Agenda packet — Bellflower City Council, April 28, 2025 (part 1 of 4)

T h e C i t y o f B e l l f l o w e r
Families. Businesses. Futures.
16600 Civic Center Drive, Bellflower, CA 90706
Tel 562.804.1424 Fax 562.925.8660 www.bellflower.ca.gov

Next CC Resolution No. 25-16 Next CC Agreement No. 1091 Next Ordinance No. 1443

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (562) 804-1424, extension 2220 or [email protected]. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

Agenda Items are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection during normal business hours. For your convenience, the Agenda is also posted on the City’s Website at www.bellflower.ca.gov with links to each Agenda Item (unless they are too lengthy or unavailable at the time of posting). Any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the members of the City Council/Successor Agency after the posting of this Agenda will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours in the City Clerk’s Office at City Hall, 16600 Civic Center Drive, Bellflower. (Privileged documents and Closed Session documents are exempted.)

REGULAR MEETING OF THE BELLFLOWER CITY COUNCIL

MONDAY, APRIL 28, 2025

BELLFLOWER CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION / 7:00 P.M. OPEN SESSION

5:30 P.M. – CLOSED SESSION

1 CALL TO ORDER

2 ROLL CALL: Mayor Ray Dunton
Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines
Council Member Dan Koops
Council Member Wendi Morse
Council Member Victor A. Sanchez

Page 1 of 5 ends

AGENDA

Bellflower City Council Agenda
April 28, 2025

Page 2 of 5 ends

3 RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION

A CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – INITIATION OF LITIGATION - GOVERNMENT CODE § 54956.9(d)(4). Number of Cases: One. Potential defendant and property listed below is not required by applicable law; voluntarily disclosed:

Jaime Alejandre; 9070 Artesia Boulevard, 9080 Artesia Boulevard, and 17427 Virginia Avenue.

4 RECONVENE FOR OPEN SESSION

7:00 P.M. – OPEN SESSION

5 CALL TO ORDER

6 ROLL CALL: Mayor Ray Dunton
Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines
Council Member Dan Koops
Council Member Wendi Morse
Council Member Victor A. Sanchez

7 INVOCATION: Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines

8 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Len Gorecki, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works

9 CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS / PRESENTATIONS

A City Council Announcements

B Certificates of Achievement for Student Art Festival Winners

10 PUBLIC COMMENTS

This is the time set aside for the public to address the City Council on matters not listed on the Agenda. Anyone wishing to address the City Council should come to the podium, be recognized by the Mayor, and state your name for the record. If you wish to address the City Council on an Agenda Item, you may do so by approaching the podium as we review that particular item. You will be given three (3) minutes to address the City Council.

Bellflower City Council Agenda
April 28, 2025

Page 3 of 5 ends

11 PUBLIC HEARINGS

A Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission’s adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 24-15 – A Resolution denying an appeal (AP-25-01) and upholding Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 24-15 denying Development Review (DR 3-24-15169) and Conditional Use Permit (CU-24-07) for the construction of a 3,786-square-foot restaurant with a drive-through component located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard.

CEQA: The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. “CEQA”) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal.

Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”). CEQA Guideline § 15061(b)(4) exempts projects that are disapproved or rejected. Should the City Council affirm the Planning Commission’s decision and deny the DR and CUP, no further environmental review is required. If, however, the City Council opts to overturn the Planning Commission’s decision and approve the project, it is still exempt pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) as the project is less than 10,000 square feet in floor area on a site zones for such use and not involving significant amounts of hazardous substances where all necessary public services and facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Open the public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; and 2) After considering the evidence, adopt Resolution No. 25-15; or 3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

12 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION

None

13 CONSIDERATION ITEMS

A Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Southern California Edison for the acquisition of the City-owned streetlights within the Executive Tract neighborhood.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Southern California Edison (SCE) for the acquisition of the City-owned streetlights, in a form approved by the City Attorney; or 2) Direct the City Manager, or his designee, to develop a capital improvement project for the design and repair of the streetlights; or 3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

Bellflower City Council Agenda
April 28, 2025

Page 4 of 5 ends

13 CONSIDERATION ITEMS – Continued

B Consideration and possible action to: (1) waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1443 – An Ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 amending various provisions of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Bellflower Municipal Code (“BMC”) to implement the Housing Element; and (2) discuss the implementation of the State law pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1443; and 2) Provide the Director with further direction on implementing the State law pertaining to ADUs; or 3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

14 CONSENT CALENDAR

All items under the Consent Calendar are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. Specific items may be removed from the Consent Calendar at the request of any member of the City Council for separate consideration.

A Consideration and possible action to receive and file Warrant Register No. 25-102, dated April 28, 2025.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Receive and file Warrant Register No. 25-102; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

B Consideration and possible action to receive and file Treasurer’s Report for the Month of March 2025.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Receive and file Treasurer’s Report; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to

C Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute Agreement File No. 752.1, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Michael Baker International, to provide an assessment of the Caruthers Park Regional Stormwater Capture and Infiltration System.

CEQA: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §§ 15000, et seq.), the City conducted an environmental assessment. Based on the environmental assessment, the project was determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15303 (Class 1 – Existing Facilities).

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Authorize the City Manager to execute Agreement File No. 752.1, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Michael Baker International; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

Bellflower City Council Agenda
April 28, 2025

Page 5 of 5 ends

14 CONSENT CALENDAR – Continued

D Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the April 14, 2025, Regular Meeting of the City Council.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Approve the April 14, 2025, Regular Meeting Minutes; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

E Consideration and possible action to receive and file Lease Agreement File No. 1087 with Mariah Lin dba The Rhizophora Post for lease of property at 16552 Bellflower Boulevard, identified as Kiosk A.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Receive and file Lease Agreement File No. 1087; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

F Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute Agreement File No. 809.3, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with Southstar Engineering & Consulting, Inc., to provide construction management and inspection services for the Bellflower Youth and Senior Center Project.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Authorize the City Manager to execute Agreement File No. 809.3 with Southstar Engineering & Consulting, Inc., in a form approved by the City Attorney; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

15 COUNCIL REPORTS

16 ADJOURNMENT

Adjourn to the next Regular Meeting of the Bellflower City Council at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, May 12, 2025.

GZS`� OF BELLpLU1VE�
r fAN
staf 1 =Ai p rt
'G�UWITiG TOGE��
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
FROM: Elizabeth C. Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services Kathryn Brun, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to 1) conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) of the Planning Commission's adoption of Resolution No. PC 24-15; and 2) adopt Resolution No. 24-15 — A Resolution denying an appeal (AP-25-01) and upholding Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 24-15 denying Development Review (DR 3-24-15169) and Conditional Use Permit (CU-24-07) for the construction of a 3,786- square-foot restaurant with a drive -through component located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard.

DATE: April 28, 2025

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The appealed project proposes a new 3,786-square-foot McDonald's restaurant with a drive -through component (the "Project") on property located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard (the "Project Site").

On December 16, 2024, and February 18, 2025, the Planning Commission held public hearings to consider the Project. The Planning Commission's concerns included, without limitation, consistency with the City's Housing Element, access to and from the Project Site, the proximity of the proposed drive -through use to the bicycle and pedestrian trail, and traffic from the Project Site related to the future Metro Light Rail Station and at -grade crossing.

After the public hearings, the Commission was unable to make the necessary findings and unanimously voted to deny the Project. A resolution incorporating the Planning Commission's findings for denial was adopted on March 3, 2025.

On March 11, 2025, Robert Preece ("Appellant") representing Design UA, Inc. appealed this decision. Pursuant to Bellflower Municipal Code ("BMC") § 17.112.060, after hearing the appeal, the City Council may affirm, reverse or modify in whole or in part, the decision of the Planning Commission.

Page 1 of 8 ends

-1-

Staff Report — Appeal Case No. AP 25-01
April 28, 2025

Page 2 of 8 ends

RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Open the public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; and

2. After considering the evidence from the public hearing, adopt Resolution No. 25-15; or

3. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no identifiable fiscal impact associated with the recommended action. Should the City Council uphold the Planning Commission's decision, the project will be denied.

Overturning the Planning Commission's decision may result in the project being approved. Once operational, the project will be a source of increased sales tax revenue; the exact amount of such revenue is speculative.

PUBLIC NOTICE
A Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Los Cerritos Community News newspaper on April 18, 2025. Public hearing notices were sent on April 16, 2025, to 176 property owners within a 300' radius of the Project Site and posted at City Hall, Bellflower Substation, Brakensiek Library, Thompson Park, Simms Park, Caruthers Park, and the City's website. Public hearing notices were also posted at the Project Site on April 18, 2025. As of the writing of this staff report, the City received no inquiries on the Project.

CEQA STATUS
The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. "CEQA") and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"). CEQA Guideline § 15061(b)(4) exempts projects that are disapproved or rejected. Should the City Council affirm the Planning Commission's decision and deny the DR and CUP, no further environmental review is required.

If, however, the City Council opts to overturn the Planning Commission's decision and approve the project, it is still exempt pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) as the project is less than 10,000 square feet in floor area on a site zones for such use and not involving significant amounts of hazardous substances where all necessary public services and facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive. -2-

Staff Report — Appeal Case No. AP 25-01
April 28, 2025

Page 3 of 8 ends

TYPE OF ACTION (LEGISLATIVE; QUASI-JUDICIAL; OR ADVISORY) Quasi-judicial: The action before the City Council constitutes a de novo quasi-judicial action. Consequently, the City Council is considering the project applications anew, as if the original hearing before the Planning Commission did not take place. While doing so, the City Council acts like a court: it applies facts gathered during a public hearing to existing law. Just like a court, the City Council can only consider facts that are relevant to the case. A party appearing before the legislative body is entitled to:
• Notice of the proposed action;
• Reasons for the action;
• A copy of the evidence on which the action is based; and • The right to respond before a reasonably impartial, non-involved reviewer.

If the City Council asks irrelevant questions and bases its decision -making on such questions, a court may overturn the City Council's decision and hold the City potentially liable for violating the Appellant's constitutionally protected due process rights.

Conditional use permits are reviewed based on the following findings. Approval requires the City Council to make all of the findings. A CUP must be denied if any of the findings are not established.

A. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by the BMC; B. The land use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is in harmony with the various elements or objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the district in which the proposed use is to be located;
C. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the land use, and for all the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features that may be required in order to adjust said use to those existing or possible future uses of land in the neighborhood; and
D. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways properly designed and improved so as to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated or to be generated by the proposed use.

Pursuant to BMC § 17.112.060, the City Council, after hearing the appeal, may affirm, reverse or modify in whole or in part, the decision appealed from, or make and substitute such other additional decisions or determination as it may find warranted under the provisions of the BMC.
-3-

Staff Report — Appeal Case No. AP 25-01
April 28, 2025

Page 4 of 8 ends

PROJECT DATA
Property Owner:

Lee Young Suk Lee Family Trust
General Plan Land Use
Designation:

Mixed Use (MU)
Zoning Classification:

Plan Area 2 of TOD SP
Property Size:

0.99 acres 43,245 SF
Current Development:

Retail Commercial Building
Previous Entitlements/
Permit History:

Resolution No. PC 01-61: CUP Case No. CU 01-29 allowing a wireless communication facility.

Resolution No. PC 09-23: CUP Case No. CU 09-06 allowing the co -location of a wireless communication facility.

Surrounding Land
Uses and Zoning:

North
Grocery Store and Gym Plan Area 2 of the TOD SP
South
Locksmith Plan Area 2 of the TOD SP
West
Automobile Dealership Plan Area 2 of the TOD SP
East
Apartment Complex and Motel Plan Area 1 of the TOD SP

BACKGROUND
➢ Request
On March 11, 2025, the Appellant submitted an appeal of the Planning Commission's action to deny the requested approval of a DR and a CUP for a new 3,786-square-foot restaurant with a drive -through component. The Appellant represented that "McDonald's" is their proposed tenant.
➢ Project Site Configuration
The Project involves construction of a proposed restaurant building with drive -through that will be situated near the southeastern portion of the triangular shaped property.

Access to the Project Site is via one driveway off Bellflower Boulevard. Twenty-four parking spaces are proposed for the Project. The Project Site will be separated from the adjacent properties by landscaping, concrete curb, and an existing CMU wall along the site perimeter. An existing wireless communication facility is located at the southwest corner of the property and is proposed to remain.
➢ Drive -Through Layout
The entrance to the drive -through area is located within the parking lot in the northwestern portion of the Project Site, opposite Bellflower Boulevard. The drive -through area starts with two lanes leading to two order points. After the two order points, the drive -through area curbs along the southern portion of the Project Site, where the two lanes merge into one lane leading to the first window (payment) and the second window (1 st pick-up) and third window (alternate pick-up). The drive -through lane ends at the eastern portion of the Project Site, adjacent to Bellflower Boulevard.
-4-

Staff Report — Appeal Case No. AP 25-01
April 28, 2025

Page 5 of 8 ends

➢ Drive -Through Layout— Continued
The two-lane portion of the drive -through has a queuing capacity of four vehicles and the single -lane portion of the drive -through has a queuing capacity of six vehicles. The combined queuing capacity of the drive -through is ten vehicles where each lane is 12 feet wide. A Drive -Through Queuing Analysis ("QA") was required for the Project and was included in the Traffic Analysis ("TA"). The QA found that the observed peak queue at three referenced McDonald's in Brea, La Palma, and South Gate were ten to 13 vehicles.

The proposed drive -through area, according to the QA has adequate queuing capacity.

Also, there is additional drive-thru capacity for two vehicles located on the east side of the proposed building (i.e., pull forward area). Therefore, the QA finds that the Project Site was designed to allow potential excess peak queues to be accommodated on -site without spilling onto Bellflower Boulevard, or the public right-of-way. Further discussion on the QA is included as part of Attachments D and H.
➢ Traffic Analysis
A Traffic Analysis (TA) report was prepared to evaluate the potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed Project. The TA assessed the following three scenarios: "Existing (2024)," "Existing plus Project ("E+P")," and "Opening Year Cumulative (2025) With Project Conditions." According to the TA, all study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable Level of Service ("LOS") of "A" and "B", during both AM and PM peak hours. Accounting for the proposed Project, all LOS are projected to remain the same, except the Bellflower & Driveway 1 which is expected to change from an LOS of "A" to "B" during the AM peak hours. Further discussion on the TA is included as part of Attachments D and H. ➢ Project Timeline
The following is the Project Timeline:

On December 16, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the Project. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Commission continued the public hearing to the January 6, 2025, Planning Commission meeting for the Appellant to address ingress and egress from the site, safety concerns of pedestrians and bicyclists, and the goals and policies of the City's Housing Element.
- On December 18, 2024, the Appellant requested that the meeting be continued to the January 21, 2025, Planning Commission meeting to continue its due diligence.

On January 6, 2025, the Appellant requested that the meeting be continued again to February 3, 2025, and the Director provided notice of the continuance to the February 3, 2025, Planning Commission meeting.

On January 29, 2025, the Appellant submitted a letter requesting another continuance to February 18, 2025, and a notice of cancellation and continuance was posted to continue the matter to the February 18, 2025, Planning Commission meeting.
-5-

Staff Report — Appeal Case No. AP 25-01
April 28, 2025

Page 6 of 8 ends

➢ Project Timeline — Continued
On February 5, 2025, the Appellant submitted revised landscape plans. The revised plans included adding an outdoor dining area and enhanced landscaping along the pedestrian entrance. Other comments raised by the Planning Commission at the December 16, 2024, meeting including, without limitation, the site layout were not addressed.
- On February 18, 2025, the Planning Commission re -opened the public hearing to consider additional information provided by the Appellant, City Staff, and public testimony, and closed the public hearing. The Planning Commission unanimously voted to deny the Project and directed staff to prepare a resolution denying DR 3-24-15169 and CU 24-07.
- On March 3, 2025, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC 24-15, a Resolution denying DR 3-24-15169 and CU 24-07.
- On March 11, 2025, an appeal application was filed appealing the Planning Commission's decision to deny the Project.

This Staff Report incorporates by reference all Staff Reports presented to the Planning Commission, including, without limitation, those dated December 16, 2024, February 18, 2025, and March 3, 2025.
➢ Discussion on Findings
Matters discussed by the Planning Commission at its December 16, 2024, and February 18, 2025, where the Planning Commission noted the Project does not satisfy the findings required for CUP and DR approvals are summarized below. The appeal application received on March 11, 2025, included the Appellant's responses and reasons for the appeal (Attachment B), which are also summarized below.

Housing Element. The Commission expressed concern about redeveloping the Project Site for a new commercial use as it is identified as a Housing Opportunity Area in the City's Housing Element ("HE"). To meet the goals of the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation ("RHNA"), the Project Site would need to be redeveloped with housing. The Project Site was recently rezoned to implement the HE by allowing a density of up to 100 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Project would remove a large parcel, in a prime location, from the City's housing inventory during a State-wide housing crisis and conflicts with the HE and the TOD SP.
➢ Appellant's response: The Appellant did not provide a response addressing these concerns.
➢ Appellant's appeal: The Appellant represented that it is not in the purview of the Planning Commission to decide the proposed development. The Appellant indicated that the Project Site is zoned to allow for commercial drive -through uses with a CUP and the housing overlay expands options for what is allowed on the Project Site.

1.3 Staff Report — Appeal Case No. AP 25-01
April 28, 2025

Page 7 of 8 ends

➢ Discussion on Findings — Continued
The Appellant further represented that the property owner has only one application and interest for development of the Project Site, does not have an applicant for a residential development, and does not plan on engaging with a residential developer in the future. The Appellant further contends that before submitting the project application, representatives of the Project met with City Staff to discuss the Project and were told there was no issue with the future residential overlay on the Project Site.

Project Site Access: The Commission expressed concern about access to and from the Project Site. The Commission asked the Appellant to seek other ingress and egress possibilities to the Project Site including a reciprocal access agreement with the property to the north or by purchasing and merging with the property to the south. ➢ Appellant's response: The Appellant represented that it was unsuccessful at negotiating a reciprocal access agreement with the property owner to the north of the Project Site and the Project design does not include any means of accessing northbound vehicle traffic from the Project Site.
➢ Appellant's appeal: The Appellant represents that the TA shows that the proposed Project will not add vehicle trips to Bellflower Boulevard, is a very low intensity use, is intended to serve those who are already traveling on Bellflower Boulevard, and that any development, including a residential development, would also have one point of ingress and egress to the Project site. The Appellant represented that the adjacent property owner will not provide reciprocal access for this proposed Project and will not for any future project.

The Commission also expressed concern about delivery trucks blocking traffic on Bellflower Boulevard while entering and exiting the Project Site. ➢ Appellant's response: The Appellant represented that they did not analyze if a 40' delivery truck could access the Project Site with center median delineators installed on Bellflower Boulevard, as conditioned by staff. ➢ Appellant's appeal: The Appellant represented that the proposed business operator will use a 26-foot dual axed straight truck for deliveries that will be able to access the Project Site without any impact to Bellflower Boulevard.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Trail: The Commission discussed the proximity of the proposed drive -through use to the bicycle and pedestrian trail, which receives higher than average pedestrian traffic.
➢ Appellant's response: The Appellant attempted to address this concern by adding an outdoor dining area and enhanced landscaping to attract pedestrians and bicyclists to the business, but did not address the pedestrian safety concerns. -7-

Staff Report — Appeal Case No. AP 25-01
April 28, 2025

Page 8 of 8 ends

➢ Discussion on Findings — Continued
➢ Appellant's appeal: The Appellant contends that the TA shows that the proposed Project will not add vehicle trips to Bellflower Boulevard as it is intended to serve those who are already traveling on Bellflower Boulevard; therefore, there is no reason for safety concerns for pedestrians and any development, including a residential development, would also have one point of ingress and egress to address.

Metro Light Rail Station and At -Grade Crossing The Commission expressed concern about the frequency and length of time the gates would be down at the at -grade rail crossing on Bellflower Boulevard for Metro's proposed Southeast Gateway Line. During peak hours, there will be an at -grade train crossing every 2.5 minutes within 500 feet of the Project Site. With the Metro crossing, the Level of Service on this segment of Bellflower Boulevard is expected to drop from "A" in the AM and "B" in the PM to "B" in the AM and "C" in the PM. All traffic from the Project Site will be funneled south directly towards the at -grade crossing.
➢ Appellant's response: The Appellant did not address this issue with their revised plans.
➢ Appellant's appeal: The Appellant contends that the opening date of the proposed Metro line is unknown and that the TA, which was based on scoping methodology provided by the City Traffic Engineer, showed that the proposed Project will not have an impact on the traffic once the Metro line is operational and that Bellflower Boulevard will carry the same amount of traffic.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution No. 25-15...................................................................................9 B. Appeal Documents Submitted March 11, 2025.................................................13 C. Resolution No. PC 24-15............................................................................18 D. December 16, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments)......................................25 E. February 18, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments)........................................32 F. March 3, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments).............................................37 G. Assessor's Map, Aerial Map, Zoning Map and General Plan Map.........................41 H. Traffic Analysis, Queuing Analysis, VMT Screening Evaluation, Project Description.46 I. Revised Project Plans dated February 5, 2025...............................................123 -8-

ATTACHMENT A
Resolution No. 25-15
m

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
RESOLUTION NO. 25-15
A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPEAL (AP-25-01) AND UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-15 DENYING
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DR 3-24-15169) AND CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT (CU-24-07) FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 3,786-SQUARE-

FOOT RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE -THROUGH COMPONENT
LOCATED AT 16211 BELLFLOWER BOULEVARD
THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: Recitals. The City Council finds and declares as follows:

A. On March 3, 2025, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted Resolution No. PC 24-15 denying Development Review Case No. DR 3-24-15169 and Conditional Use Permit Case No. 24-07 to allow a new 3,786-square-foot, drive -through restaurant (the "Project") on property located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard (the "Project Site"); B. Resolution No. PC 24-15, and its findings, were made based upon the evidence presented to the Planning Commission at its December 16, 2024, and February 18, 2025, hearings including, without limitation, the staff reports submitted by the Director on both the above dates.

C. Robert Preece of Design UA, Inc. (the "Appellants"), timely appealed the PC Resolution to the City Council in accordance with the Bellflower Municipal Code ("BMC") on March 14, 2024 (the "Appeal"); D. The Appeal was scheduled for a public hearing on April 28, 2025; and E. On April 28, 2025, the City Council opened a public hearing and took testimonial and documentary evidence regarding the Appeal. This Resolution, and its findings, are made based upon the evidence presented to the City Council at its April 28, 2025, hearing including, without limitation, the staff report submitted by the Planning and Building Services Director ("Director").

SECTION 2: Incorporation by Reference. Except as set forth in this Resolution, all of the findings, conclusions, and determinations in the Resolution No. PC 24-15 are incorporated by reference including, without limitation, Sections 2 through 6.

Page 1 of 3 ends

-10-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. 25-15

Page 2 of 3 ends

SECTION 3: Determination. Based upon the Findings and Conclusions set forth in Section 2, the City Council renders the following determinations:

A. There is no substantive evidence in the record supporting the Appeal. The PC Resolution was properly adopted based upon the evidence before the Planning Commission on March 3, 2025.

B. The City Council denies the Appeal and upholds the PC Resolution for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.

SECTION 4: Reliance on Record. Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the Project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.

SECTION 5: Severability. If any part of this Resolution or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Resolution are severable.

SECTION 6: Construction. This Resolution must be broadly construed to achieve the purposes stated in this Resolution. It is the City Council's intent that the provisions of this Resolution be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Resolution.

SECTION 7: 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 8: Notice. The City Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Resolution to the Appellant, Applicant, and to any other person requesting a copy.

SECTION 9: Recordation. The Mayor, or, presiding officer, is authorized to affix his signature to this Resolution signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Bellflower, and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, is directed to attest.

SECTION 10: Electronic Signatures. This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.
-11-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. 25-15

Page 3 of 3 ends

SECTION 11: Effective Date. This Resolution becomes effective immediately upon adoption and memorializes the City Council's final decision. Persons dissatisfied with the City Council's decision may appeal it in accordance with applicable law to the Los Angeles Superior Court within 90 days of the City Council's decision.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER THIS 28TH DAY OF APRIL 2025.

Ray Dunton, Mayor
ATTEST:

Mayoa Ochiqui, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
-12-

� At �
Appeal Documents Submitted March 111 2025
-13-

oy BELLFLO
W., "
Appeal Application,
Decisions rendered by Administrative Review and the Design Review Board can be appealed to the Planning Commission; those made by the Planning Commission can be appealed to the City Council. RECEIVED
A.,_LA
Fees: For current fees, please consult the planning fee schedule handout. J, TYPE OR PRINT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION CrTY CLERK'S OFFICE NAME OF APPELLANT: Design UA, Inc. (Robert Preece)
MAILING ADDRESS: 153 E City Place Dr

STREET NUMBER STREET NAME
Santa Ana, CA 92705

CITY STATE ZIP CODE
DAYTIME TELEPHONE: 909-821-6703 FAX NUMBER:

TYPE OF APPEAL: (PLEASE CHECK THE APPLICABJ_E TYPE OF ACTION) ADMINISTRATIVE - PROJECT ADDRESS: 16211 Bellflower Blvd.

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OR
X PLANNING COMMISSION CASE TITLE: CU24-07 & DR 3-24-415169 SPECIFIC REASONS FOR APPEAL: (ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES IF NECESSARY) See separate letter.

St
0:3110/202!i.-
LATE
NOTE: THIS APPEAL MUST BE SUBMITTED WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS AFTER THE FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL OR ADVISORY BODY. IF THE ACTION TAKEN ON THE APPEAL IS CHALLENGED IN

COURT, THE CHALLENGE IMAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING ONLY THOSE ISSUES RAISED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING OR IN WRITTEN C04SZ.RESPOINIDENCE DELIVERED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR CITY COUNCII, AT OR PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
"'OR OFFICE USE ONLY (City Clerk)
r
E SUBMITTED:

RLIC- i%lc.:

RECEIVED BY:

August 16, 2006 Effective 07/28103
16600 Civic Center Drive, Beliflower, Ca. 96700 562-804-1424 _q or -14-

March 11, 2025
City of Bellflower
Department: Planning Division
16600 Civic Center Dr.

RE: Planning Commission Appeal for CU24-07 & DR3-24-15169 McDonald's @ 16211 Bellflower Blvd. Bellflower, CA 90706 Dear Staff,
Thank you for the time and review commitment to date on this project. We are filing an appeal against the above -mentioned cases based on the Planning Commission denial and reasons below:
1- Reason for denial communicated via staff: The property is in a commercial zone (which conditionally allows restaurants with drive thru lanes) but it's also part of a transit -oriented development overlay zone and part of an area that was identified in the housing element as a housing opportunity area. The commissioners felt the site was better suited for a residential or mixed -use development.
a. Appeal Reason:

It is not in the Planning Commissions purview to choose what development is proposed on a site. This site is zoned to allow for commercial drive-thru use with a conditional use permit and the housing element exists, per staffs direct comments and feedback, to. expand options for what is allowed on a site, See highlighted blue below from the City's Housing Element. As it stands, the land- owner has only one application and interest for development on this parcel, and that is this McDonald's project.

N. The site currently has no applicants or has ever had previously an applicant for a residential project and the property owner is not, and does not, plan to engage any residential project for this site — now or in the future. This was communicated to staff and the Planning Commission.
ili. In the infancy stages of the project McDonald's and its consultants met with city staff and McDonalds specifically brought up the housing element as an early potential issue to address. Staff responded, after internal review, that "Pre or post -overlay there wouldn't be an issue with the project as it relates to the Housing Element. On our end, we would need to find another parcel to rezone that can accommodate for the potential housing lost with the development of commercial at this site."
2- Reason for denial communicated via staff: Traffic. Egress. Delivery. Traffic is also further enhanced because there is a Metro light rail station planned almost adjacent to the site and there will be at -grade crossings proposed to be happening up to every 2.S minutes and stopping traffic.
153 East City Place Dr. Santa Ana, CA 92705 i phone 714,802.3900 -15-

a. Appeal Reason:

The start date for the metro rail operations is unknown currently, At the Planning Commission hearing it was stated it could possibly commence in 2030 or even further beyond.. In the current proposal without the light rail, our traffic analysis, which was based on scope methodology provided directly by the city traffic engineer at early meetings, determined the McDonald's development will not have an impact on the current traffic pattern or impact current adjacent intersections studied. Once the light rail goes in the same findings would still be consistent that the McDonald's development would not impact traffic pattern or impact current adjacent intersections studied. ii. There was a statement from the Planning Commission that McDonald's would cause public safety concerns having only one ingress and egress, The volume of the store and traffic analysis show that there are no added trips on Bellflower Blvd. compared to pre -development. That said there wouldn't be any reason for safety concerns for pedestrians or the public. Even a residential project would have one ingress and egress point to address.
ill. Delivery process was brought up on the delivery truck impacting traffic on Bellflower Blvd, McDonalds has put in place to use a 26-foot dual axei straight truck rather than the typical 65-foot semi -truck. This will allow delivery to come and go onsite gust like any other vehicle without -any impact on Bellflower Blvd..

This will ensure a delivery truck does not need to back into the location and can adequately maneuver completely on -site.
iv. The existing condition of Bellflower Blvd. will carry the same points of critical review on any other project, including a proposed residential project.

McDonald's is a very low intensity use and does not cause significant added trips. Instead, it pulls from already existing trips and is intended to serve those who are already traveling on Bellflower Blvd. Cross -parcel access, for this project, and any other assumed project in the future, will not happen based on direct feedback from the adjacent ownership group.

Below is a snapshot of the City's Housing Element. The Planning Commission's concerns on traffic, access, light rail impact would be significantly further compounded by a proposed residential development of the size below described compared to a McDonald's development. Thus, stating that a residential project is preferred here is a cyclical argument that stands in opposition to the straightforward intent of the overlay.

I53 East City Place Or, Sena Ana, CA 92705 Phone 714,892,3900 Papa 2 of 3
-16-

QS!rPiiY'rMi - �klllt{,sf'ilj
t,.a•'tr+«iiy e.9�'+�?W3,;7 wta}r Fk
r.

V"i VM,
Y
. `•c1,m:F -yT.RP !SU'+'(er4.1C+•M+•3r nS
. ,•. � ... ..z : -,:�s`.w S!e ff r ,: RIN�fR��f'li�iM
Ofteiaonr+-•d neWW"O tees 4600 W W* COV.MPOWi loom a .
aocownoda* Owwr s dip to ourws pelt ?M OWW4 -C 01-0
q d KW eve r!xu90 vo Or4WWWO vAM OCLwo a" WO VO *004 W
M ' N Der oas. am 90000OV VA".vPMOIIIIIIlmkvw
e�an w+KrpIJWOM01r fit m"rr E: ,:i��J^'n'SF'.7�w"'+rt K i»*Kd': ir+ L'r^'�•'YP C'J��fJ xftq G+rY +YY; sFtes�".�•4dks `G nrx4va :,yx c�.�s«#•err, i r«>;�, �s�!-��x +cr «wr+.rsrs!�; c>++sru�,aa+n z� � a .k :.�� a� rx �'*:.ir+°ci0':GIG*� w^'>• ev�P,e�r,? v� rcfrr.�b�r!+.:w c?.�7+� i�tir � .i "..;a°�;a,r3r,:*,r,.;> �'G� ..._....__ if you have any questions, please let us know. Thank you all in advance for your continued efforts in reviewing this project. We look forward to our continued investment into the City of Beliflower.

Sincerely,
/'OBERTREEECE

PRINCIPAL
DESIGN UA, INC.
153 East City Place Or. Santa Ana. CA 327051 Phone 73A.892.3900

Page 3 of 3 ends

-17-

It 1 m i� lon
Resolution No. PC 24-15
-18-

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
RESOLUTION NO. PC 24-15
A RESOLUTION DENYING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CASE NO. DR 3-
24-15169 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. CU 24-07 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 3,786-SQUARE-FOOT RESTAURANT

WITH A DRIVE -THROUGH COMPONENT WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN

BELLFLOWER TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN
("TOD SP") ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16211 BELLFLOWER
BOULEVARD.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS;
SECTION 1. Recitals. The Planning Commission finds and declares that:

A. On March 14, 2024, Robert Preece of Design UA, Inc. ("Applicant"), filed an application and submitted plans and associated documentation for a Development Review ("DR") and a Conditional Use Permit ("CUP") to allow a new 3,786-square-foot, drive -through restaurant (the "Project"). The application was initially deemed incomplete on April 11, 2024. On May 1, 2024, the Applicant submitted revised plans, and the application was deemed incomplete for a second time on May 31, 2024. On August 20, 2024, the Applicant submitted revised plans, and the application was deemed incomplete for a third time on September 20, 2024. On October 7, 2024, the Applicant submitted revised plans, and the application was deemed complete on November 7, 2024;
B. The application was reviewed by the City's Department of Planning and Building Services for, in part, consistency with the General Plan and conformity with the Bellflower Municipal Code CBMC");
C. In addition, the City reviewed the Project's environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., "CEQA"), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regulations §§15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Environmental Guidelines ("Bellflower Guidelines"; CEQA, CEQA Guidelines and Bellflower Guidelines collectively referred to as "CEQA Regulations"); D. The Director of Planning and Building Services ("Director") completed its review and scheduled a public hearing regarding the application before this Planning Commission on December 16, 2024;
E. Notice of Public Hearing before the Planning Commission was duly given and published in the time, form, and manner as required by law; F. On December 16, 2024, the Planning Commission opened a public hearing to receive and consider public testimony and other evidence regarding the Project including, without limitation, information provided to the Planning Commission by the Applicant. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing to January 6, 2025;
G. On December 18, 2024, the Applicant submitted a letter requesting that the meeting be continued to the January 21, 2025, Planning Commission meeting

Page 1 of 6 ends

-19-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. PC 24-15

Page 2 of 6 ends

to complete their due diligence. On January 6, 2025, the Applicant requested to continue the meeting to February 3, 2025 and notice was given at the January 6, 2025 Planning Commission meeting. On January 29, 2025, the Applicant submitted a letter requesting that the meeting be continued to the February 18, 2025, Planning Commission meeting and the February 3, 2025 Planning Commission meeting was cancelled with a notice of continuance for the February 18, 2025 Planning Commission meeting;
H. On February 5, 2025, the Applicant submitted revised landscape plans, On February 18, 2025, the Planning Commission re -opened the continued public hearing to receive testimony and other evidence regarding the application including, without limitation, information provided to the Planning Commission by the Applicant; and
J. The Planning Commission considered the information provided by the Director and designees, public testimony, and the Applicant. This Resolution, and its findings, are made based upon the evidence presented to the Planning Commission at its December 16, 2024 and February 18, 2025 hearing including, without limitation, the staff reports submitted by the Director on both the above dates.

SECTION 2. Factual Findings and Conclusions. The Planning Commission finds that the following facts exist:

A. The Applicant seeks approval of a DR and CUP to allow a new 3,786-square- foot, drive -through restaurant within TOD SP on property located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard (the "Project Site");
B. The Project Site is accessible from Bellflower Boulevard, a 75-foot-wide right- of-way, major arterial street,
C. The Project Site is bounded: to the north, by a grocery store and gym located within Plan Area 2 of the TOD SP; to the south, by a locksmith located within Plan Area 2 of the TOD SP; to the west by an automobile dealership within Plan Area 2 of the TOD SP; and to the east, by an apartment complex and motel zoned Plan Area 1 of the TOD SP;
D. The Applicant submitted a Traffic Analysis ("TA") which represents that all intersection will continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service; and E. The developable Project Site area measures 0.99 acres (43,245 square feet) and is currently developed with a vacant janitorial supply retail building.

SECTION 3. Environmental Assessment. The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. "CEQA") and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"). CEQA Guideline § 15061(b)(4) exempts projects that are disapproved or rejected. This -20-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. PC 24-15

Page 3 of 6 ends

Resolution is a denial of a conditional use permit and development review. Accordingly, no further environmental review is required.

SECTION 4. Conditional Use Permit Findings and Conclusions. Pursuant to BMC § 17.96.040 (Necessary Conditions Precedent to the Granting of a Conditional Use Permit) the Planning Commission finds as follows:

A. The use applied for at the location set forth in the application is properly one for which a Conditional Use Permit is authorized by the BMC. The Project Site is located within Plan Area 2 of TOD SP and must conform to the C-G provisions. Pursuant to BMC § 17.44.030(A)(26) (C-G Conditional Uses), "drive-in, or drive -through businesses" are conditionally permitted.

B. The proposed drive -through restaurant use is not necessary or desirable for the development of the community. The Project Site is identified as Housing Opportunity Area ("HOA") I (Bellflower Station) and part of Site 11.2 in the City's adopted 2021 — 2029 Housing Element ("HE"). Site 11.2 is comprised of two parcels, including the Project Site, totaling 1.06 acres off Bellflower Boulevard, directly adjacent to the planned Beli lower Metro light rail station.

The Project Site was recently rezoned to implement the HE by allowing up to 100 dwelling units per acre, accommodating 65 residential units of varying income levels to address the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RHNA") requirements. The proposed drive -through restaurant use at the Project Site would remove a large parcel, in a prime location for a true mixed - use development, from the City's housing inventory during a State-wide housing crisis and conflicts with the HE and TOD SP, including, without limitation:
• HE Program 27 ensuring adequate sites to accommodate RHNA by reducing the number of large, available sites for housing development.

HE Program 29 lot consolidation because the Project Site accounts for the majority of Site 11.2's acreage and development potential such that its development as a drive -through would further isolate and discourage consolidation of the remaining 0.07 acres within Site 11.2, interfering with the City's ability to rely on large parcels that allow mixed use zoning to develop affordable housing.

HE Policy 5.2: Create mixed use opportunities along key commercial corridors as a means of providing housing in close proximity to services and transit, enhancing pedestrian activity and community interaction.

The HE and TODSP identify Bellflower Boulevard, including the segment between Alondra Boulevard and Artesia Boulevard as a key commercial corridor. The Project Site is located adjacent to the future light rail station which is uniquely situated to contribute to the corridor's existing pedestrian -oriented character, and the intended mixed use and multi -modal transportation vision for this area of the City. • HE Policy 5.6: Explore opportunities for new residential development within those areas of the City occupied by vacant or underutilized -21-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. PC 24-15

Page 4 of 6 ends

commercial or industrial uses. The Project Site was developed in 1952 and has a land -to -improvement ratio of less than one, indicating no significant upgrades have been made. Currently, the building on the Project Site only occupies 17% of the total site area, leaving considerable room for mixed -use development to increase allowable density in such a prime location. Given the location, transit accessibility, and high potential for increased development, the Project Site is likely to be redeveloped with mixed use residential during the 2021-2029 planning period.

C. The Project Site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use and for all the yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping. The Project is tailored to the Project Site such that, as proposed, it meets and exceeds all required development standards.

D. The Project Site does not relate to streets and highways properly designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated or to be generated by the proposed use, The Project Site abuts the parcel where the future transit station will be located, is accessible only bytto southbound traffic on Bellflower Boulevard and is less than 500 feet north of at -grade rail crossing on Bellflower Boulevard and the Bellflower -Flora Vista signalized intersection. The Final Transportation Impact Analysis Report prepared for the EIS/EIR for Metro's West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor states that during peak hours, there will be an at -grade train crossing every 2.5 minutes. The Project Site is not situated for a vehicle centric use because of its inability to provide safe and legal access to northbound traffic, the narrow width of Bellflower Boulevard, the proximity to the T-intersection at Flora Vista, and at -grade rail crossing within 500 feet. The Applicant is proposing a drive -through use at the Project Site that limits patrons to right -turn -in and right -turn -out only. Additionally, Metro's EIS/EIR identifies that the Level of Service ("LOS") on this segment of Bellflower Boulevard will drop once the transit station is developed which Will be exacerbated by the proposed drive though use funneling traffic southbound towards the at -grade crossing. The existing LOS at Bellflower Boulevard and Flora Vista Street is "A" in the AM and "B" in the PM. The LOS is expected to drop to "Bm in the AM and "C" in the PM. Moreover, the purpose and intent of the TOD SP is to provide a regulatory framework for the downtown Bellflower area that includes customized land uses and development standards, and provides expanded multimodal transportation choices, including, without limitation, contributing to the existing pedestrian -oriented character of the City's downtown. The proposed drive -through use is contrary to the City's visions for this area and the approved future use of Bellflower Boulevard.

SECTION 5. Development Review Findings and Conclusions. Pursuant to BMC § 17.80.040 (Development Review findings), the Planning Commission finds as follows:

A. The Project conflicts with the HE and TOD SP as identified in section 5 of this Resolution.

B. The Project design is not appropriate to the City, the neighborhood, and the lot on which it is proposed as identified in section 5 of this Resolution. -22-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. PC 24-15

Page 5 of 6 ends

C. The Project design is incompatible with its environment with respect to use, forms, materials, colors, setbacks, location, height, design, or similar qualities as specified in the TOD SP as stated in Section 5. Additionally, Bellflower Boulevard prohibits northbound traffic from entering the Project Site, and limits vehicles exiting the Project Site to southbound traffic making the Project Site right turn-in/out only. Among other things, the Project Site has only one proposed point of ingress and egress which increases the volume of vehicle traffic headed southbound on Bellflower Boulevard towards the Bellflower -Flora Vista intersection, at -grade rail crossing, Bellflower Pedestrian and Bicycle Trail that runs along the Pacific Electric Railroad, and further into the pedestrian oriented downtown. Pursuant to the 2017 Bellflower -Paramount Bike Trail Master Plan bicycle and pedestrian counts, the highest peak hour pedestrian volume was observed at the West Santa Ana Branch Trail and Bellflower Boulevard. Moreover, the Project Site is directly adjacent to the Town Center District, which is intended to enhance pedestrian activities, and a strictly commercial development would impede the City's future efforts to obtain funding for complete neighborhoods in low resource areas (HE Program 34), including, without limitation the TOD SP, because of the Project Site's removal as an affordable housing site needed to meet the City's RHNA obligations.

Accordingly, the Project design is, among other things, incompatible with the Project Site location.

SECTION 6. General Plan and Zoning. The Project is inconsistent with the General Plan and TOD SP as stated in Sections 5 and 6 of this Resolution.

SECTION 7. Action. The Planning Commission determines that the findings for a conditional use permit and design review cannot be satisfied and denies DR 3-24-15169 and CU 24-07.

SECTION 8. Construction. This Resolution must be broadly construed to achieve the purposes stated in this Resolution. It is the Planning Commission's intent that the provisions of this Resolution be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Resolution.

SECTION 9. Reliance On Record. Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the Project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the Planning Commission in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.

SECTION 10, Limitations. The Planning Commission's analysis and evaluation of the Project is based on the best information currently available. It is inevitable that in evaluating a Project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the Project will not exist. One of the major limitations on analysis of the Project is the Planning Commission's lack of knowledge of future events. In all instances, best efforts have been made to form accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are the limitations on the City's ability to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national problems and issues. -23-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. PC 24-15

Page 6 of 6 ends

The City must work within the political framework within which it exists and with the limitations inherent in that framework.

SECTION 11. Severability. If any part of this Resolution or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the Planning Commission intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Resolution are severable.

SECTION 12. Preservation. This Resolution does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this Resolution's effective date. Any such amended part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Resolution.

SECTION 13. The Planning Commission Secretary is directed to mail a copy of this Resolution to the Applicant and to any other person requesting a copy.

SECTION 14. Appeal. This Resolution may be appealed within ten calendar days after its adoption, pursuant to BMC Chapters 17.80, 17.96 and 17.112. All appeals must be in writing and filed with the City Clerk within this time period. Failure to file a timely written appeal will constitute a waiver of any right to appeal.

SECTION 15. Effective ,bate. Except as provided in Section 15, this Resolution is the Planning Commission's final decision and will become effective immediately upon adoption and remain effective until superseded by a subsequent resolution.

SECTION 16. Electronic Signatures. This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

SECTION 17. Recordation, The Planning Commission Chairman, or, presiding officer, is authorized to affix its signature to this Resolution signifying its adoption by the Planning Commission of the City of Bellflower, and the Planning Commission Secretary, or its duly appointed deputy, may attest,

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER THIS 3a'° DAY OF M Ci2#i2 —
Robert Wilson, Chairman
ATT ST:
62zel-
Elizabeth 4. Oba, Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Marl H. Berger, City Attorney
Justi A. Ta ay , Ass taut City Attorney
-24-

ATTACHMENT
December 16, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments)
-25-

oil Op 8ELLF1
of
leport
TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission ATTENTION: Elizabeth C. Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services FROM: Kathryn Brun, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to consider an application for a Development Review and a Conditional Use Permit, and to adopt Resolution No. PC 24-15 — A Resolution approving Development Review Case No. DR 3-24-15169 and Conditional Use Permit Case No. CU 24-07 to allow the construction of a 3,786-square-foot restaurant with a drive -through component within The Downtown Bellflower Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan ("TOD SP") on property located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard.

DATE: December 16, 2024

RECOMMENDATION

1. Open the public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; and after considering the evidence, adopt Resolution No. PC 24-15, or

2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

TYPE OF ACTION (LEGISLATIVE; QUASI-JUDICIAL, OR ADVISORY) Quasi-judicial: The recommended action includes issuing a Development Review ("DR") and a Conditional Use Permit ("CUP"), In considering such actions, the Planning Commission acts in a quasi-judicial role. While doing so, the Planning Commission acts like a court: it applies facts gathered during a public hearing to existing law. Just like a court, the Planning Commission can only consider facts that are relevant to the case. A party appearing before the legislative body is entitled to:
• Notice of the proposed action;
• Reasons for the action;
• A copy of the evidence on which the action is based; and • The right to respond before a reasonably impartial, noninvolved reviewer.

If the Planning Commission asks irrelevant questions and bases its decision -making on such questions, a court may overturn the Planning Commission's decision and hold the City potentially liable for violating the Applicant's constitutionally protected due process rights.
-26-

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Boulevard December 16, 2024

Page 2 of 6 ends

The DR is typically subject to an administrative -level review per Bellflower Municipal Code ("BMC") § 17.80.020 (A)(1). However, when a development review application requires other approvals by the Planning Commission, such as the requested CUP, the DR then occurs concurrently per BMC § 17.80.030(C). In the matter of the DR, the Planning Commission must also make findings pursuant to BMC § 17.80.040:

A. That the proposal is consistent with the Bellflower General Plan and the BMC- B. That the design of the proposal is appropriate to the City, the neighborhood, and the lot on which it is proposed; and
C. That the design of the proposal is compatible with its environment with respect to use, forms, materials, colors, setbacks, location, height, design, or similar qualities as specified in § 17.80.010.

In the matter of the CUP, the Planning Commission must make findings pursuant to BMC § 17.96.040:

A Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Los Cerritos Community News newspaper on December 6, 2024. Public hearing notices were sent on December 5, 2024 to 176 owners within a 300' radius of the Project Site and posted at City Hall, Bellflower Substation, Brakensiek Library, Thompson Park, Simms Park, Caruthers Park, and the City's website. Public hearing notices were also posted at the Project Site on December 6, 2024. As of the writing of this staff report, the City received no inquiries on the Project.

CEQA STATUS
The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. "CEQA") and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"). CEQA Guideline § 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) provides an exemption in urbanized areas, up to four such commercial buildings not exceeding 10,000 square feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use if not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances where all necessary -27-

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Boulevard December 16, 2024

Page 3 of 6 ends

public services and facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive. This Project proposes the construction of a 3,786-square-foot restaurant building.

Property Owner:

Lee Young Suk Lee Family Trust
General Plan Land Use
Designation:

Mixed Use (MU)
Zoning Classification:

Plan Area 2 of TOD SP
Property Size:

0.99 acres (43,245 SF)
Current Development:

Retail Commercial Building
Previous Entitlements/
Permit History:

Resolution No. PC 01-61: CUP Case No. CU 01-29 allowing a wireless communication facility.

Resolution No. PC 09-23: CUP Case No. CU 09-06 allowing the co -location of a wireless communication facility.

Surrounding Land
Uses and Zoning:

North
Grocery Store and Gym (Plan Area 2 of the TOD SP)
South
Locksmith (Plan Area 2 of the TOD SP
West
Automobile Dealership (Plan Area 2 of the TOD SP)
East
Apartment Complex and Motel -4-1 Plan Area 1 of the TOD SP) ME= �
The Applicant seeks approval of a DR and a CUP for a new 3,786-square-foot restaurant with a drive -through component. In addition, the Applicant is proposing parking lot improvements. The Applicant represented that "McDonald's" is their proposed tenant.

The Project Site is located within Plan Area 2 of TOD SP and is subject to the General Commercial ("C-G") provisions (i.e., permitted/conditionally permitted uses and development standards). Pursuant to BIVIC § 17.44.030(A)(26) (C-G Conditional Uses), "drive-in, or drive -through businesses" are conditionally permitted. ➢ Project Site Configuration
The proposed building will be situated near the southeastern portion of the triangular shaped property. Access to the Project Site is via one driveway off of Bellflower Boulevard. A Project Condition is recommended requiring the plans include decorative paving within the ten -foot setback of the driveway entrance (Condition No. 15 on Exhibit A of Resolution No. PC 24-15 - Attachment A). Twenty-four (24) parking spaces are proposed for the Project. Lastly, the Project Site will be separated from the adjacent properties by landscaping, concrete curb, and an existing CMU wall along the site perimeter.

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Boulevard December 16, 2024

Page 4 of 6 ends

➢ Business Operation
The Applicant represented that the proposed dine -in restaurant will include a drive - through component with two -order points (i.e., menu / order board), along with delivery and mobile service pickup counters for pedestrians. They are proposing to operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The Applicant also represented that the restaurant would employ approximately seventeen (17) employees per shift. ➢ Building Architecture I Floor Plan Layout
The proposed building is consistent with the corporate prototype architectural design and includes vertical and horizontal composite wood siding, awnings, accent lighting, and colors such as gold, white, brown, and gray. The tallest point of the building measures 19'-9 %2" and complies with the BMC. Setbacks between the building and Site boundaries are proposed to measure between 12 feet and 88 feet, which is consistent with the C-G standards.

The dining area is located on the northeast side of the building and is approximately 418 square feet in size. The remainder of the building floor area is dedicated as kitchen and utility areas including a pedestrian order, pick-up and delivery "customer service" area.

Along the north portion of the building are the public restrooms, utility, food storage areas, walk-in cooler and freezer, mechanical equipment and electrical rooms. The drive -through windows are located on the south side of the building, along with the kitchen, hallways, office, and crew room. In addition, the order and delivery / pick-up windows for vehicles are located on the south side of the building,
➢ Drive -Through Layout
The entrance to the drive -through area is located within the parking lot in the northwestern portion of the Project Site, opposite Bellflower Boulevard. The drive -through area starts with two lanes leading to two order points. After the two order points, the drive -through area curbs along the southern portion of the Project Site, where the two lanes merge into one lane leading to the first window (payment) and the second window (I St pick-up) and third window (alternate pick-up). The drive -through lane ends at the eastern portion of the Project Site, adjacent to Bellflower Boulevard. The two-lane portion of the drive -through has a queuing capacity of four (4) vehicles and the single -lane portion of the drive -through has a queuing capacity of six (6) vehicles. The combined queuing capacity of the drive - through is ten (10) vehicles where each lane is 12-foot wide. ➢ Landscaping
The Applicant is proposing to landscape 34.7% of the site and incorporate 10-foot-wide landscaped planters along Bellflower Boulevard. The Project Site will also include the minimum required 6-foot-wide landscape planters along the western and southern property lines. Within the landscaped areas, a total of five (5), 48-inch box trees, ten (10), 24-inch box trees, thirteen (13), fifteen -gallon trees, eight hundred forty (840), five -gallon shrubs, and ground cover are proposed.
-29-

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Boulevarf December 16, 2024

Page 5 of 6 ends

➢ Mechanical Equipment and Lighting
The Project proposes rooftop mechanical equipment and exhausts. Consistent with the BMC, a parapet wall will screen the rooftop mechanical equipment from the ground surface, from a distance of 100 feet.

Site lighting is proposed throughout, including the parking area, the drive -through area and on all sides of the building. A recommended Project Condition is included that would require the Applicant to submit a photometric plan for the Director's review and approval, before building permits can be issued. The photometric plan must show a zero -foot candle at the Project Site boundaries (Condition No. 15 on Exhibit A of Resolution No. PC 24-15 - Attachment A).

ANALYSIS
As discussed below, the project satisfies the BMC requirements. As a courtesy to the Applicant, certain Building, Fire, and Engineering requirements are identified in the attached Courtesy Notice (Attachment C). The requirements identified in Attachment C are not to be construed to be a comprehensive list of the applicable law or of technical code requirements, and the Applicant is solely responsible for complying with all applicable laws.
➢ Traffic Analysis
A Traffic Analysis ("TA") report was prepared to evaluate the potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed Project (Attachment D). The TA assessed the following three scenarios: "Existing (2024)," "Existing plus Project ("E+P")," and "Opening Year Cumulative (2025) With Project Conditions." According to the TA, all study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable Level of Service ("LOS") of "A" and "B", during both AM and PM peak hours. The following are the studied intersections: Bellflower Bl. & Alondra BI., Bellflower Bl. & Harvard St., Bellflower Bl. & Driveway 1, Bellflower Bl. & Flora Vista St., Bellflower Bl. & Mayne St., and Bellflower Bl. & Oak St. The existing AM LOS is "A" for all studied intersections. The existing PM LOS is "A" for the studied intersections except Bellflower Bl. & Alondra Bl. and Bellflower Bl. & Driveway 1 which have a LOS of "B". Accounting for the proposed Project, all LOS are projected to remain the same, except the Bellflower & Driveway 1 which is expected to change from an LOS of "A" to "B" during the AM peak hours. ➢ Drive -Through Queuing
A Drive -Through Queuing Analysis ("QX) was also required for the Project and included in the TA (Attachment D). The QA found that the observed peak queue at three referenced McDonald's in Brea, La Palma, and South Gate were ten (10) to thirteen (13) vehicles.

The proposed drive -through area is designed to accommodate ten (10) vehicles, which is adequate queuing capacity according to the QA. Also, there is additional drive-thru capacity for two (2) vehicles located on the east side of the proposed building (i.e., pull -30-

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Boulevard December 16, 2024

Page 6 of 6 ends

forward area). Therefore, the QA finds that the Project Site was designed to allow potential excess peak queues to be accommodated on -site without spilling onto Bellflower Boulevard, or the public right-of-way.
➢ Noise Analysis
A Noise Analysis ("NA") was prepared and evaluated the future exterior noise environment. The NA concluded that Project daytime and nighttime operational noise, construction noise, and construction vibration impacts are considered less than significant. Therefore, no recommendations were provided. ➢ Parking and Loading
Per the BMC, the minimum required number of parking spaces for the Project, based on the floor area of the building, is thirteen (13) parking spaces (at a ratio of one parking space for every 300 square feet of building floor space). A total of twenty-four (24) parking spaces are proposed, which exceeds the minimum parking requirements by eleven (11) parking spaces. All proposed parking spaces measure a minimum of 9'-0" by 20'-0" and comply with BMC requirements. In addition, short-term and long-term bicycle racks are proposed.
➢ Conclusion
The Project conforms with the City's General Plan Land Use Element and as conditioned, the Zoning Regulations in the BMC. In addition, the Project meets all the DR and CUP findings, as outlined in Resolution No. PC 24-15 (Attachment A).

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution No. PC 24-15
B. Assessor's Map, Aerial Map, Zoning Map and General Plan Map C. Courtesy Code Notice
D. Traffic Analysis, Queuing Analysis, VMT Screening Evaluation, Project Description and Project Plans
-31-

February 18, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments)
4 -32-

OF BELLF104,
af
mwmk,.00&� ok
,GkGt'�'iNG TOGE'�R leport
TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission ATTENTION: Elizabeth C. Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services FROM: Kathryn Brun, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to consider an application from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) for a Development Review and a Conditional Use Permit, and to adopt Resolution No. PC 24-15 — A Resolution approving Development Review Case No. DR 3-24-15169 and Conditional Use Permit Case No. CU 24-07 to allow the construction of a 3,786- square-foot restaurant with a drive -through component within The Downtown Bellflower Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan ("TOD SP") on property located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard.

DATE: February 18, 2025 (Continued from February 3, 2025)

RECOMMENDATION
Re -open the public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; and after considering the evidence, adopt Resolution No. PC 24-15; or

2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

TYPE OF ACTION (LEGISLATIVE; QUASI-JUDICIAL; OR ADVISORY) Quasi-judicial: The recommended action includes issuing a Development Review ("DR") and a Conditional Use Permit ("CUP"). In considering such actions, the Planning Commission acts in a quasi-judicial role. While doing so, the Planning Commission acts like a court: it applies facts gathered during a public hearing to existing law. Just like a court, the Planning Commission can only consider facts that are relevant to the case. A party appearing before the legislative body is entitled to:
• Notice of the proposed action;
• Reasons for the action;
• A copy of the evidence on which the action is based; and • The right to respond before a reasonably impartial, non-involved reviewer.

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Boulevard February 18, 2026

Page 2 of 4 ends

A. That the proposal is consistent with the Bellflower General Plan and the BMC.

B. That the design of the proposal is appropriate to the City, the neighborhood, and the lot on which it is proposed; and
C. That the design of the proposal is compatible with its environment with respect to use, forms, materials, colors, setbacks, location, height, design, or similar qualities as specified in § 17.80.010.

In the matter of the CUP, the Planning Commission must make findings pursuant to BMC § 17.96.040:

A Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Los Cerritos Community News newspaper on December 6, 2024. Public hearing notices were sent on December 5, 2024, to 176 owners within a 300' radius of the Project Site and posted at City Hall, Bellflower Substation, Brakensiek Library, Thompson Park, Simms Park, Caruthers Park, and the City's website. Public hearing notices were also posted at the Project Site on December 6, 2024. As of the writing of this staff report, the City received no inquiries on the Project.

Leiagjm
The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. "CEQA") and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"). CEQA Guideline § 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) provides an exemption in urbanized areas, up to four such commercial buildings not exceeding 10,000 square feet in floor area on sites zoned for such use if not -34-

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Boulevard February 18, 2025

Page 3 of 4 ends

involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances where all necessary public services and facilities are available, and the surrounding area is not environmentally sensitive. This Project proposes the construction of a 3,786-square-foot restaurant building.

BACKGROUND
On December 16, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider a request for a DR and CUP to allow the construction of a 3,786-square-foot restaurant with a drive -through component within The Downtown Bellflower Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan ("TOD SP") on property located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Commission continued the public hearing to the January 6, 2025, Planning meeting. On December 18, 2024, the Applicant submitted a letter requesting that the meeting be continued to the January 21, 2025, Planning Commission meeting to continue their due diligence. A staff report for the continuance was provided at the January 6, 2025, Planning Commission meeting. On January 6, 2025, the Applicant requested that the meeting be continued to February 3, 2025, and the Director provided notice at the January 6, 2025 meeting. On January 29, 2025, the Applicant submitted a letter requesting that the meeting be continued to February 18, 2025, and a notice of cancellation and continuance was posted for the February 3, 2025 Planning Commission meeting. On February 5, 2025, the Applicant submitted revised plans. The revisions to the plans include adding an outdoor dining area and enhanced landscaping along the pedestrian entrance to create a more welcoming entrance for pedestrians. The following items of concern were discussed during the December 16, 2024 meeting:

1. Housing Element.- The Commission expressed concern about redeveloping the Project Site for a new commercial use as it is identified as a Housing Opportunity Area in the City's Housing Element. To meet the goals of the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation ("RHNA"), the Project Site would need to be redeveloped with housing.

2. Traffic and Circulation:
a. Project Site Access: The Commission expressed concern that the proposed center median delineators on Bellflower Boulevard in front of the Project Site would restrict potential northbound customers from accessing the site.

The Applicant acknowledges that even if the Public Works Director requires delineators installed in the center median of Bellflower Boulevard, the southbound traffic still warrants the Project Site viable. b. Project Site Circulation: The Commission asked if there were other ingress and egress possibilities to the Project Site including a reciprocal access agreement with the property to the north or by purchasing and merging with the property to the south.
-35-

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Bouleva • 18, 2025

Page 4 of 4 ends

The Applicant has made attempts to negotiate a reciprocal access agreement with the property owner to the north of the Project Site, but the property owner is not willing to discuss the issue.
c. Bicycle and Pedestrian Trail: The Commission expressed concern about adding a high vehicle traffic use next to the bicycle and pedestrian trail that could harm pedestrians.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution No. PC 24-15
B. December 16, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments) C. Revised Project Plans
-36-

ATTACHMENT F
March 3, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments)
-37-

,URGING TOCsE'�R to
e p ort-_
TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission ATTENTION: Elizabeth C. Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services FROM: Kathryn Brun, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. PC 24-15 — A Resolution denying Development Review Case No. DR 3-24- 15169 and Conditional Use Permit Case No. CU 24-07 for the construction of a 3,786-square-foot restaurant with a drive -through component within The Downtown Bellflower Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan ("TOD SP") on property located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard.

DATE: March 3, 2025

RECOMMENDATION

1. Adopt Resolution No. PC 24-15; or

2. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

CEQA STATUS
The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. "CEQX) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq., the "CEQA Guidelines"). CEQA Guideline § 15061(b)(4) exempts projects that are disapproved or rejected. The attached resolution is a denial of a conditional use permit and development review. Accordingly, no further environmental review is required.

BACKGROUND
This Staff Report incorporates by reference the prior Staff Reports for DR 3-24-15169 and CU 24-07 dated December 16, 2024, and February 18, 2025, On December 16, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider a design review ("DR") and condition use permit ("CUP") request from Robert Preece (representing Design UA, Inc.) ("Applicant") for the construction of a 3,786-square-foot restaurant with a drive -through component within The Downtown Bellflower Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan ("TOD SP") on property located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Commission continued the public hearing to the January 6, 2025, Planning meeting.

Page 1 of 3 ends

-38-

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Boulevard March 3, 2025

Page 2 of 3 ends

On December 18, 2024, the Applicant requested that the meeting be continued to the January 21, 2025, Planning Commission meeting to continue its due diligence. On January 6, 2025, the Applicant requested that the meeting be continued to February 3, 2025, and the Director provided notice of the continuance at the January 6, 2025, Planning Commission meeting. On January 29, 2025, the Applicant submitted a letter requesting another continuance to February 18, 2025, and a notice of cancellation and continuance was posted for the February 3, 2025, Planning Commission meeting.

On February 18, 2025, the Planning Commission re -opened the public hearing to consider additional information provided by the Applicant, City Staff, and public testimony, and closed the public hearing. The Applicant submitted revised plans that included adding an outdoor dining area and enhanced landscaping along the pedestrian entrance but failed to address other comments raised by the Planning Commission at the December 16, 2024 meeting including, without limitation, site layout. The Planning Commission unanimously voted to deny the Project and directed staff to prepare a resolution denying CU 24-07 for consideration at the March 3, 2025 meeting.

Among other matters discussed at its December 16, 2024, and February 18, 2025, meetings, the Project does not satisfy the findings required for CUP and DR:

Proiect Site Access, The Commission expressed concern about access to and from the Project Site. The Commission asked the Applicant to seek other ingress and egress possibilities to the Project Site including a reciprocal access agreement with the property to the north or by purchasing and merging with the property to the south. The Applicant was unsuccessful at negotiating a reciprocal access agreement with the property owner to the north of the Project Site and the Project design does not include any means of accessing northbound vehicle traffic from the Project Site.

The Commission also expressed concern about delivery trucks blocking traffic on Bellflower Boulevard while entering and exiting the Project Site. The Applicant indicated that they did not analyze if a 40' delivery truck could access the Project Site with center median delineators on Bellflower Boulevard.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Trail. The Commission discussed the proximity of the proposed drive -through use to the bicycle and pedestrian trail which receives higher than average pedestrian traffic. The Applicant attempted to address this concern by adding an outdoor dining area and enhanced landscaping to attract pedestrians and bicyclists to the business but did not address the pedestrian safety concerns. -39-

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Boulevard March 3, 2025

Page 3 of 3 ends

Metro Light Rail Station and At -Grade Crossing:_The Commission expressed concern about the frequency and length of time the gates would be down at the at -grade rail crossing across Bellflower Boulevard for Metro's proposed Southeast Gateway Line.

During peak hours, there will be an at -grade train crossing every 2.5 minutes within 500 feet of the Project Site. With the Metro crossing, the Level of Service on this segment of Bellflower Boulevard is expected to drop from "A" in the AM and "B" in the PM to "B" in the AM and "C" in the PM. All traffic from the Project Site will be funneled south directly towards the at -grade crossing. The Applicant did not address this issue with their revised plans.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution No. PC 24-15
B. December 16, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments) C. February 18, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments) -40-

ATTACHMENT G
Assessor's Map, Aerial Map, Zoning Map and General Flan Map -41-

it
V/
- - - - - - - - - - -- - - -
�. t�A�r'
b, Arp-
I"
d LM

Q2idHDHO
AY
O�P� .
/�, 7
n
or
L
� aJ
f—=
/�
by
V
r'
'3.aZ.if.O-s CL
z
w
9 _
co
V
ry
U
}. ❑ Til
C
4 � ina6 O^
,fl C Q V1
N
�Ac�D
C m ti m N
M
a
J VSL'11U
L �
t
}
n
N
O
J
O
z�Etz
a
U
I` -
o$�{
0)
i--I
F-
er ��r
£,
Q
n
Q
` o
:ry Om
Z I
�
L_
U
�,m
N
-43

N
LU O
r a_
2 VS C N
U C
e a
L q
Z019t
yv
v l9t Q
`yt
900t Ott
c c
_ W
eiltlower Blvd —
m
�L L
co
c
3 CL
°a
r .

V m
1 � T
o N
'e t0
T
9t:6 I'lurmp
� p
9'90 O r Z
7 't�
and p�p
i_96
-45-

ATTACHMENT H
Traffic Analysis, Queuing Analysis, VIVIT Screening Evaluation, Project Description
-46-

URBAN CROSSROADS
MCDONALD'S - 16211

BELLFLOWER BOULEVARD
DEV2021-00218

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
PREPARED BY: Robert Vu
I [email protected]
Jose Alire
I [email protected]
Aric Evatt
I [email protected]
Lt�f QCT A 7 2024
BY:

URBAN CF,OSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tableof Contents............................................................................ ............... ii ....................................................

Appendices......................................................................................................................................................... iv Listof Exhibits..................................................................................................................................................... v Listof Tables...................................................................................................................................................... vi Listof Abbreviated Terms ..................... .......................................................................................................... vii 1 Introduction...............................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Summary -of Findings...............................................................................................................................................1

1.2 Project Overview.......................................................................................................................................................3

1.3 Analysis Scenarios.....................................................................................................................................................3

1.4 Study Area.................................................................................................................................................................... 5

1.5 Deficiencies..................................................................................................................................................................7

1.6 Recommen ations....................................................................................................................................................7

1.7 Queuing Analysis....................................................................................................................................................... 8 2 Methodologies........................................................................................................................................11

2.1 Level of Service..................................................................................................-....................................................11

2.2 Intersection Capacity Analysis...........................................................................................................................11

2.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Methodology............................................................................................12

2.4 Minimum Acceptable Levels of Service(LOS)............................................................................................12

2.5 Deficiency Criteria..................................................................................................................................................12 3 Area Conditions......................................................................................................................................15

3.1 Existing Circulation Network.............................................................................................................................15

3.2 City of Bellflower Circulation Element Roadway Classifications........................................................15

3.3 Transit Service..........................................................................................................................................................15

3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian. Facilities............................................................................................................................20

3.5 Existing (2024) Traffic Counts........................................................................................................................... 20

3.6 Intersection Operations Analysis.....................................................................................................................20

3.7 Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis....................................................................................................................... 20 4 Projected Future Traffic.........................................................................................................................25

4.1 Project Trip Generation....................................................................................................................................... 25

4.2 Project Trip Distribution......................................................................................................................................26

4.3 Modal Split.................................................................................................................................................................26

4.4 Project Trip Assignment....................................................................................................................................... 26

4.5 Background Traffic.................................................................................................................................................26

4.6 Cumulative Development Traffic..................................................................................................................... 26 5 E+P Traffic Conditions............................................................................................................................34 1 S789B-03 TA Report

URBAN i CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

5.1 Roadway Improvements..................................................................................................................................... 35

5.2 Existing plus Project Traffic Volume Forecasts.......................................................................................... 35

5.3 Intersection Operations Analysis..................................................................................................................... 35

5.4 Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis....................................................................................................................... 35 6 Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Traffic Conditions, ......................................................................... 39

6.1 Roadway Improvements..................................................................................................................................... 39

6.2 Without Project Traffic Volume Forecasts.................................................................................................. 39

6.3 With Project Traffic Volume Forecasts......................................................................................................... 39

6.4 Intersection Operations Analysis..................................................................................................................... 39

6.5 Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis....................................................................................................................... 42 7 References...............................................................................................................................................43 157896-03 TA Report
-49-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

APPENDICES
Appendix 1.1: Approved Traffic Study Scoping Agreement
Appendix 1.2: Site Adjacent Queues
Appendix 3.1: Traffic Counts - January 2024
Appendix 3.2: Existing (2024) Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets Appendix 5.1: E+P Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets Appendix 6.1: Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without Project Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets
Appendix 6.2: Opening Year Cumulative (2025) With Project Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets
157896-03 TA Report
IV
-50-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit1-1: Location Map..................................................................................................................................2 Exhibit 1-2: Preliminary Site Plan.....................................................................................................................4 Exhibit1-3: Study Area....................................................................................................................................... 6 Exhibit 1-4: Site Access Recommendations .................... ........ 9 .......................................................................

Exhibit 3-1: Existing Number of Through Lanes and Intersection Controls.............................................16 Exhibit 3-2: City of Bellflower General Plan Roadway Classification Plan.................................................17 Exhibit 3-3: Existing Transit Routes (1 of 2)...................................................................................................18 Exhibit 3-3: Existing Transit Routes (2 of 2)...................................................................................................19 Exhibit3-4 Bicycle Facilities ............ :..................... ................. .... ......... ............................................................. 21 Exhibit 3-5: Existing (2024) Traffic Volumes..................................................................................................22 Exhibit4-1: Project Trip Distribution (Outbound)........................................................................................27 Exhibit 4-1: Project Trip Distribution (inbound)...........................................................................................28 Exhibit 4-2: Project Only Traffic volumes
Exhibit 4-3: Cumulative Development Location Map..................................................................................30 Exhibit 4-4: Cumulative Only Traffic Volumes..............................................................................................31 Exhibit 5-1: E+P Traffic Volumes.....................................................................................................................36 Exhibit 6-1: Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without Project Traffic Volumes......................................40 Exhibit 6-2: Opening Year Cumulative (2025) With Project Traffic Volumes............................................41 15789B-03 TA Report
v
-51-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Intersection Analysis Locations......................................................................................................5 Table1-2: Summary of LOS...............................................................................................................................7 Table 2-1: Signalized Intersection LOS Thresholds for ICU.........................................................................11 Table 2-2: Unsignalized Intersection LOS Thresholds.................................................................................12 Table 2-3: Threshold of Significance ................................ ..............................................................................13 Table 3-1: Intersection Analysis for Existing (2024) Conditions.................................................................23 Table 4-1: Project Trip Generation Summary ...............................................................................................25 Table 4-2: Cumulative Development land use Summary...........................................................................32 Table 5-1: Intersection Analysis for E+P Conditions....................................................................................37 Table 6-1: Intersection Analysis for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Conditions..................................42 15789E-03 TA Report
vi
-52-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
(1)
Reference
ADT
Average Daily Traffic

CAMUTCD
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
Caltrans
California Department of Transportation
CEQA
California Environmental Quality Act
CMP
Congestion Management Program
DIF
Development Impact Fee
E+P
Existing plus Project
HCM
Highway Capacity Manual
ICU
Intersection Capacity Utilization
ITE
Institute of Transportation Engineers
LOS
Level of Service
MUTCD
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
NP
No/Without Project
--OPR
Office -of Planning -and Research
PHF
Peak Hour Factor
Project
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard
sf
Square Feet
TA
Traffic Analysis
WP
With Project
v/c
Volume to Capacity
VMT
Vehicle Miles Traveled
vphgpl
Vehicles per Hour Green per Lane
15789E-03 TA Report

URBAN 1 CROSSROADS McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This Page Intentionally Left Blank
15789B-03 TA Report
Will
-54-

URBAN ' CPOSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the Traffic Analysis (TA) for McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard development ("Project"), which is located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard, in the City of Bellflower, as shown on Exhibit 1-1. The purpose of this TA is to evaluate the potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed Project, and where necessary recommend improvements to achieve acceptable operations consistent with the City's General Plan level of service goals and policies. This TA has been prepared in accordance with the Los Angeles County Public Works Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines Quly 2020) (TA Guidelines) as the City of Bellflower does not have their own traffic study guidelines. City of Bellflower staff was consulted on traffic analysis methodology during the scoping process. (1) The Project's traffic study scoping agreement is provided in Appendix 1.1 of this TA, which has been reviewed and approved by the City of Bellflower.

1.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The Project is to construct the following improvements as design features in conjunction with development of the site:
• Project to install a stop control on the eastbound -approach at -Driveway 1 (egress Project traffic).

Driveway-1 willaccommodatesite access with right-in/right-out only access. • The Project's frontage from the southern boundary to the northern boundary is to allow on -street parking, consistent with Bellflower Boulevard within the vicinity of the Project. Additionally, Project to install a green -painted curb (i.e., short-term parking) beginningfrom the Projects southern boundary to 40' north of the boundary.
• On -site traffic signing and striping should be implemented agreeable with the provisions of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) and in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the Project site.

Additional details and intersection lane geometries are provided in Section 1.6 Recommendations of this report. The Project Applicant's responsibility for the Project's contributions towards deficient off - site intersections is fulfilled through payment into pre-existing fee programs (if applicable) that would be assigned to the future construction of any future localfregional improvement needs. The Project Applicant would be required to pay requisite fees consistent with the City's requirements. 15789E-03 TA Report
1 -55-

URBAN': CROSSROADS McDon a[ d's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 1-1: LOCATION MAP
�ALONDRA W L
HARVARD.
-7
SITE
Zj
0 T. MAYNE

OAK ST,
15789B-03 TA Report
-56-

URBAN ' CROSSROADS McDonald's — 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The proposed Project consists of developing a new 3,786 square foot (SF) McDonald's restaurant with a drive-thru window. The Project is proposed to utilize the following driveways:
• Driveway 1: right-in/right-out only driveway
A preliminary site plan of which the traffic study will be based on is shown on Exhibit 1-2.

In an effort to provide a conservative analysis and to provide flexibility in future minor site plan changes, a higher square footage has been evaluated than the square footage shown on the latest site plan. For the purposes of the Traffic Study, the Project has been evaluated as 3,915 SF of restaurant use.

In order to develop the traffic characteristics of the proposed project, trip -generation statistics published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021). (2) The Project is anticipated to generate a net total of 824 two-way trips per day with 89 AM peak hour trips and 61 PM peak hour trips. The assumptions and methods used to estimate the Project's trip generation characteristics are discussed in greater detail in Section 4.1 Project Trip Generation of this report.

1.3 ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
For the purposes of this traffic study, potential deficiencies to traffic and circulation have been assessed for each of the following conditions:
• Existing (2024)
• Existing plus Project (E+P)
• Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without Project Conditions • Opening Year Cumulative (2025) With Project Conditions

1.3.1 EXISTING (2024) CONDITIONS
Information for Existing (2024) conditions is disclosed to represent the baseline traffic conditions as they existed at the time this report was prepared. For a detailed discussion on the existing traffic counts, see Section 3.5 Existing Traffic Counts.

1.3.2 EXISING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
The Existing plus Project (E+P) conditions analysis determines the potential circulation system deficiencies based on a comparison of the E+P traffic conditions to Existing conditions. The roadway network is similar to Existing conditions except for new connections to be constructed by the Project.

Cumulative development projects and ambient growth are not included for E+P traffic conditions. 15789B-03 TA Report
3 -57-

URBAN;. CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 1-2: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
F,
... ......... . m
fi
2 15789B-03 TA Report
4 -58-

URBAN ` CPOSSPOADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

1.3.3 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2025) CONDITIONS
The Opening Year Cumulative (2025) traffic conditions analysis determines the potential near -term cumulative circulation system deficiencies. The roadway network is similar to Existing conditions except for new connections to be constructed by the Project. To account for background traffic growth, an ambient growth factor from Existing (2024) conditions of 1 % is included for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) traffic conditions. Conservatively, this TA estimates the area ambient traffic growth and then adds traffic generated by other known or probable related projects, if applicable. These related projects are at least in part already accounted for in the assumed ambient growth rates; and some of these related projects may not be implemented and operational within the 2025 Opening Year time frame assumed for the Project. The resulting traffic growth utilized in the TA (ambient growth factor plus traffic generated by related projects) would therefore tend to overstate rather than understate background cumulative traffic deficiencies under 2025 traffic conditions.

1.4 STUDY AREA
To ensure that this TA satisfies the City of Bellflower's traffic study requirements, Urban Crossroads, Inc. prepared a Project traffic study scoping package for review by City of Bellflower staff prior to the preparation- of this report. This agreement _provides an outline of the Project study area, trip generation, trip distribution, and analysis methodology. The agreement provided to the City is included in Appendix 1.1 of this TA.

The 5 study area intersections shown on Exhibit 1-3 and listed in Table 1-1 were selected for evaluation in this TA based on consultation with City of Bellflower staff. At a minimum, the study area includes intersections where the Project is anticipated to contribute 50 or more peak hour trips. The "50 peak hour trip" criterion represents a minimum number of trips at which a typical intersection would have the potential to be affected by a given development proposal. The 50 peak hour trip criterion is a traffic engineering rule of thumb that is accepted and used throughout the City for the purposes of estimating a potential area of influence (i.e., study area). Additional study area intersections were requested by the City of Bellflower to be included with this traffic study.

TABLE 1-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATIONS
#
Intersection
Jurisdiction
Signalized?
1 Bellflower BI. & Alondra BI.*
Bellflower
Yes
2 Bellflower BI. & Harvard St.*
Bellflower
Yes
3 Bellflower BI. & Driveway 1
Bellflower
No
4 Bellflower BI. & Flora Vista St.*
Bellflower
Yes
5 Bellflower BI. & Mayne St.*
Bellflower
Yes
6 Bellflower BI. & Oak St.*
Bellflower
Yes
* Requested
by the City of Bellflower
15789E-03 TA Report
-59-

URBAN:

CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 1-3: STUDY AREA
1$789B-03 TA Report
6 -60-

URBAN' CROSSROADS

1.5 DEFICIENCIES
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This section provides a summary of deficiencies by analysis- scenario. Section 2 Methodologies provides information on the methodologies used in the analysis and Section 5 E+P Traffic Conditions, and Section 6 Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Traffic Conditions include the detailed analysis. A summary of level of service (LOS) results for all analysis scenarios is presented on Table 1-2.

1.5.1 EXISTING (2024) CONDITIONS
All study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS during both AM and PM peak hours.

1.5.2 E+P CONDITIONS
No study area intersections are anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS for E+P traffic conditions, consistent with Existing traffic conditions. The addition of Project traffic would not trigger the City of Bellflower's significance criteria.

1.5.3 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2025) CONDITIONS
No study area intersections are anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without and With Project traffic conditions, consistent with Existing traffic conditions. The addition of Project traffic would nottriggerthe City of Bellflower's significance criteria.

TABLE 1-2: SUMMARY OF LOS
Existing
E+P
2025 NP
2025 WP
# Intersection
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
1 Bellflower BI. &Alondra BI.
-at
2 Bellflower BI. & Harvard St.l
y'
3 Bellflower BI. & Driveway 1
4 Bellflower BI. & Flora Vista St.
r,
,:
5 Bellflower BI. & Mayne St.,
w171
6 Bellflower BI. &Oak St.
�.
t
:7-1
74 =A -D '=E Q =F

1.6 RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are based on the minimum improvements needed to accommodate site access and maintain acceptable peak hour operations forthe proposed Project. The site adjacent recommendations are shown on Exhibit 1-4.

Recommendation 1 - Bellflower Ell. & Driveway 1 (#3) - The following improvements are necessary to accommodate site access:
• Project to install a stop control on the eastbound approach at Driveway 1 (egress Project traffic).

Driveway 1 will accommodate site access with right-in/right-out only access. 15789E-03 TA Report
7 -61-

URBAN ! CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis Recommendation 2 - Bellflower BI. - it is recommended that the Project's frontage from the southern boundary to the northern boundary is to allow on -street parking, consistent with Bellflower Boulevard within the vicinity of the Project. Additionally, Project to install a green -painted curb (i.e., short-term parking) beginning from the Project's southern boundary to 40' north of the boundary.

On -site traffic signing and striping should be implemented agreeable with the provisions of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) and in conjunction with detailed in the master signing program and construction plans for the Project site.

Sight distance at each project access point should be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans and City of Bellflower sight distance standards at the time of preparation of final grading, landscape, and street improvement plans.

1.7 QUEUING ANALYSIS
The traffic modeling and signal timing optimization software package SimTraffic has been utilized to assess the queues. SimTraffic is designed to model networks of signalized and unsignalized intersections, with the primary purpose of checking and fine-tuning signal operations. SimTraffic uses the input parameters from Synchro to generate random simulations. These random simulations generated by SimTraffic have been utilized to determine the 95th percentile queue lengths observed for each applicable turn lane. A SimTraffic simulation has been recorded up to 5 times, during the weekday AM and weekday PM peak hours, and has been seeded for 15-minute periods with 60-minute recording intervals. The queuing analysis was conducted for study area intersections utilizing existing signal timings provided by City staff. The results of the queuing analysis worksheets for the weekday AM and PM peak hours are provided in Appendix 1.2 of this report for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) With Project traffic conditions. Under Opening Year Cumulative (2025) With Project traffic conditions, sufficient signal progression is anticipated along Bellflower Boulevard within the study area. 15789B-03 TA Report
-62-

URBAN. CROSSROADS
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 1-4: SITE ACCESS RECOMMENDATIONS
15789B-03 TA Report
9 -63-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This Page Intentionally Left Blank
15789B-03 TA Report
10 -64-

URBAN CROSSROAA DS
2 METHODOLOGIES
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This section of the report presents the methodologies used to perform the traffic analyses summarized in this report. The methodologies described are consistent with the TA Guidelines. (1)

2.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE
Traffic operations of roadway facilities are described using the term "Level of Service" (LOS). LOS is a qualitative description of traffic flow based on several factors, such as speed, travel time, delay, and freedom to maneuver. Six levels are typically defined ranging from LOS A, representing completely free -flow conditions, to LOS F, representing breakdown in flow resulting in stop -and -go conditions.

LOS E represents operations at or near capacity, an unstable level where vehicles are operating with the minimum spacing for maintaining uniform flow.

2.2 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The definitions of LOS for interrupted traffic flow (flow restrained by the existence of traffic signals and other traffic control devices) differ slightly depending on the type of traffic control. The LOS is typically dependent on the quality of traffic flow at the intersections along a roadway. The 7t" Edition Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology expresses the LOS at an intersection in terms of delay time for the various intersection approaches. (3) The HCM uses different procedures depending on the type of intersection control. In comparison, the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology expresses the LOS at a signalized intersection in terms of volume -to -capacity ratio (v/c). (4)

2.2.1 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
The City of Bellflower requires signalized intersection operations analysis based on the methodology described in the ICU for signalized intersections and HCM for unsignalized intersections. (3) (4) ICU LOS operations are based on an intersection's intersection capacity per the ICU methodology.

Signalized intersections located within the City of Bellflower have been analyzed using Traffix (Version 8). The ICU methodology is utilized at signalized intersections only. A minimum clearance interval of

0.10 in association with lane capacities of 1,600 vehicles per hour of green time for through lanes and turn lanes will be assumed for the ICU calculations.

TABLE 2-1: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS THRESHOLDS FOR ICU Description
ICU
Level of
Service
Little or no capacity deficiencies.

1.00 F
Source: County of Orange CMP, ICU Methodology
15789E-03 TA Report
11 -65-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

2.2.2 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
The City of Bellflower requires the operations of unsignalized intersections be evaluated using the methodology described in the HCM. (3) The LOS rating is based on the weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle (see Table 2-2). At two-way or side -street stop -controlled intersections, LOS is calculated for each controlled movement and for the left turn movement from the major street, as well as for the intersection as a whole. For approaches composed of a single lane, the delay is computed as the average of all movements in that lane. Delay for the intersection is reported for the worst individual movement at a two-way stop -controlled intersection. For all -way stop controlled intersections, LOS is computed for the intersection as a whole (average delay).

TABLE 2-2: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS THRESHOLDS
Average Control Delay
Level of Service,
Description
(Seconds), V/C 50.00
F
Source: HCM, 6th Edition
If V/C is greater than 1.0 then LOS is F per HCM.

2.3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The term "signal warrants" refers to the list of established criteria used by Caltrans and other public agencies to quantitatively justify or determine the potential need for installation of a traffic signal at an otherwise unsignalized, full access intersection. This TA uses the signal warrant criteria presented in the latest edition of the Caltrans California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). (5) Since the study area intersections are either signalized or unsignalized with restricted access, traffic signal warrant analysis cannot be applied to the study area intersections.

2.4 MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF SERVICE (LOS)
A volume/capacity ratio of 0.90 or LOS D shall be the lowest acceptable LOS at study area intersections.

2.5 DEFICIENCY CRITERIA
For intersections, the impact is considered significant if the project related increase in the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio equals or exceeds the threshold shown below:
1578913-03 TA Report
12 URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis TABLE 2-3: THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE
Level of Service Final V/C Ratio Project -Related Increase In V/C C > 0.700-0.800 Equal to or greater than 0.04
D > 0.800-0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.02
E, F > 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.01
15789E-03 TA Report
13 -67-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This Page Intentionally Left Blank
15789E-03 TA Report
14 -68-

URBAN CPOSSPOADS) McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 3 AREA CONDITIONS
This section provides a summary of the existing circulation network, the City of Bellflower General Plan Circulation Element, and a review of existing peak hour intersection operations and traffic signal warrant analyses.

3.1 EXISTING CIRCULATION NETWORK
Pursuant to the scoping agreement with City of Bellflower staff (Appendix 1.1), the study area includes a total of 6 existing and future intersections as shown previously on Exhibit 1-3. Exhibit 3-1 illustrates the study area intersections located near the proposed Project and identifies the number of through traffic lanes for existing roadways and intersection traffic controls.

3.2 CITY OF BELLFLOWER CIRCULATION ELEMENT ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS As noted previously, the Project site is located within the City of Bellflower. Exhibit 3-2 shows the City of Bellflower Circulation Element Update Final Report (prepared by DKS Associates for the City of Bellflower) roadway classifications. The roadway classifications and planned (ultimate) roadway cross -sections of the major roadways within the City of Bellflower in the vicinity of the proposed Project, as identified on the City's Circulation Element, are described subsequently.

Major Arterial streets and highways are designed to move relatively high volumes of traffic between freeway systems, and between the freeway and local circulation system. • Bellflower Boulevard
Secondary Arterial are designed to collect and distribute traffic from major highways and other arterial roadways to traffic destinations. Such as schools, shopping centers, and employment centers. • Flora Vista Street

3.3 TRANSIT SERVICE
The study area is currently served by Bellflower Bus via the North Route and South Route, and Long Beach Transit via Route 91. There are currently several bus stops near the proposed Project along Bellflower Boulevard. The transit services are illustrated on Exhibit 3-3. These existing transit routes could potentially serve the site. Transit service is reviewed and updated by Bellflower and Long Beach Transit periodicallyto address ridership, budget, and community demand needs. Changes in land use can affect these periodic adjustments which may lead to either enhanced or reduced service where appropriate.
15789B-03 TA Report
1s

URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-1: EXISTING NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS DEf
.1 t— Ilk
= Exis6rg Tra.rw _stt-rxt;
- ► = Exz ring Erne
DEF .- DOac'to Turn Lane
-Ir= Existingstop sign
15789E-03 TA Report
16 -70-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-2: CITY OF BELLFLOWER GENERAL PLAN ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION PLAN u
15789B-03 TA Report
17 -71-

q
00 I
I�
sit
O
p�
�a
64 tCOC7rURLI'F
t#'WX
i
t:tt.o T
ail
t�tt EX
B�Z.L.Fl_.UiT'E�
MUTT
'
s �■�t■■i■

WOODRUFF
rn
X
G7
-I
W
X
Z
D
Z
O
C
-i
L-1
t.�
ZZ
O
n
N
K
-72-

CD
w
D
rt;
�� Yy
C3 P.{s:fi :,dV
fry
mm
WJ
W
w
X
Z
�
G1
Z
C
m
v
Q
N
N CC
O
351�¢rvik>R4 dw
�
W
O
C
S
-73-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

3.44 BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
In an effort to promote alternative modes of transportation, the City of Bellflower also includes a bikeway system. The City of Bellflower General Plan planned bicycle network, shown on Exhibit 3-4, shows the existing and proposed bikeways within the City. There are no existing bike routes within the vicinity of the Project site.

Pedestrian facilities are built out within the study area. Field observations and traffic counts conducted in January 2024 indicate active pedestrian and bicycle activity within the study area.

3.5 EXISTING (2024) TRAFFIC COUNTS
The intersection LOS analysis is based on the traffic volumes observed during the peak hour conditions using traffic count data collected in January 2024 when local schools were in session and operating on normal bell schedules. The following peak hours were selected for analysis:
• Weekday AM Peak Hour (peak hour between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM) • Weekday PM Peak Hour (peak hour between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM) There were no observations made in the field that would indicate atypical traffic conditions on the count dates, such as construction activity or detour routes, and near -by schools were in session and operating on normal schedules. The raw manual peak hour turning movement traffic count data sheets are included in Appendix 3.1. Existing weekday AM and weekday PM peak hour intersection volumes are shown on Exhibit 3-5.

3.6 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
Existing peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections based on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 2.2 Intersection Capacity Analysis of this report. The intersection operations analysis results are summarized on Table 3-1, which indicates that all the study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS during both of the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection operations analysis worksheets are included in Appendix 3.2 of this TA.

3.7 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
Traffic signal warrants for Existing traffic conditions are based on existing peak hour intersection turning volumes. There are currently no study area intersections that traffic signal warrant analysis can be applied to.
15789B-03 TA Report
20 -74-

URBAN I CROSSROADS
I
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-4 BICYCLE FACILITIES
to d)
�
2 A/
ml >
Foster Rd
TCompton183INd
+ Vista St
Arlinoton St
183rd St
15789B-03 TA Report
21 -75-

URBAN C R 0 SSSR 0 A D S McDona I d's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-5: EXISTING (2024) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
sar
IDI
va
4 I
WRIOWer El, & Alorgra
2 84ffower8L tfamrd,3
5,e41b,**r5L & Ddveeway
st
§
250
c4PVf
i.. t
1 W C-4.4
20,M
j"
&Floravlsu
5 S'"Owef 5L St
6 seffkmer Ef. & Oak st,
1,200
iz,
o
j
4f=
44 15789B-03 TA Report
22 -76-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis TABLE 3-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING (2024) CONDITIONS Delay (secs .)2 Level of
Traffic ICU (v/c) Service
# Intersection Control'. AM PM AM PM
1 Bellflower BI. & Alondra BI. TS 0.497 0.618 A B
2 Bellflower BI. & Harvard St. TS 0.190 0.290 A A
3 Bellflower BI. & Driveway 1 CSS 9.8 10.3 A B
4 Bellflower BI. & Flora Vista St. TS 0.313 0.363 A A
5 Bellflower BI. & Mayne St. TS 0.222 0.238 A A
6 Bellflower BI. & Oak St. TS 0.241 0.287 A A
CSS = Cross -Street Stop; TS = Traffic Signal
2 All signalized intersections will be evaluated utilizing Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. For intersections with all way or cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. HCM delay reported in seconds and ICU reported as a volume -to - capacity ratio.
157896-03 TA Report
23 -77-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This page intentionally left blank
15789B-03 TA Report
24 -78-

URBAN ' 'CROS)SROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 4 PROJECTED FUTURE TRAFFIC
This section presents the traffic volumes estimated to be generated by the Project, as well as the Project's trip assignment onto the study area roadway network. The proposed Project consists of developing a new 3,786 SF McDonald's restaurant with a drive-thru window. The Project is proposed to utilize the following driveways:
• Driveway 1: right-in/right-out only driveway
A preliminary site plan of which the traffic study will be based on is shown on Exhibit 1-2.

4.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is both attracted to and produced by a development. Determining traffic generation for a specific project is based upon forecasting the amount of traffic that is expected to be both attracted to and produced bythe specific land uses being proposed for a given development. in order to develop the traffic characteristics of the proposed Project, trip -generation statistics published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (111" Edition, 2021) was used to estimate the trip generation. (2) In order to develop the traffic characteristics of the proposed project, trip -generation statistics published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11t" Edition, 2021) for Fast -Food Restaurant with Drive - Through (ITE Land Use Code 934) land use were utilized. (2) The trip generation rates are shown in Table 4-1. As shown in Table 4-1, the Project is anticipated to generate a net total of 824 two-way trips per day with 89 AM peak hour trips and 61 PM peak hour trips.

TABLE 4-1: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
ITE LU Ai is Peak Hour PM Peak K cur
Lard Use L r. ta` [fie In Our Toot In Gaut 0 %l [Daily
=rip G eneratior, Rates
Fa-Fe-cdRes c,Vrartv:ith Drive ahrough s5F 2 22.75 2'1.96 4�161 17,19 JaSS 33"z3 467Aq T':f-...sm.:t_..: «o =L Ilaxa: 74-L Ma
ANT i oak Hour
PM P+ a!< Rvjr
Lar:o l 3c
Quantity urats'
In Cut
T c�I
Ia Out Total .

D ily
F_cFcc.uEe-staurantWth Drh=- Rreugh

3.91575F
03 SEE
;755
_12-0
1:3??
P33•l f ?SsSS AM: 3=K PMtGaFh: `:
-43 _ZI
-3.6

34. 31-EL
-1,009
tits! NetTrips_
46 Z_
35 33 i fit
e f
`:1:- I;�«...F-_ { -a ..,.k'.( -,3. .f.._:i3. ,_ir ti.p-kC+• ., :L. Ti L' �. ..hzi 5+1-r sf,.

L'?� _ .....,. r_ .'�s `;y.
15789B-03 TA Report
25 -79-

URBAN. CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

4.2 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The Project trip distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the Project site. Trip distribution is the process of identifying the probable destinations, directions or traffic routes that will be utilized by Project traffic. The potential interaction between the planned land uses and surrounding regional access routes are considered to identify the route where the Project traffic would distribute. Exhibit 4-1 shows the Project passenger car trip distribution patterns.

4.3 MODAL SPLIT
The potential for Project trips to be reduced by the use of public transit, walking or bicycling have not been included as part of the Project's estimated trip generation. Essentially, the Projects traffic projections are "conservative", in that these alternative travel modes would reduce the forecasted traffic volumes.

4.4 PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The assignment of traffic from the Project area to the adjoining roadway system is based upon the Project trip generation, trip distribution, and the arterial highway and local street system improvements that would be in place by the time of initial occupancy of the Project. Based on the identified Project traffic generation and trip distribution patterns, the Project only peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-2.

4.5 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC
Future year traffic forecasts have been based upon background (ambient) growth at 1% per year, compounded annually, for 2025 traffic conditions. The total ambient growth is 1% for 2025 traffic conditions. The ambient growth factor is intended to approximate regional traffic growth. This ambient growth rate is added to existing traffic volumes to account for area -wide growth not reflected by cumulative development projects. Ambient growth has been added to daily and peak hour traffic volumes on surrounding roadways, in conjunction with traffic generated bythe development of future projects that have been approved but not yet built and/or for which development applications have been filed and are under consideration by governing agencies. 2025 traffic volumes are provided in Section 6 of this report. The traffic generated by the proposed Project was then manually added to the base volume to determine With Project forecasts.

4.6 CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC
A cumulative project list was developed for the purposes of this analysis through consultation with planning and engineering staff from the City of Bellflower. The cumulative project list includes pending/approved projects that are anticipated to contribute traffic to the study area intersections.

At the request of City staff, the future Metro light rail station and at -grade crossing is to be included in this Traffic Analysis. Additional details on the Metro light rail station is provided in Section 4.6.1.

Exhibit 4-3 illustrates the cumulative development location map. A summary of cumulative development projects and their proposed land uses are shown on Table 4-2. If applicable, the traffic generated by individual cumulative projects was manually added to the future forecasts to ensure that traffic generated by the listed cumulative development projects on Table 4-2 are reflected as part of the background traffic. In an effort to conduct a conservative analysis, the cumulative projects are added in conjunction with the ambient growth identified in Section 4.5 Background Traffic. Cumulative ADT and peak hour intersection turning movement volumes, in actual vehicles, are shown on Exhibit 4-4.
15789B-03 TA Report
26 -80-

URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT4-1: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION (OUTBOUND)
S
s «
a
.

Lid -
A YN E r
"5
I
f
OAK
..
_ LO
!
LEGEND:
10 - PERCENT FROM PROJECT
15789B-03 TA Report
27 -81-

i URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-1: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION (INBOUND)
ON:

TO - PERCENT TO, P40JECT
15789B-03 TA Report
28 -82-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-2: PROJECT ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
WMCWer 81. a AkfWra
2 eAftweraL a tiamard
3 Wlftwerst&Dfivewsay
1$0
Se
it
100
I'm
4 84 &-W-ar aL & oa ra Vista
5 eamtowerBL & rvuy"- sit.
&W�--Wer Ef. & Oak SL
st
100
*-f Av,-mgeD-0YT*5
1578913-03 TA Report
29 -83-

URBAN ; CROSSROADS
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-3: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION MAP
-
9 Hln 4 C
AfI
Y 4
}
t f^ ¢ rt
r
F
ik `4 `3
_ h,f
tHw d,Y�G
it
rt
it i
RaL"9." Y .4.It- 'J
Q
Ail
lxs fil s
,•
aY
4 Am
i
At .'p�•-
Al J,�k1rJ;•f ZZ
' Ztot
art •'[•h, �
_
Swrdes. Emi, HERE,Ga i1-r tecrnap, mcr dctt P`_Corp.

J
GEBC0. USGS,FA0,NPS ease 1CxN,aoa ier
. ■ _;. i_r ..
.NRCAN
N �or6aPs-a Sur - ESti S]p3ti, It i CiP. �_-h}na fi'?4N?t7 Kongi, icj Open�tTe?t14t ip contr6Cutor . and the CtS User 15789B-03 TA Report
30 -84-

11%

URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-4: CUMULATIVE ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Ajoodra
2 54%WfF &Nat atti3
eq,
VDI
IT ir
14 ko
R
-930
It
4 BeCow er IL & gora 1,Lqa
5 W)fl�W r 81. toaVte St.
6 W W tower el. Oak St
200
i,30
CO 241
+ 0(2)
41 1 - wl L
C%

2.1 -5W
Im-
*4 Average 004- rips
1578913-03 TA Report
31 -85-

URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis TABLE 4-2: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LAND USE SUMMARY
Project
Address
rand Use
Quamityl
City
c: Bellflower
2-1
Polla Camper
9045 Rosecrans Ave.

CGrnmercW

2.596 TSF
B2
Best Buy Cutfet
17220 Lakewood Blvd..

Comrnercial

63.656 TSF
B3
7-Eleven wl Attached Restaurant
1311 GLakewood Blvd.

Carnmercfal
N.A
B4
Dunkin'Daaum
10100RosecransAve
CarrTmerciat

1.256 TSF
B5
Medical Building
9400 Rosecrans fare.

Medica[ Office
33,G36 TSF
BG
Sell lower Mieed-Use Projea
1641 1 Bell-flomter• Blvd�, 973.5 Gak St,; 9-7'2 Mayne Sr- Resider lal
91 DU
Commercial
15,209 TSF
B7
McDonald's
10146Artes`ra Blvd.

Commercial

1.947 TSF
86 MCDonald`s
NWC of nloadra Blvd. and McNaL Aver
Ccrnrnereiaf
3:,600 TSF
B9
Metro Bellflower Stadon
€tiWCand SwCofBellflewerEkTd.and Flora Vista
Transit Facilivy
Ave.

B10 Metro MaimetTance and Storage
'903G Somerset Blvd.
i�1alC4i�ran�e"
Facility
and Stora e
I DU =LINeIiirtg units �t of Avaiiaabk-;
TEF = 7h.ousimd'-; `u ars Fest

4.6.1 METRO LIGHT RAIL STATION
In March 2024, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) completed the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Pro-ject Final Transportation Impact Analysis Report (Metro Report). The study provides a transportation impact analysis report on the proposed light rail transit (LRT) line, which would connect the City of Bellflower to other portions of Los Angeles County. As stated in the Metro Report, the locally preferred alternative (LPA) consists of a 14.5-mile LRT line that will extend from the northern terminus in the City of Los Angeles/Florence-Firestone community of LA County to a southern terminus in the City of Artesia. The LPA is currently under environmental review and the forecasted opening is 2035. As part of the LPA, the following development was proposed within the study area of this Traffic Analysis (see Exhibit 4-5):
• an at -grade transit facility (Bellflower Station) is proposed to be constructed west of Bellflower Boulevard, south of Flora Vista Street, and north of the Bellflower Bike Trail. The Bellflower Station will provide approximately 260 parking spaces.
• A future Bellflower maintenance and storage facility (MSF) is proposed to be designated as the LRT's main MSF site. The MSF site is located at 9030 Somerset Boulevard in the City of Bellflower and is currently occupied by the Hollywood Sports Park. The MSF site could accommodate up to 80 light rail vehicles.
• Realignment of the existing Bellflower Bike Trail east of Bellflower Boulevard. The Bellflower Station platform and tracks will conflict with an approximately 350-foot-long segment of the Bellflower Bike Trail. The existing segment west of Bellflower Boulevard will remain. The bike trails will remain operational and the function of the bike trails will be maintained.

The following study area intersections were located in the Metro Report and evaluated for traffic impacts:
• Bellflower BI./Flora Vista St. (#4)
• Bellflower BI./Mayne St. (#5)
• Bellflower BI./Oak St. (#6)
A summary of the 2042 year impacts are summarized in Table 4-3. 15789B-03 TA Report
32 URBAN CROSSROADS) McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-5: METRO LOCALLY PREFFERED ALTERNATIVE
++.YY
��c]'•
r'-
'iw:+kpnr t�e�xi=.�ptr�o-rs�nti�+^ama
��
7 V
"
DOWNEY
A
A9
#
$�
4 #
c
�Cii�''w•�P�i��'� i St
b
ZI
'N
h�tlth#
a
..' . 4
!e
ce.

Ilk

PARAMOUNT
sr
�n
y
41%
ttz
is
.125 [}.S
ibAK T
mites
s
a
a� tr
W5lcS 3`€ansit Cati•idor'F'rnjs--f
a a
LAOgE .
ne
MSF Fitz
i"UR
�
>-0: At -Grad- e
w iP E
f0flboljsdt Ae.+(j(
WALNUT
Pari6ng Fawi'lRy
At#;ia*s54w
So rce: W }Band TA HA 20123
1578913-03 TA Report
33 _87_

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis TABLE 4-3: SUMMARY OF METRO STUDY IMPACTS (2042)
Level of Service
Existing (2017)
No Build (2042)
LPA (2042)
Delay (SeCS.)2
Level of
Delay (secs.) Level of
Delay (SeCS.)2
Level of
Traffic
ICU(v/c)
Service
ICU (wc) Service
ICU (v/c)
Service
# Intersection
Control'
AM PM
AM PM

AM PM AM PM
AM PM
AM PM
4 Bellflower Bl. &Flora Vista St.

7.1 14.2
A B

6.9 25.5 A C

18.1 25.9
B C
5 Bellflower Bl. &Mayne St,
TS

11.0 10.1
B B

6.2 19.4 A B

18.2 24.8
B C
6 Bellflower BI. & Oak St.

21.7 25.0
C C

17.5 28.3 B C

22.1 32.2
C C
Source: West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Project Final Transportation Impact Analysis
Report (March 2024)
I TS =Traffic Signal
Ouguing
Available
Stacking ,g 95th Percentile
Intersection Distance (Feet) Queue (Feet) Acceptable? t Bellffower Blfflora Vista St
From Intersection to Back of Rail Crowing 155 195 No
9 el [-;I ower Ell Joa k St.

From Intersection to Back ofemail Crossing 240 248 No
' ,t
act D--starice is acceptable if the required stacking distance is less than or equal to the -stacking distance provi,cled.

Parking
Proposed Stati on PrqJ ected 21;42 Excess Transit
Parking Spaces Prq[ecte d 21042 Excess Transit ParkinglDernand Parking Deal and (Uncanstralnecl Parking Dernand Narking Demand (Constrained (Constrained Station Locations) (All Stations) (All Stations) Locations) Locations) 6 e-Hilower Station 7 *2-: f) 6 : * iili-- ;:* -7, G` , - - i, 411) - : -17-60, - Source: West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Project Final Transportation ImR:LctAnai}�r Report flylarch 20:74) Table 5-18. 1 S789B-03 TA Report
34 LEA

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's — 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 5 E+P TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
This section discusses the traffic forecasts for Existing plus Project (E+P) conditions and the resulting intersection operations and traffic signal warrant analyses.

5.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for E+P conditions are consistent with those shown previously on Exhibit 3-1, with the exception of the following:
• Project driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by the Project to provide site access are also assumed to be in place for E+P conditions only (e.g., intersection and roadway improvements at the Project's frontage and driveways).

5.2 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
This scenario includes Existing traffic volumes plus Project traffic. The weekday ADT and weekday peak hour intersection turning movement volumes, which can be expected for E+P traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 5-1.

5.3 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
E+P peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections based on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 2 Methodologies of this TA. The intersection analysis results are summarized on Table 5-1 for E+P traffic conditions, which indicate that no study area intersections are anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS under E+P traffic conditions, consistent with Existing (2024) traffic conditions. The addition of Project traffic would not trigger the City of Bellflower's significance criteria. The intersection operations analysis worksheets for E+P traffic conditions are included in Appendix 5.1 of this TA.

5.4 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
The traffic signal warrant analysis for E+P traffic conditions are based on peak hour and average daily volume -based traffic signal warrants. There are no study area intersections that traffic signal warrant analysis can be applied to for E+P traffic conditions due to restricted access (i.e., right-in/right-out only access).
15789E-03 TA Report
35 -89-

URBAN: CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 5-1: E+P TRAFFIC VOLUMES
pjv-,,Aprl.. -ST
A
&0wer ef r & Afand ra
2 safewe a & m r amard
sa-a0we r al. & D Kvew-y
SL
St
1 WV
j 4A
1r,
20934-7
.1,qw
1,00
4 sa&wv 5L Aora Vixm
5 BdiffawerflL Nwmest.
6 aeKbwtr ft, oak st,
4m
Ps
L I.

Tti3,4DO
N,
2 t r
OrZ4 4 TT
13�
--I,
W4 T�',
ZOO
#49
15789B-03 TA Report
36 -90-

URBAN i CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis TABLE 5-1; INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR E+P CONDITIONS
Existing (2024)
E+P
Delay (secs.)Z-Level
of
Delay (seCS.)2
Level of
Pro}ect-
Traffic
ICU (v/c)
Service
ICU
(v/c)
Service
Related
#
Intersection
Control
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
Deficiency?3
1 Bellflower BI. &Alondra BI.

0.497

0.618
A
B

0.497

0.627
A
B
No
2 Bellflower BI. & Harvard St.

0.190

0.290
A
A

0.207

0.302
A
A
No
3 Bellflower BI. & Driveway 1
CSS

9.8 10.3
A
B

10.3 10.5
B
B
No
4 Bellflower BI. & Flora Vista St.

0.313

0.363
A
A

0.320

0.367
A
A
No
5 Bellflower BI. & Mayne St.

0.222

0.238
A
A

0.235

0.236
A
A
No
6 Bellflower BI. & Oak St.

0.241

0.287
A
A

0.252

0.289
A
A
No
CSS = Cross -Street Stop; TS = Traffic Signal
z All signalized intersections will be evaluated utilizing Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. For intersections with all way or cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. HCM delay reported in seconds and ICU reported as a volume -to -capacity ratio. 3 Atransportation impact on a City of Bellflower intersection shall be deemed "significant" in accordance with the following table:

Level of Service FlnalV/C Ra4o Project -Related increase in VIC C > (k700 0-800 Equal to or greaterthan 0.04
D > 0.800-0.900 Equal to orgreater than 0.02
E.E >0.900 Equal toorgreatentfi)anq.01
15789B-03 TA Report
37 -91-

URBAN ` CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This page intentionally left blank
15789E-03 TA Report
38 -92-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 6 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2025) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
T-h-is-section-d iseus-ses-the-methods-used-to-deve lop -Ope-ni ng-Y-ear-Cumulative-(20-257)-Without-nd With Project traffic forecasts, and the resulting intersection operations and traffic signal warrant analyses.

6.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) conditions are consistent with those shown previously on Exhibit 3-1, with the exception of the following:
• Project driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by the Project to provide site access are also assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative conditions only (e.g., intersection and roadway improvements along the Project's frontage and driveways). • At the request of City staff, the Metro Light Rail Station cumulative project has been included in the Opening Year Cumulative conditions.
• If applicable, driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by cumulative developments to provide site access are also assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative conditions only.

6.2 WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
This scenario includes Existing traffic volumes, plus an ambient growth rate of 1.0%, plus traffic from pending and approved but notyet constructed known development projects in the area. The weekday ADT and weekdayAM and PM peak hourvolumes which can be expected for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without Project traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 6-1.

6.3 WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
This scenario includes Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without Project traffic in conjunction with the addition of Project traffic. The weekday ADT and weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes which can be expected for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) With Project traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 6-2.

6.4 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
LOS calculations were conducted for the study intersections to evaluate their operations under Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without Project conditions with roadway and intersection geometrics consistent with Section 6.1 Roadway Improvements. The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 6-1 for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without Project traffic conditions, which indicates that no study area intersections are anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the peak hours under Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without Project traffic conditions, consistent with Existing (2024) traffic conditions.
15789E-03 TA Report
39 -93-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 6-1. OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2025) WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES I Eetiti,7*erU MOM—
2 saf werat &ffanewti
40ft werBf.&Udwway
25 . 750q
E'_
.,
fir;
r
P' i%.� :e�
r� 1+
l:.
{t+--V✓
serk v E!. . Ftara'.SPis[a
5- €3e ilea ter at. & A&vm St.
6 belPawer el, &Oak-q,
st
21[2-
.ell L
.riq�'= C
�a
it
�
Itq live! r„ � ySr il';g35
15789B-03 TA Report
40 -94-

URBAN ; CROSSROADS
i
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 6-2: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2025) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES M
2 eWlftow ¢rat. & s ondra'7_
Wife er SL & sRamwd
3 Bate-wer aL G ffwway
tl
"°-k
S
Ly—fat; -'.�.
:7 '.' t
Avk*tj�ta±z�jt''a'�5.
1578913-03 TA Report
41 -95-

I
URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis With the addition of Project traffic, no study area intersections anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the peak hours under Opening Year Cumulative (2025) With Project traffic conditims The-additiic woolsl-nottrigger-the_City_ofBellflower!s significance criteria. The intersection operations analysis worksheets for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without Project and With Project traffic conditions are included in Appendices 6.1 and 6.2, respectively.

TABLE 6-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2025) CONDITIONS 2025 kNithout Project:
2025 With Project
Delay{secs,}
Levelot
Delay (secs.)'-
Level of
Project-
Trafs"ic ICJ (vtC)
Service
ICU (vFC)
Service
Related
r Intersection Control' MA PM
Ail PM
AM PM
AM PM
Derrciency?;
1 Beltfiower El. & r lorldra EII. TS 0.552 0316
A C

0.511 0:715
A C
No
2 Beliflo.iver 61. & Harvard 5t TS 0.2.55 0.338
A A

0.302 0.346
A A
No
3 Bellflovter 91. & €3rtveway tC5S 10.3 1�15
.8 B
? l.7 .1*1 Z
B 0
No
4 Beli lomr Bi: 13. Flora Mist St. TS 0.504 O�538
A A

0.521 0.593
A A
No
5 Bellflower 6f. & Mayne SL TS 0.234 0.293
A A
0,256_ 0:301
A A
No
6 Betl4iower €xl'.. & Oak St TS 0.296 0345
A A

0.299 0,352
A A
NO
= C�5 = Crc�s-Sven Sin; ;s=7rsr;rcSSgn_t
` Alf t Rakiaesi' intera£Cti6ns vrNtbee`�ralva d utfflz xe lawzriecc�-,r� CapEcitn U dlizati" {tCW mediodclogy. For irterzactionz wIt all Bray
or crtlssstreat
stop control:, t:ne delay and levelo sa,,ficefor theivo,--tinrlivid-usirnovement formovemmentssha.riq asingle lave;are51ci.'wn. 14CM delay rep--ortE4 in zecond,sa and ICJ reported as avo lame -to -cap achy ratio, A transr.`ortatw,n irpacton aCibf of e"ellfl-werintersemon:Shall be deem" 'VgTificant` in accord ante withth a fool bwlrI „Iat,1c:
.

L€iv'di t}f 'E'YIC: r@rs=31 Vic 0110 PY9;e4t Relit ;ttCr 75s in ,rX C - If 700-f7 %€7 Eqxal Tod or g-*3ts'f Eifatt aOLA
Fgkga: fi',YiFP;Zmater atarl0-02

1.F ?0,900 Eq Al toorgreater thanUI

6.5 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
The traffic signal warrant analysis for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) traffic conditions are based on the peak hour volumes or planning level ADTvolume-based traffic signal warrants. There are no study area intersections that traffic signal warrant analysis can be applied to for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Withoutand With Project traffic conditions due to existing signalization or restricted access (i.e., right-in/right-out only access).
15789B-03 TA Report
42 -96-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 7 REFERENCES

1. Los Angeles County Public Works. Transportation ImpactAnalyisis Guidelines. Los Angeles County:
s. n.

2. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manual. 11th Edition. 2021.

3. Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). 7th Edition. s.l.: National Academy of Sciences, 2022.

4. Husch, David and Albeck, John. Intersection Capacity Utilization: Evaluation Procedures for Intersections and Interchanges. Albany, California : Trafficware, 2003 Edition. 09742903-0-0.

S. California Department of Transportation. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). [book auth.] California Department of Transportation. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). 2014, Updated January 11, 2024 (Revision 8).

6. —. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). [book auth.] California Department of Transportation. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). 2014, Updated March 30, 2021 (Revision 6).
15789B-03 TA Report
43 -97-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This page intentionally left blank
15789E-03 TA Report
44 URBAN ` CROSSROADS
DATE:

July 18, 2024
TO:

Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

FROM:

Jose Alire & Robert Vu, Urban Crossroads
JOB NO:
1578913-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation

MCDONALD'S BELLFLOWER BOULEVARD DRIVE-THRU

EVALUATION
Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submitthe following Drive-Thru Evaluation for the proposed McDonald's Bellflower Boulevard (referred to as "Project"). The Project is located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard in the City of Bellflower, as shown on Exhibit A. This Drive-Thru Evaluation is intended to determine if the proposed circulation plan provides adequate on -site drive-thru storage capacity to accommodate the peak on -site vehicle demands.

EXHIBIT A: LOCATION MAP
AUG 2 0 ?C24
-99-

Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

July 18, 2024

Page 2 of 4 ends

INTRODUCTION
The Project site is currently occupied by an existing and vacant commercial building. The proposed McDonald's project will redevelop the site with a 3,786 SF fast food restaurant with side -by -side drive-thru, as shown in Exhibit B.

EXHIBIT B: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
t4" 4
ma L�
MR
The proposed building will implement many of the current McDonald's restaurant design improvements. McDonald's restaurants are designed to optimize operations, drive-thru lane configurations, parking, and on -site circulation. McDonald's understands that the drive-thru wait time directly impacts the customer experience and sales. To reduce the vehicle drive-thru wait time, McDonald's has developed equipment and procedures to improve cook times and crew efficiency. These improvements include dual order boards (or a Side -By -Side drive-thru) that enables customers to place orders earlier. The Side -By -Side drive-thru allows two cars to stack next to each other. This allows the kitchen more cook time to prepare the food to have it ready by the time the customer gets to the pickup window. For a Side -By -Side drive-thru, approximately 180 seconds would elapse from the time the customer completes the order to the time the customer picks up the order from the window. Overall, the Side -By -Side drive-thru decreases total wait time and total stacking lengths during peak demands. Recognizing the benefits of the URBAN CROSSROADS 15789B-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-100-

Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

July 18, 2024

Page 3 of 4 ends

dual order boards, nearly all rebuilds, and newly constructed McDonald's restaurants employ this more efficient design configuration.

DRIVE-THRU LANE
The proposed McDonald's Bellflower Boulevard Circulation plan prepared on July 1, 2024, by Kimley Horn, as shown on Exhibit B, indicates that the drive-thru lane will provide storage capacity for 10 vehicles.

It should be noted that approximately 20 to 25 feet per vehicle is an industry standard used to estimate the length needed for a queued vehicle. However, since the drive-thru operations involve relatively low speeds, a slightly shorter distance between vehicles is often observed. This can result in allowing more vehicles to queue in a given length. While a reduced queue length is appropriate, this analysis relies on a more conservative vehicle length of 25 feet per queued vehicle.

REFERENCE DRIVE-THRU LANE DATA COLLECTION
To evaluate the proposed dual drive-thru order board configuration, Urban Crossroads, Inc. collected drive-thru queuing data at three reference McDonald's restaurant locations in October 2023. The three reference queuing surveys, shown on Table 1, were collected at McDonald's locations with dual drive-thru configurations and high drive-thru volumes. Table 1 presents the existing weekday drive-thru queuing data for the breakfast and lunch conditions. The reference queuing data includes a count of each vehicle entering the drive-thru lane during peak breakfast and lunch activity. Peak customer activity begins in the morning at 11:00 AM and concludes at 1:00 PM. The dinnertime volumes are estimated to be approximately 62% of the lunchtime volumes. In addition, the counts describe the total number of vehicles queued in the drive-thru lane at any time. This includes vehicles queued at the pickup window, cashier window, and order board.

TABLE 1: REFERENCE DRIVE-THRU QUEUING DATA SUMMARY
Average Vehicle Queue Peak Vehicle Queue
Location AM MD AM MD
(7am-9am) (11am-1pm) (7am-9am) (11am-1pm)
Brea' 7 5 11 12
La Palmaz 5 5 11 10
South Gate3 7 5 11 13
Based on counts collected at the McDonald's located at 825 Imperial Highway on Tuesday, October 17, 2023 (Appendix A).
z Based on counts collected at the McDonald's located at 5062 Orangethrope Avenue on Tuesday, October 17, 2023 (Appendix B).
3 Based on counts collected at the McDonald's located at 3309 Tweedy Boulevard on Tuesday, October 17, 2023 (Appendix Q.

Table 1 shows that the peak observed vehicle queue lengths in the drive-thru lane ranged from 10 to 13 vehicles. The average vehicle queue at the three reference McDonald's locations ranged URBAN 1 CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-101-

Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

July 18, 2024

Page 4 of 4 ends

from 5 to 7 vehicles. The maximum number of total vehicles observed in the drive-thru never venicies at any of the three reference locations.

DRIVE-THRU QUEUING ANALYSIS
Since the proposed McDonald's Bellflower Boulevard Circulation Plan provides a drive-thru storage capacity of 10 vehicles, the proposed drive-thru lane will accommodate the reference average queue length of approximately 6 vehicles. At no time does the existing or reference peak queue exceed a maximum of 13 vehicles.

The site plan provides adequate drive-thru storage capacity to serve the average queue length of approximately 6 vehicles within the drive-thru lane. During peak drive-thru demands, the site plan can accommodate a total of 10 vehicles within the drive-thru, suggesting an overflow of on - site drive-thru lane capacity approaching 3 vehicles under peak conditions. Additional drive-thru capacity for 2 vehicles is located on the east side of the proposed building (i.e., pull forward area).

Potential excess peak queues can be accommodated on -site without spilling onto Bellflower Boulevard or the public right of way.

CONCLUSIONS
The Project site is currently occupied by an existing and vacant commercial building. The proposed McDonald's project will redevelop the site with a 3,786 SF fast food restaurant with side -by -side drive-thru, located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard, in the City of Bellflower.

Our evaluation indicates that the proposed drive-thru lane will provide sufficient capacity to accommodate average vehicle demands for the proposed McDonald's Bellflower Boulevard. The McDonald's Bellflower Boulevard drive-thru analysis suggests that the Project provides stacking accommodations for approximately 10 vehicles. Our review also suggests that the drive-thru storage may experience an overflow of drive-thru capacity approaching 3 vehicles during peak conditions. Additional drive-thru capacity for 2 vehicles is located on the east side of the proposed building (i.e., pull forward area). Potential excess peak queues can be accommodated on -site without spilling onto Bellflower Boulevard or the public right of way.

If you have any questions or comments, I can be reached at [email protected].

Respectfully submitted,
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.
r%
Jose Alire, P.E.

Senior Traffic Engineer
_11�
Robert Vu, P.E.

Senior Traffic Engineer
URBAN 1 CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-102-

APPENDIX A:

REFERENCE SURVEY (825 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, BREA)
URBAN 1 CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-103-

This page intentionally left blank

URBAN I CROSSROADS
15789E-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-104-

DRIVE THRU SURVEY
LOCATION: McDonalds, 825 Imperial Hwy
CITY: La Brea, CA
DATE: 10/17/2023
DAY: Tuesday
TIME
PickUp Window
To Order Board
Order Board
to DT Entrance
DT Entrance
into Street
TOTAL
7:00
5 0
0 5
7:05
3 1
0 4
7:10
0 1
0 1
7:15
2 2
0 4
7:20
4 1
0 5
7:25
5 1
0 6
7:30
5 5
0 10
7:3S
6 4
0 10
7:40
5 2
0 7
7:45
6 1
0 7
7:50
5 1
0 6
7:55
4 4
0 8
8:00
5 6
0 11
8:05
5 6
0 11
8:10
4 6
0 10
8:15
4 5
0 9
8:20
4 5
0 9
8:25
3 2
0 5
8:30
4 1
0 5
8:35
5 4
0 9
8:40
4 1
0 5
8:45
2 6
0 8
8:50
6 5
0 11
8:55
6 0
0 6
9:00
5 3
0 8
-105-

DRIVE THRU SURVEY
LOCATION: McDonalds, 825 Imperial Hwy
CITY: La Brea, CA
DATE: 10/17/2023
DAY: Tuesday
TIME
PickUp Window
To Order Board
Order Board
to DT Entrance
DT Entrance
into Street
TOTAL
11:00
3 0
0 3
11:05
2 0
0 2
11:10
0 1
0 1
11:15
2 0
0 2
11:20
0 0
0 0
11:25
0 0
0 0
11:30
0 0
0 0
11:35
4 3
0 7
11:40
3 0
0 3
11:45
4 2
0 6
11:50
6 3
0 9
11:55
6 1
0 7
12:00
1 1
0 2
12:05
6 1
0 7
12:10
2 2
0 4
12:15
7 5
0 12
12:20
4 0
0 4
12:25
2 3
0 5
12:30
4 1
0 5
12:35
9 1
0 10
12:40
3 1
0 4
12:45
6 5
0 11
12:50
6 4
0 10
12:55
5 3
0 8
13:00
3 1
0 4
-106-

APPENDIX B:

REFERENCE SURVEY (5062 ORANGETHORPE AVENUE, LA
PALMA)

URBAN I CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-107-

This page intentionally left blank

URBAN I CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-108-

DRIVE THRU SURVEY
LOCATION: McDonalds, 5062 0rangethorpe Ave
CITY: La Palma, CA
DATE: 10/17/2023
DAY: Tuesday
TIME
Pickup Window
To Order Board
Order Board
to DT Entrance
DT Entrance
into Street
TOTAL
7:00
2 2
0 4
7:05
3 2
0 5
7:10
4 1
0 5
7:15
1 2
0 3
7:20
1 2
0 3
7:25
1 2
0 3
7:30
2 1
0 3
7:35
3 0
0 3
7:40
2 2
0 4
7:45
6 3
0 9
7:50
1 2
0 3
7:55
2 2
0 4
8:00
2 3
0 5
8:05
3 2
0 5
8:10
4 0
0 4
8:15
5 3
0 8
8:20
6 5
0 11
8:25
5 6
0 11
8:30
5 4
0 9
8:35
1 1
0 2
8:40
3 4
0 7
8:45
3 5
0 8
8:50
4 0
0 4
8:55
3 0
0 3
9:00 1
1 3
0 4
-109-

DRIVE THRU SURVEY
LOCATION: McDonalds, 5062 Orangethorpe Ave
CITY: La Palma, CA
DATE: 10/17/2023
DAY: Tuesday
TIME
Pickup Window
To Order Board
Order Board
to DT Entrance
DT Entrance
into Street
TOTAL
11:00
1 1
0 2
11:05
2 1
0 3
11:10
6 4
0 10
11:15
4 1
0 5
11:20
1 4
0 5
11:25
1 0
0 1
11:30
2 2
0 4
11:35
1 2
0 3
11:40
1 1
0 2
11:45
5 2
0 7
11:50
4 2
0 6
11:55
4 3
0 7
12:00
3 0
0 3
12:05
2 0
0 2
12:10
2 5
0 7
12:15
5 2
0 7
12:20
4 5
0 9
12:25
3 1
0 4
12:30
1 2
0 3
12:35
2 3
0 5
12:40
2 1
0 3
12:45
3 4
0 7
12:50
1 0
0 1
12:55
1 1
0 2
13:00
3 3
0 6
-110-

APPENDIX C:

REFERENCE SURVEY (3309 TWEEDY BOULEVARD, SOUTH
GATE)
URBAN i CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-111-

This page intentionally left blank

URBAN I CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-112-

DRIVE THRU SURVEY
LOCATION: McDona Ids, 3309 Tweedy Blvd
CITY: South Gate, CA
DATE: 10/17/2023
DAY: Tuesday
TIME
PickUp Window
To Order Board
Order Board
to DT Entrance
DT Entrance
into Parking Lot
TOTAL
7:00
3 2
0 5
7:05
1 1
0 2
7:10
0 4
0 4
7:15
4 4
0 8
7:20
4 0
0 4
7:25
1 3
0 4
7:30
1 4
1 6
7:35
2 2
0 4
7:40
1 3
0 4
7:45
3 3
0 6
7:50
2 3
6 11
7:55
2 3
5 10
8:00
4 3
1 8
8:05
5 3
3 11
8:10
1 4
1 6
8:15
1 4
3 8
8:20
3 4
3 10
8:25
4 3
3 10
8:30
1 2
0 3
8:35
0 2
0 2
8:40
3 3
3 9
8:45
2 4
3 9
8:50
1 4
5 10
8:55
1 4
5 10
9:00
3 2
2 7
-113-

DRIVE THRU SURVEY
LOCATION: McDonalds, 3309 Tweedy Blvd
CITY: South Gate, CA
DATE: 10/17/2023
DAY: Tuesday
TIME
PickUp Window
To Order Board
Order Board
to DT Entrance
DT Entrance
into Parking Lot
TOTAL
11:00
2 3
3 8
11:05
0 2
0 2
11:10
1 1
0 2
11:15
0 2
0 2
11:20
2 0
0 2
11:25
2 0
0 2
11:30
1 2
0 3
11:35
1 3
0 4
11:40
1 4
0 5
11:45
1 4
1 6
11:50
3 4
1 8
11:55
1 4
5 10
12:00
2 3
6 11
12:05
5 3
5 13
12:10
3 3
3 9
12:15
4 4
1 9
12:20
3 0
0 3
12:25
2 1
0 3
12:30
1 0
0 1
12:35
0 0
0 0
12:40
0 0
0 0
12:45
1 2
0 3
12:50
1 1
0 2
12:55
0 2
0 2
13:00
1 4
2 7
-114-

URBAN ; CROSSROADS
DATE:

July 17, 2024
TO:

Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

FROM:

Alex So, Urban Crossroads, Inc.

JOB NO:
1578913-02 VMT
16211 BELLFLOWER BOULEVARD MCDONALD'S VEHICLE MILES

TRAVELED (VMT) SCREENING EVALUATION
Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to provide the following Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Evaluation for the 16211 Bellflower Boulevard McDonald's (Project), which is located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard in the City of Bellflower.

PROJECT OVERVIEW
It is our understanding that the project is to consist of a 3,786 square foot drive- thru restaurant. The Project site plan can be found in Attachment A.

BACKGROUND
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires all lead agencies to adopt VMT as the measure for identifying transportation impacts for land use projects.

To comply with CEQA, local agencies have adopted VMT guidelines to establish analysis methodologies and impact thresholds for their respective jurisdictions. It is our understanding that the City of Bellflower utilizes the County of Los Angeles Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines Quly 23, 2020) (County Guidelines) (1) to conduct VMT assessments in their City.

VMT SCREENING
The County Guidelines provide details on screening criteria that are used to identify when a proposed land use project is anticipated to result in a less than significant transportation impact. The screening criteria identified within the County Guidelines are listed below and those shown in bold will be evaluated further based on their applicability to the Project.
-115-

Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

July 17, 2024

Page 2 of 2 ends

-------------------------- --
• Non -Retail Project Trip Generation Screening
• Retail Project Site Plan Screening
• Proximity to Transit Based Screening
• Residential Land Use Based Screening
A land use project needs only to meet one of the above screening criteria to be excused from further VMT analysis.

RETAIL PROJECT SITE PLAN SCREENING
As identified in the County Guidelines, projects that consist of local serving retail uses such as specialty retail, shopping center, grocery store, pharmacy, financial services/banks, fitness center or health club, restaurant, and cafe under 50,000 sf may be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact. The proposed Project consists of a 3,786 square foot drive-thru restaurant and is therefore expected to have a less than significant impact on VMT.

Retail Project Site Plan Screening criteria is met.

PROXIMITY TO TRANSIT BASED SCREENING
The County Guidelines state that projects located within a one-half mile radius of a major transit stop or an existing stop along a high -quality transit corridor may be presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact if the Project meets the following sub -criteria:
• Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;
• Includes more parking than required by the County Code; • Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy RTP/SCS; or • Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of market -rate residential units.

The Project site is located within the 2045 High Quality Transit Areas (HQTA) SCAG Region map (see Attachment B), however, the Project does not meet sub -criteria such as having a FAR greater than 0.75.

Proximity to Transit Based Screening criteria is not met.

CONLCUSION
The Project was found to meet the Retail Project Site Plan Screening criteria and is presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact; no further VMT analysis is required.

If you have any questions, please contact me directly at [email protected].

URBAN ; CROSSROADS
157898-02 VMT
-116-

-117-

-118-

DUSTING COMMERCIAL
NAP.

EXISTING COMMERCIAL
N.A.P.
4ERAL NOTE
_E REPORT EXCEPTIONS

EXISTING COMMERCIAL
NA.P-
cma MA-17A
URBAN CROSSROADS 157898-02 VMT

-120-

URBAN I CROSSROADS
15789B-02 VMT
-121-

March 11, 2024
City of Bellflower
Department: Planning Division
16600 Civic Center Dr.

RE: Project Description
McDonald's @ 16211 Bellflower Blvd. Bellflower, CA 90706 Dear Staff,
We are proposing filing for the above -mentioned McDonald's, a newly constructed restaurant, approximately 3,786 Sq. Ft. The filings will be for a Conditional Use Permit. We are requesting 24-hour operation open daily. There will be about 17 employees per shift. The proposal will be a drive-thru and dine -in operation with delivery and mobile service pickup counters. This new building for McDonald's is of the latest standards and brings many of McDonald's new initiatives into this project location. This will. further enhance the proximity of McDonald's in Bellflower and meet what our customers have come to expect of our brand.

The site is proposing to add a new drive thru with two -order points. This allows customers less wait time compared to a traditional single order point drive-thru lane so they can go about their day. This also assists in alleviating longer queue lines as we can now take two orders simultaneously.

The site will be fully developed to include new landscaping, paving, and parking meeting municipal code requirements. New site structures will also be added (light poles with LED heads and trash corral).

The proposed building will house our standard kitchen production facilities and a small dining room area. This location is ideal for placement of a new McDonald's as our customers expect to find a McDonald's within a certain range of travel so we feel this new model will be very welcomed by the public to meet these development needs.

We look forward to the opportunity of working with staff on these filings. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.

Sincerely,

ROBERT PREEECE

PRINCIPAL
DESIGN UA, INC.
153 East City Place Or. Santa Ana, CA 92705 1 phane 714.892.3900 -122-

ATTACHMENT
Revised Project Plans dated February 5, 2025
-123-

Page 1 of 3 ends

13-A
TO:Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
ATTENTION:Ryan Smoot, City Manager
FROM:Len Gorecki, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works SUBJECT:Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Southern California Edison for the acquisition of the city-owned streetlights within the Executive Tract neighborhood.

DATE:April 28, 2025

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This City owns fifteen streetlights within the Executive Tract neighborhood that continue to have operational issues and are aged to the extent that they are no longer serviceable as configured. City staff is requesting direction from the City Council on the possibility of selling the streetlights to Southern California Edison (SCE) to be operated and maintained going forward in the same manner as other streetlights in the City owned by SCE or continue to own the streetlights and develop a capital improvement project for the necessary repairs.

RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
1) Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Southern California Edison (SCE) for the acquisition of the city-owned streetlights, in a form approved by the City Attorney; or
2) Direct the City Manager, or his designee, to develop a capital improvement project for the design and repair of the streetlights; or
3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

FISCAL IMPACT
There would be no fiscal impact to the City if the decision is made to sell the streetlights to SCE. If staff is directed to develop a CIP project for the streetlight repairs, the City would have to work with a design team and SCE to develop the plans and specifications to estimate the cost of the project. Initial estimates for this work could range from $300,000-$400,000.
-1-
0y: BELLFLOLVEQ «*1 m stafteport

Staff Report – Executive Tract Streetlight Operation & Maintenance Issue Overview April 28, 2025

Page 2 of 3 ends

DISCUSSION
The Executive Tract neighborhood was originally developed in the mid-1950’s and is located just south of St. John Bosco High School. When it was developed, the area was part of the City of Downey. The development of the parcels and infrastructure (including the streetlights in the Executive Tract area) were later annexed to the City of Bellflower when the city boundary was extended north up to Foster Road. The Executive Tract area includes 47 single family homes on segments of Leahy Avenue, Crestbrook Street, Cabell Avenue and Belfair Street (see the attached map). While most of the streetlights in the surrounding area, and throughout the rest of the City, are owned and operated by SCE, the lights in this tract were never transferred to SCE for ongoing maintenance and operations. The City has owned and maintained these streetlights since the area was annexed into the City.

Over the past decade, there has been a steady increase in outages and maintenance issues with the streetlights in this area. The City’s contractor (Santa Fe Springs) has historically handled these issues, however the repairs are limited to available parts for the aging system. SCE recently replaced the old oil can transformer and connected the system to a new transformer, but that has not proven to make the system more reliable and operational issues still persist. To resolve these issues going forward and ensure the lights continue to be functional for the residents in the area, the City has two options it can explore. Public Works staff is seeking direction from the City Council on these options.

Option #1 – Sell the Streetlights to SCE
SCE has approached the City and offered to purchase these streetlights and incorporate them into their existing Bellflower inventory for the purchase price of $1.00. Upon completion of the sale, SCE would eliminate the existing underground wiring and power the system with overhead wiring from streetlight to streetlight, similar to the existing configuration of streetlights on the streets surrounding the Executive Tract. This is a similar method powering the majority of the streetlights throughout the City. The high- pressure sodium bulbs would be replaced with more efficient LED streetlights that will also match the surrounding streets. Finally, SCE will assume the on-going operation and maintenance of these lights in perpetuity as they do with all of the other streetlights they own throughout the City. This option would ensure that the lights remain functional in the future and ensure that outages related to the aging infrastructure are able to be appropriately managed.

Option #2 – Develop a CIP project and Streetlight Assessment District Alternatively, the City could direct staff to explore the feasibility of developing a Capital Improvement Project to replace and rehabilitate the existing underground infrastructure of the lighting system in this particular tract. To accomplish this, City staff would need to initiate a feasibility and design study to develop a future capital improvement project to rehabilitate the existing streetlight system and bring it up to a standard that could integrate with SCE’s other systems. Should the City Council direct staff to explore this option, staff would also recommend the City consider establishment of a streetlight assessment district for this that would allow the costs of these repairs and upgrades to be shared among the affected property owners within the tract.
-2-

Staff Report – Executive Tract Streetlight Operation & Maintenance Issue Overview April 28, 2025

Page 3 of 3 ends

DISCUSSION – Continued
The process of creating an assessment district is lengthy and ultimately requires approval of a majority of the affected property owners in the area. However, in doing so, the cost of such a project would ultimately be reimbursed to the City over a defined period of time.

A preliminary project estimate, including the feasibility and design, formal election of the ballot measure and construction will be in excess of $400,000.

ATTACHMENT
Executive Tract Area Map ............................................................................................... 4 -3-

-4-
3 _ ...a‘ ' '
e1-Wl5W‘ef—B Iv d
(I
S
A

~31 ,: 3'
~30. -_,,=,
9’ F‘,
0-

1 W Stafteport 13-3
1 of BELLFLOWG
R
"c ‘.

ROWING TOGET‘aF}
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
FROM: Elizabeth C. Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services Rowena Genilo—Concepcion, Planning Manager
Patti Nahill, Planning Consultant
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to: (1) waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1443 — An Ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 amending
various provisions of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Bellflower Municipal Code (“BMC") to implement the Housing Element; and (2) discuss the implementation of the State law pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Units.

DATE: April 28, 2025

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Ordinance No. 1443 was introduced on April 14, 2025. Second reading and adoption is recommended. If adopted, the Ordinance will take effect in 30 days.

At its April 14, 2025 Meeting, the City Council directed staff to provide more information on Accessory Dwelling Unit (“ADU”) requirements, specifically the maximum square footage and the number of ADU allowed. The Director of Planning and Building Services (“Director”) is seeking further direction on ADU regulations, specifically the allowable square footage and the number of allowable units.

RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1) Waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1443; and 2) Provide the Director with further direction on implementing the State law pertaining to ADUs; or -
3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is a cost for codifying the proposed ordinance within the BMC along with publication, etc. These are already anticipated as part of the City’s budget. No additional direct fiscal impact is identified. Indirectly, the proposed actions will assist the City with obtaining State and federal grants.

Page 1 of 3 ends

Staff Report — Ordinance No. 1443
April 28, 2025

Page 2 of 3 ends

DISCUSSION
On April 14, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing to consider Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 amending various provisions of Title 17 (Zoning) of the BMC to implement the Housing Element. One of the amendments included amending the City’s ADU regulations.

As recommended during the public hearing, Ordinance No. 1443 applies the “default” California law (Gov. Code § 66323). This is intended to be more efficient given the Legislature’s decision to constantly change the ADU laws required adjustments and amendments that are costly and time consuming. The City Council introduced Ordinance No. 1443 and directed the Director to return with a discussion for the City Council to provide more information regarding ADUs, specifically the maximum allowable square footage and the allowance for a combination of new and converted ADUs on a single lot.

During the presentation, the City’s Planning Consultant noted that the proposed ADU amendment includes, without limitation.
- Maximum allowable square footage of 800 square feet for ADUs; and - Maximum number of allowable ADUs for multifamily lots (conversion o_r new construction — rather than a combination of the two scenarios). , Government Code § 66321 provides that “a local agency may establish minimum and maximum unit size requirements for both attached and detached accessory dwelling units.” Such regulations, however, may not establish a “maximum square footage requirement that is less than either of the following [e]ight hundred fifty square feet.” In other words, the City Council may establish a greater limit than 850 square feet. Such regulations must be adopted by ordinance in accordance with the City Charter.

Until Ordinance No. 1443 becomes effective, the City allows a maximum floor area of 1,200 square feet for new detached ADUs. The Director recommends the City'Council maintain the maximum allowable square footage for new detached ADUs at 1,200 square feet. Should the City Council decide to maintain the current maximum allowable square footage, then an ordinance will be presented at a future date.

Additionally, the maximum number of allowable ADUs for multifamily lots is based on Government Code § 66323(a) which states “[n]otwithstanding Sections 66314 to 66322, inclusive, a local agency shall ministerially approve an application for a building permit within a residential or mixed-use zone to create any of the following” (emphasis added).

This Government Code allows multiple ADUs: (1) within portions of existing multifamily dwelling units, up to 25% of the number of existing multifamily units; or (2) on a lot with a multifamily dwelling, not to exceed eight ADUs or the number of existing units on the lot.

Currently, the City allows applicants to combine these provisions (i.e., conversions up to 25% and multiple detached ADUs not to exceed eight ADUs or the number of existing units on the lot).

Staff Report— Ordinance No. 1443
April 28, 2025

Page 3 of 3 ends

DISCUSSION — Continued
Given the Legislature’s use of the term “any” rather than “all” in Government Code section 66323(a), the Director recommends the City Council apply the State law to allow multiple ADUs on a lot with a multifamily dwelling as either conversions or detached ADUs, pursuant to Government Code section 66323(a)(3)—(4) respectively but not a combination of both.

The Director recommends the City Council waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1443 and provide direction regarding the two considerations above.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Ordinance No. 1443 ................................................................................................... 4 B. April 14, 2025, Staff Report (Without Attachments) .................................................. 28 C. Gov. Code § 66310-66342 ....................................................................................... 33

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
ORDINANCE NO. 1443

AN ORDINANCE APPROVING ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT
AMENDMENT CASE NO. ZOTA 25-01 AMENDING VARIOUS
PROVISIONS OF TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE BELLFLOWER

MUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPLEMENT THE HOUSING ELEMENT
THE COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council finds and declares as follows:

A. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 is proposed to amend Title 17 of the Bellflower Municipal Code (“BMC”) to implement the Housing Element (“HE”);
B. The City desires to update the BMC to address changes in State laws, including accessory dwelling units, density bonus, special needs housing, and encourage future development by incentivizing Iot consolidation, removing constraints to development, and streamlining the review processes (“Project”); C. The City reviewed this Ordinance pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regulations §§1500¥0, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”); CEQA, CEQA Guidelines and Bellflower Guidelines collectively referred to as “CEQA Regulations”); D. Notice of Public Hearing before the City Council was duly given and published in the time, form, and manner as required by law;
E. .On April 14, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing to receive public testimony and other evidence regarding the proposed ZOTA, including information provided by City staff and public testimony; and F. On April 14, 2025, the City Council considered this Ordinance. Its findings are made based on the entire administrative record including, without limitation, testimony and evidence presented to the City Council at its April 14, 2025 heanng.

SECTION 2. Planning Agency. Pursuant to BMC § 2.32.050(F), the City Council is acting as the Bellflower Planning Agency for purposes of the Project.

SECTION 3. Factual Findings and Conclusions. The City Council finds as follows:

Page 1 of 12 ends

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 2 of 12 ends

A. On January 20, 2022, the City Council adopted the HE for the 2021-2029 E.
planning period. On September 9, 2022, the Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) certified Bellflower’s HE; The City's HE includes the requirements to accommodate Bellflower’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”) specifically, the City must implement land use regulations that encourage new housing. In order to achieve this goal, the Housing Plan identifies long term housing goals and short term policies that will be implemented through a series of Housing Programs including, without limitation, removing development constraints (Program 13), establishing objective design standards (Program 14), providing affordable housing incentives (Program 15), streamlining the process (Program 17), and address special needs population (Program 18);
. The proposed ZOTA allows for development to accommodate the City of Bellfiower's 2021-2029 RHNA;
The ZOTA establishes a regulatory framework of future development and uses by amending Title 17 of the BMC that wouid be applicable citywide, as it pertains to relevant State laws and the HE as shown on Exhibits A through E; and
The City Council initiated this Project through its adoption of the HE.

SECTION 4. Environmental Assessment. In accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines § 15162, the City Council finds as follows:

A. Resolution No. 22-04 was adopted by the City Council on January 20, 2022, approving Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 21-01. . Changing the regulatory framework for future deveiopment and uses within the BMC is an activity contemplated by MND 21-01.

This activity does not contemplate any changes which will require major revisions to MND 21-01 nor are there any substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which MND 21-01 was undertaken. . There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time MND 21-01 was approved.

SECTION 5. Notice of Determination. The City Manager, or designee, is directed to file a Notice of Determination in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §§ 15075; and any other applicable law.

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 3 of 12 ends

SECTION 6. General Plan Findings. Pursuant to Government Code § 65860, the changes implemented by this Ordinance are consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan. The City Council finds as follows:

A. Land Use Element — General Policy 1.2: “Encourage opportunities to sensitively integrate different, but compatible, land uses”; . Land Use Element - General Goal 5: “Provide incentives for reinvestment in aging, built-out developments and encourage consolidation of properties for higher quality land uses and designs”;
Housing Element — Goal 2: “Provide a variety of housing types to accommodate special needs groups and all economic segments of the City”; Housing Element — Goal 3: “Minimize the impact of governmental constraints on housing production and affordability”; ‘
Housing Element — Policy 5.3: “Encourage infill development and reuse of underutilized land, where reuse is consistent with desired neighborhood character”; and
Housing Element - Policy 5.4: “Encourage recycling of existing, poorly designed, substandard multi-family developments to higher densities as a means of facilitating housing for all economic segments of the community and providing improvements to housing in need of major upgrades”.

SECTION 7. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Findings. Pursuant to BMC § 17.104.030, the City Council makes the following findings:

A. There are changed conditions since the existing zoning became effective to warrant other or additional zoning in that State laws require the City to implement the Housing Programs identified in the HE that was adopted by the City on'January 20, 2022, and was subsequently certified by HCD on September 9, 2022. In addition, several zoning code provisions require amendments in order to be consistent with recently passed State laws.

This proposed Ordinance will not adversely affect any property in the City as to value or precedent and will not be detrimental to any area of the City, based upon the findings in this Ordinance. The proposed ZOTA establishes a regulatory framework of future development and uses as it pertains to the implementation of the HE. Furthermore, the proposed changes are intended to enhance property values and apply city-wide.

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 4 of 12 ends

C. The ZOTA will be in the interest or furtherance of public health, safety and general welfare, by implementing the adopted HE, ensuring that future developments are built and designed to the highest standard, and increasing the City’s housing stock and value of private properties by facilitating new development of underutilized properties.

D. This ZOTA will not adversely affect the City’s General Plan or zoning regulations set forth in the BMC in that it is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, identified in this Ordinance. Furthermore, the ZOTA will not adversely affect Title 17 (Zoning) of the BMC because Title 17 encourages the most appropriate use of the land; conservation and stabilization of the property value; and promotion of public peace, health, safety, morale, and general welfare - all in accordance with the General Plan.

E. The proposed ZOTA will not adversely affect the City’s General Plan in that the proposed ZOTA adheres to changes in State laws.

SECTION 8. Amendment. BMC § 17.41 (Density Bonus) is repealed and replaced in its entirety as set forth in the attached Exhibit “A” which is incorporated by reference.

SECTION 9. Amendment. The definition of “Accessory Dwelling Unit” within BMC § 1708.010 is removed in its entirety.

SECTION 10. Amendment. BMC § 17.16.020(L) is repealed.

SECTION 11. Amendment. BMC § 17.16.170 is repealed in its entirety.

SECTION 12. Amendment. BMC § ‘1 7.20.020(E) is repealed.

SECTION 13. Amendment. BMC § 17.20.200 is repealed in its entirety.

SECTION 14. Amendment. BMC § 17.24.020(M) is repealed.

SECTION 15. Amendment. BMC Chapter 17.17 is repealed and replaced in its entirety as set forth in the Attached Exhibit “B” which is incorporated by reference.

SECTION 16. Amendment. BMC § 17.12.010 is amended as follows:
“§ 17.12.010. Zones Enumerated.

For purposes relating to the orderly development of the City of Bellflower, and in order to carry out the provisions of this title, the City is hereby divided into 17 zones known as the following:

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 5 of 12 ends

SF Single Family Residential
R1 Low Density
AE Agricultural Estate Zone
R-2 Medium Density Residential
R—3 Multiple Residential
SCH Senior Citizen Housing
C-G General Commercial Zone
T-C Bellflower Town Overlay Zone
M-1 Light Industrial Zone
PD Planned Development Zone
O-S Open Space Zoning Zone
P Public Uses
MU Mixed Use
DFD Design for Development for the South Bellflower Commercial Area CENTZ Court Enforced Neutral Tenancy Zone
DAZL Development Agreement Zone Layover
SP Specific Plan
HOOZ Housing Opportunity Overlay Zone”
SECTION 17. Amendment. BMC § 1720.150 Parking Requirements is amended to read:
“A. In addition to the Off-Street Parking? requirements of this Title, each single family residence must provide a minimum of two enclosed parking spaces, with a minimum combined dimension of 20 feet in length by 20 feet in width of an unobstructed floor space, and one open guest parking space.”
SECTION 18. Amendment. BMC § 17.24.110(B) (Parking Requirements) is amended as follows:
“B. Properties with two or more single family residences must provide a minimum of two enclosed parking spaces and one open guest parking space for each dwelling unit.” SECTION 19. Amendment. BMC § 1728.020 is amended by adding a new subsection (C) as follows:
“C. Mixed use, provided that the real property has a General Plan Land Use designation of MU.”
SECTION 20. Amendment. BMC § 17.28.080(A) is amended as follows:
“A. Front Yard. A front yard setback of not less than 15 feet for one-story buildings and 20 feet for two-story buildings must be provided. No building, structure, or the enlargement of a building or structure is permitted to encroach within the required

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 6 of 12 ends

“D.
“E-
front yard setback. Notwithstanding, properties with less than the minimum required front yard setback may be deemed conforming pursuant to this Title.” SECTION 21. Amendment. BMC § 17.28.080(D) is amended as follows:

Corner Lots or Reverse Corner Lots. The side yard fronting a street must be not less than ten feet for one-story buildings and 15 feet for two-story buildings.” SECTION 22. Amendment. BMC § 17.28.080(E) is amended as follows:

Rear Yards.

1. interior lots must have a rear yard for residential buildings and structures of eight feet when adjacent to living areas and bedrooms and five feet for secondary walls.

2. Through lots must have a rear yard for residential buildings and structures of 15 feet for one-story buildings and 20 feet for two-story buildings.” SECTION 23. Amendment. BMC § 17.28.080(E) is repealed.

SECTION 24. Amendment. BMC § 1728.100. is amended to read:
“To minimize building bulk and mass, any new two-story residential structure must satisfy the 2/3 rule. The 2/3 rule requires the top story to be not more than 2/3 the size in total floor area of the bottom story.”
SECTION 25. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.020 is amended by adding a new subsection C as follows:
“C. Mixed use, provided that the real property-has a General Plan Land Use designation of MU.”
SECTION 26. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.070 is amended as follows:
“No building or structure may exceed three stories or 40 feet in height, whichever is less." “A.

SECTION 27. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.080(A) is amended as follows:

A front yard setback of not less than 10 feet for one-story buildings and 15 feet for two-story buildings must be provided. No building, structure, or the enlargement of a building or structure is permitted to encroach within the required front yard setback. Notwithstanding the foregoing, properties with less than the minimum required front yard setback may be deemed conforming pursuant to this Title.”

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 7 of 12 ends

SECTION 28. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.080(D) is amended as follows:
“D. The side yard fronting a street must be not less than 10 feet for one-story buildings and 15 feet for two-story buildings.”
SECTION 29. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.080(E) is amended as follows:
“E. Rear Yards.

1. Interior lots must have a rear yard for residential buildings and structures of eight feet when adjacent to living areas and bedrooms and five feet for secondary walls.

2. Through lots must have a rear yard for residential buildings and structures of 15 feet for one-story buildings and 20 feet for two-story buildings.” SECTION 30. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.080(B) is repealed.

SECTION 31. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.100 is amended to read:
“To minimize building bulk and mass, any new two-story residential structure must satisfy the 2/3 rule. The 2/3 rule requires the top story to be not more than 2/3 the size in total floor area of the bottom story.”
SECTION 32. Amendment. BMC § 17.08.010. (DEFINITIONS) is amended by removing the definition of “Community Care Facility” in its entirety.

SECTION 33. Amendment. BMC § 17.44.200 is repealed in its entirety.

SECTION 34. Amendment. BMC § 17.16.020 is amended by repealing subsection “N. Community Care Facility serving six of fewer persons.” SECTION 35. Amendment. BMC § 1720.020 is amended by repealing subsection “H. Community Care Facility serving six of fewer persons.” SECTION 36. Amendment. BMC § 1724.020 is amended by repealing subsection “0. Community Care Facility serving six of fewer persons”.

SECTION 37. Amendment. BMC § 17.28.020(B) is amended by repealing subdivision “6. Community Care Facility serving six of fewer persons.” SECTION 38. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.020(B) is amended by repealing subdivision “5. Community Care Facility serving six of fewer persons.” SECTION 39. Amendment. BMC § 17.44.030(A) is amended by repealing subdivision “22. Community Care Facilities.”

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 8 of 12 ends

SECTION 40. Amendment. BMC § 17.72 is amended by adding section 17.72.140 entitled “Community Care Facilities" as set forth in the attached Exhibit “C” which is incorporated by reference.

SECTION 41. Amendment. BMC § 17.08.010. (Definitions) is amended by removing the definition of “Emergency Shelter” in its entirety.

SECTION 42. Amendment. BMC § 17.44.020(A)(45) is repealed.

SECTION 43. Amendment. BMC § 1744.330 is repealed in its entirety.

SECTION 44. Amendment. BMC § 17.54.040 entitled “Development Standards” is amended as follows:
“The development standards that apply to the underlying base zone apply unless and until the CENTZ is activated. If the CENTZ is activated, the requirements for emergency shelters set forth in this Title apply to the activated property and temporary shelters along with the following additional standards:

A. Standards, regulations, and any other requirement of the OCCW order take precedence over any conflicting provision of this Code.

B. Approval of the CENTZ and any development within the CENTZ rests solely within the City Council's discretion.”
SECTION 45. Amendment. BMC Chapter 17.72 is amended by adding section

17.72.130 entitled “Emergency Shelter” as set forth in the attached Exhibit “D" which is incorporated by reference. .

SECTION 46. Amendment. BMC § 17.08.010 (Definitions) is amended by repealing the definition of “Supportive housing” in its entirety.

SECTION 47. Amendment. BMC § 1716.180 entitled “Transitional/Supportive Housing" is repealed in its entirety.

SECTION 48. Amendment. BMC § 17.16.020(M) is repealed.

SECTION 49. Amendment. BMC § 17.20.020(G) is repealed.

SECTION 50. Amendment. BMC § 17.20.040(L) is repealed.

SECTION 51. Amendment. BMC § 17.24.020(N) is repealed.

SECTION 52. Amendment. BMC § 17.24.0400) is repealed.
-11-

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 9 of 12 ends

SECTION 53. Amendment. BMC§ 17.28.020(B)(5) is repealed.

SECTION 54. Amendment. BMC § 17.28.030(A) is repealed.

SECTION 55. Amendment. BMC§ 17.32.020(B)(4) is repealed.

SECTION 56. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.0300) is repealed.

SECTION 57. Amendment. The BMC is amended by establishing a new section entitled “17.72.120 Supportive Housing” as follows:
“§ 17.72.120. Supportive Housing.

This section is established to implement applicable law, including, without limitation, Government Code section 65650, as may be amended from time to time:

A. Review. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Title, supportive housing will be processed ministerially upon compliance with this Section.

B. Standards. Supportive housing must satisfy all objective development standards in the underlying zoning designation.

0. Covenant. All units are subject to a recorded affordability restriction which must be submitted, reviewed, and approved by the Director, in a form approved by the City Attorney."
SECTION 58. Amendment. BMC § 17.42.020 is amended to read:
“in order to make specific housing available to an individual with a disability, any person. may request a modification or exception to the rules, standards and practices for the siting, development and use of housing or housing-related facilities that would eliminate regulatory barriers and provide a person with a disability equal opportunity to housing of their choice.

This Chapter applies to only those persons who qualify as disabled pursuant to applicable law, including the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.” SECTION 59. Amendment. BMC § 17.42.040 is amended to read:
“A. Approval Authority. The Director will review and decide upon requests for reasonable accommodation, including whether the applicant is a disabled person within the meaning of this Chapter.

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 10 of 12 ends

B. Notice. No advance notice or public hearing is required for consideration of reasonable accommodation requests by the Director.

C. Decision. The Director will render a decision within 30 days after the application is deemed complete, and approve, approve with conditions or deny the application, based on the findings in this Chapter. The decision will be in writing and mailed to the applicant." SECTION 60. Amendment. BMC § 17.42.050(A) is amended to read:
“A. Any decision on an application under this Chapter will be supported by written findings addressing the criteria set forth in this Section. An application under this Chapter for a reasonable accommodation will be granted if all of the following findings are made:

1. The housing, which is the subject of the request, will be used by a disabled individual as defined under the applicable law.

2. The requested reasonable accommodation is necessary to make specific housing available to an individual with a disability under the Acts.

3. The requested reasonable accommodation would not impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City.

4. The requested reasonable accommodation would not require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a City program or law, including, without limitation, land use and zoning.”
SECTION 61. Amendment. BMC § 17.42.060 is repealed in its entirety.

SECTION 62. Amendment. The BMC is amended by repealing and replacing Chapter 17.14 as set forth in the attached Exhibit “E" which is incorporated by reference.

SECTION 63. Renumbering. All subsections, and subdivisions of the BMC affected by changes implemented by this Ordinance are appropriately renumbered.

SECTION 64. Approval. Based on the above findings, the City Council approves ZOTA 25-01, as set forth in Exhibits A through E, attached to this Ordinance and incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 65. Construction. This Ordinance must be broadly construed in order to achieve the purposes stated in this Ordinance. It is the City Council’s intent that the provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance. -13-

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 11 of 12 ends

SECTION 66. Enforceability. Repeal of any provision of the BMC does not affect any penalty, forfeiture, or liability incurred before, or preclude prosecution and imposition of penalties for any violation occurring before this Ordinance’s effective date. Any such repealed part will remain in full force and effect for sustaining action or prosecuting violations occurring before the effective date of this Ordinance.

SECTION 67. Validity of Previous Code Sections. If this entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or amendment of the BMC or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be rendered void and cause such previous BMC provision or other city ordinance to remain in full force and effect for all purposes.

SECTION 68. Reliance on Record. Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Ordinance are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.

SECTION 69. Limitations. The City Council’s analysis and evaluation of the project is based on the best information currently available. It is inevitable that in evaluating a project that absolute and perfect knowledge of all possible aspects of the project will not exist. One of the major limitations on analysis of the project is the City Council’s lack of knowledge of future events. In all instances, best efforts have been made to form accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are 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 70. Severability. If any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.

SECTION 71. Electronic Signatures. This Ordinance may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §1'6.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

SECTION 72. 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.
-14-

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

Page 12 of 12 ends

SECTION 73. Recordation. The City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City of Bellflower’s book of original ordinances; make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within 15 days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law.

SECTION 74. Effective Date. This Ordinance will take effect on the 30th day following its final passage and adoption.

ORDINANCE NO. 1443 HAD ITS FIRST READING ON APRIL 14, 2025, ITS SECOND READING ON APRIL 28, 2025, AND WAS DULY PASSED, APPROVED,

AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER AT ITS REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 28, 2025.

Ray Dunton, Mayor
ATTEST:

Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
By:

Justin A. Tamayo, Assistant City Attorney
EXHIBITS:

Exhibit A: Density Bonus
Exhibit B: Accessory Dwelling Units
Exhibit C: Community Care Facilities
Exhibit D: Emergency Shelters
Exhibit E: Affordable Housing— Lot Consolidation
-15-

Exhibit A
Density Bonus
“§ 17.41.010. Purpose and Intent.

This Chapter establishes procedures for implementing density bonus requirements set forth in Government Code Sections 65915, et seq., as may be amended from time to time (the "Density Bonus Ac ").
§ 17.41.020. Procedure.

A. In addition to any other requirement, applications for a density bonus must be'filed on a form approved by the Director. An application must be filed concurrently with any other land use application required by this code. At the time the application is submitted, the applicant must pay all application fees established by City Council resolution.

The Director will process the Density Bonus Act application in the same manner as all applications required by this code.

Applications filed pursuant to this Chapter must include reasonable documentation to establish eligibility under the Density Bonus Act.
§ 17.41.020. Definitions.

Terms and phrases used in this Chapter have the same meaning as defined by the Density Bonus Act. Undefined words and phrases and have the same meaning as set forth in this Code. § 17.41.030. Bonuses and incentives.

A. Housing developments qualifying under the Density Bonus Act may receive a bonus or concession pursuant to this Chapter. -
Where the density allowed under this Code is inconsistent with the density allowed under the land use element of the general plan, the maximum density allowed controls.

Before the Building Official issues a building permit, an applicant receiving bonuses or concessions under this Chapter must execute and record an agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, securing the continued affordability of all dwelling units in accordance with the Density Bonus Act and this Chapter.

All dwelling units benefitting from the bonuses or concessions under this Chapter must be concurrently built in the same manner as market rates. All affordable units must be integrated and reasonably distributed throughout the approved project with the market rate units to ensure a reasonable mix of affordable and market rate units.

Density Calculation. The area of any land required to be dedicated for street or alley purposes may be included as lot area for purposes of calculating the maximum density permitted by the underlying zone in which the project is located.

Page 1 of 3 ends

-16-

§ 17.41.040. Amenities.

Residents of affordable units may not be charged for amenities not charged to other residents including, without limitation, access to recreational facilities, parking, cable television, and interior amenities like dishwashers and microwave ovens. Optional services for all residents must be the same. Tenants of affordable units may not be required to purchase additional services. § 17.41.050. Menu of Incentives.

Applicants with projects qualifying for incentives may request one or more of the following incentives; the number of incentives being requested must be consistent to the Density Bonus Act unless otherwise authorized by the approving body:

A. Yard/Setback. Up to a 20% decrease in the required width or depth of any individual yard or setback, except along any property line that abuts an R-1 or more restrictively zoned property.

A landscaping plan must be submitted to the Director for approval.

B. Lot Width. Up to a 20% decrease from a lot width requirement. A landscaping plan must be submitted to the Director for approval.

C. Floor Area Ratio.

1. A percentage increase in the allowable floor area ratio equal to the percentage of density bonus for which the project is eligible, not to exceed 35%; or

2. In lieu of the otherwise applicable floor area ratio, a floor area ratio not to exceed those identified in the adopted General Plan Housing Element governing the project site.

D. Height. A percentage increase in the height requirement in feet equal to the percentage of density bonus for which the project is eligible. This percentage increase in height is applicable over the entire parcel regardless of the number of underlying height limits. For purposes of this subsection, height limits contained in this Title and adopted specific plans do not apply.

1. in any zone in which the height or number of stories is limited, this height increase will permit a maximum of 11 additional feet or one additional story, whichever is lower, to provide the affordable units.

2. No additional height can be permitted for that portion of a building in a project that is located within 50 feet of a lot classified in an R-1 or more restrictive zone.

3. No additional height Is permitted for that portion of a building in a project that' Is located within 15 feet of a lot classified In the R-1 or more restrictive zone.

4. For each foot of additional height, the building must be set back one horizontal foot.

5. No additional height can be permitted for any portion of a building in a project located on a lot sharing a common lot line with or across an alley from a lot classified in an R-1 or more restrictive zone. This prohibition does not apply if the lot on which the project is located is within 1,500 feet of a transit stop but no additional height can be permitted for that portion of a building in the project that is located within 50 feet of a lot classified in an R—1 or more restrictive residential zone.

Page 2 of 3 ends

-17-

E. Open Space. Up to a 20% decrease from an open space requirement. A landscaping plan must be submitted to the Director for approval.
§ 17.41.060. Request for Incentives.

A. For projects qualifying under the Density Bonus Act for which ministerial approvals are required, the following procedures apply:

1. Application. An applicant must file a request on a form provided by the Director, accompanied by fees established by city council resolution.

2. Director Authority. The Director will review applications for consistency with this Title.

B. Action. The City will approve a density bonus and requested incentive(s) unless the Director makes one or more of the written findings provided for under Government Code section 65915(d‘)(1).

C. Written Decision. The Director must transmit a written decision by first class mail to the applicant."

Page 3 of 3 ends

-13-

Exhibit B
Accessory Dwelling Units
"§17.17.010. Definitions.

Unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the following definitions govern the construction of the words and phrases used in this Chapter. Undefined words and phrases and have the same meaning as set forth in this Code or in applicable law. “Primary dwelling" means a residential structure on a single parcel with provisions for living, sleeping, eating, a single kitchen for cooking, and sanitation facilities. Where more than one residential structure exists on a lot, the "primary dwelling" will either be the residential structure that was first issued a valid certificate of occupancy, or, when applicable, the largest residential structure on the lot.
“Tandem parking" means two or more automobiles parked in a line, one behind the other. § 17.17.020. Certificate of Occupancy.

A. The Building Official will not issue a final certificate of occupancy for an Accessory Dwelling Unit (“ADU") or Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (“JADU”) before the Building Official issues a final certificate of occupancy for the primary dwelling(s). Before the Building Official issues any final certificate of occupancy for an ADU and/or JADU, the property owner must record with the County Recorder a covenant, in a form approved by the City Attorney, satisfying applicable law, including this Section.

B. ADU may not be used in violation of this code, and any rental of the ADU must be for a term of 30 days or longer;
C. JADU must include the following:

1. The JADU may not be sold separately;

2. The JADU has size and attribute restrictions required by this code;

3. The property owner must occupy either the single-family residence in which the JADU is permitted, or the newly created JADU.

4. The JADU cannot be rented for any period less than 30 days. § 17.17.030. Application for Address Number.

Any ADU or JADU that includes a separate entrance from the main entrance of the Primary Dwelling, or will be improved with a new or separate utility connection directly between the unit and the utility, must submit an application for an address number. Address numbers will be determined by the Director pursuant to the procedures outlined in this code. Address numbers must be placed over the entrance to the ADU or JADU or on some other place where the number will be visible from the public right-of-way. When required by the Director, address identification must be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response.

Page 1 of 2 ends

-19-

§17.17.040. Fees.

A. Except as provided in California law, all ADUs are subject to development impact fees proportional to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit in accordance with this code.

Except as provided by California law, each ADU must install a separate utility connection directly between the ADU and the utility, which is subject to a connection fee or capacity charge. '
The City may charge reasonable inspection and construction fees for inspections and for all required permits. The fees will be established by City Council resolution and be assessed on the property owner.

An ADU will not be considered a new residential use for purposes of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, unless the ADU is constructed simultaneously with a new primary single-family dwelling.”

Page 2 of 2 ends

-20-

Exhibit C
Community Care Facilities
“§ 17.72.140 Community Care Facilities.

A. Purpose. This Section reduces development constraints and regulates community care facilities for their orderly development. .

Unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the words and phrases used in this Section and have the same meaning as used in Health and Safety Code Section 1502, as may be amended from time to time, or as set forth in .this Code.

Permitted uses. Community care facilities serving six of fewer persons are considered residential uses and may be permitted in those zones that allow residential uses.

Conditionally permitted use. A conditional use permit, approved by the Planning Commission pursuant to this Title, is required for:

1. Every community care facility in the C-G General Commercial zone; or

2. Residential care facilities serving seven or more persons in the following zones:
a. SF Single Family zone;
b. A—E Agricultural Estate zone;
c. R-1 Low Density Residential zone;
d. R—2 Medium Density Residential zone; or
e. R-3 Multiple Residential zone;

3. Standards. In addition to any other applicable law, the following standards apply to all community care facilities:
a. Community care facilities serving six or fewer persons must comply with all development standards applicable to other residential uses in the same zone. b. Community care facilities serving seven or more persons must comply with all development standards applicable in the underlying zone, and all of the following:
i. One-half of a parking spaces must be provided for each bedroom in a residential care facility. Nonresidential care facilities must provide one parking space for every five persons residing at the facility, plus one parking space for every two persons employed at the facility.
ii. Residential care must not be located within:

Page 1 of 2 ends

-21-

a) 500 feet of any public or private school, park or playground, and any on-sale or off-sale alcohol establishments; or
b) 1,000 feet of any other residential care facility for seven or more persons, including for the elderly.
iii. Occupancy Limits. A residential care facility within residential zones may not serve more than 20 persons. ’

4. Findings. Before approving a conditional use permit for a community care facility as permitted by this Section, the Planning Commission must find that the community care facility:
a. Will not result in adverse effects to, orjeopardize or endanger, the health, welfare, peace, or safety of persons in the surrounding area;
Will not adversely affect the livability of the surrounding neighborhood as a result of inadequate maintenance, prohibited activities, and/or operating characteristics; Conforms with applicable law, including, without limitation, this Title, the General Plan, the Building Standards Code, and appropriate State/ Federal licensing.

Will not result in nuisance activities including, without limitation, disturbance of the peace, illegal drug activity, public drunkenness, public consumption of alcohol, harassment of passers-by, gambling, public urination, theft, assault, battery, vandalism, littering, loitering, illegal parking, noise levels above those allowed pursuant to the BMC, lewd conduct, or police detentions and/or arrests; The design of the physical structure is wholly consistent with the design and scale of the surrounding neighborhood;
The use and structure will not create measurable and identifiable adverse traffic impacts in the surrounding neighborhood, including a reduction in off-site parking within the surrounding neighborhood. in making this determination, the applicant must furnish sufficient information to the Director for evaluation.”

Page 2 of 2 ends

-22-

Exhibit D
Emergency Shelters
“§ 17.72.130. Emergency Shelter.

This section implements applicable law, including Government Code § 65583, related to the City’s assessment of housing needs.

A. Definitions. Terms and phrases used in this section have the same meaning as defined by Government Code section 65582, as may be amended from time to time. Undefined words and phrases and have the same meaning as set forth in this Code.

Zone. Emergency shelters may be permitted in the C-G (General Commercial) Zone and in the M-1 (Light Industrial) District, subject to the provisions of this Title.

Standards. Emergency shelters must satisfy the following:

1. 2.

Occupancy cannot exceed 30 occupants at any one time.

Provide one parking space for each person working in the emergency shelter, if the standards do not require more parking for emergency shelters than other residential or commercial uses within the same zone.

All proposed on-site intake and waiting areas must be separated from the public right-of—way and be fully screened from public view. Exterior intake and waiting areas must be covered by a permanent structure. The intake and waiting area must be suitably sized to prevent queuing in the public right-of-way or within any parking lot but cannot exceed 400 square feet.

Each emergency shelter must have an on-site management office and implement a management plan which includes, without limitation:
a. Maintaining a minimum of one staff member for every 15 beds when the emergency shelter is in operation.
b. Training emergency shelter staff persons in operating procedures, safety plans, and assisting clients. The emergency shelter may not employ any person who has been convicted of a felony or who are required to register as a sex registrant under Penal Code § 290.
c. Maintaining current information on all individuals utilizing the emergency shelter and referral sheets for persons who, for any reason, cannot be served by the emergency shelter.
d. Screening individuals for admittance eligibility, with the objective of first providing services to individuals with connections to the City’s jurisdiction. e. Continuously monitoring waiting areas to inform prospective clients whether they can be served within a reasonable time. If they cannot be served by the provided because of time or resource constraints, then Page1 of2
-23-

D.
informing prospective clients of alternative programs and locations where similar services are provided.
f. Removing all litter on and within the vicinity of the emergency shelter daily.

9. Establishing standards for responding to emergencies and incidents, expelling clients from the facility, and establishing re-admittance policies for clients who have been expelled.
h. Establishing policies and procedures that prohibit alcohol and illegal drug use, and expelling persons in possession of such substances on the premises.

5. Not more than one emergency shelter is permitted within a radius of 300 feet from another emergency shelter.

6. Individual occupancy in an emergency shelter is limited to four months during any 12 consecutive month period.

7. Exterior lighting must be provided at all building entrances and outdoor activity areas, and must be activated between sunset and sunrise of each day. .

8. Each emergency shelter must have at least one on-site security personnel present while the emergency shelter is operational.

9. The emergency shelter may provide one or more of the following specific facilities and services including, without limitation:
a.
rh
s
n
s
z
p
s
r

Commercial kitchen facilities designed and operated in compliance with applicable law;
Dining area;
Laundry;
Recreation room;
Support services (e.g., training, counseling); and
Child care facilities.

Procedure. A permit application for an emergency shelter will be considered and approved ministerially by the Director.”

Page 2 of 2 ends

-24-

Exhibit E
Affordable Housing — Lot Consolidation
“BMC Chapter 17.14. AFFORDABLE HOUSING - LOT CONSOLIDATION.

17.14 Affordable Housing - Lot Consolidation
§ 17.14.010. Intent and Purpose.

The purpose and intent of this Chapter is to incentivize lot consolidation for housing development, and redevelopment in underutilized portions of the City, and support more compact and higher-density rental and owner-occupied residential developments affordable to lower income households.
§ 17.14.020. Definitions.

Terms and phrases used in this Chapter have the same meaning as defined by the California Code of Regulations, including 25 CCR § 6912, et. seq., as may be amended from time to time, and as provided below. Undefined words and phrases have the same meaning as set forth in this Code.
“Affordable Housing Project” means new development consisting of residential units restricted to occupancy by Lower Income Households. For purposes of this Chapter, Affordable Housing Project includes a mixed use project with ground-level commercial uses, provided that the residential uses account for not less than 85% of the Affordable Housing Project’s gross floor area.
§ 17.14.030. Applicability.

This Chapter applies to Affordable Housing Projects that include consolidation of two or more contiguous legal lots for the purposes of establishing an Affordable Housing Project. § 17.14.040. Minimum Standards for Lot Consolidation.

An Affordable Housing Project submitted pursuant to this Chapter must comply with all the folIowing minimum standards:

A. Number of Residential Units. The Affordable Housing Project must include not less than 16 residential units, and amount to a development density of not less than 30 dwelling units per acre.

B. Development Standards. All development standards in the underlying zone are applicable, except as otherwise authorized by this Chapter.

C. Affordability. The property owner or authorized representative must record a covenant against title to the resulting lot, in a form approved by the City Attorney, securing the

Page 1 of 3 ends

-2 5-

continued affordability of all dwelling units in accordance with the Density Bonus Act, California Code of Regulations, and any other applicable law governing Affordable Housing Costs and Affordable Rent. The Restrictive Covenant must be recorded against the property before the issuance of the first construction permit. The property owner or authorized representative must annually report affordable housing costs to the Director.

D. Underutilized Lot. At least one of the lots proposed for consolidation must be less than or equal to 0.16 acres in gross area.
§ 17.14.050. Submittal Requirements.

The property owner or authorized representative must file an application on forms provided by the Director, together with required filing fees, a chain of title, and other information that may be required by the Director or Engineer. § 17.14.060. Review.

All Affordable Housing Projects submitted pursuant to this Chapter which include lot consolidation of four lots or less are subject to Development Review by the Director. The Director will evaluate all other Affordable Housing Projects for compliance with this Chapter before scheduling for a public hearing before the approving body pursuant to this Code.
§ 17.14.070. Incentives.

Affordable Housing Projects that satisfy the requirements of this Chapter may select not more than three of the following incentives:

A. Lot coverage. When the project proposes the maximum density allowed per the underlying zone, a five percent increase in maximum allowed building coverage.

B. Landscape requirements. When the project proposes the maximum density allowed per the underlying zone, a 10% reduction in minimum landscape requirements.

C. Setbacks. When the project proposes the maximum density allowed per the underlying zone, all required setbacks may be reduced to five feet, except when any property line of the consolidated lot abuts a parcel zoned for low-density residential uses, in which case the setbacks identified in the underlying zone apply.

D. Parking Reduction. A reduction in the number of required parking spaces may be granted by the Director, provided the property owner, or authorized agent, submits a parking study prepared by a traffic engineer which evaluates parking impacts and demands and demonstrates sufficient off-street parking to accommodate the use in support of reduction for review and approval to the Director and City Engineer.

Page 2 of 3 ends

-25-

Parking Alternatives. Tandem, shared and off-site parking options may be permitted when a parking study, prepared by a traffic engineer, is submitted to the Director for review and approval, which demonstrates sufficient off-street parking and circulation to accommodate the use. -
Minimum Group Open Space. The required amount of group open space may be reduced by five percent.

Small Lot Subdivisions. The minimum lot size required by the underlying zone may be reduced to not less than 4,000 square feet.
§ 17.14.080. Findings.

Before approving any Affordable Housing Project, including incentives pursuant to this Chapter, the approving authority must find all of the following:

The application satisfies the provisions of this Chapter.

The granting of the requested incentives will not result in any adverse impacts to adjacent properties due to an encroachment of building elements that would substantially'reduce such property's access to light and air, the privacy enjoyed by the adjacent residents, or otherwise reduce the reasonable use of the property.

In granting a reduction in the number of parking spaces and/or parking alternatives, the approving authority must find that the Affordable Housing Project will provide sufficient parking to accommodate the proposed use.”

Page 3 of 3 ends

-27-

E , 6d 0? B LLFLOWGQ
, ,— ,,, -
'9 1“ XIII» 4.3 (“$7, st f . °R°Mmman¢ a teport
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
FROM: Elizabeth C. Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services Rowena Genilo-Concepcion, Planning Manager
Patti Nahill, Planning Consultant
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to consider 1) Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25- 01; and 2) read by title only, waive first reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1443 —- An Ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 amending various
provisions of Title 1? (Zoning) oi the Bellflower Municipal Code to implement the Housing Element.

DATE: April 14,2025
EECOMMENDATION TO CITY COLINCH;~
1) Open the public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; and after considering the evidence, read by titie only, waive first reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1443; or
2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is a cost for codifying the proposed ordinance within the Bellflower Municipal Code (“BMC”) along with publication, etc. These are already anticipated as part of the City‘s operations. No additional direct fiscal impact is identified. Indirectly, the proposed actions will assist the City with obtaining State and federal grants.

PUBLIC NOTICE
A Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Los Cerritos Community News newspaper on March 21, 2025. Public hearing notices were posted at City Hall, Bellflower Substation, Thompson Park, Simms Park, Caruthers Park, Brakensiek Library, and the City’s website on March 21, 2025 As of the writing of this staff report, the City has received no correspondence.

Page 1 of 5 ends

-23-

Staff Report — Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 April 14, 2025

Page 2 of 5 ends

CEQA STATUS
The City reviewed the environmental impacts of the proposed Ordinance pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq. “CEQA”) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regs. §§ 15000, et seq, the “CEQA Guidelines”). In accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines § 15162, the City Council finds as follows:

A. Resolution No. 22-04 was adopted by the City Council on January 20, 2022. approving Mitigated Negative Declaration No. MND 21-01.

B. Changing the regulatory framework for future development and uses within the Bellfiower Municipal Code is an activity contemplated by MND 21-01.

C. This activity does not contemplate any changes which will require major revisions to MND 21-01 nor are there any substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which MND 21 -01 was undertaken.

D. There is no new information of substantial Importance, which was not known and could not have been: known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time MND 21 -01 was approved.

TYPE OF ACTION (Legislative)
in considering BMC amendments, the City Council acts in its discretionary legislative capacity. The recommended action constitutes 3 Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment (“ZOTA”) that would amend the BMC by adding and modifying zoning regulations to remove development constraints, to streamline processing and to update the BMC to address changes in state laws to implement the Housing Element (“HE”). Pursuant to BMC § 17.104.030, the City Council must find:

A. There are changed conditions since the existing zoning regulations became effective that warrant the proposed amendment to the BMC.

B. The proposed amendment to the BMC will not adversely affect adjoining property as to the value or precedent and will not be detrimental to the area.

C. The proposed amendment to the BMC will be in the interest or furtherance of public health, safety and general welfare.

D. The proposed amendment to the BMC will not adversely affect the City's General Plan or the City's Comprehensive Zoning Plan.
-jg-

Staff Report - Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 April 14, 2025

Page 3 of 5 ends

BACKGROUND
.:. Housing Element
The City’s Housing Element includes the requirement to accommodate Bellflower’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”). Specifically, the City must implement land use regulations that encourage new housing consisting of 3,735 new residential units (1,015 very low-income units; 488 low-income units; 553 moderate income units; and 1,679 above moderate-income units). To achieve this goal, the Housing Plan identifies long-term housing goals and short-term policies to address the identified housing needs.

The goals and policies are then implemented through a series of housing programs. The City has 35 recognized programs, including existing and new programs that have been added to address the City’s unmet housing needs. Each program identifies specific actions the City plans to undertake toward achieving each goal and policy.

DISCUSSION
As part of the certification of the Housing Element, the City committed to the implementation of certain Housing Element Programs. The proposed ZOTA is necessary to implement certain Housing Element Programs.
0:. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment
ZOTA 25-01 establishes a regulatory framework of future development and uses. The BMC amendments would be applicable City-wide, as they implement relevant State laws and the HE (Ordinance No. 1443, Exhibits A through E). The proposed ZOTA addresses the following categories:

A. Density Bonus (Program _5) — Harmonize the BMC with State Density Bonus provisions consistent with new legislation. All changes occur in BMC Chapter

17.41. (Exhibit A).

B. Accessory Dwelling Units (Program 9) — Repeal and replace the City’s ADU ‘ regulations with provisions that implement the dynamic State mandates. The ZOTA further removes development constraints by consolidating all ADU regulations into one Chapter for ease of access and removing antiquated terminology from the BMC. (Exhibit B).

C. Community Care Facilities (Program 13) — Establish a new Section 17.72.140 governing community care facilities that consolidates all land use regulations for community care facilities, conditionally allows residential care facilities sewing seven or more persons in residential zones, and imposes objective standards. (Exhibit C).
-30-

Staff Report - Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 April 14, 2025

Page 4 of 5 ends

DISCUSSION - Continued
D. Emergency Shelters (Program 18) — Harmonize the BMC with State law regarding the areas where emergency shelters are permitted and regulations governing use and development within the City. The proposed amendment includes establishing a maximum capacity of 30 occupants, and updating parking standards based on the number of staff rather than the number of beds/rooms. These changes proposed are mandated under State law. Additionally, the ZOTA removes development constraints by consolidating all of the City’s emergency shelter regulations in a single BMC section. (Exhibit D).
. Affordable Housing — Lot Consolidation (Program 29) — Repeals and replaces BMC Chapter 17.14 to provide standards and incentives for the consolidation of lots in support of the development of affordable housing. The proposed provision provides incentives (maximum of three) applicable to affordable housing projects that: are proposing at least 16 residentiai units with a minimum density of 30 dwelling units per acre, which include: increased lot coverage; reduced landscaping; reduced setback; reduced parking; parking alternatives; reduced group open space; and/or allowance for small lot subdivisions. (Exhibit E) . Remove Development Constraints (Program 13) — to revise the BMC to address constraints identified in Section 5 of the Housing Element, including (Attachment A, Sections, 15-30):
0 reducing parking requirements in the A-E, R—‘i, R-2 and R-3 zones (i.e., to ensure they do not constrain the development of housing) to require only a two-car garage and one guest parking space for each dwelling unit — removing the requirement of additional parking spaces for additional bedrooms after the first two
. increased height requirements in the R—3 zone to three stories or 40 feet, whichever is less -— previously two and one-half stories or 35 feet, whichever is less;
0 removal of subjective findings as part of the design. review process (i.e., point system for the 2/3’d rule);
. establishing explicit setbacks (Le, 15 feet for one-story buildings wand 20 feet for two-story buildings), rather than setbacks based on formula . new references have been added to BMC Chapter 17.14, “Zones Enumerated” Section to list “Specific Plan (SP)" and “Housing Opportunity Overlay Zone (HOOZ).”
. Supportive Housing (Program 18) — State law requires that supportive housing be permitted in multi-family and mixed use zones subject only to objective standards in the underlying zone. The ZOTA harrnonizes the BMC with the current State laws and consolidates all the BMC regulations into a single chapter to remove development constraints. (Attachment A, Sections 45-56) -51-

Staff Report — Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 25-01 April 14, 2025

Page 5 of 5 ends

DISCUSSION -— Continued
H. Reasonable Accommodations for Persons with Disabilities (Program 25) —- the proposed amendment includes, without limitation: updating the disability definition; removing findings 5 and 6 that were deemed by HCD to be a constraint; and removing the public notice and public hearing requirements to be consistent with State law changes. All changes occur in BMC Chapter 17.42. (Attachment A, Sections 57-60)

ATTACHMENT
A. Ordinance No. 1443 ' ' ' "‘........... ............................................ 6 -32-

LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION
Home Bill information : California Law Publications i other Resources _ My Subscriptions 1 My Favorites Code- Section: 1or20r1001 I (D
' . lid: W GOVERNMENT CODE - GOV
TITLE 7. PLANNING AND LAND USE [55000 - 66499.58] (Heading of Title 7' amended by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) DIVISION 1. PLANNING AND ZONING [65000 - 66342] ( Heading afDlvislon 1 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) CHAPTER 13. Accessory Dwelling Units [66310 - 66342] { Chapter 13 added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. ) ARTICLE 1. General Provisions [66310 - 66313] (Article 1 added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. ) 25319- The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) Accessory dwelling units are a valuable form of housing in California. (b) Accessory dwelling units provide housing for family members, students, the elderly, in-home health care providers, the disabled, and others, at below market prices within existing neighborhoods. (c) Homeowners who create accessory dwelling units benefit from added income, and an increased sense of security.
(d) Allowing accessory dwelling units in single—family or multifaniiy residential zones provides additional rental housing stock in California.
(e) California faces a severe housing crisis.
(f) The state is falling far short of meeting current and future housing demand with serious consequences for the state’s economy, our ability to buiid green infill consistent with state greenhouse gas reduction goals, and the well~ being of our citizens, particularly lower and middle-income earners. (g) Accessory dwelling units ofl’er lower cost housing to meet the needs of exisb'ng and future residents within existing neighborhoods, while respecting architectural character. (h) Accessory dwelling units are, therefore, an essential component of California's housing supply. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Efi’ectr've March 25,. 2024.) $313: It is the intent of the Legislature that an accessory dwelling unit ordinance adopted by a local agency has the effect of providing for the creation of accessory dwelling units and that provisions in this ordinance relating to matters including unit size, parking, fees, and other requirements, are not so arbitrary, excessive, or burdensome so as to unreasonably restrict the ability of homeowners to create accessory dwelling units in zones in which they are authorized by local ordinance.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) $12- Notwithstanding Section 65803, this chapter shall also apply to a charter city. addé‘d by $555. 2524,Ch7, $35.20.. 733177} Efiécu“”‘ve“ii'a“r& 2, 2024:}. ' 9—913: For purposes of this chapter:
(a) “Accessory dwelling unit” means an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons and is located on a lot with a proposed or existing primary residence. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family or multifamily dwelling is or will be situated. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following:
(1) An efficiency unit.
(2) A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code. -33-

(b) “Accessory structure” means a structure that is accessory and Incidental to a dwelling located on the same lot. (c) “Efficiency unit” has the same meaning as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code. (d) “Junior accessory dwelling unit” means a unit that is no more than 500 square feet in size and contained entirely within a single-family residence. A junior accessory dwelling unit may include separate sanitation facilities, or may share sanitation facilities with the existing structure. (e) “Livable space” means a space in a dwelling intended for human habitation, including living, sleeping, eating, cooking, or sanitation.
(f) “Living area" means the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit, including basements and attics, but does not include a galage or any accessory structure.
(9) “Local agency” means a city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered. (h) “Nonconforming zoning condition" means a physical improvement on a property that does not conform to current zoning standards.
(i) “Objective standards" means standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal. (j) “Passageway” means a pathway that is unobstructed ciear to the sky and extends from a street to one entrance of the accessory dwelling unit.
(k) “Permitting agency” means any entity that is involved in the review of a permit for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit and for which there is no substitute, including, but not limited to, applicable planning departments, building departments, utilities, and speciai diStricts. (i), “Proposed dwelling" means a dwelling that is the- subject of a permit application and that meets the requirements for permitting. .
011) “Public. transit" means a location, induding, but not iimited to, a bus stop or train station, where the public may access buses, trains, subways, and other forms of transportation that charge set fares, run on. fixed! routes, and are avaiiable to the public.
(n) “Tandem parking” means that two or more automo-biies are parked on a driveway or in any other iocation on a. lot, lined up behind one another.
(Amended by Stats. 2024, Ch. 296, Sec. 1. (SB 1211} Effective January 1, 2025.) -34-

LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION A
Home
!
Billlnformation ’ CaiifornlaLaw Publications Other Resources ‘ My Subscriptions MyFavorites Codoz— Section: iorzo'rioor (D
no: AW

GOVERNMENT CODE - GOV
TITLE 7. PLANNING AND LAND USE [65000 - 66499.53] ( Heading of Title 7 amended by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) DIVISION 1. PLANNING AND ZONING [55000 -66342] (Heading of Division 1 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) CHAPTER 13. Accessory Dwelling Units [5831!) - 66342] ( Chapter 13 added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. ) ARTICLE ZAccessory Dwelling Unit Approvals [68314 - 66332] ( Artide 2 added by Stab. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. ) m A local agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of accessory dwelling units in areas zoned to allow single—family or multifamily dwelling residential use. The ordinance shall do all of the following:
(a) Designate areas within the jurisdiction of the local agency where accessory dwelling units may be permitted.

The designation of areas may be based on the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of accessory dwelling units on traffic flow and public safety. A local agency that does not provide water or sewer services shall consult with the local water or sewer service provider regarding the adequacy of water and sewer services before designating an area where accessory dwelling units may be permitted. (in) (I) Impose objective standards on accessory dwelling uniis that include, but are not limited to, parking, height, setback, landscape, architectural review, maximum size of a, unit, and standards that prevent adverse impacts on any real property that is listed in the California. Register of Historical Resources. These standards shall not include requirements on minimum lot size.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a local agency may reduce or eliminate parking requirements for any accessory dwelling unit located within its jurisdiction. (c) Provide that accessory dwelling units do not exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which the accessory dwelling unit is located, and that accessory dwelling units are a residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designation for the lot.
(d) Require the accessory dwelling units to comply wifi'i all of the following:
(1) Except as provided in Article 4 (commencing with Section 66340), the accessory dwelling unit may be rented separate from the primary residence, but shall not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence.
(2) The lot is zoned to allow single-family or multifamily dwelling residential use and includes a proposed or existing dwelling. -
(3) The accessory dwelling unit is either attached to, or located within, the proposed or existing primary dwelling, including attached garages, storage areas or similar uses, or an accessory structure or detached from the proposed or exerting primary dwelling and located on the same lot as the proposed o’r "éxistirig primary dwelling, including detached garages.
(4) If there is an existing primary dwelling, the total floor area of an attached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 50 percent of the existing primary dwelling.
(5) The total floor area for a detached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 1,200 square feet. (6) No passageway shall be required in conjunction with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit. (7) No setback shall be required for an existing living area or accessory structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit -3 5-

or to a portion of an accessory dwelling unit, and a setback of no more than four feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit that is not converted from an existing structure or a new structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure. (8) Local building code requirements that apply to detached dwellings, except that the construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not constitute a Group R occupancy change under the local building code, as described in Section 310 of the California Building Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), unless the building official or enforcement agency of the local agency makes a written finding based on substantial evidence in the record that the construction of the accessory dwelling unit could have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety. Nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted to prevent a local agency from changing the occupancy code of a space that was unhabitable space or was only permitted for nonresidential use and was subsequently converted for residential use pursuant to this article. (9) Approval by the local health officer where a private sewage disposal system is being used, if required. (10) (A) Parking requirements for accessory dwelling units shall not exceed one parking space per accessory dwelling unit or per bedroom, whichever is less. These spaces may be provided as tandem parking on a driveway. (B) Offstreet parking shall be permitted in setback areas in locations determined by the local agency or through tandem parking, unless specific findings are made that parking in setback areas or tandem parking is not feasible based upon specific site or regional topographical or fire and life safety conditions. (C) This subparagrarph shall not apply to an accessory dwelling unit that is described in Section 66322. (11) When a garage, carport, covered parking, structure, or uncovered parking space is demolished in conjunction:
with the construction of an accessory dwelling unit or converted to an accessory dwelling unit, the local agency shall not require that those off'street parking spaces be replaced. (12) Accessory dwelling units shall not be required to provide fire sprinklers if they are not required for the primary residence. The construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not trigger a requirement: for fire sprinklers to be installed in the existing primary dwelling. (e) Require that a demolition permit for a detached garage that is to be replaced with an accessory dwelling unit be reviewed with the application for the accessory dwelling unit and issued at the same time. (f) An accessory dwelling unit ordinance shall not require, and the applicant shall; not be otherwise required, to provide written notice or post a placard for the demolition of a detached garage that is to be replaced with an ' accessory dwelling unit, unless the property is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district.
(Amended by Stats. 2024, Ch. 296, Sec. 2. (SB 1211) Effective January 1, 2025.) Eli Section 66314 establishes the maximum standards that a local agency shall use to evaluate a» proposed accessory dwelling unit on a lot that includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. No additional standards, other than those provided in Section 66314, shall be used or imposed, including an owner—occupant requirement, except that a local agency may require that the property may be used for rentals of terms 30 days or longer; (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) M4 An existing accessory dwelling unit ordinance governing the creation of an accessory dwelling unit by a- local agency or an accessory dwelling ordinance adopted by a local agency shall provide an approval process that includes only ministerial provisions for the approval of accessory dwelling units and shall not include any discretionary processes, provisions, or requirements for those units, except as othen/vise provided in this article. If a local agency has an existing accessory dwelling unit ordinance that fails to meet the requirements of this article, that ordinance shall be null and void and that agency shall thereafter apply the standards established in this article for the approval of accessory dwelling units, unless and until the agency adopts an ordinance that complies with this article.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) M (a) A permit application for an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit shall be considered and approved ministerially without discretionary review or a hearing, notwithstanding Section 65901 or 65906 or any local ordinance regulating the issuance of variances or special use permits. The permitting agency shall either approve or deny the application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory I
-36-

dwelling unit within 60 days from the date the permitting agency receives a completed application if there is an existing single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot. If the permit application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot, the permitting agency may delay approving or denying the permit application for the accessory dwelling unit or the junior accessory dweiling unit until the permitting agency approves or denies the permit application to create the new single-family or multifamily dwelling, but the application to create or serve the accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall be considered without discretionary review or hearing. If the applicant requests a delay, the 60-day time period shall be tolled for the period of the delay. If the local agency has not approved or denied the completed application within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved. A local agency may charge a fee to reimburse it for costs incurred to implement this section, including the costs of adopting or amending any ordinance that provides for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit. (b) If a permitting agency denies an application for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit pursuant to subdivision (a), the permitting agency shall, within the time period described in subdivision (a), return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant. (c) No local ordinance, policy, or regulation, other than an accessory dwelling unit ordinance consistent with this article shail be the basis for the delay or denial of a building permit or a use permit under this section. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) m (a) A local agency may amend its zoning ordinance or general plan to incorporate the policies, procedures, or other provisions applicable to the creation of an accessory dwelling unit if these provisions are consistent with the limitations of this article.
(b) An accessory dweliing unit ordinance shail not be considered in the appiication of any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residentiai growth.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Efi‘ecfive March 25, 2024.} 3311 An accessory dweiiing unit that conforms to Section 66314 shall be deemed to be an accessory use or an accessory buriiding and shall not be considered to exceed the ailowabie density for the iot upon which it is located, and shall be deemed to be a residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designations for the iot. The accessory dwelling unit shalt not be considered in the application of any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential growth. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Efi'ective March 25, 2024.) M- (a) When a loaf agency that has not adopted an ordinance governing accessory dwelling units in accordance with Section 66314 receives an application for a permit to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit pursuant to this article, the local agency shall approve or disapprove the application ministerialiy without discretionary review pursuant to Section 66317. The permitting agency shall either approve or deny the application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit within 60 days from the date the permitting agency receives a completed application if there is an existing single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot. If the permit application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create or serve a new single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot, the permitting agency may delay approving or denying the permit application for the accessory dwelling unit or the junior accessory dwelling unit until the permitting agency approves or denies the permit application to create or serve the new single-family or multifamily dwelling, but the application to create or serve the accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall still be considered ministeriaily without discretionary review or a hearing.

If the applicant requests a delay, the 60-day time period shall be tolled for the period of the delay. If the local agency has not approved or denied the completed application within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved.
(b) If a permitting agency denies an application for an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit pursuant to subdivision (a), the permitting agency shall, within the time period described in subdivision (a), return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) 51331: (a) Subject to subdivision (b), a local agency may establish minimum and maximum unit size requirements for both attached and detached accessory dwelling units. -37-

(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a local agency shall not establish by ordinance any of the following:
(1) A minimum square footage requirement for either an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit that prohibits an efficiency unit.
(2) A maximum square footage requirement for either an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit that is less than either of the following:
(A) Eight hundred fifty square feet.
(B) One thousand square feet for an accessory dwelling unit that provides more than one bedroom. (3) Any requirement for a zoning clearance or separate zoning review or any other minimum or maximum size for an accessory dwelling unit, size based upon a percentage of the proposed or existing primary dwelling, or limits on lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, front setbacks, and minimum lot size, for either attached or detached dwellings that does not permit at least an 800 square foot accessory dwelling unit with four-foot side and rear yard setbacks to be constructed in compliance with all other local development standards. (4) Any height limitation that does not allow at least the following, as applicable:
(A) A height of 16 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit.
(5) A height of 18 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit that is within one-half of one mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor, as those terms are defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code. A local agency shall also allow an additional: two feet in height to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch: of the primary dwelling unit. (C) A height of 18 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed multifamily, multistory dwelling.
(D) A height of 25 feet or the height limitation in the local zoning ordinance that applies to the primary dwelling, whichever is lower, for an accessory dwelling unit that is attached to a primary dwelling. This subparagraph shall not require a local agency to allow an accessory dwelling unit to exceed two stories. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Efi'ective March 25, 2024'.) m Notwithstanding any other law, and whether or not the local agency has adopted an ordinance governing accessory dwelling units in accordance with Section 66314, all of the following shall apply:
(a) A local agency shall not impose any parking standards for an accessory dwelling unit in any of the following instances:
(1) Where the accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half of one mile walking distance of public transit. (2) Where the accessory dwelling unit is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district.
{3) Where the accessory dwelling, unit is part of the proposed or existing primary residence or an accessory structure.
(4) When on-street parking permits arerequiredbut not. offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit. (5) When there is a car share vehicle located within one block of the accessory dwelling unit. (6) When a permit application for an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create a new single—family dwelling or a new multifamily dwelling on the same lot, provided that the accessory dwelling unit or the parcel satisfies any other criteria listed in this subdivision. (b) The local agency shall not deny an application for a permit to create an accessory dwelling unit due to the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions, building code violations, or unpermitted structures that do not present a threat to public health and safety and are not affected by the construction of the accessory dwelling unit. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) -38-

m (a) Notwithstanding Sections 66314 to 65322, inclusive, a local agency shall ministeriaily approve an application for a building permit within a residential or mixed-use zone to create any of the following:
(1) One accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit per lot with a proposed or existing single- famiiy dwelling if all of the following apply:
(A) The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is within the proposed space of a single- family dwelling or existing space of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure and may include an expansion of not more than 150 square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure. An expansion beyond the physical dimensions of the existing accessory structure shall be limited to accommodating ingress and egress.
(B) The space has exterior access from the proposed or existing single-family dwelling. (C) The side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire and safety. (D) The junior accessory dwelling unit complies with the requirements of Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333).
(2) One detached, new construction, accessory dwelling unit that does not exceed four-foot side and rear yard setbacks for a lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. The accessory dwelling unit may be combined with a junior accessory dwelling unit described in paragraph (I). A local agency may impose the following conditions on the accessory dwelling unit:
(A) A total floor area limitation of not more than 800 square feet. (8) A height limitation as provided in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (5} 0f Section 66321, as applicable.
(3) (A) Multiple accessory dwelling units within the portions of existing multifamily dwelling structures that are not used as livable space, including, but not limited to, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages, if each unit complies with state building standards for dwellings. (B) A local agency shall allow at least one accessory dwelling unit within an existing multifamily dwelling and shall allow up to 25 percent of the existing multifamily dwelling units. (4) (A) (i) Multiple accessory dwelling units, not to exceed the number specified in clause (ii) or (iii), as applicable, that are located on a lot that has an existing or proposed multifamily dwelling, but are detached from that multifamily dwelling and are subject to a height limitation in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 66321, as applicable, and rear yard and side setbacks of no more than four feet. (ii) On a lot with an existing multifamily dwelling, not more than eight detached accessory dwelling units.

However, the number of accessory dwelling units allowable pursuant to this clause shall not exceed the number of existing units on the lot.
(iii) On a lot with a proposed multifamily dwelling, not more than two detached accessory dwelling units. (3) If the existing multifamily dwelling has a rear or side setback of less than four feet, the local agency shall not require any modification of the existing multifamily dwelling as a condition of approving the application to construct an accessory dwelling unit that satisfies the requirements of this paragraph. (b) A local agency shall not impose any objective development or design standard that is not authorized by this section upon any accessory dwelling unit that meets the requirements of any of paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive, of subdivision (a).
(c) A local agency shall not require, as a condition for ministerial approval of a permit application for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit, the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions. (d) The installation of fire sprinklers shall not be required in an accessory dwelling unit if sprinklers are not required for the primary residence. The construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not trigger a requirement for fire -39-

sprinklers to be installed in the existing multifamily dwelling. (e) A local agency shall require that a rental of the accessory dwelling unit created pursuant to this section be for a term longer than 30 days.
(f) A local agency may require, as part of the application for a permit to create an accessory dwelling unit connected to an onsite wastewater treatment system, a percolation test completed within the last five years, or, if the percolation test has been recertified, within the last 10 years. (9) Notwithstanding Section 66321 and subdivision (a) a local agency that has adopted an ordinance by July 1, 2018, providing for the approval of accessory dwelling units in multifamily dwelling structures shall ministerially consider a permit application to construct an accessory dwelling unit that is described in subdivision (a), and may impose objective standards including, but not limited to, design, development, and historic standards on said accessory dwelling units. These standards shall not include requirements on minimum lot size. (Amended by Stats. 2024, Ch. 296, Sec. 3. (SB 1211) Effective January 1, 2025. ) $3211 (a) Fees charged for the construction of accessory dwelling units shall be determined in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 66000) and Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 66012). (b) An accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered by a local agency, special district, or water corporation to be a new residential use for purposes of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for utilities, including water and sewer service, unless the accessory dwelling unit was constructed with a new single-family dwelling. (c) (1) A local agency, special district, or water corporation shall not impose any impact fee upon the development of an accessory dwelling unit less than 750 square feet. Any impact fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.
(2) For purposes of this subdivision, “impact fee” has the same meaning as the term “fee" is defined in subdivision (b) of Section 66000, except that it also includes tees specified in Section 66477. “Impact fee" does not include any connection fee or capacity charge charged by a local agency, special district, or water corporation. (d) For an: accessory dwelling unit described in paragraph (1} of subdivision (a) or Section 66323, a: local agency, special district, or water corporation shall not require the applicant to install a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility or impose a related connection fee or capacity charge, unless the accessory dwelling unit was constructed with a new single-family dwelling, or upon separate conveyance of the accessory dwelling; unit pursuant to Section 66342. (e) For an accessory dwelling unit that is not described in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 66323, a local agency, special district, or water corporation may require a new or separate utility connection directly between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility. Consistent with Section 66013, the connection may be subject to a connection fee or capacity charge that shall be proportionate to the burden of the proposed accessory dwelling unit, based upon either its square feet or the number of its drainage fixture unit (DFU) values, as defined in the Uniform Plumbing Code adopted and published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, upon the water or sewer system. This fee or charge shall not exceed the reasonable cost of providing this service. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) m (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), this article shall supersede a conflicting local ordinance. (b) This article does not limit the authority of local agencies to adopt less restrictive requirements for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) m (a) A local agency shall submit a copy of the ordinance adopted pursuant to Section 66314 to the Department of Housing and Community Development within 60 days after adoption. After adoption of an ordinance, the department may submit written findings to the local agency as to whether the ordinance complies with this article.
(b) (1) If the department finds that the local agency’s ordinance does not comply with this article, the department shall notify the local agency and shall provide the local agency with a reasonable time, no longer than 30 days, to respond to the findings before taking any other action authorized by this article. (2) The local agency shall consider the findings made by the department pursuant to paragraph (1) and shall do one of the following:
-40-

(A) Amend the ordinance to comply with this article.
(B) Adopt the ordinance without changes. The local agency shall Include findings in its resolution adopting the ordinance that explain the reasons the local agency believes that the ordinance complies with this article despite the findings of the department.
(c) (1) If the local agency does not amend its ordinance in response to the department’s findings or does not adopt a resolution with findings explaining the reason the ordinance complies with this article and addressing the department's findings, the department shall notify the local agency and may notify the Attorney General that the local agency is in violation of state law.
(2) Before notifying the Attorney General that the local agency is in violation of state law, the department may consider whether a local agency adopted an ordinance in compliance with this article between January 1, 2017, and January 1, 2020.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) m The department may review, adopt, amend, or repeal guidelines to implement uniform standards or criteria that supplement or clarify the terms, references, and standards set forth in this article. The guidelines adopted pursuant to this section are not subject to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) m A local agency shall not issue a certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit before die local agency issues a certificate of occupancy for the primary dwelling. (Added by $135. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effeaive March 25, 2024.) m Nothing in this article shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code), except that the local government shall not be required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit applications for accessory dwelling units.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Ehrective'Mai-eh 25, 2024.) m- A local agency may count an accessory dwelling unit for purposes of identifying adequate sites for housing, as specified in subdivision (a) of Section 65583.1, subject to authorization by the department and compliance with this division.
(Addedby Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) EFFecfive March 25, 2024.) m- In enforcing building standards pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 17950) of Chapter 5 of Part

1.5 of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code for an accessory dwelling unit described in subdivision (a): or (b), a local agency, upon request of an owner of an accessory dwelling unit for a delay in enforcement, shall delay enforcement of a building standard, subject to compliance with Section 17980.12 of the Health and Safety Code:
(a) The accessory dwelling unit was built before January 1, 2020. (b) The accessory dwelling unit was built on or after January 1, 2020, in a local jurisdiction that, at the time the accessory dwelling unit was built, had a noncompliant accessory dwelling unit ordinance, but the ordinance is compliant at the time the request is made.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Efi'ective March 25, 2024.) 55332: (a) Notwithstanding any other law, and except as otherwise provided in subdivision (b), a local agency shall not deny a permit for an unpermitted accessory dwelling unit or unpermitted junior accessory dwelling unit that was constructed before January 1, 2020, due to either of the following:
(1) The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is in violation of building standards pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 17960) of Chapter 5 of Part 1.5 of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code. (2) The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit does not comply with this article or Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333), as applicable, or any local ordinance regulating accessory dwelling units or junior accessory dwelling units.
-41-

idea-”m iii f / LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION
Home Bill lnfonnation canfumfa Law : Publications 3 Other Resources f My Subscriptions MyFavorites Code: SelectCodev Section: 1or20r1001 ‘ (D
up: mm GOVERNMENT CODE - GOV
TITLE 7. PLANNlNG AND LAND USE [65000 - 66499.58] (Heading of Title 7 amended by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) DIVISION 1. PLANNING AND ZONING [65000 - 66342] ( Heading of Division 1 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) CHAPTER 13. Accessory Dwelling Units [66310 - 66342] ( Chapter 13 added by Stats. 2024. Ch. 7, Sec. 20. ) ARTiCLE 3. Junior Accessory Dwelling Units [66333 -66339] ( Article 3 added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. ) m Notwithstanding Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314), a local agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of junior accessory dwelling units in single-family residential zones. The ordinance may require a permit to be obtained for the creation of a junior accessory dwelling unit, and shall do all of the following:
(3) Limit the number of junior accessory dwelling units to one per residential lot zoned for single‘family residences with a single-family residence built, or proposed to be built, on the lot. (b) Require owner-occupancy in the single family residence in which the junior accessory dwelling unit will be permitted. The owner may reside in either the remaining portion of the structure or the newly created junior accessory dwelling unit. miner-occupancy shall not be required if the owner is another governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization-
(c) Require the recordationt of a deed restriction, which. shall run with the land, shall be filed with the permitting agency, and shall include both of the following:
(I) A prohibition on the sale of the junior accessory dwelfing- unit separate from the sale of the single—family residence, including a statement that the deed restriction may be enforced against future purchasers. (2) A restriction on the size and attributes of the junior accessory dwelling unit that conforms with this article. (cl) Require a permitted junior accessory dwefl’ing unit to be constructed within the walls of the proposed or existing single-family residence. For purposes of this subdivision, enclosed uses within the residence, such as attached garages, are considered a part of the proposed or existing single-family residence. (e) (1) Require a permitted junior accessory dwelling unit to include a separate entrance from the main entrance to the proposed or existing single-family residence.
(2) Ifa permitted junior accessory dwelling unit does not include a separate bathroom, the permitted junior accessory dwelling unit shall include a separate entrance from the main entrance to the structure, with an interior entry to the main living area.
(f) Require the permitted junior accessory dwelling unit to include an efficiency kitchen, which shall include all of the following:
(1) A cooking facility with appliances.
(2) A food preparation counter and storage cabinets that are of reasonable size in relation to the size of the junior accessory dwelling unit.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Efi‘ec‘tive March 25, 2024.) M5: (a) A junior accessory dwelling unit ordinance adopted pursuant to Section 66333 shall not require additional parking as a condition to grant a permit.
(b) This article shall not be interpreted to prohibit the requirement of an inspection, including the imposition of a fee for that inspection, to determine if the junior accessory dwelling unit complies with applicable building -42-

standards.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) E5935 (a) (1) An application for a permit pursuant to this article shall, notwithstanding Section 65901 or 65906 or any local ordinance regulating the issuance of variances or special use permits, be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or a hearing.
(2) The permitting agency shall either approve or deny the application to create or serve a junior accessory dwelling unit within 60 days from the date the local agency receives a completed application if there is an existing single—family dwelling on the lot.
(3) If the permit application to create or serve a junior accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create or serve a new single-family dwelling on the lot, the permitting agency may delay approving or denying the permit application for the junior accessory dwelling unit until the permitting agency approves or denies the permit application to create or serve the new single-family dwelling, but the application to create or serve the junior accessory dwelling unit shall still be considered ministerially without discretionary review or a hearing.
(4) If the applicant requests a delay, the 60-day time period shall be toiled for the period of the delay. (b) If a permitting agency denies an application for a junior accessory dwelling unit pursuant to subdivision (a), the permitting agency shall, within the time period described in subdivision (a), return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant.
(c) A local agency may charge a fee to reimburse the local agency for costs incurred in connection with the issuance of a permit pursuant to this article.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Efi‘ective March 25, 2024.) m A local agency shall not deny an application for a permit to create a junior accessory dwelling unit pursuant to this article due to the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions, building code violations, or unpermitted structures that do not present a threat to public health and safety and that are not affected by the construction of ' the junior accessory dwelling unit.
(Added by SE38. 2024, Ch. 2, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) M1: (a) For purposes of any fire or life protection ordinance or regulation, a junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered a separate or new dwelling unit.
(b) This article shall not be construed to prohibit a city, county, city and county, or other local public entity from adopting an ordinance or regulation relating to fire and life protection requirements within a single-family residence that contains a junior accessory dwelling unit so long as the ordinance or regulation applies unlfon'nly to all single- family residences within the zone regardless of whether the single~family residence includes a junior accessory dwelling unit or not.
(Added by Ski’s. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) m (a) For purposes of providing service for water, sewer, or power, including a connection fee, a junior accessory dwelling unit shall not be considered a separate or new dwelling unit. (b) This section shall not be construed to prohibit a local agency from adopting an ordinance or regulation related to a service or a connection fee for water, sewer, or power, that applies to a single-family residence that contains a junior accessory dwelling unit, so long as that ordinance or regulation applies uniformly to all single—family residences regardless of whether the single-family residence includes a junior accessory dwelling unit. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) $333. If a local agency has not adopted a local ordinance pursuant to this article, the local agency shall ministerially approve a permit to construct a junior accessory dwelling unit that satisfies the requirements set forth in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 66323 and the requirements of this article. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. ( SB 477 ) Effective March 25, 2024.) -43-

”a“ gl/W'QL .r i' LEGISLATIVE INFORMATION
A
Home Bill Information . California Law .- Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Code: Section: 1or20ri00i ‘ y (D
Lilli MW

GOVERNMENT CODE - GOV
TITLE 7. PLANNING AND LAND USE [85000 - 66499.58] (Heading of Title 7 amended by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) DIVISION 1. PLANNING AND ZONING [65000 - 66342] (Heading of Division 1 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) CHAPTER 13. Accessory Dwelling Units [66319 - 66342] ( Chapter 13 added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. ) ARTICLE 4.Accessory Dwelling Unit Sales [56340 - 66342} ( Article 4 added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. ) m For purposes of this article:
(a) “Qualified buyer" means persons and families of low or moderate income, as that term is defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code.
(b) ‘Quaalified nonprofit corporation" means a nonprofit corporation organized- pursuant to Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code that has received a welfare exemption under Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code for properties intended to be sold to low-income families who participate in a special no—Interest loan program.
(Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (so 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) M A local agency shall allow an accessory dwelling unit to be sold or conveyed separately from the primary residence to a qualified buyer if all of the following apply:
(a) The accessory dwelling unit or the primary dwelling was built or developed by a qualified nonprofit corporation. (b) There is an enforceable restriction on: the use of the land. pursuant to a recorded contract between the qualified buyer and the qualified nonprofit corporation that satisfies all of the requirements specified in paragraph (10) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. (c) The property is held pursuant to- a- recorded tenancy in common agreement that includes all of the following:
(1) The agreement allocates to each qualified buyer an undivided, unequal interest in the property based on the size of the dwelling that each qualified buyer occupies. (2) A repurchase option that requires the qualified buyer to first offer the qualified nonprofit corporation to buy the accessory dwelling unit or primary dwelling if the buyer desires to sell or convey the property. (3) A requirement that the qualified buyer occupy the accessory dwelling unit or primary dwelling as the buyer’s principal residence.
(4) Affordability restrictions on the sale and conveyance of the accessory dwelling unit or primary dwelling that ensure the accessory dwelling unit and primary dwelling will be preserved for low-Income housing for 45 years for mmner~occupled housing units and will be sold or resold to a qualified buyer. (5) If the tenancy in common agreement is recorded after December 31, 2021, it shall also Include all of the following: .
(A) Delineation of all areas of the property that are for the exclusive use of a cotenant. Each cotenant shall agree not to claim a right of occupancy to an area delineated for the exclusive use of another cotenant, provided that the latter cotenant's obligations to each of the other cotenants have been satisfied. (B) Delineation of each cotenant’s responsibility for the costs of taxes, insurance, utilities, general maintenance and repair, improvements, and any other costs, obligations, or liabilities associated with the -44-

property. This delineation shall only be binding on the parties to the agreement, and shall not supersede or obviate the liability, whether joint and several or otherwise, of the parties for any cost, obligation, or liability associated with the property where such liability is otherwise established by law or by agreement with a third party.
(C) Procedures for dispute resolution among the parties before resorting to legal action. (d) A grant deed naming the grantor, grantee, and describing the property interests being transfen‘ed shall be recorded in the county in which the property is located. A Preliminary Change of Ownership Report shall be filed concurrently with this grant deed pursuant to Section 480.3 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. (e) Notwithstanding Section 66324, if requested by a utility providing service to the primary residence, the accessory dwelling unit has a separate water, sewer, or electrical connection to that utility. (f) Nothing in this section limits the ability of an accessory dwelling unit to be sold or othenNise conveyed separate from the primary residence as a condominium pursuant to an ordinance adopted under Section 66342. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (SB 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) $353: In addition to the requirement that a local agency allow the separate sale or conveyance of an accessory dwelling unit pursuant to Section 56341, a local agency may also adopt a local ordinance to allow the separate conveyance of the primary dwelling unit and accessory dwelling unit or units as condominiums. Any such ordinance shall include all of the following requirements:
(a) The condominiums shall be created pursuant to the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act (Part 5 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 4 of the Civil Code). (b) The condominiums shall be created in conformance with all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410)) and ail objective requirements of a local subdivision ordinance.
(c) Before recordation of the condominium pian, a safety inspection of the accessory dwelling unit shall be conducted as evidenced either through a certificate of occupancy from the local agency or a housing quality standards report from a building inspector certified by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.
(d) (1) Neither a subdivision map nor a condominium plan shall be recorded with the county recorder in the county where the reai property is located without each lienhoider’s consent. The following shall apply to the consent of a lienhoider:
(A) A lienholder may refuse to give consent.
(3) A lienholder may consent provided that any terms and conditions required by the llenholder are satisfied. (2) Prior to recordation of the initial or any subsequent modifications to the condominium plan, written evidence of the lienholder's consent shall be provided to the county recorder along with a signed statement from each llenholder that states as follows:
“(Name of llenholder) hereby consents to the recording of this condominium plan In their sole and absolute discretion and the borrower has or will satisfy any additional terms and conditions the llenholder may have.” (3) The lienholder’s consent shall be included on the condominium plan or a separate form attached to the condominium plan that includes the following information:
(A) The lienholder’s signature.
(B) The name of the record owner or ground lessee.
(C) The legal description of the real property.
(D) The identities of all parties with an interest in the real property as reflected in the real property records. (E) The lienholder’s consent shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder of the county in which the real property is located.
-45-

(e) The local agency shall include the following notice to consumers on any accessory dwelling or junior accessory dwelling unit submittal checklist or public information issued describing requirements and permitting for accessory dwelling units, including as standard condition of any accessory dwelling unit building permit or condominium plan approval:
“NOTICE: If you are considering establishing your primary dwelling unit and accessory dwelling unit as a condominium, please ensure that your building permitting agency allows this practice. If you decide to establish your primary dwelling unit and accessory dwelling unit as a condominium, your condominium plan or any future modifications to the condominium plan must be recorded with the County Recorder. Prior to recordation or modification of your subdivision map and condominium plan, any lienholder with a lien on your title must provide a form of written consent either on the condominium plan, or on the lienholder’s consent form attached to the condominium plan, with text that clearly states that the lender approves recordation of the condominium plan and that you have satisfied their terms and conditions, if any.

In order to secure lender consent, you may be required to follow additional lender requirements, which may include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following:
(a) Paying off your current lender.

You may pay off your mortgage and any liens through a refinance or a new loan. Be aware that refinancing or using a new loan may result in changes to your interest rate or tax basis. Also, be aware that any subsequent modification to your subdivision map or condominium plan must also be consented to by your lender, which consent may be denied.
(b) Securing your lender’s approval of a modification to their loan collateral due to the change of your current property legal description into one or more condominium parcels. (c) Securing your lender’s consent to the details of any construction loan or ground lease. .

This may include a copy of the improvement contract entered in good faith with a licensed contractor, evidence that the record owner or ground lessee has the funds to complete the work, and a signed statement made by the record owner or ground lessor that the information in me consent above is true and correct.” (f) If an accessory dwelling unit is established. as a condominium, the local government shall require the homeowner to notify providers of utilities, including water, sewer, gas, and electricity, of the condominium creation and separate conveyance.
(g) (1) The owner of a property or a separate interest within an existing planned development that has an existing association, as defined in Section 4080 of the Civil Code, snail not record a condominium plan to create a common interest development under Section 4100 of the Civil Code without the express written authorization by the existing association.
(2) For purposes of this subdivision, written authorization by the existing association means approval by the board at a duly noticed board meeting, as defined in Section 4090‘ of the Civil Code, and if needed pursuant to the existing association’s governing documents, membership approval of the existing association. (h) An accessory dwelling unit shall be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence only under the conditions outlined in this paragraph or pursuant to this article. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 7, Sec. 20. (so 477) Effective March 25, 2024.) -45-

14-A

TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager

FROM: Tae Rhee, Finance Director/City Treasurer

SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to receive and file Warrant Register No. 25-102, dated April 28, 2025.

DATE: April 28, 2025

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Section X.B of the Budget, Financial and Administrative Policies stipulates the City’s process in executing warrants for the payment of goods and services, as well as the requirement to make each warrant register a matter of public record by placing it on the City Council Agenda as a Consent Calendar item.

RECOMMENDATION

1) Receive and file Warrant Register No. 25-102; or

2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

FISCAL IMPACT

$3,994,598.78 in expenditures.

ATTACHMENT

Warrant Register No. 25-102 .......................................................................................... 2

0F BELLFL {Cl OWGQ «It Stafteport
0 v- ROWING T001819?”

Fund No.CITY OF BELLFLOWER:
010 General Fund 1,011,065.29$
015 TDA Article 3 Fund - Pedestrian/Bikeway 90,000.00
037 Drug Education/Rehabilitation Fund (6,960.00)
090 Agency Fund/Refundable Deposits - Private Projects 668.10 100 Proposition A Fund - Transportation 20,703.42
115 Measure M Fund - Transportation / Streets 155,266.37 125 Measure R Fund - Transportation / Streets 226,143.76 135 Proposition C Fund - Transportation / Streets 86,173.94 140 State Gas Tax Fund - Streets 95,000.00
510 Economic Development Fund 9,485.00
530 IT/Equipment Replacement Fund 11,825.78
540 GIS Update Fund 2,175.00
600 Building and Safety Fund 99,646.25
602 Accessibility Compliance Fund 593.34
900 Community Development Block Grant Fund 12,557.50
920 ARPA SLFRP Fund 1,869,244.47
944 Parking District No. 1 Fund 99.64
Total Accounts Payable 3,683,687.86
Payroll Check/ACH Payments (Pay Period Ending 04/04/25) 310,910.92

Total Expenditures - City 3,994,598.78$

WARRANT REGISTER FUND SUMMARY

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
(Warrant Register No. 25-102 Dated April 28, 2025)
https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/Warrant Registers/Warrant Register Cover Page Template

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 001 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: 20434 (20434 SOUTH SANTA FE AVENUE, LLC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: AFF01 (AFFORDABLE PRINTER SERVICES)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ALL12 (ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ALL22 (ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: AMA01 (AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 002 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: AMA01 (AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES) ..Continue..

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BLU01 (BLUE DIAMOND MATERIALS)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BNY01 (THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BUR01 (BURKE,WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP)

19.28 010 42032 1400 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/RETAINER EXPENSES 339400 XXXXXX 04/10/25 86.40 010 42098 1400 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/GENERAL LITIGATION 13794.60 010 42032 1400 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/GENERAL TRANSACTIONAL 7320.60 010 42032 1350 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/LABOR & EMPLOYMENT

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 003 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: BUR01 (BURKE,WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP) ..Continue..

---- WARRANT ----- --------------------------------------- DISTRIBUTION --------------------------------------- Invoice No Number Date Amount Paid G/L Account No Ctr Description ---------- ------ -------- ------------ -------------- --- -------------------------------------------------- 339400 XXXXXX 04/10/25 8627.12 010 42032 1400 02/25 LEGAL SVCS/CONSOLIDATED FIRE PROT.LA COUNTY 1008.00 010 42032 1400 02/25 LEGAL SVCS/ADDITIONAL ATTY.SVCS/AMICUS 3136.50 010 42032 1400 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/SPECIAL PROJ/HOUSING ELEMENT 178.50 010 42032 4105 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/GENERAL/13736 REGENTVIEW 1045.50 010 42032 4105 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/GENERAL/CE MEETINGS 178.50 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/CDBG/MASSAGE PARLORS 433.50 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/CDBG/17420 DOWNEY 510.00 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/CDBG/9070 ARTESIA 280.50 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/CDBG/15751 WOODRUFF 153.00 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/CDBG/17046 BELLFLOWER

76.50 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/CDBG/17430 BELLFLOWER 1377.00 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/CDBG/17024 CLARK 943.50 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/CDBG/9879 ALONDRA

51.00 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/CDBG/9103 ARTESIA 6630.00 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/CDBG/10015 ARTESIA PL.

34.00 900 42032 4152 02/25 LEGAL SVCS/CE/CDBG/17450 BLFR.(HARD TIMES) 746.70 010 36000 02/25 LEGAL SVCS/DEV.REIMB/16728 BELLFLOWER 3458.40 010 36000 02/25 LEGAL SVCS/DEV.REIMB/16211 BELLFLOWER 668.10 090 20522 TGH 02/25 LEGAL SVC/DEV.REIMB/8825 ARTESIA/STORAGE FAC 314.40 010 36000 02/25 LEGAL SVC/DEV.REIMB/17046 BELLFLOWER 314.40 010 42032 1400 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/GENERAL LEGAL/CBP ADMIN.

76.50 010 42032 4105 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/CE/GENERAL/10015 ARTESIA PL. 339269 XXXXXX 04/21/25 2772.10 010 42032 8010 TSS 02/25 LEGAL SERVICES/20434 SOUTH SANTA FE AVE,LLC ------------
Vendor's Total = 74734.60
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CAP02 (CAPITOL ENQUIRY, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CBE01 (SEMA INC. DBA CBE OFFICE SOLUTIONS)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 004 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CBE01 (SEMA INC. DBA CBE OFFICE SOLUTIONS) ..Continue..

48.00 010 43100 3000 03/05/25-04/04/25 COPIES/PW ADMIN.OFFICE ------------
Vendor's Total = 1149.03
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CEN03 (CENTRAL BASIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT)

88.87 010 43212 3900 01/25 RECYCLED WATER ------------
Vendor's Total = 232.14
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CHA25 (JOSEPH CHACON)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CJC01 (CJ CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, INC.)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 005 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CJC01 (CJ CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, INC.) ..Continue..

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CLE11 (CLEARPAY PROCESSING LLC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: COR01 (CORBIN WILLITS SYSTEMS, INC)

33.42 100 42030 3500 04/25 FINANCIAL SOFTWARE SUPPORT

50.12 135 42030 3650 04/25 FINANCIAL SOFTWARE SUPPORT ------------
Vendor's Total = 1670.80
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: COS00 (COSTAR REALTY INFORMATION, INC.)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 006 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: CPR03 (CPRS )

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: DIA02 (CESAR DIAZ)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: DIV05 (DIVISION OF THE STATE ARCHITECT)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ECK01 (ECKERSALL, LLC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ELE07 (ELECNOR BELCO ELECTRIC, INC.)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 007 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ELE07 (ELECNOR BELCO ELECTRIC, INC.) ..Continue..

---- WARRANT ----- --------------------------------------- DISTRIBUTION --------------------------------------- Invoice No Number Date Amount Paid G/L Account No Ctr Description ---------- ------ -------- ------------ -------------- --- -------------------------------------------------- XXXXXX 04/10/25 100000.00 140 47148 9000 111 02/25 TRAF.SIG.MOD/BLFR.,PARK ST/SPEC.#21/22-02 -8171.92 115 20400 111 RETENTION:02/25 TS MOD/BLFR.,PARK ST/SP.#21/22-02 -5000.00 140 20400 111 RETENTION:02/25 TS MOD/BLFR.,PARK ST/SP.#21/22-02 13384 XXXXXX 04/10/25 83215.11 135 47148 9000 112 12/24-2/25 NEW TRAF.SIG/BLFR.,CEDAR/SP#23/24-04 9812.62 125 47148 9000 112 12/24-2/25 NEW TRAF.SIG/BLFR.,CEDAR/SP#23/24-04 -4160.76 135 20400 112 RETENTION: 12/24-2/25 NEW TS/BLFR.,CEDAR/#23/24-04 -490.63 125 20400 112 RETENTION: 12/24-2/25 NEW TS/BLFR.,CEDAR/#23/24-04 ------------
Vendor's Total = 338642.71
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ELY01 (ELYSIAN ARTS & EVENTS, LLC DBA SOCA ARTS)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: EMP05 (EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: FRO07 (FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 008 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: FRO07 (FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS) ..Continue..

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: FUN06 (FUN EXPRESS, LLC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: GAL00 (GALLAGHER BENEFIT SERVICES, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: GOL12 (GOLDEN STAR TECHNOLOGY INC. (GST))

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: HDL03 (HDL SOFTWARE LLC)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 009 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: HDL03 (HDL SOFTWARE LLC) ..Continue..

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: IRS02 (INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: LOM01 (VICTOR LOMAS)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: LON02 (CITY OF LONG BEACH)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 010 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: LOS50 (LOS CERRITOS COMMUNITY NEWS)

---- WARRANT ----- --------------------------------------- DISTRIBUTION --------------------------------------- Invoice No Number Date Amount Paid G/L Account No Ctr Description ---------- ------ -------- ------------ -------------- --- -------------------------------------------------- 37413 XXXXXX 04/09/25 545.65 010 43000 4100 LEGAL AD/PUB.NTC.ND-24.01,DR 14488,V-23-01/3/7/25 37444 XXXXXX 04/09/25 748.32 010 43000 1300 LEGAL AD/FY24/25 ESCHEATMENT/UNCLAIMED/3/21/25 37443 XXXXXX 04/17/25 584.63 010 43000 4100 LEGAL AD/PUBLIC NOTICE ZOTA 25-01/PUB.03/21/25 37455 XXXXXX 04/17/25 512.37 010 43000 4100 LEGAL AD/PUBLIC NOTICE CU 24-10/PUB.03/29/25 ------------
Vendor's Total = 2390.97
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: LOS52 (LOS ANGELES REGIONAL INTEROPERABLE)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: MAR39 (STEVEN MARTINEZ)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: MER05 (MERCY HOUSE LIVING CENTERS)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 011 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: MIL10 (ROSS A. MILLER DBA MILLER SOUND)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: MSI01 (CONCENTRUS INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: MUN12 (MUNI ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: NAT43 (NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 012 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: NIC02 (NICHOLLS CONSULTING, INC.)

---- WARRANT ----- --------------------------------------- DISTRIBUTION --------------------------------------- Invoice No Number Date Amount Paid G/L Account No Ctr Description ---------- ------ -------- ------------ -------------- --- -------------------------------------------------- BLFR20253 XXXXXX 04/17/25 125.00 010 42348 3310 03/25 BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING SVCS. 450.00 010 42346 3310 03/25 USED OIL RECYCLING SERVICES 125.00 010 20800 03/25 BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING SVCS. -125.00 010 34080 03/25 BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING SVCS. 450.00 010 20800 03/25 USED OIL RECYCLING SERVICES -450.00 010 34070 03/25 USED OIL RECYCLING SERVICES ------------
Vendor's Total = 575.00
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: NOR16 (BARBARA NORBUT)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: OCE01 (OCEAN BLUE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ONE02 (O'NEIL VENTURES, INC.)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 013 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ONG01 (OSCAR NERI)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: PAR01 (LIBERTY UTILITIES/PARK WATER COMPANY)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: PERS0 (PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM)

0.01 010 43524 3900 ROUNDING ADJ
------------
Vendor's Total = 60533.64
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: PERS1 (PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 014 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: PML01 (P.M. LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES, LLC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: QUA08 (QUADIENT LEASING USA, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: REV04 (REVIZE LLC)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: ROB00 (ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONAL INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SCS02 (S.C. SIGNS & SUPPLIES LLC)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 015 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SCS02 (S.C. SIGNS & SUPPLIES LLC) ..Continue..

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SHE10 (GAIL P SHEPPARD-CAPRIETTA)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SIM06 (J R SIMPLOT COMPANY)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SMA02 (SMART & FINAL)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SMA03 (SMART & FINAL)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 016 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SMI01 (JIMMY L. SMITH)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SOU01 (SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SOU29 (SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: SOU70 (SOUTHWEST PATROL, INC.)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 017 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: TAY06 (TAYLOR'S LOCK & KEY)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: TIM06 (CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDINGS, LLC)

---- WARRANT ----- --------------------------------------- DISTRIBUTION --------------------------------------- Invoice No Number Date Amount Paid G/L Account No Ctr Description ---------- ------ -------- ------------ -------------- --- -------------------------------------------------- B250408H XXXXXX 04/08/25 210.73 010 41317 1012 3/26/25-4/25/25 INTERNET/CC VIDEO MTG/14388 LKWD. 206.50 010 41317 1012 3/26/25-4/25/25 INTERNET SVCS/CITY HALL 181.90 010 43300 8000 3/26/25-4/25/25 CABLE SVCS/CITY HALL 277.42 010 43300 5000 3/26/25-4/25/25 CABLE SVCS/SIMMS PARK 179.99 010 43300 2000 3/26/25-4/25/25 INTERNET SVCS/SUBSTATION 140.92 010 43300 3000 3/26/25-4/25/25 INTERNET SVCS/PUBLIC WORKS ------------
Vendor's Total = 1197.46
------------

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: TIT01 (TITAN ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC.)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: UNI39 (UNIDOS MASTERS SWIM TEAM)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 018 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: VIS01 (VISTA PAINT CORPORATION)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: WIL01 (WILLDAN ENGINEERING)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \BE04 (BELLFLOWER HIGH SCHOOL)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \CAN2 (GARY CANNON)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \FED4 (FEDEX )

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 019 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \G068 (ISAIAH GONZALEZ)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \GOV5 (GOVERNMENTJOBS.COM, INC. DBA NEOGOV)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \H038 (JESUS MEDINA HERNANDEZ)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \LAC8 (PATRICIA LA COMMARE-PELZ)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \LEY4 (CLEMENTE FRAUSTO LEYVA)

REPORT.: 04/22/25 City of Bellflower PAGE: 020 RUN....: 04/22/25 Cash Disbursement Report by Vendor ID #: PYVP Run By.: Deserie Stanley CTL.: BEL

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \R055 (TERESA RAMIREZ)

....................................................................................................................................

VENDOR.: \SCH0 (NATALIE SCHULZ)

Report's Grand Total = 3683687.86
============

https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/AA/Treasurer's Reports/Staff Report for TR.docx

14-B

TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager

FROM: Tae Rhee, Finance Director/City Treasurer

SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to receive and file the Treasurer’s Report for the Month of March 2025.

DATE: April 28, 2025

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Investment Policy requires the City Treasurer to provide to the City Council a monthly investment report which contains certain required information pursuant to Government Code Section 53646. The Treasurer’s Report also contains certain other information required pursuant to BMC Subsection 2.12.030.B.5, which requires submission of monthly financial statements of receipts and disbursements of the City to the City Council and City Manager. Furthermore, the Treasurer’s Report contains revenue and expenditure details on the development impact fees (Park Facilities, Public Facilities, Transportation Facilities, and Public Safety Facilities) and Public Arts Fees for fiscal years 2023-24 and 2024-25.

RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL

1) Receive and file the Treasurer’s Report; or

2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

FISCAL IMPACT

None

ATTACHMENT

Treasurer’s Report for the Month of March 2025 ........................................................... 2

(:4 OF BELLFLOWQ
0 ROWING TOGETY‘EQ.
« Staft’eport

NOTE: Figures with parentheses indicate negative amounts.

Beginning Revenues Expenditures Ending
Balance/and Other and Other Balance/
(Deficit)Deposits Disbursements (Deficit)
CITY OF BELLFLOWER:

UNRESTRICTED:
010 General Fund 54,841,790$ 1,973,622$ (1,842,517)$ 54,972,895$ 011 General Fund Capital Projects 18,080,525 7,333 (4,440) 18,083,418 012 Public Projects 7,129,414 25,190 - 7,154,604 999 Cash Clearing Unallocated Interest 663,103 204,768 (2,434) 865,437 RESTRICTED:

Development Impact/Other Fees (revenue/expenditure details attached) 024 Park Facilities 1,056,271 65,743 (112,742) 1,009,272 022 Public Facilities 16,623 5,796 - 22,419 026 Public Safety Facilities 6,529 1,973 - 8,502 028 Transportation Facilities 126,435 39,042 - 165,477 020 Public Arts 33,174 11,465 (22,990) 21,649 Other Funds
013 DOT Highway Relinquishment 3,549,942 - - 3,549,942 015 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 - - - - 030 Grant Projects 2,472,616 64,391 (55,880) 2,481,127 037 Drug Rehabilitation Program 279,911 - - 279,911 040 Public Educational Government (PEG) 995,539 - - 995,539 050 California COPS 482,006 11,896 - 493,902 070 Measure A Fund (503,217) 144,549 - (358,668) 090 Agency Fund/Refundable Deposits-Private Projects 2,018,165 92,314 (17,209) 2,093,270 100 Proposition A - Transportation 2,445,114 152,503 (228,899) 2,368,718 115 Measure M - Streets 2,847,919 249,886 (14,613) 3,083,192 125 Measure R - Streets 2,684,676 220,578 (476,808) 2,428,446 135 Proposition C - Streets 2,619,890 129,730 (32,832) 2,716,788 140 State Gas Tax - Streets 6,505,153 151,990 (101,017) 6,556,126 145 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA)8,255,173 153,872 - 8,409,045 150 Air Quality Management District Fees 221,259 24,379 - 245,638 230 Sewer Reconstruction 316,278 - - 316,278 320 Measure W 6,583,867 - (19,499) 6,564,368 510 Economic Development 3,133,637 9,522 (40,486) 3,102,673 530 IT & Equipment Replacement 1,294,261 - (176,076) 1,118,185 540 GIS Update 284,471 2,598 - 287,069 542 General Planning and Zoning Update 1,085,316 7,600 (58,789) 1,034,127 600 Building and Safety 452,196 90,231 (104,431) 437,996 602 Accessibility Compliance Fund 126,110 1,447 - 127,557 700 Debt Service - Public Facilities Corporation - - - - 710 Debt Service - Financing Authority (22,437) 5,971 - (16,466) 720 Debt Service - 2021/2018 Transportation COPS 2,075 66,868 - 68,943 730 Debt Service - 2021 Pension Obligation Bonds (1,965) 36 - (1,929) 900 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)(329,944) 332,530 (91,200) (88,614) 910 HOME Investment Partnership (159,388) 158,955 (46,301) (46,734) 920 ARPA SLFRP Fund 1,869,244 - (1,869,244) - 944 Parking District No. 1 (4,925) 40 (1,421) (6,306) Successor Housing Agency:
974 Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund 637,127 - (357) 636,770 TOTAL CITY OF BELLFLOWER 132,093,933$ 4,406,818$ (5,320,185)$ 131,180,566$ SUCCESSOR AGENCY:

RESTRICTED:
956 Successor Agency BUSD Trust 94,935$ 356$ -$ 95,291$ 970 Redevelopment Obligation Retirement Fund 56,276 125 (16,801) 39,600 972 Successor Agency Administration Fund (5,887) 15,000 (2,800) 6,313 TOTAL SUCCESSOR AGENCY 145,324$ 15,481$ (19,601)$ 141,204$ COMBINED TOTAL - CITY & SUCCESSOR AGENCY 132,239,257$ 4,422,299$ (5,339,786)$ 131,321,770$

CASH AND INVESTMENT BALANCES BY FUND

CITY OF BELLFLOWER AND BELLFLOWER SUCCESSOR AGENCY
(As of April 22, 2025)
TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2025
https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/AA/Treasurer's Reports/TR 24-25/TR 25-03

PARK FACILITIES FEES
Revenues:
18,288.00$ July 15, 2024 Park Fac Fee/15109 Ryon
20,605.60 July 22, 2024 Park Fac Fee/13610 Clark 7,000.00 August 28, 2024 Park Fac Fee/8740 Cedar 20,605.60 October 23, 2024 Park Fac Fee/14037 Charlemagne 45,440.64 November 7, 2024 Park Fac Fee/16415 Cornuta 20,622.80 December 18, 2024 Park Fac Fee/9509 Prichard 36,576.00 January 23, 2025 Park Fac Fee/9720 Flower St 18,920.00 January 27, 2025 Park Fac Fee/15302 Leahy 7,176.45 March 4, 2025 Park Fac Fee/16620 Grand Ave 37,926.00 March 17, 2025 Park Fac Fee/9700 Mayne St 20,640.00 March 20, 2025 Park Fasc Fee/14703 Betty Jean 253,801.09$
Project Expenditures:
16,800.00$ Park Master Plan
15,510.29 Simms Park Improvements
3,802.50 Constitution Park Improvements
2,849.96 Thompson Park Improvements
112,741.58 Caruthers Park Improvements
151,704.33$

PUBLIC FACILITIES FEES
Revenues:
1,185.00$ July 15, 2024 Public Fac Fee/15109 Ryon 3,277.80 July 17, 2024 Public Fac Fee/17640 Bellflower 1,569.38 July 22, 2024 Public Fac Fee/13610 Clark 1,569.38 October 23, 2024 Public Fac Fee/14037 Charlemagne 3,466.56 November 7, 2024 Public Fac Fee/16415 Cornuta 1,570.69 December 18, 2024 Public Fac Fee/9509 Prichard 2,370.00 January 23, 2025 Public Fac Fee/9720 Flower 1,441.00 January 27, 2025 Public Fac Fee/15302 Leahy 1,335.15 March 5, 2025 Public Fac Fee/9333 Rosecrans Ave 2,888.55 March 17, 2025 Public Fac Fee/9700 Mayne St 1,572.00 March 20, 2025 Public Fac Fee/14703 Betty Jean 22,245.51$
Project Expenditures:
-$
-$

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT/OTHER FEES
Revenue and Expenditure Detail Report
(July 1, 2024 - March 31, 2025)
https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/AA/Treasurer's Reports/TR 24-25/TR 25-03

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT/OTHER FEES
Revenue and Expenditure Detail Report
(July 1, 2024 - March 31, 2025)

PUBLIC ARTS FEES
Revenues:
16,000.00$ July 17, 2024 Public Arts Fee/17640 Bellflower 465.00$ March 4, 2025 Public Arts Fee/16620 Grand Ave 11,000.00$ March 5, 2025 Public Arts Fee/9333 Rosecrans Ave 27,465.00$
Project Expenditures:
276.25$ Bellflower Gateway Sign
24,200.00$ Veterans Memorial Modifications
24,476.25$

PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES FEES
Revenues:
4,006.20$ July 17, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/17640 Bellflower 119.80 July 22, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/13610 Clark

0.90 October 3, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/9119 Artesia 119.80 October 23, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/14037 Charlemagne 287.04 November 7, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/16415 Cornuta 119.90 December 18, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/9509 Prichard 110.00 January 27, 2025 Public Safety Fac Fee/15302 Leahy 1,631.85 March 5, 2025 Public Safety Fee/9333 Rosecrans Ave 220.50 March 17, 2025 Public Safety Fee/9700 Mayne St 120.00 March 20, 2025 Public Safety/14703 Betty Jean 6,735.99$
Project Expenditures:
-$
-$

TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES FEES
Revenues:
63,079.44$ July 17, 2024 Transportation Fac Fee/17640 Bellflower 4,696.16 July 22, 2024 Transportation Fac Fee/13610 Clark 4,696.16 October 23, 2024 Transportation Fac Fee/14037 Charlemagne 6,933.12 November 7, 2024 Transportation Fac Fee/16415 Cornuta 4,700.08 December 18, 2024 Transportation Fac Fee/9509 Prichard 4,312.00 January 27, 2025 Transportation Fac Fee/15302 Leahy 25,694.22 March 5, 2025 Transportation Fac Fee/9333 Rosecrans Ave 8,643.60 March 17, 2025 Transportation Fac Fee/9700 Mayne St 4,704.00 March 20, 2025 Transportation Fac Fee/14703 Betty Jean 127,458.78$
Project Expenditures:
-$
-$
https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/AA/Treasurer's Reports/TR 24-25/TR 25-03

PARK FACILITIES FEES
Revenues:
18,288.00$ July 3, 2023 Park Fac Fee/9876 Crestbrook 21,839.00 September 14, 2023 Park Fac Fee/10337 Mapledale 21,839.00 October 17, 2023 Park Fac Fee/10349 Mapledale 21,839.00 October 17, 2023 Park Fac Fee/10341 Mapledale 21,839.00 October 17, 2023 Park Fac Fee/10345 Mapledale 21,839.00 October 17, 2023 Park Fac Fee/10347 Mapledale 21,839.00 October 17, 2023 Park Fac Fee/10339 Mapledale 15,021.58 December 29, 2023 Park Fac Fee/9435 Cedar 18,288.00 January 3, 2024 Park Fac Fee/8746 Burton 18,730.80 January 11, 2024 Park Fac Fee/17932 Balfern 36,576.00 January 11, 2024 Park Fac Fee/10490 Greenhurst 7,176.45 January 17, 2024 Park Fac Fee/16620 Grand 20,327.00 January 18, 2024 Park Fac Fee/15714 Cornuta 11,111.55 January 18, 2024 Park Fac Fee/16624 Grand 2,000.00 February 7, 2024 Park Fac Fee/15550 Bellflower 16,288.00 February 7, 2024 Park Fac Fee/15550 Bellflower 20,622.80 March 8, 2024 Park Fac Fee/9465 1/2 Jefferson 18,810.12 March 21, 2024 Park Fac Fee/9735 Arkansas 24,682.00 April 9, 2024 Park Fac Fee/9431 1/2 Ramona 18,288.00 April 9, 2024 Park Fac Fee/14039 Premiere 10,896.52 May 8, 2024 Park Fac Fee/16849 Chicago 30,448.85 May 20, 2024 Park Fac Fee/9267 Faywood 9,144.00 May 28, 2024 Park Fac Fee/17648 Downey 18,288.00 June 10, 2024 Park Fac Fee/16217 Chicago 446,021.67$
Project Expenditures:
164,211.71$ Park Master Plan
861,231.45 Butterfly Garden Improvements
31,557.00 Simms Park Improvements
350,385.68 Thompson Park Improvements
1,407,385.84$

PUBLIC FACILITIES FEES
Revenues:
1,185.00$ July 3, 2023 Public Fac Fee/9876 Crestbrook

22.95 July 26, 2023 Public Fac Fee/16000 Woodruff 1,416.00 September 14, 2023 Public Fac Fee/10337 Mapledale 488.42 September 25, 2023 Public Fac Fee/9045 Rosecrans 830.77 September 28, 2023 Public Fac Fee/15700 Woodruff 1,416.00 October 17, 2023 Public Fac Fee/10349 Mapledale 1,416.00 October 17, 2023 Public Fac Fee/10341 Mapledale 1,416.00 October 17, 2023 Public Fac Fee/10345 Mapledale 1,416.00 October 17, 2023 Public Fac Fee/10347 Mapledale 1,416.00 October 17, 2023 Public Fac Fee/10339 Mapledale 973.34 December 29, 2023 Public Fac Fee/9435 Cedar 1,185.00 January 3, 2024 Public Fac Fee/8746 Burton 1,426.59 January 11, 2024 Public Fac Fee/17932 Balfern 2,370.00 January 11, 2024 Public Fac Fee/10490 Greenhurst 465.00 January 17, 2024 Public Fac Fee/16620 Grand 1,416.00 January 18, 2024 Public Fac Fee/15714 Cornuta 720.00 January 18, 2024 Public Fac Fee/16624 Grand 1,185.00 February 7, 2024 Public Fac Fee/15550 Bellflower 1,570.69 March 8, 2024 Public Fac Fee/9465 Jefferson 1,434.98 March 21, 2024 Public Fac Fee/9735 Arkansas 1,879.85 April 9, 2024 Public Fac Fee/9431 1/2 Ramona 1,185.00 April 9, 2024 Public Fac Fee/14039 Premiere 706.05 May 8, 2024 Public Fac Fee/16849 Chicago 4,800.00 May 17, 2024 Public Fac Fee/17102 Clark

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT/OTHER FEES
Revenue and Expenditure Detail Report
(July 1, 2023 - June 30, 2024)
https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/AA/Treasurer's Reports/TR 24-25/TR 25-03 i

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT/OTHER FEES
Revenue and Expenditure Detail Report
(July 1, 2023 - June 30, 2024)
1,701.18 May 17, 2024 Public Fac Fee/17102 Clark 1,972.98 May 20, 2024 Public Fac Fee/9267 Faywood 592.50 May 28, 2024 Public Fac Fee/17648 Downey 1,185.00 June 10, 2024 Public Fac Fee/16217 Chicago 902.25 June 24, 2024 Public Fac Fee/10146 Artesia 38,694.55$
Project Expenditures:
42,843.41$ Maintenance Yard Office Refurbishment
42,843.41$

PUBLIC ARTS FEES
Revenues:
16,000.00$ September 14, 2023 Public Arts Fee/10337 Mapledale 10,000.00 September 25, 2023 Public Arts Fee/9045 Rosecrans 15,000.00 June 26, 2024 Public Arts Fee/10146 Artesia 41,000.00$
Project Expenditures:
445,957.22$ Bellflower Gateway Sign
1,185.64 Veterans Memorial
447,142.86$

PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES FEES
Revenues:

28.05$ July 26, 2023 Public Safety Fac Fee/16000 Woodruff 108.90 January 11, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/17932 Balfern 119.90 March 8, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/9465 Jefferson 118.82 March 21, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/9735 Arkansas 143.50 April 9, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/9431 1/2 Ramona 1,102.75 June 24, 2024 Public Safety Fac Fee/10146 Artesia 1,621.92$
Project Expenditures:
-$
-$

TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES FEES
Revenues:
441.66$ July 26, 2023 Transportation Fac Fee/16000 Woodruff 4,268.88 January 11, 2024 Transportation Fac Fee/17932 Balfern 4,700.08 March 8, 2024 Transportation Fac Fee/9465 Jefferson 2,869.96 March 21, 2024 Transportation Fac Fee/9735 Arkansas 5,625.20 April 9, 2024 Transportation Fac Fee/9431 1/2 Ramona 17,363.30 June 24, 2024 Transportation Fac Fee/10146 Artesia 35,269.08$
Project Expenditures:
-$
-$
https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/AA/Treasurer's Reports/TR 24-25/TR 25-03

Beginning Disbursements/Ending Yield Type of Issuer of
Balance/Bond Prem.Balance/Par Market Interest (If Diff.)/Investment/Investment/Date of (Deficit)Deposits Amort./Discount (Deficit)Value Value Rate Steps Deposit Deposit Maturity CITY OF BELLFLOWER :

State of California
Local Agency Investment Fund (1)35,935,527$ -$ -$ 35,935,527 N/A 35,966,043$ 4.313%See attached Pooled Money Investment Account Portfolio.

Detail report available at:
https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/pmia-laif/pmia/index.asp
Los Angeles County Pooled Investment Fund (5)3,654,335 9,832 - 3,664,167 N/A 3,552,937 3.690%See attached Los Angeles County Pooled Surplus Investments.

Detail report available at:
https://ttc.lacounty.gov/monthly-reports/
CalTrust / Local Agency Investment Pool (4)
-Liquidity Fund (City)42,990,661 161,112 - 43,151,773 N/A 43,151,773 4.420%Local Agency Investment Pool
Investment Trust of
California, dba CalTRUST
-Liquidity Fund (Deposit)52,479 196 - 52,675 N/A 52,675 4.420%Local Agency Investment Pool
Investment Trust of
California, dba CalTRUST

Cash / Investments Held By Bond Trustee -
Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company
-Dreyfus Treasury Securities Cash Management -
Institutional / (2008/2018) 2021 COPs
2,075 66,868 - 68,943 N/A 68,943 4.170% Money Market Fund Dreyfus N/A -Dreyfus Treasury Securities Cash Management -
Institutional / 2021 Pension Obligation Bonds
155 36 - 191 N/A 191 4.170% Money Market Fund Dreyfus N/A Cash / Investments Held By Trustee -
Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company
-Dreyfus Treasury Securities Cash Management -
Institutional / Water Infrastructure Trust Fund
2,263,732 7,333 (1,869,244) 401,821 N/A 401,821 4.170% Money Market Fund Dreyfus N/A

Cash / Investments Held By Custodian -
Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company
-Federal Home Loan Bank 2,500,000 - - 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,497,400 4.750%U.S. Agency Bonds Federal Home Loan Bank 12/6/2027 -Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation 3,000,000 - - 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,004,140 4.640%U.S. Agency Bonds Federal Agricultural
Mortgage Corporation 12/23/2027
-Federal National Mortgage Association 3,000,000 - 3,000,000 3,000,000 2,997,960 5.000%U.S. Agency Bonds Federal National Mortgage
Association 7/24/2028
-Federal Home Loan Bank 3,000,000 - - 3,000,000 3,000,000 2,998,620 4.875%U.S. Agency Bonds Federal Home Loan Bank 12/27/2028 -Federal Home Loan Bank 3,000,000 - - 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,016,770 4.500%U.S. Agency Bonds Federal Home Loan Bank 12/10/2029 -Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation 4,000,000 - - 4,000,000 4,000,000 3,995,800 5.000%U.S. Agency Bonds Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corporation 12/13/2029
-Federal Home Loan Bank 3,000,000 - - 3,000,000 3,000,000 2,999,250 4.625%U.S. Agency Bonds Federal Home Loan Bank 12/18/2029 -Dreyfus Treasury Securities Cash Management -
Institutional 21,233,222 32,366 - 21,265,588 N/A 21,265,588 4.170%Money Market Fund Dreyfus N/A

CITY OF BELLFLOWER AND BELLFLOWER SUCCESSOR AGENCY

CASH AND INVESTMENTS BY TYPE
TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2025
Dollar Amount Invested
(As of April 22, 2025)
https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/AA/Treasurer's Reports/TR 24-25/TR 25-03

CITY OF BELLFLOWER AND BELLFLOWER SUCCESSOR AGENCY

CASH AND INVESTMENTS BY TYPE
TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2025
Dollar Amount Invested
(As of April 22, 2025)

Charles Schwab Trust Bank
-Section 115 Pension Stabilization Trust
Investments / Mutual Funds 1,786,183 4,696 - 1,790,879 N/A 1,959,682 N/A Various Investments /
Mutual Funds
Various; Held by Charles
Schwab Trust N/A
Trust Cash 10,784 5,671 (4,764) 11,691 N/A 11,691 0.050%Trust Cash Account Charles Schwab Trust
Bank N/A
TOTAL INVESTMENTS 129,429,153 288,110 (1,874,008) 127,843,255 127,941,284 BANK DEPOSITS (2):
-General Operating Account (3)2,635,428 4,037,491 (3,350,328) 3,322,591 N/A 3,322,591 N/A Checking Account BMO N/A -Payroll Account (3)(11,443) 1,236,917 (1,234,894) (9,420) N/A (9,420) N/A Checking Account BMO N/A -Revolving Account (3)- 174,854 (174,854) - N/A - N/A Checking Account BMO N/A -Sec. 125 Flex Spending Account (3)30,849 - (4,456) 26,393 N/A 26,393 N/A Checking Account BMO N/A -Pooled Cash Allocated to SA 5,886 - (12,199) (6,313) N/A (6,313) N/A TOTAL BANK DEPOSITS 2,660,720 5,449,262 (4,776,731) 3,333,251 3,333,251 PETTY CASH 4,060 - - 4,060 N/A 4,060 N/A CITY -
TOTAL DEPOSITS AND INVESTMENTS 132,093,933$ 5,737,372$ (6,650,739)$ 131,180,566$ 131,278,595$ SUCCESSOR AGENCY:

BMO Business Checking Account (2) (3)45,715$ -$ (16,800)$ 28,915$ N/A 28,915$ N/A Checking Account BMO N/A CalTrust / Local Agency Investment Pool (4)
-Liquidity Fund (SA BUSD TRUST)94,935 356 - 95,291 N/A 95,291 4.420%Local Agency Investment Pool
Investment Trust of
California, dba CalTRUST
Cash / Investments Held By Bond Trustee -
Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company
-Taxable Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds, Series 2016
Dreyfus Treasury Securities Cash Management -
Institutional
10,560 125 - 10,685 N/A 10,685 4.170% Money Market Fund Dreyfus N/A TOTAL INVESTMENTS 151,210 481 (16,800) 134,891 134,891 Pooled Cash Account (5,886) 12,199 - 6,313 N/A 6,313 N/A

SUCCESSOR AGENCY -
TOTAL DEPOSITS AND INVESTMENTS 145,324$ 12,680$ (16,800)$ 141,204$ 141,204$

CITY & SUCCESSOR AGENCY -
TOTAL DEPOSITS AND INVESTMENTS 132,239,257$ 5,750,052$ (6,667,539)$ 131,321,770$ 131,419,799$ NOTES:
(1)Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is a special fund of the California State Treasury through which local governments may pool investments. The market value factor is provided by LAIF on a quarterly basis as of March 31, June 30, September 30, and December 31. The intervening months' market values are estimates. (2)All bank deposits are insured up to $250,000 by the FDIC. Under the California Government Code, banks and savings are also required to secure the City's deposits by either (1) pledging government securities with market value of at least 110% of the deposits as collateral, or (2) pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of at least 150% of the deposits. Bank deposits, CDs and money market account market values are the same as the carrying values. (3)Analysis account.
(4)CalTRUST is a joint powers authority formed by a number of public agencies in California to provide a method of pooling for investment purposes. (5)Los Angeles County Pooled Investment Fund is an investment pool managed by the L.A. County Treasurer. Market value and interest rate are estimates based on the preceding month's data.

A.The City's investment portfolio complies with the Statement of Investment Policy.

B.Based on the City's current cash and investment position and estimated cash flows, the City will meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months.

C.Interest rates and market values are provided on the monthly trustee, custody, investment, and investment pool statements and websites. https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/AA/Treasurer's Reports/TR 24-25/TR 25-03

ACTUAL BUDGET
Fiscal Year Reporting FY 2024-25 Fiscal Year
2023-24 Month To Date 2024-25
Beginning Cash Balance 338,025$ 482,006$ 416,959$ 416,959$ Receipts:

SLESF Funding 222,545 11,896 223,397 200,000 Interest 16,687 - 10,040 7,800 Total Receipts 239,232 11,896 233,437 207,800 Expenditures/Allocations:

L.A. County Sheriff's Department/
City Public Safety
General Law Cars (150,000) (38,947) (188,947) (150,000) Equipment Leases / Purchases (11,795) (2,077) (8,307) (49,000) Total Expenditures/Allocations (161,795) (41,024) (197,254) (199,000) Net Adjustment (Receivables & Payables)1,497 41,024 40,760 - Ending Cash Balance 416,959$ 493,902$ 493,902$ 425,759$ ACTUAL
(As of April 22, 2025)
TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2025
SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUND - FUND NO. 050

STATEMENT OF RECEIPTS, ALLOCATIONS AND EXPENDITURES
https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/AA/Treasurer's Reports/TR 24-25/TR 25-03

The City of Bellflower and Successor Agency invest funds in the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund and the Los Angeles County Pooled Investment Fund. The latest summary reports are attached, and the detail reports are available at:

State of California Local Agency Investment Fund:

Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/pmia-laif/laif/index.asp
Pooled Money Investment Account (PMIA)
http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/pmia-laif/pmia/index.asp
PMIA Market Valuation
https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/pmia-laif/reports/valuation.asp PMIA Selected Investment Data
https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/pmia-laif/performance/data.pdf Los Angeles County Pooled Investment Fund:

Los Angeles County Pooled Surplus Investments
https://ttc.lacounty.gov/monthly-reports/

CITY OF BELLFLOWER & BELLFLOWER SUCCESSOR AGENCY

TREASURER'S REPORT
https://bellflowergcc.sharepoint.com/sites/fin/Shared Documents/AA/Treasurer's Reports/TR 24-25/TR 25-03 ⴱ〭

Carrying Cost Plus
Description Accrued Interest Purch. Amortized Cost Fair Value Accrued Interest United States Treasury:

Bills 40,147,336,135.36 $ 40,475,086,722.20 $ 40,480,617,490.00 $ NA Notes 42,918,275,329.21 $ 42,905,793,758.30 $ 43,039,332,894.00 $ 377,246,656.00 $ Federal Agency:

SBA 209,725,735.24 $ 209,725,735.24 $ 213,398,560.71 $ 840,069.51 $ MBS-REMICs 1,137,937.87 $ 1,137,937.87 $ 1,127,788.60 $ 4,964.16 $ Debentures 6,726,125,283.48 $ 6,726,125,283.48 $ 6,723,244,200.00 $ 51,486,574.00 $ Debentures FR -$ -$ -$ -$
Debentures CL 2,750,000,000.00 $ 2,750,000,000.00 $ 2,758,623,500.00 $ 30,063,449.00 $ Discount Notes 29,244,125,236.00 $ 29,523,194,138.66 $ 29,512,185,000.00 $ NA Supranational Debentures 3,336,408,572.81 $ 3,335,613,056.14 $ 3,334,716,800.00 $ 19,165,126.50 $ Supranational Debentures FR -$ -$ -$ -$
CDs and YCDs FR -$ -$ -$ -$
Bank Notes -$ -$ -$
CDs and YCDs 14,500,000,000.00 $ 14,500,000,000.00 $ 14,500,669,836.83 $ 173,222,847.19 $ Commercial Paper 10,600,784,777.74 $ 10,703,897,041.65 $ 10,704,693,041.66 $ NA Corporate:

Bonds FR -$ -$ -$ -$
Bonds 940,730,522.83 $ 940,109,761.72 $ 935,812,095.00 $ 7,807,479.16 $ Repurchase Agreements -$ -$ -$ -$
Reverse Repurchase -$ -$ -$ -$
Time Deposits 5,184,500,000.00 $ 5,184,500,000.00 $ 5,184,500,000.00 $ NA PMIA & GF Loans 233,331,000.00 $ 233,331,000.00 $ 233,331,000.00 $ NA TOTAL 156,792,480,530.54 $ 157,488,514,435.26 $ 157,622,252,206.80 $ 659,837,165.52 $ Fair Value Including Accrued Interest 158,282,089,372.32 $ Repurchase Agreements, Time Deposits, PMIA & General Fund loans, and Reverse Repurchase agreements are carried at portfolio book value (carrying cost).

The value of each participating dollar equals the fair value divided by the amortized cost (1.000849191) As an example: if an agency has an account balance of $20,000,000.00, then the agency would report its participation in the LAIF valued at $20,016,983.81 or $20,000,000.00 x1.000849191 State of California
Pooled Money Investment Account
Market Valuation
3/31/2025
-11-

TYPE OF SECURITY AMOUNT ($)
*PERCENT OF

PORTFOLIO
*DIFFERENCE IN

PERCENT OF

PORTFOLIO FROM

PRIOR MONTH
Government
Bills 40,147,336 25.61 +0.18
Bonds 0 0.00 0
Notes 42,918,756 27.37 -0.21
Strips 0 0.00 0
Total Government 83,066,092 52.98 -0.03
Agency Debentures 13,022,260 8.30 -0.24
Certificates of Deposit 14,500,000 9.25 +0.03
Bank Notes 0 0.00 0
Repurchases 0 0.00 0
Agency Discount Notes 29,244,125 18.65 -0.17
Time Deposits 5,184,500 3.31 +0.07
GNMAs 0 0.00 0
Commercial Paper 10,600,785 6.76 +0.30
Remics 1,138 0.00 0
Corporate Bonds 940,730 0.60 +0.03
PMIA Loans 233,331 0.15 +0.01
GF Loans 0 0.00 0
Other 0 0.00 0
Reversed Repurchases 0 0.00 0
Total (All Types) 156,792,961 100.00
*Percentages may be off due to rounding.

INVESTMENT ACTIVITY March 2025 February 2025
NUMBER AMOUNT ($) NUMBER AMOUNT ($)
Pooled Money 1,346 66,940,176 1,008 50,074,879
Time Deposits 67 2,856,000 44 1,269,000
Other 36 32,641 1 510,276
Total 1,449 69,828,817 1,053 51,854,155
PMIA Monthly Average Effective Yield (%) 4.313 4.333
Year to Date Yield Last Day of Month (%) 4.459 4.477

POOLED MONEY INVESTMENT ACCOUNT
Selected Investment Data
Analysis of the Pooled Money Investment Account Portfolio (Dollars In Thousands)
March 31, 2025
-12-
‘3 “WES "'6'
)
l.

‘6
“

50 4
,
0 ,

“0035‘
Q
f5
'lmumfi“

THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY POOLED SURPLUS INVESTMENTS
The Treasurer and Tax Collector (Treasurer) of Los Angeles County has the delegated authority to invest funds on deposit in the County Treasury (Treasury Pool). As of February 28, 2025, investments in the Treasury Pool were held for local agencies including school districts, community college districts, special districts and discretionary depositors such as cities and independent districts in the following amounts:

The Treasury Pool participation composition is as follows:

Decisions on the investment of funds in the Treasury Pool are made by the County Investment Officer in accordance with established policy, with certain transactions requiring the Treasurer's prior approval. In Los Angeles County, investment decisions are governed by Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 53600) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the California Government Code, which governs legal investments by local agencies in the State of California, and by a more restrictive Investment Policy developed by the Treasurer and adopted by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on an annual basis. The Investment Policy adopted on March 19, 2024, reaffirmed the following criteria and order of priority for selecting investments:

1. Safety of Principal

2. Liquidity

3. Return on Investment
The Treasurer prepares a monthly Report of Investments summarizing the status of the Treasury Pool, including the current market value of all investments. This report is submitted monthly to the Board of Supervisors. According to the Report of Investments dated March 31, 2025, the February 28, 2025, book value of the Treasury Pool was approximately $56.793 billion, and the corresponding market value was approximately $55.069 billion.

Local Agency
Invested Funds
(in billions)
County of Los Angeles and Special Districts $23.852
Schools and Community Colleges 29.052
Discretionary Participants 3.889
Total $56.793
Non-discretionary Participants 93.16%
Discretionary Participants:

Independent Public Agencies 6.72%
County Bond Proceeds and Repayment Funds 0.12%
Total 100.00%
ⴱ㌭

An internal controls system for monitoring cash accounting and investment practices is in place. The Treasurer's Compliance Auditor, who operates independently from the Investment Officer, reconciles cash and investments to fund balances daily. The Compliance Auditor’s staff also reviews each investment trade for accuracy and compliance with the Board adopted Investment Policy. On a quarterly basis, the County’s outside independent auditor (External Auditor) reviews the cash and investment reconciliations for completeness and accuracy. Additionally, the External Auditor reviews investment transactions on a quarterly basis for conformance with the approved Investment Policy and annually accounts for all investments.

The following table identifies the types of securities held by the Treasury Pool as of February 28, 2025:

Type of Investment % of Pool
Certificates of Deposit 3.35
U.S. Government and Agency Obligations 71.76
Bank Acceptances 0.00
Commercial Paper 24.84
Municipal Obligations 0.05
Corporate Notes & Deposit Notes 0.00
Repurchase Agreements 0.00
Asset Backed Instruments 0.00
Other 0.00
100.00
The Treasury Pool is highly liquid. As of February 28, 2025, approximately 39.65% of the investments mature within 60 days, with an average of 673 days to maturity for the entire portfolio.

TreasPool Update
02/28/2025
ⴱ㐭

-15-

POOLED SURPLUS INVESTMENTS (PSI) EARNINGS REPORT
FEBRUARY 28, 2025

SCHEDULE B

TREASURER POOLED SURPLUS

INVESTMENTS PORTFOLIO
Investment Balance 02/28/25 $ 56,793,364,574
Market Value at 02/28/25 $ 55,069,335,487
Average Daily Balance $ 57,105,847,403
Gains and Losses:

For the Month $ 5,467
For the Past 12 Months $ 5,467
Unrealized Gains and Losses on Transfers
between Portfolio for the Month $ -
Earnings for the Month $ 162,031,726
Earnings for the Past 12 Months $ 2,246,413,684
Earnings Rate for the Month 3.69%

Page 1 of 2 ends

Bellflower City CouncilApril 28, 2025

Bellflower City Council
April 28, 2025