer to the following pages
19
PRINTED ON RECYCLE13 PAPER 13
IssuesEXPLANATION OF RESPONSES TO CEOA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Case Name: Helms Avenue Street Vacation
The following provides corresponding explanations for each response indicated on the completed
Environmental Checklist Form. Explanations for "Potentially Significant Impact", "Potentially Significant
Unless Mitigation Incorporated", and "Less Than Significant Impact" are provided, along with
appropriate mitigation Measures. All items checked "No Impact' is similarly described.
L AESTHETICS.
(a,b) No Impart. The project site is located .within an urbanized cornmerdal area. There will not
be any adverse impacts to a scenic Vista, or scenic resources, as the street vacation involves no new
building construction, renovation, or demolition. All existing structures are to remain.
• (cAl) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incolporation. The proposed street vacation is a
necessary step in order to formally transfer or vacate the City's maintenance and responsibility of a public
street, The street vacation involves no new constriction, renovation or demolition of structures or
buildings. Through separate and required City permits, the applicant Will make minor changes to Helms
Avenue such that it will no longer appear or be used as through Public street but rather a privately
owned driveway, and pedestrian area. In particular, the southern portion of Helms Avenue towards the
intersection at Washington Boulevard will be closed off to through traffic and used for special events
such as a street fair or other pedestrian type activity associated with the Helms Bakery Complex. The
applicant proposes to reconstruct the sidewalks on both sides of Helms Avenue to match the same gade
as the roadway and install bollards on both sides of Helms Avenue to separate pedestrians from
motorists. The applicant also proposes to construct a cul-de-sac and pedestrian plaza at the southerly end
•of Helms Avenue north of Washington Boulevard. Finally, mananlly controlled bollards that can be
raised and lowered will be installed at the north jurisdiction line of Culver City and another set will be
located at the south end of Helms Avenue at Washington Boulevard.
Potentially significant impacts may result from project implementation due to changes to existing visual
character and new source of light or glare. However, these potential impacts can be mitigated to a level
of insignificance by the following measure:
s • Mitigation I: Prior to the concurrent recordation of the Street Vacation Resolution and the
Final Map addressing Helms Avenue within the City of Los Angeles at the Los Angeles County
Recorder's office, the applicant shall submit to the City of Culver City, a detailed plan for
consideration of and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Manager, or his/her designee,
illustrating any physical changes proposed to or near the intersection of Helms Avenue and
Washington Boulevard including but not limited to the construction of a pedestrian plaza, a cul-
de-sac, new lighting, installation of bollards, sigiage, and removal of sidewalks and trees.
19
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1IL AGRICULTURE RESOURCES.
(a-c) No Impact. The project site does not contain any Prime or Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
State wide importance, is not under a Williamson Act contract, and will not result in the conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, no such impacts are expected to occur.
HT AIR OUALITY.
(a-e) No Impact. The proposed street vacation is a necessary step in order to formally transfer or vacate
the City's inaintenance and responsibility of a public street The street vacation involves no new
construction; renovation Or demolition of structures or buildings. Through separate and required City
permits, the applicant will only make minor changes to Helms Avenue such that it will no longer appear
or be used as through public street but rather a privately owned driveway and pedestrian area.
Therefore, the proposed project will not generate new vehicular traffic nor add mobile source pollutants
into the air and would not significantly conflict with any applicable air quality plan, contribute to any
existing air quality threshold violations, expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations, increase
non-attained criteria pollutant, or create objectionable odors. Therefore, no air quality impacts are
• expected to occur.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
(a-f) No Impact.The project site is located in an urbanized commercial area, developed with paved
streets, parking area, and retail and office buildings. The project site is not within any federally protected
wetlands area or identified in any habitat conservation plan. The proposed street vacation - involves no
new construction, renovation or demolition of structures or buildings. Through separate and required
City permits, the applicant will only make minor changes to Helms Avenue such that it will no longer
appear or be used as through public street but rather a privately owned driveway and pedestrian area
The street vacation is not anticipated to have substantial adverse effect to endangered species or their
habitats. Therefore, no biological resources impacts are expected to occur.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
(a-4) No impact. The proposed street vacation will - not impact any cultural resources, as it
involves no new construction, renovation or demolition of structures or buildings. Through separate and
required City permits, the applicant will only make minor changes to Helms Avenue such that it will no
longer appear or be used as through public street but rather a privately owned driveway and pedestrian
area. Therefore, the street vacation is not anticipated to have substantial adverse effect to any historical,
archaeological, paleontological resource or site. The proposed street vacation will not adversely impact
existing or unknown cultural resources.
VL GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
a-e) No impact, The act of vacating a street and modifying Helms Avenue to a privately owned
driveway and a pedestrian area would not generate any greater degree of geologic hazards beyond those ."
2.0
PR1NTED ON, RECYCLED PARER
2already existing in the area. The project involves no new construction, renovation or .demolition of
structures or buildings and the project site and surrounding area is already developed and urbanized.
Helms Avenue, after it is vacated will function primarily as private driveway as well as additional
pedestrian area for the existing Helms Bakery Complex. Therefore, the proposed street vacation would
not expose additional people to known geologic hazards or exacerbate unstable geologic conditions or
disturb existing and unique geologic structures. There are no lo-town active or potentially active faults
located on the project site or is there potential for landslides. Therefore, the proposed street vacation is
not anticipated to have substantial adverse effect to geology or soils.
1/IL HAZARDS AND HAZAR . DOUS MATERIALS.
(a-h), No Impact. The propOsed street vacation _involves no new construction, renovation or
demolition of structures_ or buildings. Through separate and required City permits, the applicant will
only make minor changes to Helms Avenue such that it will no longer appear or be used. as throngh
public street but rather a privately owned driveway and pedestrian area. Therefore, this project will not
have any impacts in regards to use or disposal of hazardous materials or create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER owurry.
(a-f), Less than Significant Impact The project site is already paved as a public street. The proposed
street vacation and proposed changes after Helms Avenue is vacated, such as construction of a cul-de-sac,
pedestrian plaza or removal of sidewalks are minor in nature and is not anticipated to have substantisl
adverse impact to the absorption rate, drainage pattern, and amount of surface water runoff already
existing. Any proposed grade changes, excavations, or change to a drainage pattern are required by City
of Culver City Municipal Code to obtain a permit and approval from the Public Works Department.
Therefore, no hydrology or water quality impacts are expected to occur.
(g-ft, No Impact- The proposed project involves no new construction, renovation or demolition of
structures or buildings therefore will not locate any structures within a 100-year flood hazard area that
would impede or redirect flood flows. Further, as the topography of the site is relatively flat and the
Pacific Ocean is appro>drnately 6 miles away, the exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of
flooding, inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow is remote.
IX.LAND USE AND PLANNING.
(a-c), No Impact. The proposed. street vacation and proposed changes after Helms Avenue is
vacated, such as construction of a cul-de-sac, pedestrian plaza or removal of sidewalks will not alter the
site in any manner that will require changes in land use or zoning designations, or conflict with policies
or plans. The proposed street vacation involves no new construction, renovation or demolition of
structures or buildings. Helms Avenue between Venice Boulevard and WaShington Boulevard will be
vacated as a public through street, it will still be used primarily as a vehicular accessway or driveway.
Motorists will still be able to drive in and out of Helms Avenue from - Venice Boulevard, however, the
south end of Helms Avenue at Washington Boulevard will be closed to through traffic_ The street
vacation will not physically divide a established community nor is the site is located within an area
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 3designated as a habit conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Therefore, the (—
proposed project will not result in any Significant impact to land use and planning.
X MINERAL RESOURCES.
(a-b), No Impact. The proposed street vacation involves no new construction, renovation Or demolition
of structures or buildings. Through separate and required City permits, the applicant will only make
minor changes to Helms Avenue such that it will no longer appear or be used as through public street but
rather a privately owned driveway and pedestrian area. The project site does not contain mineral
resources and the proposed street vacation will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Therefore, the proposed
project will not result in the loss of availability of a !oreily important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan.
)a. NOISE.
(a-f), Ma Impact . The proposed street vacation and associated changes to Hans Avenue will not
generate additional or create new noise. The proposed street vacation involves no new construction,
renovation or demolition of structures or buildings. Through separate and required City permits, the
applicant will only make minor changes to Helms Avenue such that it will no longer appear or be used as
through public street but rather a privately owned driveway and pedestrian area. Any noise from
construction activities and construction equipment are regulated by the Culver City municipal code.
Therefore no noise impacts are expected to occur.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING.
(a-c), No Impact The proposed street vacation will not induce population growth in the area,
either directly or indirectly as involves no new construction, renovation or demolition of structures or
buildings or proposes to extend any roads or infrastructure. Through separate and required City permits,
the applicant will only make Minor changes to Helms Avenue such that it will no longer appear or be
used as through public street but rather a privately owned driveway and pedestrian area. In fact, the
southerly end of Helms Avenue at Washington will be dosed to through traffic. The project site does not
contain any housing; therefore, no displacement or replacement of housing will occur.
ME. PUBLIC SERVICE&
No rinpact, The proposed street vacation does not involve development such as new construction,
renovation of demolition of structures of buildings. Therefore, it would not generate the need for new or
additional fire, police, schools, parks or other public facilities. The project will not result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with public services.
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 4X/V. RECREATION.
(a-b), No Impact. The proposed project is a street vacation that involves no new construction, renovation
or demolition of structures or buildings. Through separate and required City permits, the applicant will
only make minor changes to Helms Avenue such that it will no longer appear or be used as Through
public street but rather a privately owned driveway and pedestrian area. No new housing would be
created with this project therefore any demand for parks or other recreational facilities would not be
generated. Therefore, the proposed project will not impact recreational opportunities in the City of
Culver City. In addition, the project is not anticipated to result in. an increase in demand on the City's
recreational resources.
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFITC.
(a), Less than Significant. According to the traffic study prepared by Transportation Management
Services (TMS) dated August 30, 2001, project related impacts are expected to occur for the street segment
at Hutchinson between Venice Boulevard and Washington Boulevard. Majority of the Hutchinson street
segment, approximately 457 feet out of 600 feet, lies within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Los
Angeles. A project-related increase of 21.6 percent is expected on this street segment. Based on the City
of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (L.ADOT) criteria for the Hutchinson street segment, a 16
percent or More of final Average Daily Trips (ADT) is deemed significant. No significant impacts are
expected at any of the remaining roadway segments analyzed in the traffic study.
The City of Los Angeles has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration (ENV-2001-2840-MND), which
incorporates a mitigation measure recommended by the traffic study that may reduce • the potential
impact on Hutchinson Street to less than significant levels. The proposed mitigation measure states "The
developer sludl fund the installation of speed humps contingent upon the Los Angeles Department of Transportation
(LADOT) conducting studies after the closure of Helms Avenue to determine if speed humps are warranted. If
ftnoul warranted by the LADOT, the developer shall coordinate with installation of speed humps at no cost to the
City. Please Tirr to IADOrs transmittal dated August 3, 2001 attached." As a majority of the Hutchinson
street segment is within the City Los Angeles, the City of Culver City recognizes the City of Los Angeles
threshold for significance and agrees with the proposed mitigation measure Therefore, with the
irnpIeeetation of this mitigation measure by the City Los Angeles it is anticipated that less than
significant impacts are expected to occur.
• As part of the Street Vacation Resolution by the City of Culver City, the final map addressing Helms
Avenue within the City of Los Angeles will be recorded concueoantly with Street Vacation Resolution at
the Los County Clerks office.
(b,c,g), No Impact. Based on the traffic study prepared for the proposed project, no significant
impacts are expected to occur regarding exceeding any level of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. Also, the proposed street vacation is
not expected to result in change in air traffic patterns or conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs
supporting alternative transportation.
23
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 5(4), Less than Significant with mitigation incorporatelL Helms Avenue between Venice Boulevard and
Washington Boulevard will he vacated as a public through street and will be used primarily as a
vehicular accessway or driveway. Motorists will still be able to drive in and out of Helms Avenue from
Venice Boulevard, however, the south end of Helms Avenue at Washington Boulevard will be dosed to
through traffic. The closure of Helms Avenue at Washington Boulevard may result in significant impacts
to this signalized intersection. However, potent-in/ impacts can be mitigated to a level of insignicance by
the following measure:
• Mitigation Measure 2: Prior to the concurrent recordation of the Street Vacation Resolution and
the Final Map addressing Helms Avenue within the City of Los Angeles at the Los Angeles
County Recorder's office, the applicant shall submit a traffic sigal and striping plan prepared by
a California Registered Traffic Engineer to the Culver City Department of -Public Works for
cosnicleration and approval by the Director of Public Works indicating the revisions to the traffic
signal equipment, operation, street pavement markings and traffic sign changes associated with
• the proposed street vacation.
(a), Less than Significant with mitigation incorporated. Environmental impacts may result from project
implementation due to inadequate emergency access. However, these impacts can be mitigated to a level
of insignificance by the following measure:
• Mitigation Measure 3: Prior to the concurrent recordation of the Street Vacation Resolution and
the Final Map addressing Helms Avenue within the City of Los Angeles at the Los Angeles
County Recorder's office, the applicant shall submit a plan to the City of Culver City Fire
Department and Police Department demonstrating adequate emergency access.
a Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will not impact any required or approved
parking for the Beacon Laundry building or other related projects 'within the Helms Bakery Complex.
Currently, there are parking spaces within the vacated right of way on either side of Helms Avenue.
However, these parlcing, spaces are not required parking spaces for the Beacon Laundry site or other
related projects within the City of Culver City. Therefore, once Helms Avenue is vacated, these parking
will not have negative impacts to the required parking. The underlying site plan for the Beacon Laundry
site requires that the applicant to maintain the existing driveways accessible from the vacated right-of
way.
WI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
(a-g), No Impact. The proposed street vacation involves no new construction, renovation or
demolition of structures or buildings. Through separate and required City permits, the applicant will
only make minor change .s to Helms Avenue such. that it will no longer appear or be used as through
public sheet but rather a privately owned driveway and pedestrian area. Therefore, the project will not
result in the demand for or improvements to water or wastewater treatment facilities, storm water
drainage facilities or land fills. Any proposed grade changes, or change to a drainage pattern are
required by City Code to obtain a permit and approval from the City of Culver City Public Works
Department. Also, all existing utilities will be provided as part of the street vacation resolution.
Therefore, no utilities and service systems impacts are expected to occur.
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 6XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE-
-(a-c), No Impact. The proposed street vacation does not have the potential to de&ade the quality
of the environment since it involves no new construction, renovation or demolition of structures or
•buildings. Through separate and required City permits, the applicant will only make minor changes to
• Helms Avenue such that it will no longer appezar or be used as through public street but rather a privately
owned driveway and pedestrian area. As the project site is fully paved there is no potential to
substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, or cause other biological concerns. The project
will not impact any important examples of California cultural resources of historic or prehistoric
significance. Furthermore, the proposed street vacation will riot result in cumulative impacts, or
environmental effects, which will cause adverse effects to human beings, either directly or indirectly.
25
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 7MITIGATION MONITORDVG PROGRAM -
In accordance with State law. AB3180 (Public Resources Code 21081.6), a mitigation program
has been prepared for the project. The Public Resources Code requires all Public agencies to
develop a mitigation monitoring and reporting program when an Environmental Impact Report
(E1R) or Mitigated Negative Declaration is adopted which identifies significant impacts that will
be mitigated to a level of insignificance. The monitoring program shall be designed to ensure
compliance with mitigation measures during project implementation_
The project applicant shall secure a signed verification for each of the mitigation measures which
indicates tbst mitigation measures have been complied with and implemented, and fulfils the
City environmental and other requirements (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6.). Final
clearance shall require all applicable verification as included , in the following table. The City of
Culver City Community Development Department will have primary responsibility for
monitoring and reporting the implementation of the mitigation measures. The mitigation
measures have been identified by impact category and numbered for ease of reference.
T
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM .
Helms Avenue Street Vacation
"4" -
'' ' '''' 12E 5VISTil(fi1 1.-14.' -461
- AESTHETICS
.
Mitigation 1:
The applicant shall submit to the
City of Culver City, a detailed plan
for consideration of and approval
by the City Engineer and Planning
Manager, or his/her designee,
illustrating any physical changes
proposed to or hear the
intersection of Helnis Avenue and
Washington Boulevard including
• but not limited to the construed=
of a pedestrian plaza, a cul-de-sac,
new lighting, installation of
bollards, signage, and removal of
sidewalks and trees.
Prior to the
concurrent
recordaticin of the
Resolution of Street
Vacation and the
Final Map
addressing Helms
Avenue within the
City of Los Angeles .
- at the Los Angeles
County Recorder's
office.
_
Planning.
Traffic
Engineering,
and
Engineering
'
.
.
.
.
.
TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION .
Mitigation Measure 2:
The applicant shall submit a traffic
signal and striping plan prepared
by a California Registered Traffic
Engineer to the Culver City .
Prior to the
concurrent
recordation of the
Resolution of Street
Vacation and the
Traffic
En.„neering "
2.6
F'RINTED Ori RECYMED PAPER
8Department of Public Works for
consideration and approval by the
Director of Public Works
indicating the revisions to the
traffic signal equipment, operation,
street pavement markings and
traffic sign changes associated with
the proposed street vacation.
Final Map
addressing Helms
Avenue within the
City of Los Angles -
at the Los Angeles
County Recorder's
office.
.
.
.
Mitigation Measure 3:
The applicant shall submit a plan _
to the City of Culver City Fire
Department and Police -
Department demonstrating
adequate emergency access.
-
_
' -
Prior to the
concurrent
recordation of the
Resolution of Street
Vacation and the
Final Map
addressing Helms
Avenue within the
City of Los Angeles
at the Los Angeles
County Recorder's
office.
Fire and Police
-
. .
.
.
•
.
PFt1147-D OW RECYCLED PAPER
9
27REFERENCES
L City of Culver City General Plan, 1996
2. City of Culver City Zoning Ordinance
3. Traffic Study prepared by PAS. August 30,2001.
4. City of Culver City Meraorandu3n b y the Traffic Engineering Manager, July 26, 2001
5. City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation Memorandum August 3, 2001
.6. City of Los Angeles, Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (2001-2840-MNDL August 24,
2001
2.%
PRINTED Oti RECYC.LED PAPfft
10I|101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO 2002-R 015
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CULVER CITY CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, RESERVING A UTILITY EASEMENT,
AND ORDERING THE VACATION OF ALL OF HELMS AVENUE
FROM WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, TOWARDS VENICE
BOULEVARD, TO THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF CULVER
CITY
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
the City of Culver City has provided public notice of the intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for this project, and
WHEREAS, proceedings have been duly taken pursuant to the provisions of
the Streets and Highways Code §8300, et seo of the State of California for vacating all of
Helms Avenue from Washington Boulevard, towards Venice Boulevard, to the City Limits of
the City of Culver City, more particularly described on Exhibit 'A" and illustrated on Exhibit
B" attached hereto and by reference made parts hereof, and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Culver City, California,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows
The City Council based upon the inal study, public comment and
the record before it determines that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on
the environment because of implementation of the mitigation measures listed in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration|109| The City Council finds that it is necessary to reserve an easement,
within said Helms Avenue for use of existing utilities This utility easement shall be within
the northeasterly 20 00 feet of the 60 00 feet wide Helms Avenue|1010|2002-R015
29ATTEST
CRIZ OAP
TOM CRUNK City Clerk|1010|3 The City Council finds that said portion of said street, as described in
the Resolution of Intention (Resolution No 2002-R010) and in Exhibit 'A and Exhibit B
attached hereto are unnecessary for present or prospective public street purposes and
said portion of said street reserving the utility easement described in Section 2 above, is
hereby vacated|109| The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause a certified
copy of this Resolution to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Los Angeles
County, California. upon receipt of written approval from the City Engineer The written
approval shall be dependent upon the concurrent recording of a Parcel Map or a Final Map
showing that portion of Helms Avenue between Washington Boulevard and Venice
Boulevard within the city limits of the City of Los Angeles, as being vacated
APPROVED and ADOPTED this 25th day of February
2002
EDWARD M WOLKpWIIZ. Mayor
City of Culver City California
APPROVED AS TO FORM
2002-R015|101010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
30 28Exhibit "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
HELMS AVENUE VACATION
BEING A PORTION OF HELMS AVENUE, 60 FEET WIDE, AS SHOWN
ON THAT MAP OF TRACT 11898, IN THE ary OF CULVER CITY,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF C.ALEFORNIA, RECORDED
IN BOOK 226, ON PAGE 42 OF OFFICIAL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF
THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, AND MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRD3ED AS FOLLOWS
BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 2 OF SAID TRACT
11898,
THENCE, NORTH 35 0 49' 30" WEST, ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY SIDE OF
SAID LOT 2, WHICH IS ALSO THE WESTERLY SIDE OF HELMS AVENUE,
140 00 _FEE]., TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 2, LOCATED
ON THE CITY LIMITS LINE OF THE CITY OF CULVER CITY CREATED BY
ORDINANCE NO 83, PASSED ON AUGUST 14, 1922,
THENCE, NORTH 54 0 18' 10" EAST, ALONG SAID CITY LIMITS LINE, WHICH IS
PARAT
1_,LE1,
TO, AND 190 FEET DISTANT NORTHWESTERLY AT RIGHT
ANGLES FROM, THE CENTERLINE OF WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, 55 26
FEET,
THENCE, NORTH 72° 23' 10' EAST, ALONG THE SAID CITY LIMITS LINE, 499
11E'l TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY SIDE OF HELMS AVENUE,
THENCE, SOUTH 35|10 10| 49' 30" EAST, ALONG THE EASTERLY SIDE OF HELMS
AVENUE, 138 47 PEW ,
THENCE, SOUTH 54|10 10| 18' 10" WEST, 60 00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING
2002-R015 31Scale 1"=50'
(-4
Cf)
xhibit "B"
orte
Ne5
Helms Avenue
Vacation
pitRESOLUTION NO. 2008-R
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CULVER CITY, CALIFORNIA, RE-ADOPTING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, RESERVING A UTILITY
EASEMENT, ORDERING THE VACATION OF ALL OF HELMS
AVENUE FROM WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, TOWARDS
VENICE BOULEVARD, TO THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF
CULVER CITY, AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
R015.
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, on
February 25, 2002 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2002-R015, which adopted a
mitigated negative declaration for the vacation of all of Helms Avenue from Washington
Boulevard towards Venice Boulevard to the City limits of the City, reserving a utility easement
for the northeasterly 20.00 feet of the 60.00 feet wide Helms Avenue, and ordered such
vacation; and
WHEREAS, the proceedings for such vacation were duly taken pursuant to the
provisions of the California Streets and Highways Code § 8300, et seq.; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2002-R015 was never recorded by the City; and
WHEREAS, as a result of a recent review of Resolution No. 2002-R015, it was
discovered the legal description and plat map of that portion of Helms Avenue that was ordered
vacated do not accurately reflect the intent and physical description of the vacation, and a field
review of Helms Avenue determined there are public utilities on both sides of Helms Avenue;
and
WHEREAS, adoption of this Resolution will correct the legal description and plat
map for that portion of Helms Avenue to be vacated and provide for a sixty-foot (60-foot) wide
public utility easement
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Culver City, California,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows:|101010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
33I|1010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
34
The City Council, based upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted
by Resolution Na. 2002-R015, determines no further environmental analysis is necessary and
hereby readopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
2. The City Council, finds it is necessary to correct the legal description and
plat map for that portion of Helms Avenue that was ordered vacated per Resolution No. 2002-
R015, to accurately reflect the intent and physical description of the vacation of Helms Avenue
from Washington Boulevard, towards Venice Boulevard, to the city limits of the City of Culver
City.
3. The City Council finds it is necessary to reserve an easement within that
vacated portion of Helms Avenue for use of existing utilities. This utility easement shall be
within the full 60_00 feet width of Helms Avenue.
4. The City Council finds said portion of said street, as described in the
Resolution of Intention (Resolution No. 2002-R01) and Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" attached
hereto, are the correct legal description and plat map for that portion of Helms Avenue that was
ordered vacated per Resolution No. 2002-R015, and are unnecessary for present or
prospective public street purposes, and that said portion of said street, reserving the utility
easement described in Section 3 above, is hereby vacated.
5. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause a certified copy
of this Resolution to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Los Angeles County,
California, upon receipt of written approval from the Public Works Director/City Engineer. The
written approval shall be dependent upon the concurrent recording of a Parcel Map or a Final
map showing that portion of Helms Avenue between Washington Boulevard and Venice
Boulevard, within the city limits of the City of Los Angeles, as being vacated.
/1/
/ / /
-2-6_ Resolution No. 2002-R015 is hereby rescinded.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of 2008.
D. SCOTT MALSIN, Mayor
City of Culver City, California
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
MARTIN R. COLE CAROL A. SCHWAB
City Clerk City Attorney|101010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
35EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
HELMS AVENUE VACATION
BEING A PORTION OF HELMS AVENUE, 60 FEET WIDE, AS SHOWN ON THAT
MAP OF TRACT 11898, IN THE CITY OF CULVER CITY, COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED IN BOOK 226, ON PAGE 42 OF
OFFICIAL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID
COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 2 OF SAID TRACT
11898, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE,
NORTH 35'49'08" WEST 140.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY
SIDELINE OF HELMS AVENUE, 60 FEET WIDE, (SAID COURSE SHOWN AS
SOUTH 35°49'30" EAST ON SAID MAP) TO THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF
SAID LOT 2, LOCATED ON THE CITY LIMITS LINE OF THE CITY OF CULVER
CITY CREATED BY ORDINANCE NO. 83, ADOPTED ON AUGUST 14, 1922;
THENCE, NORTH 54°18'03" EAST, ALONG SAID CITY LIMITS LINE, WHICH IS
PARALLEL TO AND 190 FEET DISTANT NORTHWESTERLY AT RIGHT
ANGLES FROM THE CENTERLINE OF WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, 54.84
FEET;
THENCE, NORTH 72°22'54" EAST, ALONG SAID CITY LIMITS LINE, 5.43 FEET
TO A POINT ON THE NORTHEASTERLY SIDELINE OF HELMS AVENUE;
THENCE, SOUTH 35°49'08" EAST, ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY SIDELINE
OF HELMS AVENUE, 147.37 FEET, TO THE NORTHERLY SIDELINE OF
WASHINGTON BOULEVARD;
THENCE, SOUTH 72'22'54" WEST, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY SIDELINE 29.19
FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT;
THENCE, SOUTH 54°18'03" WEST, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY SIDELINE 32.27
FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING AN AREA OF 8,521 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS
RESERVATION STATEMENT:
RESERVING OVER SAID VACATION A 60 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT FOR
PUBLIC UTILITIES, SANITARY SEWER AND EMERGENCY ACCESS PURPOSES
TO THE CITY OF CULVER CITY.
36EXHII T"
CITY OF CULVER
r--
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
SE COR LOT 2, TRACT NO, 11898
MB' 226, PO42
L12
Le)
WASHINGTON
II
LINE TABLE
LINE LENGTH BEARING
L9 5.43
N7222'54 "E
LW 54.84
N54'18'03E
L 11 29.19
S72'22'54'W
L12 32.27
55418'03'W
L13 140.00
N3549'0811/
L16 147.37
S35'49'08"E
60
CITY OF LOS
LW
•
iblvezes
Cipy •n„
n„.
HELMS AVENUE
VACATION
"44
800
SCALE: 1"---,50'