Bellflower City Council
May 12, 2025

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. 25-17 Next CC Agreement No. 1092 Next Ordinance No. 1448

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, MAY 12, 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

3 Consideration and possible action to appoint Deputy City Attorney N. Richard Shreiba as an additional Labor Negotiator for the City.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Appoint Deputy City Attorney N. Richard Shreiba as an additional Labor Negotiator for the City; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

AGENDA

Bellflower City Council Agenda
May 12, 2025

4 RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION

A CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
(Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6)

Agency Negotiators: City Manager, City Attorney, Deputy City Attorney N. Richard Shreiba
Employee Organization: All represented employee bargaining units.

B CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
(Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8)

Property: 17046 Bellflower Boulevard (APN 7109-025-002) Agency Negotiator: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
Negotiating Party: Euclid Hazard Capital, LLC; Artes Capital Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment

5 RECONVENE FOR OPEN SESSION

7:00 P.M. – OPEN SESSION

6 CALL TO ORDER

7 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

8 INVOCATION: Council Member Dan Koops

9 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Elizabeth Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services

10 CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS / PRESENTATIONS

A City Council Announcements

B Proclamation Declaring May 18 – 24, 2025, as “National Public Works Week”

C Proclamation Declaring the month of May as “Asian American and Pacific Islander Month”

11 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
May 12, 2025

12 PUBLIC HEARINGS

A Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. 25 -14 – A Resolution approving a Substantial Amendment to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2020- 2021 Annual Action Plan to reprogram unused Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Relief funds (CDBG-CV) for the redesign of the public sidewalk located at TownCenter Gateway Plaza on the northeast corner of Belmont Street and Bellflower Boulevard to encourage social distancing. (Continued from April 14, 2025)
Recommendation to City Council: 1) Re-open the continued public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; and after considering the evidence, provide direction to the City Manager regarding the reallocation of CDBG -CV funds, and continue the Public Hearing to May 27, 2025 ; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

B 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. 25-15 – 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. (Continued from April 28, 2025)
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 disapp roved 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 pro ject, 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) Re-open the continued 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.

Bellflower City Council Agenda
May 12, 2025

13 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION

A Consideration and possible action to: 1) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1444 - An Urgency Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing maximum allowable square footage; 2) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1445 - An Urgency Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing the number of allowable accessory dwelling units; 3) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1446 – An Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing maximum allowable square footage; and 4) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1447 – An Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing the number of allowable accessory dwelling units. (Matter continued from April 28, 2025)
Recommendation to City Council: 1) Adopt Urgency Ordinance Nos. 1444 and 1445 by at least a four-fifths (4/5) vote to take effect immediately; 2) Read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance Nos. 1446 and 1447. Second reading and possible adoption would occur on May 2 7, 2025; or 3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

14 CONSIDERATION ITEMS

None

15 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. 25-111, dated May 12, 2025.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Receive and file Warrant Register No. 25-111; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

B Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the April 21, 2025, Special Meeting of the City Council.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Approve the April 21, 2025, Special Meeting Minutes; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

C Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the April 24, 2025, Special Meeting of the City Council.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Approve the April 24, 2025, Special Meeting Minutes; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

Bellflower City Council Agenda
May 12, 2025

15 CONSENT CALENDAR – Continued

D Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the April 29, 2025, Special Meeting of the City Council.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Approve the April 29, 2025, Special Meeting Minutes; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

E Consideration and possible action to approve the appointment of the Chamber of Commerce’s nominee Jennifer Beech to the Southeast Los Angeles County Workforce Development Board (SELACO WDB) for the term July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2027.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Approve the appointment of Chamber of Commerce’s nominee Jennifer Beech to the SELACO WDB Board of Directors for the term ending June 30, 2027; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

F Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. 25-16 – A Resolution approving the Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the Los Angeles Gateway Region Integrated Regional Water Management Authority.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 25-16, authorizing the City Manager to sign the Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the Gateway Region Integrated Regional Water Management Joint Powers Authority (Agreement File No. 523); or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

G Consideration and possible action to approve the 2025 Fireworks Permits.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Approve 14 Fireworks Permits; and 2) Authorize the City Manager to execute the necessary approvals for the Bellflower Chamber of Commerce and Bellflower Kiwanis Club to operate on City owned property; or 3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

16 COUNCIL REPORTS

17 ADJOURNMENT

Adjourn to the next Regular Meeting of the Bellflower City Council at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 27, 2025.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS

CITY OF BELLFLOWER )
I, Jennifer Russell, Management Assistant, of the City of Bellflower, do hereby declare under penalty of perjury, that the Agenda for the Regular Meeting of the Bellflower City Council to be held on Monday. May 12, 2025, at 5:30 p.m., was posted Thursday, May 8, 2025, at the following locations in the City of Bellflower:

City Hall Lobby and Doors, 16600 Civic Center Drive
City Website at www.bellflower.orq
Clifton M. Brakensiek Library
Executed this 8t" of May 2025 at Bellflower, California.

Jennifer Russell,
Management Assistant

PUBLIC COMMENTS
MAY 12, 2025

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

Thank you
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
2 PUBLIC COMMENTS
MAY 12, 2025,

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

Mayra Ochiqui
From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Attachments:

Hello,
Ace Elchico
Monday, May 12, 2025 3:50 PM
Mayra Ochiqui
[email protected]; [email protected]
Remaining Videos -Ace Elchico
RingVideo_20241008_231816.mp4; RingVideo_20231005_095002.mp4; Argus 4 Pro_ 20250211183212_20250211183233_9527000HZN4A9FFE_O..mp4; Argus 4 Pro_ 20250124100524_20250124100539_9527000HZN4A9FFE_O..mp4; Argus 4 Pro_ 20250413153836_20250413153920_9527000HZN4A9 FFE_0.. mp4 this is Ace Elchico. Below, I have attached additional videos. I already sent 3 videos on my yahoo.com address.
1 3

Mayra Ochiqui
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Attachments:

Ace Elchico
Monday, May 12, 2025 3:55 PM
Mayra Ochiqui; City Clerk
Videos -Ace Elchico
Ring Video_20231005_095002.mp4; Argus
9527000HZN4A9FFE_0..mp4; Argus 4 Pro_
9527000HZN4A9FFE_0..mp4; Argus 4 Pro_
9527000HZN4A9FFE_0..mp4; Argus 4 Pro_
9 5 2 7000 H Z N 4A9 F F E_0.. m p4
4 Pro_20250211183212_20250211183233_
20250124100524_20250124100539_
20250404210005_20250404210039_
20250413153836_20250413153920_
Hello, below are more videos and a photo. I sent three other videos from my yahoo account. 1 3

Mayra Ochiqui
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Attachments:

Ace Elchico
Monday, May 12, 2025 3:59 PM
Mayra Ochiqui; City Clerk
Re: Videos -Ace Elchico
Ring V i d e o_20241008_2 31816. m p4
On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 3:55 PM Ace Elchico wrote:

Hello, below are more videos and a photo. I sent three other videos from my yahoo account.

N

3 Continuation of the Public
Hearing for the Re-allocation
of the Remaining CDBG-CV
Funds
May 12, 2025

•Currently
•$407,553 in CDBG-CV Funds Remain
•Expenditure Deadline – November 2026 or funds get returned •Must meet eligibility requirements established by HUD for regular CDBG and CV funds
Brief Background

Brief Background

PROGRAM FUNDED
AMOUNT

EXPENDED

FUNDS REMAINING
Planning and Administration (20% cap)$237,696 $237,696 $0 Emergency Housing Needs Assistance $186,784 $181,143 $5,641 Food Insecurity Program $27,000 $24,564 $2,436
Homeless Shelter Meals Program $30,000 $30,000 $0
Youth/Family/Senior Services $507,000 $213,023 $293,976 Business Assistance Grants $100,000 $94,500 $5,500
New Small Business Start-up Program
(Belle Fleur Centre)$100,000 $0 $100,000
Totals:$1,188,480 $780,927 $407,553

•Eligible Uses pursuant to HUD’s CDBG-CV Requirements
•Public Services
•Public Facilities and Improvements
•Economic Development
•Ongoing Coronavirus Recovery
•Administration and Planning (20% cap)
HUD CDBG-CV Requirements

Tieback to
Coronavirus
CDBG
National
Objective
Eligible
CDBG
Activity/Cost

MUST MEET ONE OF THE

THREE CDBG NATIONAL
OBJECTIVES:
•Benefit low- and
moderate-income
persons
•Meet community
development needs that
have a particularly
urgent need
•Aid in the prevention or
elimination of slums or
blight
ELIGIBLE USES/COSTS:
•Public Services
•Public Facilities &
Improvements
•Economic Development
•Ongoing COVID-19
Recovery
•Admin & Planning
COVID TIEBACK:

Project must be designed to prevent, prepare for, or respond to the coronavirus by documenting a logical relationship between the benefits of the activity and the effects of the coronavirus.

Projects
For Consideration

•Conversion of the former
Bank of the West building to
a Public Safety building
•Town Center Plaza Stage
Area Redesign
•Town Center Gateway Plaza
Sidewalk/Pedestrian Area
Redesign
Considered Potential Projects/Programs
•Improvements to the public
serving areas of city facilities
(lobbies and restrooms)
•Public improvements/Sidewalks
•Various park improvements
•Park development
•Additional Business Grants
•Additional Public Services

PROJECT COMMENTS
Executive Tract Street Lighting Not in a CDBG Low- and Moderate-Income Area Bank of the West building conversion to Public Safety Only public serving area of building conversion would be, but project would not be completed by deadline
Oak Center Access Would potentially supplant existing allocated funding – other funds have been budgeted for this project
Town Center Plaza Stage Re-Design Difficult to justify/document a COVID tieback, project should be designed in conjunction with full plaza re-design which will not be complete by deadline Sidewalks (Coke Street)Unlikely to be approved - Cannot justify/document a COVID tieback Traffic Calming Bulb Outs & Medians Unlikely to be approved - Cannot justify/document a COVID tieback Projects Determined to be Ineligible

PROJECT COMMENTS
Town Center Gateway Plaza Sidewalk/Pedestrian Re-design Re-design and installation of features to create and encourage social distancing. Project has been conceptually discussed by staff, but has remained unfunded.

Additional Business Grants Difficult for recipients to document COVID Tieback Additional Public Services (Grants to non-profits)Difficult for subrecipients to document COVID Tiebacks directly to recipients of services Projects Determined to be Eligible

PROJECT COMMENTS
Improvements to public serving areas of city facilities (i.e. City Hall front lobbies and counters, etc.)
Limited improvement project options that would encourage social distancing and may not use all funds
Laurel Street Pedestrian Plaza Conversion Re-design and installation of features to create social distancing New Neighborhood Park at 9443 Artesia Blvd.New outdoor space must encourage social distancing Palm Street Park Fitness or Amenity Zone Activation (SWC of Clark Ave/Palm St)Installation of fitness features and/or amenities must encourage social distancing Projects Determined to be Potentially Eligible

Town Center Gateway Plaza Sidewalk Pedestrian Area Redesign (NEC of Bellflower Blvd. and Belmont St.)

Laurel Street Pedestrian Plaza Conversion

Palm Street Park Fitness or Amenity Zone Activation
(SWC of Clark Ave./Palm St.)

New Neighborhood Pocket Park – South of the 91 Freeway
(9443 Artesia Blvd.)

Next Steps/Recommendation

1.Provide direction to staff regarding the reprograming of CDBG -CV funds to one of the potential project presented;

2.Continue the public hearing to May 27, 2025 with a substantial amendment to the FY 2020-21 Annual Action Plan formally reprograming the remaining CDBG-CV funds for the chosen project; or

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

12-A
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager

FROM: Jim DellaLonga, Director of Economic Development

SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. 25-14 – A Resolution approving a Substantial Amendment to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan to reprogram unused
Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Relief funds (CDBG-CV) for the redesign of the public sidewalk located at TownCenter Gateway Plaza on the northeast corner of Belmont Street and Bellflower Boulevard to encourage social distancing. (Continued from April 14, 2025)

DATE: May 12, 2025

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

At the April 14, 2025, Regular City Council Meeting, the City Council held a public hearing to consider adopting Resolution No. 25-14, which would approve a Substantial Amendment to the FY 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan to reallocate the $407,553 remaining CDBG-CV funding for the redesign of the public sidewalk and pedestrian area located at Town Center Gateway Plaza to encourage social distancing. Following the discussion, the City Council directed the Director of Economic Development (“Director”) to return with other public infrastructure and public facility project proposals that have been and could be considered, including a review of those identified by the City Council, and those previously considered. The City Council continued the public hearing to May 12, 2025, to review and consider additional project proposals that could potentially be funded with the remaining CDBG-CV funds.

RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL

1) Re-open the continued public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; after considering the evidence, provide direction to the City Manager regarding the reallocation of CDBG-CV funds, and continue the Public Hearing to May 27, 2025; or

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

FISCAL IMPACT

Specific project costs will be dependent on the project ultimately selected and additional funds beyond CDBG-CV may be required to complete a potential project. $407,553 in CDBG-CV funds are remaining to be reprogramed and expended.

1: BELLF
{‘1 O LOR’GQ
*‘ Sitafteport

Staff Report – CDBG-CV Substantial Amendment #6
May 12, 2025

BACKGROUND

In 2020, under the CARES Act, the City received at total of $1,188,480 in funding to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the coronavirus. Pursuant to the CARES Act , these funds must be fully expended by November 2026. As shown in the table below, just under $781,000 was spent on various programs, approved by HUD through substantial amendments to the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Annual Action Plan, leaving $407,553 in CDBG-CV funds to be reprogramed and expended by the deadline, or returned to HUD.

PROGRAM FUNDED
AMOUNT

EXPENDED

FUNDS REMAINING
Planning and Administration (20%
cap) $237,696 $237,696 $0
Emergency Housing Needs
Assistance $186,784 $181,143 $5,641
Food Insecurity Program $27,000 $24,564 $2,436
Homeless Shelter Meals Program $30,000 $30,000 $0
Youth/Family/Senior Services $507,000 $213,024 $293,976 Business Assistance Grants $100,000 $94,500 $5,500
New Small Business Start-up
Program $100,000 $0 $100,000

Totals: $1,188,480 $780,927 $407,553

DISCUSSION

In addition to the restrictions expenditures of CDBG funds must normally meet, projects funded using these CV funds must also be directly used to address the impact of coronavirus and must be approved by HUD as meeting those requirements . Any project proposed must also be completed by November 2026.

In considering potential projects that could be eligible for this funding source, the Director conferred with the Parks and Recreation and Public Works Departments as well as Avant Garde, the City’s HOME and CDBG consultant, to review the projects that the City has planned for but have thus far been unfunded and that may be eligible under the specific funding guidelines of this program as established by HUD. After establishing a list of potentially eligible projects, the Director reviewed the projects with the Avant Garde, and determined which projects were most likely to be approved by HUD. Some of the projects identified were determined to be ineligible, while others could be considered further.

These projects are discussed in the table below. Projects identified as ineligible have not been considered further because they do not meet HUD g uidelines and requirements.

Projects that have been identified as Eligible have been previously discussed or approved with HUD representatives and would be likely to be approved if presented. Other projects identified as potentially eligible for the City Council’s consideration have not been discussed with HUD representatives, but based on review of the guidelines and discussions with Avant Garde, could be submitted for consideration.

A

Staff Report – CDBG-CV Substantial Amendment #6
May 12, 2025

DISCUSSION – Continued

PROJECTS DETERMINED TO BE INELIGIBLE

PROJECT COMMENTS
Executive Tract Street
Lighting Not in a CDBG Low- and Moderate-Income Area
Bank of the West
building conversion to
Public Safety
Only public serving area of building conversion would be eligible, but project would not be completed by deadline
Oak Center Access Would potentially supplant existing allocated funding - other funds have been budgeted for this project
Town Center Plaza
Stage Re-Design
Difficult to justify/document a COVID tieback, project should be designed in conjunction with full plaza re-design, which will not be complete by deadline
Sidewalks
(Coke Street, or
others)
Unlikely to be approved - Cannot justify/document a COVID tieback Traffic Calming Bulb
Outs & Medians Unlikely to be approved - Cannot justify/document a COVID tieback

PROJECTS DETERMINED TO BE ELIGIBLE

PROJECT COMMENTS
Town Center Gateway
Plaza
Sidewalk/Pedestrian
Re-design
Re-design and installation of features to create and encourage social distancing. Project has been conceptually discussed by staff, but has remained unfunded.

Additional Business
Grants Difficult for recipients to document COVID Tieback Additional Public
Services (Grants to
non-profits)
Difficult for subrecipients to document COVID Tiebacks directly to recipients of services

V
k

Staff Report – CDBG-CV Substantial Amendment #6
May 12, 2025

DISCUSSION – Continued

PROJECTS DETERMINED TO BE POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE

PROJECT COMMENTS
Improvements to public
serving areas of city
facilities (i.e., City Hall
front lobbies and counters,
etc.)
Limited improvement project options that would encourage social distancing and may not maximize usage of funding Laurel Street Pedestrian
Plaza Conversion
Re-design and installation of features to create social distancing.

Project could be eligible, but timing may be problematic depending on design
New Neighborhood
Park/Rec site at
9443 Artesia Boulevard
New outdoor space must specifically encourage social
distancing. Project timing may be problematic depending on design. Project costs may exceed funding
Palm Street Park Fitness
or Amenity Zone Activation
(SWC of Clark Ave/Palm St)
Installation of fitness features and/or amenities must specifically encourage social distancing. Project costs may not exhaust funding, but project may be able to be completed more quickly than others.

While the above table is not an exhaustive list of potential projects, these projects have been determined to be the most likely to b e approved as addressing specific effects of COVID-19, meet the eligibility requirements, and to be completed within the required timeframe without supplanting existing funding allocations.

It is recommended that the City Council review the list of potentially eligible projects and provide direction to the City Manager and Director as to which project(s) or program(s) should be submitted to HUD for reallocation of these funds. Alternatively, the City Council can elect to not reallocate the funding and the funds will be returned to HUD.

ATTACHMENT

Project Site Locations

Staff Report – CDBG-CV Substantial Amendment #6
May 12, 2025

ATTACHMENT

Project Site Locations

Town Center Gateway Plaza

Laurel Street Pedestrian Plaza Conversion

Staff Report – CDBG-CV Substantial Amendment #6
May 12, 2025

Palm Street Park Fitness or Amenity Zone Activation

New Neighborhood Pocket Park – Sout of the 91 Freeway – 9443 Artesia Blvd.

of BELLFL0%
Q
*3 $tafteport
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. 25-15 — A Resolution denying an appeal (AP-25-O1) and upholding Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 24-15 denying Development Review (DR 3-24- 15169) and Conditional Use Permit (CU-24-O7) for the construction of a 3,786-square-foot restaurant with a drive-through component located at 16211 Bellflower Boulevard. (Continued from April 28, 2025)
DATE: - May 12, 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 April 28, 2025, the City Council opened the public hearing, heard testimony from the public and at the conclusion of the meeting, continued the public hearing to the May 12, 2025 City Council Meeting. The City Council continued the public hearing at the request of the appellant to allow additional time to explore alternatives related to traffic.

On May 1, 2025, City staff and the appellant's Project design team met to discuss the alternative related to installing a two-way left-turn pocket on Bellflower Boulevard to help mitigate traffic conditions. To meet the required design criteria, the installation of a two-way left-turn pocket would require both sides of Bellflower Boulevard to be red curbed and would eliminate on-street parking. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Project design team indicated they would revise the plans, design the two-way left-turn pocket to meet certain criteria, update the traffic analysis, and determine if the street improvements would be financially feasible.

On May 5, 2025, the Project team informed City staff that McDonald’s will not expend additional funds for the traffic improvements. Therefore, none of the changes to Bellflower Boulevard that were discussed were included in the plans and the project is being brought back to the City Council as previously presented.

12-B

Staff Report — Appeal Case No. AP 25-01
May 12, 2025

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

1. Re-open the continued 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.

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 will result in the project being approved.

Once operational, the project will be a source of increased sales tax revenue.

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.

BACKGROUND
On April 28, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing to consider an appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of a Development Review (“DR”) and Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) application 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”). During the public hearing, the appellant’s Project team and City staff informed the City Council that they are working toward a possible solution related to the traffic and circulation concerns and requested continuance to May 12, 2025. At the conclusion of the meeting, the City Council continued the public hearing to May 12, 2025.

Staff Report — Appeal Case No. AP 25-01
May 12, 2025

BACKGROUND — Continued
On May 1, 2025, City staff and the Project design team met to discuss installing a two-way left-turn pocket on Bellflower Boulevard to help mitigate traffic conditions and to allow for better ingress and egress for the Project Site. In order to accommodate the two-way left- turn pocket, both sides of Bellflower Boulevard would need to be red curbed and on-street parking would need to be eliminated. Since Flora Vista Street is a designated truck route, a left-turn lane woutd need to be installed to accommodate trucks making a left turn onto Flora Vista Street going southbound on Bellflower Boulevard. Due to specific traffic engineering criteria, the left-turn lane onto Flora Vista Street would need to be designed and incorporated before the two-way left-turn pocket began. In addition, it was recommended that the two-way left turn pocket extend to Alondra Boulevard since both sides of the street are already red curbed between Harvard Street to Alondra Boulevard.

The pocket would allow vehicles to turn left in and left out of the Project Site as well as access driveways for other properties along the block, including without limitation, the Aldi and Smart & Final sites. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Project design team indicated they would revise the plans, design the two-way left-turn pocket to meet certain criteria, update the traffic analysis, determine if the street improvements would be financially feasible and submit revised plans for more formal review by the City.

On May 5, 2025, an email was received from the appellant’s Project team informing the City that additional funds for any alternative traffic improvements to Bellflower Boulevard, as discussed with staff, would not be approved by the applicant (Attachment C) and providing justification for that decision. Therefore, none of the changes to Bellflower Boulevard that were discussed on May 1, 2025, were included in the plans and the project is being brought back to the City Council as previously presented and without modification.

This Staff Report incorporates by reference the April 28, 2025, City Council Staff Report and all Staff Reports presented to the Planning Commission including, without limitation, those dated December 16, 2024, February 18,2025, and March 3, 2025.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution No. 25-15 ................................................................................... 5 B. Appeal Documents Submitted March 11, 2025 .................................................. 9 C. April 28, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments) ............................................. 15 D. May 5, 2025 Email ...................................................................................... 24 E. Resolution No. PC 24-15 ........................................ ........ 26 F. December 16, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments) ..................................... 33 G. February 18, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments) ....................................... 40 H. March 3, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments) ............................................ 45 l. Assessor’s Map, Aerial Map, Zoning Map and General Plan Map ........................ 49 J. Traffic Analysis, Queuing Analysis, VMT Screening Evaluation, Project Description ............................................................................................................. 54 K. Project Plans dated February 5, 2025 .......................................................... 131

ATTACHMENT A .
_ Resolution No. 25-15

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-O7) 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”);
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.

Robert Preece of Design UA, Inc. (the “Appellant”), timely appealed the PC Resolution to the City Council in accordance with the Bellflower Municipal Code (“BMC”) on March 14, 2024 (the “Appeal”);
The Appeal was scheduled for a public hearing on April 28, 2025; On April 28, 2025, the City Council opened a public hearing and took testimonial and documentary evidence regarding the Appeal. At the conclusion of the meeting, the City Council continued the public hearing to May 12,2025;
On May 1, 2025, the Appellant and the Project team met with City staff to discuss alternatives related to traffic and ingress and egress to the Project Site. On May 5, 2025, the Appellant informed the City that no additional changes were made to the plans as the'additional improvements related to traffic on Bellflower Boulevard were not financially feasible; On May 12, 2025, the City Council re-opened the continued public hearing to receive testimony, and other evidence regarding the Appeal including, without limitation, information provided to the City Council by the Appellant; and

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. 25-15

H. This Resolution, and its findings, are made based upon the evidence presented to the City Council at its April 28, 2025, and May 12, 2025, hearings including, without limitation, the staff reports submitted by the Planning and Building Services Director (“Director”) on both the above dates.

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.

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: 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 were made to form accurate assumptions. Somewhat related to this are the limitations on the City's ability to solve what are in effect regional, state, and national problems and issues. The City must work within the political framework within which it exists and with the limitations inherent in that framework.

SECTION 7: 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.

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. 25-15

SECTION 8: Summaries of lnfonnation. All summaries of information in the findings which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record.

The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding, is not based in part on that fact.

SECTION 9: 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 10: 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 11: 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 12: 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 127"I DAY OF MAY 20-25.

Ray Dunton, Mayor
ATTEST:

Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
By:

Justin A. Tamayo, Assistant City Attorney

ATTACHMENT B
Appeal Documents Submitted March 11, 2025

Appeal ApplIcatIon
~:~ Decisions rendered byAdministrative 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 «m
.:~ Fees: For current fees, please consult_the planning fee schedule handout. M AR 1 1 will AQW TYPE OR PRINT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION CITY CLERK. 8 OFFICE NAME OF APPELLANT: Design UA. Inc. (Robert Preece)
MAILING ADDRESS: 153 5 CITY PIECE Dr.

STREET NUMBER . STREET NAME
Santa Ana, CA 92705 .

CITY STATE ZIP CODE
DAYTIME TELEPHONE: 9098216703 FAX NUMBER:

TYPE OF APPEAL: (PLEASE CHECK THE APPLICABLE TYPE OF ACTION) __ ADMINISTRATIVE - ' PROJECT moaess: 16211 Bellfiower Blvd.

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OR
X PLANNING COMMISSION .CASE TITLE: CUM)? & DR 3-24-15169 SPECIFIC REASONS FOR APPEAL: (ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES IF NECESSARY) See separate letter.

W I W.“ SIGNATURE DATE
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 MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING ONLY THOSE ISSUES RAISED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ’

OR IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR CITY COUNCIL AT OR PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY (City Clerk)
DATE SUBMITTED: FILE No; RECEIVED BY:

August 16, 2006 Effective 07/28/03
16600 Civic Center Drive. Belmower. Ca. 90706 562—804-1424 W or mfiflmflm

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

RE: Planning Commission Appeal for CU24-07 & ORB-2445169 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.

3. Appeal Reason:
i. 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 drivethm use with a conditional use permit and the housing element exists, per staff's 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.
ii. 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.
iii. 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 2.5 minutes and stopping traffic.
l53 fast [lily Place fir. Santa Ana, Bil 52705 i phone ”4.5523900 -10-

'I!!ii!!cassfg;tataca

3. Appeal Reason:
i. 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.
iii. 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 axe! straight truck rather than the typical SSpfoot semi—truck. This will allow delivery to come and go onsite just like any other vehicle without any impact. on Beliilower 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 Bellilower 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. Crossoparcel 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’ 5 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.
l53 Elli City Place Dr. Santa Ana. EA 52735 i phone ”43523900

-11-

n
Ste 17. 16
tM rgrirer.r, 4.
•.ri.f '..`.r;,�rf ,�«rt' 7I w�..: " w. --'now,? re 'C' ^:,'' 'n-7.4, !: 6+4'E:,,se'!1 ctra1 ' Chit !WSL fattR:: , * '1' 41 Vnr Vs'.. A . r,;'cV. V ?vz-7 sr.= S ct !Tv
1:!.arC: �^ ,'x'.d1!i"+?�o "�.,e .;h.;:`g{]Y'!: S�hra".:+*+CrC,"CM'.+� �I"tS'SAb' : e VIr r1"-tlIgY
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 Bellflower.

Sincerely,

OBERT PREEECE

PRINCIPAL
DESIGN UA, INC.
153 East City Place Dr: Santa Ana, CA 92705 phone 714.892.3900

-12-

❑ Building
❑ Grading
❑ Reroof
�- Or_BELLF-toiv

SERVICES AND FEES
16600. Civic Center Drive Phone: (562) 804-1424.

Bellflower, CA 90706. Fax: (562) 925-8660
www.beliflower.org
Receipt #:

Cashier:

Date:
°kO" yet -.$ .

SB 11861 AB 1379 602-31654 $
Quantity:
:Specs'#(:'
CC Charge (Over $2,000,00)
Copies
010-37600 $
0750-361iJ0'° ` $
Card Processing Fee (3%)
010-42054-1300 $
TOTAL I$ 2,806.00
Total (Excluding CC Charge) $ 2,806.00
CC excluding card fee $
Cash/Check $
Prepared By:

Date: 3/11/2025
2,806.00
-13-

ATTACHMENT C
April 28, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments)

C." BELLFLO E,
sta#
OR,,
TOG£'ty' Ieport
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.

-15-

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

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. -16-

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

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.
-17-

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

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 (1St 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.
-18-

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

> 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 (Le., 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.
-19-

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

➢ 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.
-20-

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

➢ 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 axel 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. -21-

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

➢ 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 Tine 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 Description46 I. Revised Project Plans dated February 5, 2025 123
-22-

ATTACHMENT D
May 5, 2025 Email

Elizabeth Oba
From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Elizabeth, Ryan, and Kathryn:

Zeshaan Younus
Monday, May 5, 2025 10:06 AM
Elizabeth Oba; Kathryn Brun; Ryan Smoot
Jackson Schuyler; Wilkeson Scott; Stephenson, Troy; Preece Robert (External) Update re: Bellflower Blvd. (Aldi site)
Hope you all had a great weekend. Thanks so much for spending time with our team last week to discuss the various McDonald's projects.

You have all made it clear that supporting businesses in Bellflower is a philosophical priority.

After our meeting, we were unfortunately informed by Corporate that the Bellflower Aldi site now has exactly zero additional dollars for proposed amendments on Bellflower Blvd. This is a mix between lease negotiations, entitlement timing, rising construction costs, and more.

This group advocated for the additional funds but they could not be penciled. Having said that, we will need to bring the project back to the City Council as -is, with no changes.

McDonald's will communicate this to the City Council next week and will make it known that you all were creative, communicative, and supportive as we tried to navigate solutions.

The assigned franchisee will also be in attendance to advocate on behalf of the site and its benefits, but none of the changes to Bellflower Blvd. that we discussed will be reflected.

This is not the news any of us wanted but I needed to communicate it immediately as I know your staff was standing by for our deliverables.

Thanks again, our team has the utmost respect for you all and we look forward to continuing our work together. 25 Curt !Mints $ Assatiastt
©o
x
Zeshaan Younus I Vice President
Curt Pringle & Associates
P 714.939.9070 F 714.939.9080
1801 East Katella Ave #1002
Anaheim, CA 92805
This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as span.
1 -24-

ATTACHMENT E
Resolution No. PC 24-15

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 ("BMC");
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

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. PC 24-15

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 -27-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. PC 24-15

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), "dive -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") 11 (Bellflower Station) and part of Site 11.2 in the City's adopted 2021 - 2029 Housing Element ("HE"). Site 11.2is comprised of two parcels, including the Project Site, totaling 1.06 acres off Bellflower Boulevard, directly adjacent to the planned Bellflower 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 -28-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. PC 24-15

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 by/to 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 "B" 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. -29-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. PC 24-15

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 thatthe 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. -30-

City of Bellflower
Resolution No. PC 24-15

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 Date. 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 3RD DAY OF MARC
Robert Wilson, Chairman
ATTEST:

Elizabeth q. Oba, Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Kart H. Berger, City Attorney
By:

Justi6i A. Tamay Assstant City Attorney
-31-

ATTACHMENT F
December 16, 2024 Staff Report (without attachments)

GSC`; pg BELLFLO
ROWING TOGid"5 4.
staf�eport
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.

-33-

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

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. 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.

PUBLIC NOTICE
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 -34-

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

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
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)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
➢ Request
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 BMC § 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.
-35-

Staff Report — DR 3-24-15169 & CU 24-07 for 16211 Bellflower Boulevard December 16, 2024
Page4of6
➢ 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 / 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'-91/2" 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 (1St 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.
-36-

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

> 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 ExhibitA 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 BI. & Alondra BI., Bellflower BI. & Harvard St., Bellflower BI. & Driveway 1, Bellflower BI. & Flora Vista St., Bellflower BI. & Mayne St., and Bellflower BI. & 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 BI. and Bellflower BI. & 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 ("QA") 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 -37-

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

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
-38-

ATTACHMENT G
February 18, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments)

Gg'C`t OF BELLFLO
staff
eport
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

1. 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.

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.

-40-

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

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. 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.

PUBLIC NOTICE
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 -41-

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

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.
-42-

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

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
-43-

ATTACHMENT H
March 3, 2025 Staff Report (without attachments)

GtC`I ag 13ELLFLp vv��
G�°Wj TOG 1�
staff
eport
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. "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. 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.

-45-

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

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:

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 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 TOD SP. The Applicant did not address these concerns.

Project 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. -46-

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

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) -47-

ATTACHMENT
Assessor's Map, Aerial Map, Zoning Map and General Plan Map -48-

7106116
SCALE 1" 80'
0 a
Qhi
cc
0 HARVARD

CALIFORNIA COOPERATIVE COLONY
_ TRACT
M. R. 21-15-I6
TRACT NO. 3197
M.B. 38-61
CODE
2267
11274
FOR PREV. ASSM'T. SEE: 483-338
r45 .6 -+L
BLK. 17
I Q
3 .55 'AC .
31 !ref
246.64
'a
,
SS
Subject Property
Str °et .1i s per h%fr.?'-t -,'c o re
CD4 5rde red the /o24 i'A lo J'
/7 "t, oiti7opgh the a'royror75 of
ea/ne /ifs or e. r7ie05'refrom
the Ce.7ter //noo7 f O 6.fre C,1- 5,

ASSESSOR'S MAP
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES . CALIF .

IJ
O
J
I .L
J
J
W
30 co

kilett
. U v LLN! Ot{ k"R
NJ
Subject Property
16221
16229
1623
16211 Bellflower Boulevard
General Plan Map
WING ' Ivc'i�
1 1 1
Scale: 1 in = 111 ft
Printed 12/12/2024

ATTACHMENT J
Traffic Analysis, Queuing Analysis, VMT Screening Evaluation, Project Description
-53-

URBAN COSSOA3S
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]
Reference Number
Agency
Date
157806.02 TA Report REV
City of Beliflovver
April 22, 2024
(Revised October 3, 2024)
-54-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
Appendices iv
List of Exhibits v
List of Tables vi
List of 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 Recommendations 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
157896.03 TA Report
-55-

URBAN !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

6.2 Without Project Traffic Volume Forecasts

6.3 With Project Traffic Volume Forecasts

6.4 Intersection Operations Analysis

6.5 Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis
39 39
39 39
42 7 References 43
157898-03 TA Report
-56-

URBAN 3 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
15789E-03 TA Report
-57-

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

LIST OF EXHIBITS
_Exhibit 1-1: Location Map- ___-- _ _-- —_-- 2
Exhibit 1-2: Preliminary Site Plan 4
Exhibit 1-3: 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
Exhibit 3-4 Bicycle Facilities 21
Exhibit 3-5: Existing (2024) Traffic Volumes 22
Exhibit 4-1: Project Trip Distribution (Outbound) 27
Exhibit 4-1: Project Trip Distribution (inbound) 28
Exhibit 4-2: Project Only Traffic volumes 29
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
-58-

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

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Intersection Analysis Locations 5
Table 1-2: 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 157898-03 TA Report
-59-

URBAN I 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
15789B-03 TA Report
vii -60-

URBAN CROSSROADS
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 157896-03 TA Report
-61-

URBAN CROSSROADS
1 INTRODUCTION
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 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 (July 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 will accommodate site 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 (Le., 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 construction plans for the Project site.

Additional details and intersection lane geometrics 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 local/regional improvement needs. The Project Applicant would be required to pay requisite fees consistent with the City's requirements. 15789B-03 TA Report
1 1.iodab vi. £0-868LS l
to•t. y!t,.
t/d,,,A1 ,tr.+.:.'f'Y_.s.
dVf W N O 11VJ O1 : 4- I. 1I8114X3
c
Ea
z
C .f)
J
O
0 Cr)
v
O
61 •
O
vi
fJ
CO
N
CD
CD
O
O
C
fD
EU
0 D
O1
a
w
vi

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) Trio 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
-64-

McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 0 CC
U)
CC
U
z
4 C1C
EXHIBIT 1-2: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN

EXISTING CO MMERCIAL
FrntncT_ttlxLE lar 'I PARCCL2, a`t") f+41I „. I •.g€�
LL.. frnC 1 * EMT M LL 4. ., viT i J C i lhC FI, .I .el•,r� 1�. .. M E '• 9 6 r NiIL
lL 'ELI. T^ E LL l C 1 9' [V A ��_ Wr' �:.. • 1�r ..+•n •^ ( f`L. •4r` H•'!*i aYya fr' 1
p C1.A1 `1�LL6
<' TT��' v, f �-y 'Z«bCEtFe�dl;fXtlitll�G ~ ) jIj ' 11y^ ~t. ��.a 5�1]M �L • [ l IT C H LY.i 11 .M •� I • I ` f I I I I I i I `�. ��:-ft�+.: i. 'r�Vl... i.r EXIST[Np.. : CQMM ERC1At
r'E:L d!Tr
MCD,
(4$84'PRdTtl)..
±3:7.865.

PARCEL 1
�, r -«F £XISTING.':CalvifiilE,RCl,0.t�
r` NcA1;P. of t ,.
f eIc•c c -µI i 'E^I...' .:E =u e•t Tr:-
• .T `. ? I.•I n �ur n T OrMrKnE
NI:E Y;siJ• • C r 'V? V-1.9 • TTE,I
:.I.: s•a: I;110 TO FE
(7,7i7 Nr7,]IPII1G'11.Y
I • Is - ,f .
• • I (n i
LbE
4E .r.T'euv rf!1�:E sU. ETKTI•:c' .

Ia,, SrSt a /+dam ' tiE
9• E.WU: �F',,t d' n'.: rrtE'• . ••
Nt' O.:'LYT ,11 i • `:II N+A fl:t• . u•
stL !7.7M ..• P.' l,TifJ T •^. F.E •i
1111,M1'..,, Y •.

I {i i
1 15789E-03 TA Report

URBAN CROSSROADS
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 (Le., 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 pi. &.Alondra BL* 2 Bellflower Yes.
2 Bellflower BI. & Harvard St.* Bellflower Yes
3 Bellflower BI.:&'Driveway::1. Bellflower No
4 Bellflower Bl. & Flora Vista St.* Bellflower Yes
5 BellflowerBl. & Mayne St.* Bellflower Yes
6 Bellflower BI. & Oak St.* Bellflower Yes
* Requested by the City of Bellflower
157898-03 TA Report
-66-

URBAN 1 CROSSROADS
f
McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 1-3: STUDY AREA
LEGEND.:..
0 - EXISTING: I ITERSEC ION A0AL.YSIS. LOCATION
-FUTURE INTERSECTION ANALYSIS I.OCATIOP
15789B-03 TA Report
-67-

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.

Intersection
1 Bellflower BI. &Alondra BI.
2 Bellflower BI. & Harvard St.
3 Bellflower BI. & Driveway 1
4 Bellflower BI. & Flora Vista St.
5 Bellflower BI. & Mayne St.
6 Bellflower BI. & Oak St.
=A -D t;. =E =F

1.6 RECOMMENDATIONS
TABLE 1-2: SUMMARY OF LOS
Existing E+P 2025 NP 2025 WP
M PM AM PM ` AM PM AM PM
The following recommendations are based on the minimum improvements needed to accommodate site access and maintain acceptable peak hour operations for the proposed Project. The site adjacent recommendations are shown on Exhibit 1-4.

Recommendation 1 - Bellflower BI. & 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. 157896-03 TA Report
-68-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis Recommendation 2 - Bellflower B. - 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. 157898-03 TA Report
-69-

URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 1-4: SITE ACCESS RECOMMENDATIONS --.
•
LEGENE
If1 NES

4.41.1 0
-EXi571E1G[NTER ECTI N`ANAL1rSES:tOGAT10N`
FU.TURE.tNT€1 sECTfON A.4ALYS[S LOCATION.
3 $4,rfoweral.
& Drivewagi
44004 One-
=.5to, :g_9.lcaprovei tent
Lenz t
15789B-03 TA Report
-70-

URBAN 1 CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This Page Intentionally Left Blank
157898-03 TA Report -71-

URBAN I CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 2 METHODOLOGIES
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 7th 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
Little: -or no capacity' deficiencies.

Short-term capacity deficiencies.

Average capacity deficiencies:

Long-term capacity deficiencies.

Very highcapacity deficiencies.

Extremely high capacity deficiencies, with intersection capacity exceeded. ' Source: County of Orange CMP, ICU Methodology
ICU
Level of
Service

1.00 F
15789B-03 TA Report
-72-

URBAN # CROSSROADS

2.2.2 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 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 ail 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
Description
Little Or rio delays:

Short traffic delays.

Average traffic delays...

Long traffic delays.

Very long traffic delays :.

Extreme traffic delays with intersection capacity exceeded.

Source: HCM, 6th Edition
If V/C is greater than 1.0 then LOS is F per HCM.

Average Control Delay Level of Service,
(Seconds), V/C ≤ 1.0 V/C ≤ 1.01
0 to T0.00

10.01 to 15.00
15;01 to 25 00:.

25.01 to 35.00

35.01 to'50 00 ,
> 50.00
D

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:
15789B -O3 TA Report
-73-

URBAN !CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis TABLE 2-3: THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE
Level of Service Final V/C Ratio
C > 0.700-0.800
>0.800-0.900
E, F > O900
Project -Related Increase In V/C
Equalito or greater.than 0.04
Equal to or greater than 0.02
Equal to or greater than 0.01 .
15789B-03 TA Report
12 -74-

F
t
URBAN I CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This Page Intentionally Left Blank
15789B-03 TA Report -75-

URBAN `CROSSROADS
3 ---AREA CONDITIONS --
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 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 periodically to 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
-76-

URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-1: EXISTING NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS D:Aifowes
& Oak St
'✓ ` -=f:X!Stfpg. rriffic.StiinW
—� =Ees[trtrLcne
DEF = LF'fact _Turn b tnz
'E' = Ex s C.+'itg Sto 5 cin
157896-03 TA Report
-77-

URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBI 3-2: CITY OF BELLFLOWER GENERAL PLAN._ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION _PLAN_ 157898-03 TA Report
A7
-78-

UR BAN 'CROSSRO ADS
Due travels West nn Somerset,
No rth on Ilcllfow•cr, East on
P o,tcr, And south un W'anlrttlf
during the Iast 30 minutes of
e ach hou r.

PLEASE NOTE: ' fron d* Cc ntcr in tempo rarily
out of serv ic e and hein p relo cated A temporary
stop ha s hccrt.tddcd in Belmon t Street & Ciei.

Ccricrfo r thc Sun th Ro ute.
li
IIU9 tra vels Wctit 4n
Ramona an d North on
B ellflower Blv d. during
the lank 30 minu tes of
c ash ho ur.
157898-03 TA Report
M cDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-3: EXISTING TRANSIT ROUTES (1 OF 2)
18 Sc hedule ,
North Route
Minute s After the /sour
Belmont & Mayne
Somerset & Bellflower
Rosecrans & Lakewood
McNab & Rosecrans
Bellflower & Somerset
Woodruff & Foster Road
:00 :30
:02 :32
:07 :37
:13 :43
:47
:51
South R oute
Belmont & Civic Center
Artesia \iVcodrurf
Artesia & Bellflower
Lakewood Artesia
Clark et Aloodra
?' t'OIrrfit k F. ex.roN, ,.
` )t ritAscr f:111,4.1
P0INTS''OrINTEREST'
1 Grohs Center & �IfU .Mu�curc
Z Ctvit l enter/LIbr ny/C0urthi usi`
PostOffict •
„4 .. .Sl14riff"s Substat dn'
6 MTA.'0reeti.Llrie;StiitrOnr.
f'hompsrnParkJA3eiattc'eeiltex:
8:. Pirete`Park

9. C?I.4 th?r Park & kate''Park
IO Fled kissed . Spot is Par < '

BELLFLOWER
BUS

U RBAN ( CRO SSROADS
157898-03 TA Report
McDonald's - 16211 Be llflo wer Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-3: EXISTING TRANSIT ROUTES (2 OF 2)
19 URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis

3.4 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
-81-

URBAN 4 CROSSROADS
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-4 BICYCLE FACILITIES
157898-03 TA Report
11 -82-

URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 3-5: EXISTING (2024) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
1 : 13ellflower Bl, &Aionra
Bt
2 Saflowerel. &Harvard
< St
3 " Se"flowerB1 &Driveway
,.
p
vr:.-
h : d I.T." ;+,
.: ;..
- if d '.F.. '
22,700
,,,12.7‘11.2),
..F. -1
:.
fit
7 #••
if . 4,' ,
,..gyp
8, ..

L.' • ,i
t+ <
..': . .

25.0 _ ii
.:� SSr3%
I. f:.k)' .
2a,S.r2"' .:

Z0
1,9
fit .
*y
I
irr
4 ' Sallower al & Flora sta
. l' - r.

5. Bellflower el. & ISyme3L
6 Sallower el. & 031(.2,
7/«"mom

4.c
t/% 171 Xt
� &7
osifr~ \
CN
1 ft--,
. 4r
2'.

N-..' �Y.
sni. r .fit.
.L1. .v •4.
iizop
'4.-'''ai?t',
r-.. !WI)
2 1;,95^_`
'.i. e.3..
:a

4.1.1ns -7.
3 2,05.2 ;
v L -
4r
f -L,
. -- ,. rrrtaxze- torgVol4. _-
x?g: Av Mge Do�y:Trp'S
157898-03 TA Report
-83-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis TABLE 3-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING (2024) CONDITIONS Delay (secsJ2 _ _Level of
# Intersection
1 Bellflower BL
2 Bellflower BL
3 Bellflower Bl.
4 Bellflower BI.
5 Bellflower BL
6 Bellflower BI.
&Alondra BL
& Harvard St.
& Driveway 1
& Flora Vista St.
&Mayne St.
&Oak St.

Traffic
Control_
TS
TS
CSS
TS
TS
TS
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.

ICU (v/c)
AM PM

0.497 0.618

0.190 0.290

9.8 10.3

0.313 0.363

0.222 0.238

0.241 0287
Service
AM PM
A .. .. . B.

A
A B
A A
A A
A. A
15789B-03 TA Report
-84-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis This page intentionally left blank
157896-03 TA Report -85-

URBAN i CROSSROADS 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.

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.

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 by the specific band 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 (11th 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 (11th 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 L[i AM Peak Flour PM F ED Hour
Land L.se nit, Code Ill; Out Total Irt Out TocaN.Daily
Trip C ieratior Ramat
Fast -Food Sea�uf3tit it Driv_ Throe=h 3F 93:^ : 2L75 11$6 _1=1.61 1718 1.S S 2"3.:.3':4 7.4 Mr, •":,
, iSF, lr •.S-.ti,?i u'Y 3;i:._[
PeakHour PM Peak Hour
Land U_e
qanrn Unit,' In Out —cal To Out Total Dairy
Trip c._neratton-urnn'.arr
F_tFccdReztaurantvdt Driv=_-Tnrotaeh 3.91STSF 55 Rb 17E 67 62 123 1.832 P3— 61,(Sz s AM; SS i Piv1IG ally,)": 13 43 86 -34 -'4 -ES -t ooi= Total NetTri : 46 -±,', 8 ?? ye 61 8'24
EysCe Uri ._;ii: e, ,_%a2!l.
15789B-03 TA Report
-86-

URBAN 1 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 Project's 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 a mbient 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 by the 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.
157898-03 TA Report
-87-

URBAN' CROSSROADS
McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-1: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION (OUTBOUND)
LEGEND:
10 - PERCENT FROM PROJECT
157896-03 TA Report
-88-

URBAN :CROSSROADS
McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-1: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION (INBOUND)
LEGEND:
10 - PERCENT TO PROJECT
157898-03 TA Report
-89-

URBAN !CROSSROADS
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-2: PROJECT ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
1 =HeliPo erEl.&Atom:1m
::13l.
2 a $ttwerei: SHarvzrd
.St.
3 : Balfiowera1. &Driveway
- �2Q.
§
§
2,830
4 Bellflower Ht. 8 Fis)ra Yts1a
tit.

Beliowere4.&Maynest.6
' . ' .
9eitksw-er&:ItOak5t.
.. _
•
lro
r 7
IA
A -
1vorgi xI
it.

NeminyF..
« A yeragetioi(y'Frijs
15789B-03 TA Report
29 -90-

URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-3: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION MAP
Ekrieara ._
t4 n:a i
• 5natr
1,A.71 unv�Prr;:.,..:
•
%.(;k
Source_:: Esr,, HERE, Garvin if�rF a�,, inicrernPnt l Cor .:, %EBCO, USG` ,,F gz +'P+S :1 Nr N GeoB;15H IG?K:X;;:fgca ter 4L ordnance Sup vey,Esp Jitpar, !OETR, Esfr..Crina (1 iorg Kcr,yj, (,j:OpenStr at,ti� .ciirtnbutors..andtne rGI.S user 15789B-03 TA Report
-91-

4y
}

URBAN' CROSSROADS
McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-4: CUMULATIVE ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
1 BefHioereFBL& ndr32
-
8e#llower_81.&Halyard
-
3 Bel#lowierEi.&Drivzwag
�.
�]It
t;..
~
�"�
Q Tr-
..K
-4 . -Bellfbwer t#: & F oravista
SL
5:.. ..

Eel tf.3werBl:. & aaayrt....:S;
..
6 =;,
- az#IawArB:,_& Oak St!
p.
'Ira'-
1 v
i-
J
zt
•r
:2?1).-
x.tip: -
,,1
"C -0:-
.4 U

30.1 , "` °I,,-
E---. OC3F
6812:45; -
-33f! C.
--1-•-,

6..73+3
.'l '1`
iZ 714.1:
r#
ek
5Q0
4 [£z'f, _Ai-
.�.liv`('�
'1 1,..
iii r'.:.
p
rj:litO
s _t 1: —1'
"6
'-f I+ '
r} C
r."
.4-
^ir s�fvfRtvq..Peak ft,au?•}ri£$ _ :•(2Viola;Ra:
.14 Av_mysDa n- f.
15789B-03 TA Report
11 -92-

URBAN ' CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis TABLE 4-2: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LAND USE SUMMARY
Project
City of Bellflower
B1 Polio .Campera
B2 Best. Buy Outlet
B3 7 -Eleven wt Attached Restaurant
B4 Dunkin` Donuts
BS fvledical Building
B6 Bellflower Mixed -Use Project
Address
_9045.RPsecran lire.
172213 Lakewood Blvd.
•
931161.akei<+kao. d, OW.
10100 Rosecran:sAve.
940D R6_ecra riS Ave.
e.
;16431 Bellflower BlVd4 9735 Oak St.;: 9742 [Mayne St,
B7 McDonald's ;10146 Artesia Blvd,
B8 McDonald's •is1'NC or Mor cfra: BlVal arid kiftNab A& , 64 Metro Bellflower Station ` MC and SWC of Bellflower Blvd:. and Flora:Vista Ave.

BIG Metro Maintenance and Storage 9x30 Scctner et Bls:%d Facility
r G'1=Ew=-itir?,z linitz NIA =Not r.taitabfelTSF= houanrl Squar t

4.6.1 METRO LIGHT RAIL STATION
Land Use Quantity
Coranerciat 2.590 TSF
Commercial 63..E-5& TSF
ComRlertial NIA
Commercial 9.256 TSF
Medical.Qf ice 33.03a TSF
Residential 91 aU
Co i .rriercial 15.209 TSF
Commercial 1,947 TSF
Coir%Grrerciat . 3.600 TSB=
Transit Facility
• Cviarnt`enartce
ancf Sctxra�e
In March 2024, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) completed the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Pro'ect 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 terminusin 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. 157896-03 TA Report -93-

URBAN (CROSSROADS
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 4-5: METRO LOCALLY PREFFERED ALTERNATIVE
j't$.gU if?:%:S Corngx Rplatt
,Fs tj w ti4gir ` licr's Agsrlinl 4
RIM MSF.Site
S.7,urce: W.SP z::'•;d• TA HA 20023
15789B-03 TA Report
-94-

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.) Level of : Delay (secs.)2 Level of Delay (secs.)2 Level of Traffic ICU (v/c) Service ICU (v/c) Service ICU (v/c) Service # Intersection Control' AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM _ AM PM AM PM 4 Bellflower BI. & Flora Vista St. TS • 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 Bl. & Oak St. TS 21:7 25.0 C C ° 175 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) 1 TS =Traffic Signal
Queuing
Available
Stacking 95th Percentile
Intersect on Distance (F t) ee Queue (Feet) Acceptable? Bent ower Bl drlora \rfsta St.

Front intersection to Back of Rail Crossing
155 196
Bellflower B[.JCra lc St.

From intersection to Back of Rail Crossing 240 248 No
Stacking Distance is acceptable it the :required, _tacking distance is less than or equal' to the stacking distance provided.

Parking
Proposed Seaton- Projected 2042 Excess Transit
Parking Spaces Projected 2042 Excess Transit Parking Demand; Parking Demand (Unconstained Parking Demand Parking Demand (Constrained (Constrained S1t on Locatons) NL (All Stations) (All Stations) Locations) L catons) Bellflower Station 260 330 70 4201.:.. :, .. . -1.60
Source: W st Santa Ana EranchTransit Corridor Protect Rnal Transportation Impact Analysts Report {March 2024) Table 5-1a.. 15789B-03 TA Report
-95-

URBAN f CROSSROADS McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 5 E+P TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Thin=section=difcusses=thc-_raffic--far-eeasts=fer=Existifgplus-PraieeV(E-F or-fditons-arid=the=resrrit`n _ 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 Projects 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).
15789B-03 TA Report
-96-

URBAN t CROSSROADS
:

McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 5-1: E+P TRAFFIC VOLUMES
1 Bellflower Bf. & Alardra
..

Z. r; lei Solve rel. &P .ac and
-.
'3
BedflovtsrBt. & D iv way

:1.
` rv;
I
'4 . 4..:..F7fli-
:22,3W
r
-- "
r
Z.
"'4�. :7f
2 &
..1
:Si

4. I3•
`r
20,950
EL-
..,,
1,900 "
ti
1,353
i
4 Sallower
St
BeilfloWerBt. -& Mar e'St
.
6 ; . -
B2ltf ow,er el. & 03k3, :.
. 4 r -'
.,;,
'PT: '
.

VS41
3,spc�.

Q;r
xi
6•, C
1,,_:
rr-
g . .•
•.
-pct
3;254'.
200...
3F.:'-3
'F
r
r
CC
K:
-'-3+' 17th'.`_T.;..
2,1}0?;
t .t`
'Ils`1'p'
.4
d9ts- „-.
2,400:
1 .&
e
524.
r ,
,-,
g;s-t7 AIVO-4,r; - 'v�:P5t .s t'1rV-Mirr:e.
avem:2eDaif.l'Pips,
157896-03 TA Report
-97-

URBAN E CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis TABLE -5-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR E+1) CONDITIONS
Delay (secs.)2 Level of Delay (secs.)2 Level of Project - Traffic ICU (v/c) Service ICU (v/c) Service Related
# Intersection Control
AM PM PM AM PM AM PM ciency73
AM Defl
1 Bellflower BL &Alondra Bl. TS ' I0.497 .0.618 :A B 0.497. 0:627 A B No 2 Bellflower BL & Harvard St. TS : 0.190 0.290 A A 0.207 0.302 A A No 3 Bellflower BL & Driveway 1 CSS 9.8 10.3 A B 10.3 10.5 B B No 4 Bellflower BL & Flora Vista St. TS ' 0.313 0.363 A A 0320 0.367 A A No 5 Bellflower BL & Mayne St. TS 0.222 0.238 A A 0.235 0.236 A A No 6 Bellflower BI. & Oak St. TS . 0.241 0.287 A A 0.252 0.289 A A No CSS = Cross -Street Stop; TS = Traffic Signal
2 All signalized intersections will be evaluated utilizing Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. For intersections withall way or cross street stop control, the delay and level of sentice for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. HCM delay reported to seconds and ICU reported as a volume -to -capacity ratio. 3 A transportation impact on a City of Bellflower intersection shall be deemed "significant" in accordance with the following table:

Level of Service Rnaf VIC Ra(o Project -Refaced tncreasa in VIC • C *V700Q800 gquaIto_orgteaterfh n:a04
D. >;0.800.0.900 Equal:tro dtgrea"tePtti�n 0:02
•YEX- *0,900. Equal to.`or:'g ea er tt ai10:0i
15789B-03 TA Report
11 -98-

URBAN ' CROSSROADS
-Thispage-intentionallyleft-blank—
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 15789B-03 TA Report -99-

• URBAN j CROSSROADS
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 6 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2025)TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
_Tkris-s-ec�ioi-�Fscas�es=t�e�1=te�hQd-used-to de�relop-6perring�'ear-Etxrr�t7l-ative (-2(�2=5)=t/tlift�out�nd _ With Project traffic forecasts, and the resulting intersection operations and traffic signal warrant analyses.

6.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The Zane 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 not yet constructed known development projects in the area. The weekday ADTandweekdayAM and PM peak hour volumes 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.
157898-03 TA Report
-100-

URBAN ; CROSSROADS
McDonald's —16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 'EXHIBIT -6-1: OPENING YEAR: CUMULATIVE -(2025) -WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES __ ._ a•Ellgfiueral-aFtlordira2-;
&l.
aafiavreral 3award
3 114Sowr=_r a8 &Pli fa
r
z...., .tom .

A" C.'
2r',7r.
r ".j .
a --
c-1.° ft4Oy
4r
� is,:
' L . ••
i..
.4 Y
,1
4 2S0
Si*
Y
s-� v1
22,9h3,3
y.
1,90.13
n
4 %oelflower E. &Flora Vida
St
5 : BElMlowtrig, & !v yre St.
6 law
aell er d._&:Oak St;
.
wk. ra
.co
34350
is
t
2»
P
'Z' .
:..
r=:

1.500
2-
5;93+
�j
• 'a
r
-
2;]40
n- p
-iLI
t ^
.�i
?,ls"t]' `f.,'
#.7* }�!.%i: �, lYf F..i:aak-i-tc4r ll?Z?'.c o>39 t5'tl..r11 .

1.r AV�tC t.D �y 7
157896-03 TA Report
-101-

URBAN CROSSROADS
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis EXHIBIT 6-2:-OPENING"YEAR -CUMULATIVE -(2025) WITH -PROJECT -TRAFFIC- VOLUMES I •LWIlairisDi. &C4oKira
Z- . 8eAfllls rti."8ttarvatii3
'_leafb-WerHt.&Driveway
2d+'
_
23,900
;LO

yG
31,
- -.i- --P-4r
;. "r
.151-5' --'.
_1 4'
^a_ .57-3.. '
. r
- . .:
. y

-" r

.
1=~s. §, —1"
.. .. . , -.

1.21.51 „.,:;,..-7:(",
;. 0152) -1'
22,000
;IT
1 400 ".

K
1,550
..4
4 •'eettiowerOF &FloraVia' ta5
, tlelifioweret,-&Mir* St.
6 ;. .:ee1fivwerM:&Oak 2,
St.
4;
3 450
.�
.2.tk}
P .
-1;550.:
.
ip .
`t
wr
`!.
-41•:131 �.
1 '1.. `ti-
Yt- ''
..� I'

4.:147: -2'-
;ti* '.t
ce-
f`i
•,
Tim _
a-. -_
Tom♦ .,
i

:: 1-..
. ',:. '
jp' n "
4,930
r.
2,550
OG'rt'
2,j00
.``y
aFfi Atv(i:Mi l i_s'1s i_:"r�uvRV. 4Y
>7 Average D;;Jilyrips
15789B-03 TA Report
41 -102-

URBAN CROSSROADS McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis With -the addition-of-Project-traffic,-no---studyarea-intersections anticipated-to--operate--at-an unacceptable LOS during the peak hours under Opening Year Cumulative (2025) With Project traffic conditions. The-addi.tion-of-P-r-o ecttraffic_ 2a.not-tr ggetth_e-City-of-B-IIf owers ignificance _ 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 intersection
t Bellil4 yer, BIB R: Afkndra EL
z Bzli=foWer B: &':Naivarc(St
3 Bellflo +mil Efs & Driveway t
4 BeifiotierBL;.B�slora'tstaScs
Bellflower @l & Maybe t.

6. Bei[fo'wer;3l:.8< Oaf,„ 5t
css =._Gres. Sv .stpR

2.025 Without Project 2025 Wih:Project.
0el'ay(sa s:.}=: teveF'at' Pelay.(secs.12 Levei;o Project- Tra Traffic iG l: (v!cl Sarrice li �? (vlc} service Re.la'=ed Eon rol' r°..4 p4:. Ai.'t RA AM PM AM .syi, • De iciency—' r D52 031b b A c .4:157.1. -..Q.725.. A ,...y. C NO ,..:_.

A 0:302 036 A A Na
7 1 S 5. B B No.
.A- A 0.521 0.593 A A No
A A:: .:25b .0!30% A: . A Nii
A A 0.299 0;332 . A A No
TS
T5
css
TS
°TS
TS
O:2,45, 0:.338 A
t•t .5

0.504 0:588
I} 254 rs 293
17,296 0.345
i t,_ ff rat:atedent wiltbe evatra d to Creccon.Capscity Ltd lr:.a5 On.{I CU) rr?;=th d:nto y: For.inrr xtiors.tl Fit Ii:aj or&n 3tr._t:
ai}c_rtroI d. -d Iayand {crn-c it re n'arrr-a lkintref neTare:'cti'n PCFL'C-lajrcOcrt<diti saccc 3=ar.:;. ICU r:Ocrcecs s c- pscley ratio;
A7=_ =e-girt=crcrimpacvn cit; dOlrfinleraTlntar cue s! !Ib-d— r d r.I:I.can t"inaccordance itthffi L.(ivig 5th,.rkEti fir,A {!CR1Uo rrei ct r _Ia.ed'ir}cP3 et�Ytt A'IQ R t3 Et at 4nargceaFrtix4ItdO4
Ll DA00.43_9Cip E;r 3C td sr. gr=ztgr iit It io2..

E. r: OSLr7. Equal. rtr.n ' ..

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 ADT volume -based traffic signal warrants. There are no study area intersections that traffic signal warrant analysis can be applied to for Opening Year Cumulative (2025) Without and With Project traffic conditions due to existing signalization or restricted access (i.e., right-in/right-out only access).
157898-03 TA Report
-103-

URBAN r CROSSROADS
7 -REFERENCES---
McDonald's -16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis -------1:- Los -Angeles -County-Public-Works,-Trgrnspo_rtati-o-r Imp-a-ct_Analysis Guidelines Los_AngeLes County s.n.

2. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manual. llth 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.

5. 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
Al
-104-

URBAN CROSSROADS
- This -page intentionally left blank
McDonald's - 16211 Bellflower Boulevard Traffic Analysis 15789B-03 TA Report
-105-

URBAN

CROSSROADS
DATE:

TO:

FROM:

JOB NO:

July 18, 2024
Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

Jose Alire & Robert Vu, Urban Crossroads
15789B-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation

MCDONALD'S BELLFLOWER BOULEVARD DRIVE-THRU

EVALUATION
Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit the 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=thr.0 °-storage capacity to accornmodate the peak on -site vehicle demands.

EXHIBIT A: LOCATION MAP
...:,:iK'I rl:��j
• rota r�243,1
Yic 11'.R•1 -"I
H Rye
•
4 SITF '
-
i tiv.w?..
.1%."sfut 71715 _7,01
t -TXr. 4-1
•
A
-106-

Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.
july 1.8, 2024

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
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 .pi.cku p_window.__For a Side -By -Side drive-th.ru, 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
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-107-

Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

July 18, 2024

dual order boards, nearly all rebuilds, and newly constructed McDonald's restaurants employ this more effrcient-design con ftgoration. _

DRIVE-THRU LANE
The proposed McDonald's Bellflower Boulevard Circulation plan prepared on July 1, 2024, by Kimsey 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 anytime. This includes vehicles queued at the pickup window, cashier window, and order board.

TABLE 1: REFERENCE DRIVE-THRU QUEUING DATA SUMMARY
Location
Brea'
La Palma2
South Gate3
Average Vehicle Queue
AM MD
(7am-9am) (11am-1pm)
7 5
5 5
7 5
Peak Vehicle Queue
AM
(7am-9am)
11 11
MD
(11am-fpm)
12 10
11 13
' Based on counts collected at the McDonald's located at 825 Imperial Highway on Tuesday, October 17, 2023 (Appendix A).
2 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 C).

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

CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-108-

Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

July 18, 2024

from 5 to 7 vehicles, The maximum number of total vehicles observed in the drive-thru never excee-ded-13-vehtctes-at-anyuf that ree 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.

Jose Alire, P.E.

Senior Traffic Engineer
Robert Vu, P.E.

Senior Traffic Engineer
URBAN

CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation

APPENDIX A:

REFERENCE SURVEY (825 IMPERIAL HIGHWAY, BREA)
URBAN

CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-110-

This page intentionally left blank
URBAN

CROSSROADS
15789B-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-111-

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
7:35
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
-112-

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
-113-

APPENDIX B:

REFERENCE SURVEY (5062 ORANGETHORPE AVENUE, LA
PALMA)
URBAN

CROSSROADS
15789E-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-114-

This page intentionally left blank
URBAN

CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation

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
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 3
0 4
-116-

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
13:0O
3 3
0 6
-117-

APPENDIX C:

REFERENCE SURVEY (3309 TWEEDY BOULEVARD, SOUTH
GATE)
URBAN

CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation
-118-

This page intentionally left blank
URBAN

CROSSROADS
157898-02 Drive-Thru Evaluation

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
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
-120-

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
-121-

URBAN
DATE: July 17, 2024
TO: Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

FROM: Alex So, Urban Crossroads, Inc.

JOB NO: 15789B-02 VMT
COSSROA3S
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 (July 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.
-122-.

Robert Preece, Designua, Inc.

July 17, 2024

• Non -Retail Project-T-rip-G—eneratron-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 PRO

ECT 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
15789B-02 VMT
-123-

REFERENCES

1. Los Angeles County Public Works. Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. Los Angeles :

Public Works, 2020.

URBAN

CROSSROADS
157898-02 VMT
-124-

ATTACHMENT A

PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
URBAN

CROSSROADS
15789B-02 VMT
-125-

DS. CELL ,mex.

EXISTING COMMERCIAL
N.A.P.

PARCEL2
ac'mi iaEi ics' -ae ..a.- u'e

EXISTING COMMERCIAL
NAP.

PISPOITT
'IERAL NOTE
1:145I1'0 rw a rxee
_E REPORT EXCEPTIONS
--"7" COMMERCIAL
N.A.P.

C ITC IIATA
I
11,71
SNOW S.= COSISIO,
74,
.f
e0[flnfR l0

1.74 SOM. MO nal 00 WT.
nws xo O.O. mic
>EI w.wtt3.1.,

URBAN CROSSROADS
157898-02 VMT
-126-

ATTACHMENT B

HQTA MAP
URBAN

CROSSROADS
15789B-02 VMT
-127-

I - r
ifa St
and St
- Oak St
Laurel St
Darnell St
O
N
"V .

Linden St
neon! a St-
., _
Park S1
-- riz sb
High Quality Transit Areas (20.44e)-------.

Site
- Part St -
Trabu
Par

URBAN CROSSROADS
157898-02 VMT
-128-

tUs
March 11, 2024
desigrnuca
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 Zook 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 0r. Santa Ana, CA 92705 I phone 714.392.3900 -129-

ATTACHMENT K
Project Plans dated February 5, 2025

cDonald's

DESIGNER OF RECORD
DISCIPLINE' NAME:

MIN CONTACT:

ARCHITECT:

GA L
UNDSCAPe

DESIGN OA INC

ROBERT PREECE
009) 621-6703
DESIGN U.A. INC

FR ANCIS ONG
(714) 892-3900

KWY EY-IOTA
H ANNAH 51,11114
(714) 939-1030

KMLEY-NDRN

N ATINEW DURBAN
(714) 939-1030

ADDRFSS'
153 E CITY PLA CE DRIVE
SAN TA ANA CA. 92705

INCENSE M
183 E CITY PUCE DRIVE
AN, 92705
A G116505
110D W. TOW N a COUNTRY RD. #90371
SURE 702
ORANGE, CA 92966
1100 W. TOW N a COUNTRY RD. 14040
OR ANGE. 700
CA 82060

MCDONALD'S CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER
MANr1GFR' ADDRESS.

TROY STEPHENSON 0RTHH CARPENTER ST
OWNER
(678) 575-0343
CHICAGO. a 60607
N AME: ADDRESS:

LEE FAIRLY TRUST 16211 BELLFLOWER ENV ° TRUSTEE: YOUNG SUN LEE BELLFLOWER. CA Nose VICINITY MAP: NOM
GENERAL INFORMATION:

ADDRESS:

STATE SITE CODE:

STREET ADDRESS:

CIT Y:

COUNTY:

STATE:

API:

BUILDING CODE:

BUILDING CODE EDITION:

MECHANICAL CODE EDTION:

ELECTRICAL CODE EDTON:

PLUM BING CODE EDITION:

ENERGY CODE EDITION:

FIRE/LIFE SAFETY CODE EDITION: •
ACCESSIBIUTY CODE EDITIO N:

ADDITIONAL CODE EDITIONS:

SITE DATA:

ZONING DISTRICT:

ADJACENT ZONING:

N:

S:

E:

W:

GENERAL PLAN DISTRICT:

EXISTING USE:

PROPOSED USE:

ADJACENT USE:

N:

S:

E:

WI
FAR PROPO SED:

TOTAL LOTS:

TOTAL LO T AREA
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA:

TOTAL PAD AREA:

IMPERVIOUS AREA
LA NDSCAPE AREA:

PROPOSED PARKING:

REQUIRED PARKING:

DRNE—THRU STACKING:

BUILDING DATA:

OCCUPANCY:

CONSTRUCTION TYPE:

NUMBER OF STORIES:

PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT:

PROPOSED GROSS FLOOR AREA:

PROPOSED NET FLO OR AREA:
004-5156
16211 BELLFLO WER BLVD

BELLFLOWER

L OS ANGELES
CA, 90706
7108-016-009
2022 CALIF ORNIA BUILDING CODE
2022 CAUFORNI A MECHANICAL C ODE
2022 CAUFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE
2022 CAUFORNIA FIRE CODE
2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, CH.11B

BELLFLOWER MUNICIPAL C ODE
2022 CAL GREEN CODE

BELLFLOWER/ALONDRA MIXED USE ( 'BAND')

OVERLAY ZONE WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN BELLFLOWER

TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN
('TOD SP ") AND UNDERLYING BASE ZONE
DESIGNATION OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL ( "C —C").

CG —GENERAL CO MMERCIAL
CG —GENERAL CO MMERCIAL
CG —GENERAL COM MERCIAL
M1/CG—LIGHT INDUSTRIAL/GENERAL COMMERCIAL
C —G — GENERAL COMMERCIAL
C —G — GENERAL COMMERCIAL
McDONALD'S RESTAURANT

COMM ERCIAL

COM MERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

COMMERCIAL

0. 09
43,245 SF (. 99 ACRES)
43,587 SF (1.00 ACRES)
3,786 SF (0.09 ACRES) 9.0%
24,269 SF (0. 56 A CRES) 55.7%
15,403 SF (0.35 ACRES) 35.3%
23 SPACES
13 SPACES
(3,786 SF/300 SF- 13 SPACES)
9 CARS, 4 FROM ORDER PO INTS

USE GROUP B
V8 SPRINKLERED
1 19'-9 1/2"
3,786 SF
3,592 SF
SCOPE OF WORK:
— DEMO EXISTING PARKING LOT
— DEMO EXISTING BUILDING AND SITE STRUCTURES
— NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A McDONALD'S RESTAURANT WITH
DUAL ORDER POINT DRIVE—THRU LANE (N O SEATING OR
LOBBY)
— NEW TRASH CORRAL
— NEW LANDSCAPING AND HARDSCAPE
— NEW PARKING LOT AND PAVING
CITY NOTES:

A "C-0" OR "A" LICENSED CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY FOR
A CITY OF BELLFLO WER RIGHT—OF—WAY PERMIT TO PERFORM
ALL LISTED RIGHT—OF—WAY IMPROVEMENTS. CLASS 8
(GENERAL BUILDING) CONTRACTORS WILL NOT BE APPROVED

FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE TO PERFORM THIS TYPE OF WORK
WITHIN THE PUBUC RIGHT—OF—WAY

2. RECONSTRUCTION OF ALL CURB A ND GUTTER WILL REQUIRE
A MINIMUM OF NO LESS THAN A 12 (TWELVE) INCH WIDE
STREET CUT, FOLLOWED BY A T WO (2) INCH DEEP GRIND
AND CAP NO LESS THAN THEE (3) FEET WIDE ADJACENT TO

THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED G UTTER PLATE

3. THE CONTRACTOR SHAL L MEET WITH THE CITY PUBLIC WORKS

INSPECTOR PRIOR TO STARTING ANY CONSTRUCTION WITHIN
THE PUBLIC RIGHT—OF—WAY .

4. ALL WORK WITHIN THE PUBUC RIGHT—OF—WAY, INCLUDING

PLACING AND REMOVAL OF TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, SHALL
BE RESTRICTED TO THE HOURS BETWEEN 8:30 AM AND 3:30
PM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY . NO WORK REQUIRING

CONTINUOUS INSPECTION OR TRAFFIC CONTROL SHALL BE

DONE ON SATURDAY, SUNDAY, OR HOLIDAYS , UNL ESS PRIOR

A RRANGEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE AT LE AST ONE WEEK IN

ADVANCE WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER

5. THE DEVELOPER, AT HIS/HER CO ST, SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE

FOR THE RELOCATION AS NECESSARY OF ANY PUBLIC OR

PRNATE UTILITIES OR OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS TO FACILIT ATE
CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIG HT—OF—W AY

6. SERVICE FOR ALL UTILITIES (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO

THE TELEPHONE, CABLE, AND ELECTRICAL SERVICE) MUST BE

OF UNDERGROUND ENTRY FROM THE PROPOSED MAIN

ELECTRICAL SERVICE AND METER LOCATION TO THE POINT OF

UTILITY C ONNECTI ON WHEN THE VALUATION OF THE PROJECT
IS 950,000 OR GREATER

DRAWING INDEX
--- Cover She et

SITE & CIVIL
--- ALTA SURVEY (pag e 1 of 3)
ALTA SURVEY (page 2 of 3)
--- ALTA SURVEY (p ag e 3 of 3)
C1 .0 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
--- P RELI MINARY GRADING PLAN
--- PHOTOMETRIC PL AN

LANDSCAPE

41.0 PRELI MINARY LANDSCAPE PL AN

ARCHITECTURAL
KI .O Kit chen Plan
A1.0 Fl oor Plan
A1.1 Occupancy/Area Pl an
A1.3 Roof Plan
A2.0 Exterior Elevati ons
A2 .1 Exterior Elevati ons & Details
A2.2 Trash E nclos ure Elevations
A2.3 Drive—Thru Comp onents Elevations
A2.4 Perspective Renderings
A3.0 Building Sections for 61)0 Screening

COVER SHEET
�oM cDonald's USA, LLC
Proposed McDonald's Restaurant #004-5156
16211 B ellflow er Blvd .

Bellfl ow er, CA 90706
29 J anuary 2025

CRY OF

BELLFLOWER
I
PROJECT : ITE
-

VICINITY
MAP
Sc.: NOT TO SCALE
LE GA L DE SC RIPTION TITLE CO MMITM ENT O RDER NO : CAZSSBOHSC e ongfdv�gi oExwA wTx EUFrEmMcawfrREm10E6a f e.mwwTr, Lrw0 FET.MErE `owlliur 1wW011MFM0M n xc l 71°

SCHEDULE B -SE CTION N EXCEPTIONS
A FROMM MFR. WHOM AMA Lel NO F VET ME MO PA TABLE.INCLOOMIG ANT 4444841.16 COLLECTED WTI 3aM,TEC TS M.u ee r 00 04.01E M ax. wTTM O
6 0
MOFIli .1 a? R 2 rt liiE m.NEmv
6611=66 OF wc.W,EaiDB.WT.4. . .0161iEarr" ABflnenw.E.wE TOE""`EI wx WR4. 66.606., 60aEx1E w00 fHoiTHERM. AS uOw603INA
PIJR•080 16. 00 .0.60.6103101.

FE ewmxnew: w.1i°E°nee2PLI w 6"627• r mnee waAL••• •t0E w Qi wfufMPIFmMFu6nMEP1ww1.0.6Mua00 •36geurturxuxT4 AeO xxnrnwn .66 .6. E:

PURPOSE . illICEPGIVA NDELECIILC 0, 00066610 60 0601.6 . r rnnw wR =2 4, 152 a= l�fr EIEs4 FIRTIADREAMYs6E0
p. RARFRENTWwx RifM UR LIe FR OWMM.aCOO awls uaourxnERMIO.N#CwtmEEOOw0Otrt Man4 re��a n rnlm s°v lare WFa cauue°Rwrer �Ymte y m�
WOW WO I.FrAND REITE R FROM LEE R OBOAM 0/10 Cm6mxR rIw 6MMY summit
lit412.6N06666.1. A.WAO 600.111.0 BRE AO ElIT IFA YO UXOLFE MOS E
H ..EOTE M IwEOT FAACq.c t A MMYE Y IL.TTEp
1611 11014011111016T6010116:6
wFft1.�TMt. 81: w1=OSI .x x 6E

PER, WOW&
M x601.mARFIFI �E3«�OOTY R : ImEMEC OL
rwes'a ". soc 0•o s!Xelnew LOT.'"° ix m°X"`xm r'""`w6'e °°'"rnL.4:"Eur06 wi

SURVEY NOTES

ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY
OFA PORTION OF L OT 5 OF TRACT NO. 3197, IN THE CITY OF BELLFLO WER, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA . AS PE R MAP RE CORDED IN BOOK 98, PA GE 81 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. 6666 .6666 ,6 66,600 66 6606 60 666.6 6.00 •
LITIMPL ANNORR OVIII I WERE e .uvornawuto
6 6, a
P POWNE•1.10061.61,166.6 WE ROAM YrEfm OS OM.wTiP4
M0
FRO M THEM A.
unenrMmeaOM Re."`" swSi ffff 2:41174107 471 . '''' ''
1 wwJ.66.01 LOEwumEirlf ru YUX•I r t ONERA DOPMOE A. VNNI E TOM OuuOXII.Om YW RK u aIN 1c fCOMO RG11441,4 mm=iFY4 Mt Yf¢.4,

BASIS OF BEARING
1,710.1 14,6,01 •000 OP IELVLO W01.2 011.90 01.1161042/6010 •146E•AV ENIMPOITP AL6N O 61011.60•11A•E ARW G

BENCHM AR K I NFORMATION

Z ONIN G & S ETBA CKS
Egg
a SE PP..=TO MEOW
W61WY660 04 utww4i OT OME
COO.. AT MOO
NO BL OOM. OMME .PLAI RO MECIAMMOTOCOMVRY IIESUR VEVERP RORFITIY.

F LOOD DE

SIGNATION

E ATION
COM A0 ox c wniFnEPIr T oI0"is"""mv"` °.61. Ov04.`w`rotE .6:6. EEETHEFE,NAwwre .

ENCROACHMENT TABLE
Qnwrcor w.Or0M 05 3e, ORECEM ma SA 00CSS#
WOW MOSS 0 IO otTV . eU3
Mu CI OM Me s u0nwu ROM A.s BEAU ORRR ONm C RY MI R OF WAY. SEE exFEia Fm CIEINL4 SHEET
rn INDE X
r,Ew�6e 0e
a4414£4rwmEv
OWNERS
WW1 FM LEE AS DIRSITE OF TOE LIF E FAMIL Y tsar

SURVEYOR'S CE RTIFICATE
twV COwIE42.114 rtE� r •O R40NYeM R. 1s�oi114 i3 M 110 0FT µn .RMiL s P. HE

RCM OF PLAT OP KY

FO P LEGA L AND TITLE REVIEW ONL Y
a
S
o
ct LL
QJ 0 IL
W
ce
LI-
OU
fi LU
IUo
CO-I
C.1 Lu
PREPO RR DSRCIRO N 12411O0416 .4021
I M41014448tRIN OMPNI 0 47e4 •44 .2023
RLVIEKK!
2 1.3

ALT A/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY
OF A P ORTION OF LOT B OF TRACT N O. 3107, IN THE CITY OF BELLFL OW ER. C OUNTY OF LOS AN GELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 38. PAGE 81 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE C OUNTY REC ORDER OF SAID COUNTY. ---------.v, •wrpr e,v—w• ssr_R„w rwmYxs
rMNA:/WEST PI
LOT 1 OF
TRACTS 3127
9G
ORAPWCBCAIL1.•w

RECORD LEGEND
Mt ARRAN. OR OllatakINIVIA.MIEM ILIRROO RGILMA TRO.
• 1263331 A MA PER T RAG TICA 31111.

R3 RECO RI313.• PFA Y AP NO.
• REGO ROOMPRR TIRE REPORT I
• MOOMP.TAFBIEEMBUTEM•,D32 .

PAR CELINFORM ATION
w.n
▪ 103.3,302 1010 t ta t II

B RIO OaFAM mNw ea xn uet
MN: 3 3.1110.1730433.0033
7I0N05T a T�,E LEAK
m•wow-z° 41',,trArc�.l

LEG END
MO M r.. 1.01004.. .tailnyes Nero.

AliESNOSPAPOLPUWER
proFera v
sneer 0.won. 04 110.4. 1.1144 64,
r
L®J

SURVEYOR'S METES AND BO UNDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION
wouTwwo®> R o VENN MTV
LOT
NM
TRACT
2 OF
3,BT
MM'wM9,/NMYIwiw
B ltt76 CL Yrt ...e
.....8....1,,., AL OUD.. BOULEVAR D �. F x oun.7747TABUSX 0. ...[cl0 , R
▪ — — — — "''�FDMrwn
1011110121.1141.4.40
IA W OW I.M.00.110111MXthilrele HEL D

T OEMSLIIIIICLINURSEP ATI ON
New STREE T 0.11.46 ,06 HA UG .014.2-- — — — r— "„ Iea blo.wAMM LOT OF
TRACT NO .31L7

SURVEYO R'S METESA ND BOUNDS LEG AL DESCRIP TIO N
Ming. PraikarAMIND
oMP am.01•ewAx MMo m om wmo AMriurieewa two
cacrwow
asfollim Seri ME A
TO R'e FO waA F.MINCE WITAIOWA .,�ww A°ofeal FFELT:" LEIM qw INIV pliA .aOF41.04,e r

LOT I OF
TR
ACT NO .UST

AT MMI MTIPA-
TRATNQ..
��p p6�W��v+aq
p7 sW�P� I °
D
i
I �
I
i 1
I1
1 I�
E.w1E� r7v. PFAOM�n�
III III 1
I
iiIll
xMT3wM lzw ^i1T �_ J
C RA ILLISNIro In,. FOO T w TIMEBIw 0ERGI RRIRMI x MS.,O FFSET OF 'I.O.W. AVI ONII 7u9Q y4"� I cA1.71 W.A..

MV • ` PEA2NB13i3 1L' I
COMM.I�� SUBJECT PARCEL 6Er n.LA ; I&
DEED N0 .72... I I2
I I I
urr,nweR� mimeo,
pow q WI
-1-177
Al TM OR

o.E OND,.M.Nm .:tai I I
Acc In�POTd � rl u TOwT. 4 1331 rz Reexc Tw x
•
AcceAre EMA BD•K• ocTAweeraA OPEMYL wB15
\'4
I_ vw a
f
8I =y 44'1bp.
:I
eO I.KT M«CF" 'IIICC E"ate
A.
11 \L A
O
Cd U,fJ
T
W . pan
ID
•.1 a a 9 g
cl m
J
ZZ �e0Ii
g o ,
L
Z re m
O
-I LL `N ° m
":C~
PROJE CT 14.31301331.6
m tar
PROW.. 3.3. 331 1333C O3.163023
ole acillIntlAVA rra
PD2 2 3

rourroPcowinwagru rfo to wmt
0 IP 20 00
O PAPIIIC WA LE 1. 0. 20.

RECO RD 3.10.00. 301.0107.
wpa oR.A.� 1,0 RECOROONIAPEIMMEREPOR31. 03•10{ 10 330 371011,

30. 0 0KR IVACE L MAP 110.

0. 3 RE CORD

PARCEL INFO RMATIO N
0313330 0,
00 00 OF A1 000 . OF LO T 6 0 3100C 3 N O. MO
0 1030100104

1.00100.3000011000% 13,17.3110.3107
AM PORD OH 710431000 3
NM Of 013010100 O FLOT6 OFTPAC31.0 3101
• 3.15310 1.3330113.0 60
LEGEND
110.0 01103030 104.,.3107TP0=03. 1.0W10.01, NO T
- 0 116060 OVEF0 0-00.0041010 .0
MUM CH AN 11110 F130 0
AU WPM PAP C0- 04001301
00 20 MOIR OF WAY

FA CE OP GUM
FENCE
WEPT

3.17301,01
0010 03.03101.
0 3000031101003 =Xt.
10 30.300 .0
0100 3,1003.10 WPC.
0,0 0.0 3y 0000 0 0.000

3.0 00.0 3000 00,
30033 ELEVATIONS
001001,0 331
1100 0,010

01.0,0 130
'00,0 0 0 0000 00 00030
801,0, 0.00 RAM C. 0.110 040 0
GOMM
ti
MIMEO .91001 0
ec x 000 330,

ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY
OFA PORTI ON OF LOT S OF TRACT NO. 3191, IN THE CITY OF BELLFL OW ER COU NTY OF LOS AN GELES, STATE OF C ALIFORNI A. AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK SO, PAGE 131 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. .FYMIINS6l. FMiPiPY c:.

Icamr
„ ,‘
oM'K

00.010 111 ,11. 0(11131 033
DEE D ara10'0l
F.i
l��' alt
eM
f
9140
W
7 e
111 c,
1co
~ O
2 Q
-Jo
to
a.O
a
en
a0
O
�LL
a
01303•3101304,0 000 0 ,10.30.100323

PE NSION
2 3.3

LEGEND
9122'55' W

PROPERTYLINE
1 PROPER TY
!!•� YID YC_"1 U ih U. U U U1\\
I� . ' _ ...

PROPE RT Y UNE

DUSTIN G MAL TIN G
'STORY,f ,,twa616419 N.
1 TE IMPROVEMENTS PEP
PLA N NO . ROW 6 24-96337

BELLFLOWER BLVD IL
I. r,I

OF FSTE IMPROVEMENTS PER
PLAN NO. RO W 6-24-96337

PROPERTY UNE
I

OFFSITE I MPROVEMENTS PER
PLAN NO. ROW 6-24-96337

CENTER UNE

PROPERTY UNE

RIGHT- OF-WAY UNE / LEASE UNE

EASEMENT / SETBACK LINE
TIM m. um am o wn pm APPROXIMATE CIVIL UNIT OF WORK UNE Cr CURB FA CE
0-0
PARKING ST A.T oLf R oPOSCUREFER To ELECTRICAL PLANS F OR MORE NFOR MAToN.

STANDARD DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT
HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT. THICKENED EDGE PER DETAIL 2. SHEET CB.O AT ALL EDGLEDS W DIDFRDU/OPPPRIOR FABIDDING . co IITSSACCT SHALL CBONNTRAAT M ANAGER IF DRIVE-1HRCUGH CONCRETE HILL BE STARED. IF DRIVE-THRDUGH CONCRETE WILLLL

TAWEO ONTPACTOR SH ALL USE JET BL ACK BY O AKS COLORS OR SBPEECIFlCATDN PER ONNER OR CM.

LANDSCAPE/PLANTER AREA. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR MORE INFORMATION.

HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT PAVE ME NT . SECTION PER DETAIL 1. SHEET CB .O.

DETECT ABLE WA RNING SYSTE M

CLASSY RIP RAP CONSISTING OF CRUSHED MIT FFT I ANEOUS BASE

CONSTRUCTION N OTES
V CONSTRUCT CONCRETE CURB PER DETAIL 4, SHEET CB.O.

O CONSTRUCT Cr CONCRETE CURB PER DETAIL B SHEET CR.O.

O3 CONSTRUCT C ONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER PE R DETAIL 6, SHEET C OO . ® INSTALL TAR WALK -OFF CURB PER DETAIL 8, SHEET 09.0 . ® INSTALL STANDARD 90. PARKING STALL STRIPING PER DETAIL 7, SHEET CB. D © CUATST RFU T R CCATED DEOMCURD RP PMOF DEETTAIL 6.SHEETTB CGANEILHPRWN C PEACE DETECA T.C SINNING 14, SHEET CB.O .

OT INSTALL ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL STRIPING PER DETAIL 7, SHEET CELT.

Q INSTALL VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL SIGN PER DETAIL 12, SHEET C AD. 0 INSTALL STANDARD ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL SAN PER DETAIL 12. SHEET C.O . 10 INSTALL ACCESSIBLE PATH OE TRAVEL STRIPING PER DETAIL 9. SHEET ILO. 11 DUAL —SIDED ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PATH —OF —TRAVEL SIGN PER DETAIL a SHEET C OO. 0 INSTALL SHORT—TERM BIKE RACK PER DETAIL 9. SHEET C6 .1.

TS EES CH GINGAST PODUN FOR FUTURE INSTAL OTODUKIN. R FEER TO NEP 4'51:1"4% MO E BINFOOYMATIO .VICE PANEL TO 14 INSTALL PAVEMENT MARKINGS PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS.

CI INSTALL MCDONALD'S PARKING STAL L SIGNAGE PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS .

INSTALL PAVEMENT MARKI NG ARROW PER PETA L 1 0. SHE ET 02.0 .

CI INSTALL MONUMENT SIGN PER SEPARATE PERMIT.
1B MNSSTTAAU. COVERED TRASH ENCLOSURE AND RECYCUNG BIN STORAG E REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL P LANS FOR 0 INSTAL L DRIVE THROUGH EQUIPMENT. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS f OR MORE DETAILS. ® INSTALL HEIGHT DETECTOR POLE . REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PUNS F OR MORE DETAILS.

O INSTALL SITE UGH TNG. REFER TO PH OTOMETRIC PLANS FOR MORE DETAILS. ® JON EXISTING CURB, CURB Q CUTTER, SIDEWALK.

Q TOW AWAY PARKING SIGN PER DET AIL e, SHEET C L1
LL HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PAVE MENT ECTON PER DETAIL 1, SHEET 060.. THICKE NED EDGE DETAIL PER ® DETAIL 2, SHEET Cfl0 AT ALL mDE CONDITIONS.
®5 INSTALL H EAVY E CU ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT, SECTION PER DETAIL 1. SHEET C6 .0. © INSTALL STANDARD D UTY CONCRETE SIDEWA LK PER DETAIL I, SHEET 0 60 .

QTROUT ENCLOSURE APPROACH TO BE HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT PER DETAIL 3, SHEET C OO. CONCRETE P I FOPCE MENT AND JOIN ASPHALT CONCRETE PFR DET AIL 3, SIIF ET CB,D. ® LANDSCAPE/PLANTER AREA . REFER TO LANDSCAPE PL ANS FOR MORE INFORMATION . ©B EXISTING CHU WALL TO REMAIN .
® INSTALL OUTDOOR PATIO SEATING PER ARCHITECTURAL PL ANS 31 INST ALL PATIO FENCE PER ARCHITE CTUR AL PUNS
® INSTALL TRASH RECEPTACLE PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS.

PAVING AND JOINTING NOTES
E%PANSONASOATION TS SHALL BE PLOD BETWEEN BUILDING AND
CUR BS SSFFEE DETAIL 4. SHEET CB.1 .

2. CONTROL JUNE 6PAUNC SH ALL BE PER GEOTEOIHICA A REPORT .

3. E%PANSON/ISOUCD N JONTS SHALL BE USE D WHEREVER THE PAVEMENT WYL ROUT A STRUCTURAL ELEME NT AUGHT ROES. RETA INING WALLS, E%ISRNG CONCRETE PAVEMENT , BUILDING WALLS, MANHOLES. ETC) AND SE ALED IM1H POLY URETHANE SE AL ANT. SEE DET AIL 4, SHEET CB.I.

4. SAW - OUT CONTROL JOINTS WU HIN T2 HOURS OF POUR.

S CONSTRUCTION JONES .A LL BE PER DETAIL 3, SHEETT OE SCELL URE

6. IT LS Hf PESPON SBIUtt OF RTE CONTRACTOR LTA'

DIRT PERNANEMT
IRRRCN,IUR�TIES. LN9T TINGo ME HNVEEGBLEEN PROPERLY INSTAC SHALL 7� PER EDEOIECHWC ACOL RNOPT.PAV4AENT REINFORCEMENT, Y REQUIRED. BE kno w ow.

Call BETDIW you 169.

ISSUE
DATE
Os

IMAM BY AB
OE CK133 BY
A6
Kimley*Horn

11.50 STREET
LLWE 6BAO LC SOO

6.64.2142

CITY OF BELLFLOW ER
APFRO W9 9W
THE OR E .9W FNNS ON OP
6WM19,'FLGW^ ODDBIO$/A.O XS
AMEJM m. TRAN ROE NO. IR 40A EP. _
BATE
m McD onald's US A, LLC
16211 BELLFLOWER BLVD
BELLFLOWER. CA 90706

CRY OF BELLFLOWER

GRAPHIC SALE IN FEET
MEN PRINTED 3 fULL SIZE

SITE KEYNOTE PLAN
C5 .0

NCI

IAND SCAPF D
SCALE

BMIRO PCNORKLAE )

PR OPERTY

AGE (P IP)
WESSTSm CRS
-PIP OMPI

LANDSCAPED
SWAIE

ADJACENT

C OM MERCI AL
;, ...—UN M RORN DSTMMWATER
D ON MYEM SEE CIVR Pure
— BRN&T*UUE ONW MEN T
(5 TP)

ADJACENT

COMM ERCIAL

BY OTHE RS (TIP)
MCD
(4584 PR OT O)
±3,786 SF
PARCEL 1
. FERMI -BY
m
ER. sayypRoyypp.... .sam
EOM

SIEE NISIESSIRITY

IF SEMIS
717
armtasmaymB
COIMI ER...

ROE S _
OPL O

46.56.666

RPM SERIN
My Aral.

DP PERIM
G I

LANDSCAPE NOTE
TIM S ELE CROH F PORT M ATERIAL IS BASED ON CLI MATIC, SEEDIER . ANO AWNIENANCE CONSIDERATIONS . PLL KA MM. AREAS SWLL BE PREPARED W ITH

AP PROPRIATEIMP ROPMATE SOIL SINENO RENTE, FERTILIS ERS MO BASED SP.'S... REPO RT FROM AN AGRICULTURAL SUITABILIT Y S OIL SAMPL E LIMIT -OF - HEIRS TANEN FRO M THE ...DEC OMP OSE D G RANITE SHALL FILL W BET WEENS... uNE NYP/ AEE OSSNALLE BE MULLXEDTO ADEPTHT OHELPC OHEERWeW ATECLO WERO DB L WENYP) GROW WTHEIR NATG RALF OR MS .ALL LIOSCAPEWPR OV EMENTESHALLFOLL OW THE OUIOELINEe SET FOI4TH BYTHE cO V DFBELLFL OWER MUNICIPALCOpE 6ETGCK
UNE IRRI 2ARO N NO TE.

L.WLE CA PF°
awA AN AVTdMTIC IRRIG ATION SYSTE M SHALL SE INSTALLED TO PR OVIDE..

G OVERNOR O. PUNTIN G MESS MIOWN ONT. P. N.

APOTA BLE W ATE R CONNECTION ANO A DEGIGTE G THE
WpATION METER

W ATER S UPP LY FOR
THIS SITE ED. L OW NOWA. EQUIP.. MIALL PR OVI DE SUFFICIENT WATER FOR Bww PROVIDE D.

WITH NO WAT ER LOSS DUE TO W ATER CONF ROU RS. ANDS
OTNERNNECES SRY IRRIGATION EMIP MENT . PI L POI NT SOURCE SYSTE MS RE GULATE D PER 'PIE IM NUF ACIIMERS F NNE DESI GN PA RAMETERS . ALL WN6A OHALL UN IMPROVEMENTS SF OLL OW".

E
OUI DEL W ES SET FO RTH MITRE CITY OF BELLPL OWFA M UNICIPAL COD E.

PR oP ERTy TE MPERA TURE. MD REDUCE W EE D GR oWI H. THE M RCSS SMALL BE ALLOWED TO HAVE
FOR T HE EF FICIE NT USE CRITE RI ACO RPU ES WORT. OFT.

TE RI T IM LANDSCAPE°E MMA PLAN APPLIED.

MATTHEW DURHA M. LIAR.

CITY OF BELLFLOWER LANDSCAPE C ODE:

TOT AL L AINISGPE 6~n SF
• CONE ARM:161M SF
• T OTAL LANDS CAPE PE RCENTS. 34.7%
MARI NO LOT L ANDSCAPE ARE A:
. TOTAL PARKIN GMEM 4 .6]4 SF
L OT
. T OTS. PAM. OT LANDST

CAPE PERCENTA GE NAIL
SPECI MEN.. REGISIRMIENIN
• REDWRED: (1)4r BON TREE/ 1.400 SF FLOOR AREA=4 TREES
. PROP OSED: Is) 4r BO N TREE,
▪ LAND SCAPE A REAS (E XCEPT FOR GRWNO COV ER ARE AS) TO BE MULCHED TO B INCHES DEEP .

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 B 32
I.1 ,
mow ma. below.

Ca ll before yo u dig.

OP
OM. BY
MO

IRECSEP BY
MD
Kimley>» Horn
651.6 1141

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
APP RO .,
PREPARED UNDER 111E D IREC T SU PERVIS IO N OR
G Da'. MA TMER DURHAM. P.L.A. No. 4640 NAP. 6/31/26
a �ry D laxew
A F
BATE
McDonald's USA, LL C
16211 BELLFLOWER BLVD
BELLFLOWER, CA 90708

CITY OF BELLFLOWER

P RELIMIN ARY LANDSCAPE PL AN
L1 .0

MMW
I. THE NDLE LEVELS AS SHOWN ARE BASED ON THE FOLLOBING
CRITERIA. Allx SUBSTITUTIONS IN SPECIFIED FIXTURES DR CHANGES FEET LIGHTING LEVELS SHORN AND "'" NOT
bE TIIE RESPOHSI BILITT Di SECIIRIiY LIONi1NG.

2. DISTANCE BETNEEN REA DINGS UV
—tr a— 10 13s—bY—to ho to ---13.— to oo oo ao o .o b.o '00 ho 131 hl a1 0., 0.1 at
iB
Calculation Summary
Label
Pave d Surface Area s
Line
ha W Is
Is Is a 1s bs
Is by ho +s by ho to be
bA W ho
CalcType
Illuminance
Illuminance
bs
u is
Units
Fc
Fc
hB
Ns Ns
be
hr—trs--b:tl--hu
IA bs ht
b. 'o I. b. bs I. hs
u ho u .. u
!Ys u }1 NS 1; .T•
to
to
NA is 1.1 "
ht � bs
bs hA }A L bs Oh
oWla"' " .t be
i.a
Is Is
FF
La h4 tae
' Ss ho
ht b .>
Ns a IS hs AS A he he is to
w
=hv--Ito—bx—he--10--lu—ba—hs--bs— tor to to
Avg

1. 77

0.00 Max

7.8 0.0
Min

0.0 0.0
Avg/ Min
N.A.

N.A.

MaxlMin
NA
NA
Lumina ke Schedule
Symbol
Qty
Label
Arra ngemen t
LLF
Description
Limn. Wa tts
EPA
Mfg Height
P ole Type
BU G Raring
1 DB2@ 180
Back -Ba ck

0. 900
RAR-1-1801-70-5K7-4W-BC-
SCP/4OF

68.4 1214
18 SES-18-40-1-T A-GL-xx(4")
BO -U0432
0—Q
-ID
2 DB
Single

0.900
RAR-1-180L-705 K7-411/-BCl-
SCP/40F

68.4 0. 807
18 SES-15.40.1-TA-GL-c (4)
B0 -U0 - G2
P
3 DB2(2180 L&R
Twin

0. 900
RAR -1-1801-70-5K74W. BC-
SCP/40F

68.4 18
SES-15-40-1-TA-GL-xx (4)
BO-UO-G2
P ol e Fixtur es Are Fu11 Cutoff
TiltwO
C alculatio n Gri ds Are At Grade
Pole Light M ounti ng Beight,.XXft
(18' P ole + 3' Base)
Regi on al D rawi ng
= 4-5156
19i"�'uc o
060.1200 61 00 caw CISTL•Lit WAD Oti,
7-10 111 60 3 60006 12-26C 2 LAII Des ,an
60 Tau M 66 0 62 60n Ame s Wa xy.

01.32 61 10 Zek 13 .4 Inkfla 30A0 85 1120
Loam
LTa & 1N6
1•-20. o.
"""CL B LEED AP BD +C

POINT -DV -POIN T FOOTCANDLE PLOT FOR

OICDONAL DS
1e211 BF1tFLOWER BLVD

BELLFL OWE R CA SONO
NBN
6/26/0024

84'-7
DS
0'
TIER

DDISPEN SFRY ER FRY-VATALAY
PIE

DISPLAY

DAN GERMONITOR
COY AV
ALARM
REM
ANSU
EREE�
PGm

MONITOR
—PRIMER
orC
CHA NGEi

D/T W INDOW I

NR UNR I
FI

HEADSET

H OSE STATION
OD AV
ALARM
-0EIEBIBT✓-
FILTE

RE VERSE

DETECTOR
sIALLWARES

ORGA NIZER

I I NSXE VING
PR

EP RA, TA BL E

STEAMERS
JULL

FREZR I
K1 .0 KITCHEN PLAN
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0 "
a.McD on ald's USA, LLC

11.• o n4 a ns pr
rl..,ura: i w ilsaeiH 010f
Proposed McDo nald's R estaura nt #004-5156
16211 Bellfl ower Blvd .

B ellflower, CA 90706
04 March 2024

S. REFE R TD PWII fW SN
ORORDERwc CONT 'AW BEER RLLL1 LAYMIN LOCATORS.

FO R
1-666-225-4377
E Awe mouNI0LN LDIESO. DOOR w/ Mix. zx RUIRWI G/C TONS SLO PE O ; ATE-IRCNT/O/SCLP L OSE BY ELEVA T&CE55.

P N/SELF cwsE. SEE
N❑B MOP SINN - SEE wow_ B/AB .1 AND PLUMBING B RAWOOLS .

SSTTRUCTTUP 15FUI0050 ;11'74 1AUNNG DIMENS Pla
TACTILE EXIT 5101000E SEE AC1 .0 AND 5/ A4 .0 FOR
O LCCCO UPS LOcoLAD SIGN—LOWERRIF S B.CNNCJG CTO MACE
AN LOCATE AS SPECIFIED ON PS - ADJA CENT 10 MAIN
E NTRANCE REWWEMENT . OCCUPANT LOAD SIGN SHALL
BE REFLECTIVE OF THAT ASSEMBLY SPACE.

MAN DIUM
OCCUR. ;DAD
PEOPLE
A1 .0 FLOOR PLAN I SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
Prop osed McDonald's Restaurant #004-5156
16211 Bellflower Blvd .

Bellflow er, CA 90706
04 March 2024

OCCUPANCY ALLOWANCE:

CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE 2022
TABLE 1004 .0

MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA ALLO WANCES PER OCCUPANT

FUNCTION OF SPACE

ALLOWANCE
AREA

OCCUPANTS

ACCESSORY STORAGE ARE AS
300 GROSS
815 SF
4 .7:

BUSINESS AREAS
100 GROSS
63 SF
1 KITCHENS, COMMERCIAL
(BASED ON FULL KITCHEN STAFF)
200 GROSS
1,209 SF
17 /

ASSEMBLY W/ FIXED SEATS
(BACK OF HOUSE)

SEE PLAN
96 SF
6 / /
//7
,:, /,, 72 '
/�•
/%

ASSEMBLY WITH FIXED SEATS

SEE PLAN
333 SF
30 ASSEMBLY W/ OUT FIXED SEATS

STANDING SPACE
5 NET
85 SF
17 ACCESS ORY AREAS: RESTROOMS,

WALLS, ELECTRICAL ROOM, FIRE
ROOM.
-

1.041 SF
-

TOTAL OCCUPANCY ALLOWANCE

3.788 SF
75 A1 .1 OCCUPANCY/ AREA PLAN
SCALE: 1/4 " = 1'-0 "
m,Mc Donald's USA , LLC
�p0" �u.�arx .��aln es
Proposed McDonald's R estaurant #004-5156
16211 Bellfl ower Blvd.

Bellflower, CA 90706
04 March 2024

LEGEND

INTEROR LADDE R ROOF
HATCH NH LOCK.

PROVIDE CURB/CRICKET

AS SHOWN

CRICKET AT ALL

CURBS R EWPMENT

SUPPORTS (TYPICAL)

TAPERED INSULATOR
m P.)

POSITIVE DMINAGE

ROOARON W/

FLWRARI
N.P . (RIDGE)
LP. LOW POINT
H .P. HIGH POINT
(- DIREC TION OF DR NNACE
canal, DH . wRH ALUMINUM IDF0 PANELS.

SLOPE TO EDGE •1/0,ER R.

KEY NOTES
ED ALuwNU M CANOPY sm . (COLOR: SEE ELE VATIONS)
E3 ...mi nium CANOPY SMACK (COLOR: SEE E LE VATION S)
0 LMEr El L SO TDU - SE EELEVAT 1NS U ELF"'"`
MGDONAIO' ATIOS SIGW GE BY OTHERS UNDER SEPA RATE PERMIT (E� ELEVNS) A1 .3 ROOF PLAN I SCALE: 1/4 " = 1'-0'
Thew
M ANI. I•40 D ESIG N
McDonald's USA, LLC
ona
Proposed McDo nald's Restaurant #004-5156
16211 Bellflower Bl vd .

Bellflower, CA 90706
04 March 2024

KEY NOTES'
oe
COLOR: WOOD M.. BAUR. wN9N n. F>DaP PAINTED TO WTCN
WES AND �,R„IE :; OPF,w a69in
OAP O= uEN. PHa (male OON ram )
0 CC..'m uu CUTOPY MTS. w/Fua.

ALIAIN AI GNP, COLON To. ALAS., GNOPT MACK
ElP 9EN„ Ka KmPE
ow N xPS ED . PRE CD. W� SPACED.
1VIIEIG (us) 330 -7x 37. mn .eo .. Mw .own
0f7 N,mw7aw (007) 343-4500. mmn oW.4.me en laa0
r.: ,.. W07 IEOPN SCNr00IE tnW .0m)
wE 037 a 9N .t rE4 ,.,,=K a.�
E „TES

COLO. MBE. DARN (CHECK I V3. PPE -PORT Aru4 B.M
Qmaw*, u a0 FIXTURE - OD DECK_
pA a m - a5E - 000504
EALCM LANTING-SEE DEM .

V0 0.5.4
Mtn `»
E
' aN.T .. PH'EL0005,.CLO SLA RES
R AL 7022
0 PIPE ROW. - PAI RED YELLO W
El a LlM T 0O OEOtOK
TO
o „' KORDER
70 N.,m S IKwIw-O 00,90.
oW . WA WA .. OTHERS - DNOEN SEP ARATE PE MIT

02. R. 7022 RACEWAY
CI- COLON:
-
CI
o raw.— SEE ----
E owEE orr s«a0 SI.EMS
2 'Mx' 379.0
o ETTERIORXDO W fl.
n 1- K. W ON MRS., NN Ku.
"l cO.OE DIRECT OR : KN LSE
h T/9506 V POM
�l EIEV. i IB' - 8 PEI 1/2-
0 T/ALU:1 fl ATFEN
q Er:1:r"
IB'-3'
. L/1IE61CK
LEV . -1'

B/(LUNOIUN BATTEN
T/FW00W k B/GWDP Y
ELEV. '-4'
B/1MOE 719-7
T(9LL
/L Lj NUA BATTEN
..

T/SIYpA
/STAB
ELEV. + 0'-D
0 T/BLK'C 9P5r,
Elfl. + 9 i/2 '
/I ♦ E.7.7_.
• ELE Y.
0 0 0
o-�
!l T/LLL
�l E1EV . i Y-0- E
$ rUr.

0.-0-
0 i
1,

WOOING D CA DDRESSSTROKE
WTI. CHARA CTE RS
CXOTESK PRO °BOLO . (COMPLIANT E
CFC .1)

ACCESSIBILITY SIONAGE SEE
GEN 04 E e0 ON 41.0
MM
r.

Cll

AT TIER DKB
m.
r Y
01 C 0 id iny m © © EH
uilD. 'Sill
0 \ \r\ 4
A'C 9 e;: 0;
o
BOLLOIND AD DRESS B -H. CICS0 04T&S MID

PRO BOLA
(NT W ITH FC 50
BOL0. (COMPLIANT W ITH CFC 505. 1)

ACCESSIBILITY SIONAGE SEE
DEN WYE /B ON 41.0
A2 .0 ELEVATIONS
T/p4LL:. +TA
EI E,;. nE BmE I�
1/WINDO W & 5/0(5091

T/AWNINIM B(TIEN
\ ELEV. + 9 '-3 1/2
/ 5/41 ELEV. + OTIT hY
J ELE v. +To -a0 Y

EAST ELEVATION
T/(EIEV .4» 50 000 Y
B/SCONCE h
T/0000
ELEV. :1-71 l�
B/O Al 0I 3. BATTEN
/ 2/SAAB
ELEV. i 0 '-0'

NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4' =1'-0"
Olellalea ralUira
m.McDo nald's USA, LLC
ep
Propo sed M cDo nald's Restaurant #004-5156
16211 B ellflow er Blvd.

B ellflower, CA 90706
04 March 2024

KEY NO TES:

EE SUOSTRATE 1/2- P�� PEE . SW
/. 1 s,u°a"su�Pa`n E v'wm'"'-0iPFNPpPxut�w c. Pmue un PPm Eom LCES
(]
LPwc MEWL PWM E EWLaa Pax . Mw ,
Er',P x w /E �M
• wwfr og
O �
SC ON TULL .UND
aim cxs snE ON MEWL PARMA.. nmtrc s.

SEE
AIL VA. 5.0
❑u C ONTRO L AWN
❑0 PPwrStrIV 7.07. IW -SSPEwuw MOORE
O WSIM En IP MLLED, PPE PAT. PPE SPACED.

WA. QM) s3D-7337. Ma4wnMmp.um
CET MPPIMIaNN (0.7) .3 160 0. 07 WM..e m
aeTI N.W M0: 30 00 0I w RAW DTC OLO R SWOP SS W
o „w 1/2.M /,1, ./.,MEW
COLOM RYE. UAW E E /P. PPE-PWIT w DS An
oM
CC.

E PWDP x.n PE - RW C LEM .

01. RATIN. SUER
L3 . Pu ONLY POOP MORE
wQ MEW. FASCW
• - TRW .T MEw PEVELN L PO NE . C LOS URES
COLOR
071 107IO LIT c ux W UEmW
• I-'iaa- N-T.D TO ORDER
® ROW 0,001 ann7. 7 PPE PUMT 70 WOW S ORROWS,. IWO.
�s M WM YOY SWAGE nr CIEWS - USan SWARM PER..

O. 'NOM WE SW 70 00 ns SMWNw MEuOs
O COS TO . A.., W,M .

FO R
7P» . s,MwM M PE.MM=
o : PP
• 0.10 SIVE MI.COLOIC DEEP Pw MIX TM.. Mw
0 0
II I
T/E:;.PMnMPET
'
efV . 9'- 9 1/R '
/

I I VcMxEPr J�
ELEV. + 10 -II Y
r7,
r-- 1
hTOOOR
/ >\
\
/
\
T 0007
/
TESILL
\
/
//
/'
_
WA UE.UN eVEel eD
—
_/
Uw 0'
i '//
i \
Y

WEST ELEVATION
1/SO'0 •IPMMET
LL
�Iu � �
/ " / `i nP. �1 ^
1 © © E.

EatVi
SIGN
EWIL Oti I
0 El£'. + tP'- a t/z'

4 T/MWU INWI aLTiEN

Mc DUNI alrcES�
'
0 ETE'. + to pe-
■` ■
w
'S
ELP/ . .% + 0. - P• -P• l�
.�
.�
I
WWII
7 IIIIII�II'IIII
IlT/SIA B
LL
.,:‘..2t:, ep
--�
T SILL
L

LEI.

E1F/ALUYWo
Vi
a41TEN
m emoi
A2 .1 ELEVATI ONS

SOUTH ELEVATION
SCALE: 1/4 ' = 1'-0"
m. McDon ald's USA, LLC
Eo-7 1a. �PEM M7=1W
Proposed McD onald' s Restaurant #004-5156
16211 Bellflower Blvd.

Bellflower, CA 90706
04 March 2024

/ /
�//
///// f //
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
r ,
,
r i
? 3-j
T
tt
O'---
r ,
a*
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
f)--
I
i
ro E,31,
a
.
x n . IN < 8
`
1O' —O•

GRIND AC & OVERLAY

AS REQUIRED TO

PROVIDE DRAINAGE
10"
HSS 4"x4"x1/8 " STEEL COL (TYP)
HSS 4"x12"x3/16" STEEL BEAM (TYP)
10"
HSS 4 "x12"x3/16" STEEL BEAM (TOP)•
—4
TYP
0 S.F. (WALL AREA)
". (ALLOWABLE UNPROTECTED OPENINGS)
HSS 4"x12 "x3/I6" STEEL BEAM (TIP)
HSS 4 "x4 "xl/8" STEEL COL (TYP)
SLOPE I/4" /FT. MIN.

HSS 4"x12"x3/16" STEEL BEAM (TOP)
HSS 4 "x4 "x1/8" STEEL COL (TOP)
SLOPE I/4" /FT . MIN .

A2.2 TR ASH ENCL OSURE
SCALE: 3/8" = 1.-0"
I I
i" McDon ald's USA , LLD
S(ED - W.�Fwx"» u .. x^.M �
'may ikw. engin �x°sp.." ma. dosnm br nuw m owx"r ivied . .

Proposed McD onald' s Restaurant #004-5156
16211 Bellflower Blvd.

Bellflower, CA 90706
04 March 2024

Coates ODMB
Single screen unit
Area of display

DIGITAL PRE -BR OWSE BOARD
i0 vs
UL48 Electric sign
cl�e!aes4 fssl g ow ns, MA re
L .1- -p
AP,R 1u VIEW

DRIVE THRU CLEA RANCE BAR
o Coates
Illumination: N /A
Othe r: • Non-itumin WNd cNarance
sign
n with spring
footled break
e ne
• Adjustable bag bar.

Coates ODMB
Double screen unit
Ar ea of display
Area of displ ay
[i coetes
[347 .16] 13.7
E�rf
UL48 Electric sign

DIGITAL MENU BOARD
Illuminati on: LED DuwnEphtig
aY
�--- ear ----1 Eleetrla sh 1.6 Amps 120 volt, 60 Ha
8ail aat:
vat cc e r• Ship VNieht:
ueDElece
VI HYI 0110CA HEM DE CAL
' VOMI T COPT
�nhyla 690ECAL
Ml11ICCGW

D RIVE THRU ORDE R C ANOPY/SPEAKER
A2.3 DT COMPONENT ELE VATIONS
SC ALE: N.T .S
m,McDonald's USA, LLC
ILL on ak, LLC rod onoll not ea cried Or ropeodzo rd
....,,.tea i w � ao• w: "'
Proposed McD onald's Restaurant #004-5156
16211 Bellflower Blvd .

Bellflower, CA 90706
04 March 2024

SOUTH-E AST ELEV ATION

N ORTH-EAST ELEVATION
A2.4 PERSPECTIVE RENDE RIN GS
SC ALE: N .T.S
M. M cDo nald's USA , LLC
Prop os ed McDonald's Rest aurant #004-5156
16211 Bellflower Bl vd.

Bellfl ower, CA 90706
04 March 2024

LONGITUDINAL SECTION

HORIZONTAL SECTIO N
A3.0 SECTIONS - 100' LINE OF SIGHT SCREENING FOR RTUS
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0'
Proposed McD onald's Restaurant #004-5156
16211 Bellflower Bl vd.

Bellflower, CA 90706
04 March 2024

STUDY ARE A
lipit.iLitt
•
{d Pak r $:i►
r.. r
Gaura Iindh eimeri 'Whirling Butterflies'
Ca ex tumulic ol a
Agave att enuate
Detosperma x'Ora ng e Glow'
Decorativ e Bould ers
McD onald's Bellfl ower B oul evard Entry Studv:

The entry corner is reimagin ed as an inviting threshold that beckons pedestrians int o the McD onald's site, with the enhanced planting opening up the area through the use of drought -toler ant plantings that provid e year-round interest.

The airy Palo Verd e tree creates an open canopy overhead, and the complem entary colors and textures of flowering shrubs and grasses captivate the eye. Architectural agaves and bo uld ers stand as striki ng f oc al points, gro unding the d esign with their b old forms . Together, these elements cr eate a harm oni ous bl end of function and b eauty that creates a welcoming experience for all visitors.

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 5 10 20

PATIO/ OUTDOOR
McDonald's Portfolios USA

BEGA/AUBRILAM - TERRACE

BEGA/AUBRILAM - ACCESSORIES

1uew edaa 6uiuueld
uoiadaauoa-oliva0 auaMoN
:A8 pa1uasaad
shun 6L11110/Via AJOSS033V
pua 9l'II 'SO N aaueuipio ieln6a}J
9114 pua 'SON aaueuipap /Caue6an
V-£[ Wail epuaf5y
SZOZ `Z 1 AeIN
6uRaaw liaunoa /4!3
to
•

suoReinfiaa
pedop /ITueooJ 6U!pUeW uogaiapisuoo
ao'. saoueuipao T4BJP oi. uopaaia :9ZOZ `8Z itdV .: .
(nav)
Sfla`dio aaquanN ,'
snQy lo ez!S
posonboJ uoneuaaolui IBU0!T!PPV •
suopinfiaa
liun 6uilloMa /jossexv •
6u!pnloU! suoisinoad (6u!uoZ) LL.

ITLL 6uipuewe 6U!JB8H ongnd :SZOZ `t4 iJdV .;.

ONflOIONOV8

euoz
6U!ipepun aye ui spaepuels TuowdoloAep
III AjsRes TSflW 1. i `oiaeuaos uopuiquaoo
an aapun Apienb ol Toe[ojd e aod .

Sflab peqoep pue aoeds amen!' se
pesn you aae ley' spn 6u!IIeMp Auuaepiinua
6U!TS!xe uminn snQy aidmnua jo uoneuiquaoo .

Sflab'Io aaquanN +
onb stile's .
100J aaenbs oo' i, uanuaixew
Noissnosia
.
aziS flab ❖

•wali siy}
ol. [Dame.' uo pe aaulo aiei. pue ssnosip `AlaniTeuaaily (£ ao :SZOZ `LZ
f'V'.J uo an000 PIflOM uoRdope aigissod pue 6U!peJ
puoe Lirfri, pue gfrtri, .SON aoueuipap aonpoaiui
pug `fiuipeaa aaul. nl anienn `Apo ami Aq peak (z
`lialeipawwi
page aiei ol aeon (9/17) syuq-ano; e ise ai
1e Aq 9ti7I- PU j7j7j4 'soN apueuipap /oue6fl Td oPt/(L uoqepueWWO3OI

;uatupedaa 6u!uuald
uoiadaauo 0-oliva0 auanno≥
:/C8 paluasaad
Si!Lin f3uiilanna i Jossaaad
pua 9j7j7[ 'SO N aaueuipap aein6aj
911 71. pua Wig 'SON aauau!pap /CaueIan
v-£ I, we4 epuaf d
SZOZ`ZI' LAI
6ugaaW I!aunoa
Cie
r

6‘1 01: BELLFLOWE
4? (It stafteport13-A 0 v- ROWING 1.009569
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
SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to: 1) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1444 - An Urgency Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing maximum allowable square footage; 2) adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 1445 - An Urgency Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing the number of allowable accessory dwelling units; 3) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1446 — An Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing maximum allowable square footage; and 4) read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance No. 1447 — An Ordinance amending Bellflower Municipal Code Chapter 17 (Accessory Dwelling Units) governing the number of allowable accessory dwelling units. (Matter continued from April 28, 2025) DATE: May 12, 2025

EXECUTWE SUMMARY
On April 28, 2025, Ordinance No. 1443 was adopted by the City Council. During that meeting, the City Council also provided direction regarding regulatory changes governing Accessory Dwelling Unit (“ADU”) size and number of units.

If adopted, the draft ordinances would amend Beliflower Municipal Code (“BMC”) Chapter 17 governing ADUs. There are, effectively, two ordinances being proposed: one governing size and the other governing the number of ADUs. The urgency ordinances are secured by the regular ordinances; the former take effect immediately and the latter would take effect 30 days after second reading.

RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
It is recommended that the City Council consider:
1) Adopt Urgency Ordinance Nos. 1444 and 1445 by at least a four-fifths (4/5) vote to take effect immediately;
.2) Read by title only, waive further reading, and introduce Ordinance Nos. 1446 and 1447. Second reading and possible adoption would occur on May 27, 2025; or 3) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item. ‘ Page 1 of3

Staff Report - Ordinance Nos. 1444, 1445, 1446, and 1447 May 12, 2025

FISCAL IMPACT
There is a cost for codifying the proposed ordinances 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.

BACKGROUND
During the April 14, 2025 Meeting, the City Council asked for additional information regarding regulation of ADUs: (1) the size of ADUs; and (2) how many could be built (or converted) on a single lot.

These matters were discussed during the April 28, 2025 Meeting. The City Council directed the City Manager to draft ordinances for consideration that would amend the regulations adopted via Ordinance No. 1443 governing ADUs to increase the size and clarify the number allowed by lot. Ordinances implementing the Council’s direction are attached for consideration.

DISCUSSION
. Maximum ADU Size
Urgency Ordinance No. 1444 and Ordinance No. 1446 add a new subsection (BMC § 17.17050) to read as follows:
Ҥ 17. 1 7. 050. Maximum Size
An Accessory Dwelling Unit, whether attached or detached, may not exceed 1,200 square feet in gross area. ”
This is the regulation currently within the BMC (i.e., before being amended by Ordinance No. 1443). Accordingly, the recommended language would maintain the status quo. This regulation is permitted by Government Code § 66321 that provides that “a local agency may establish minimum and maximum unit size requirements for both attached and detached accessory dwelling units.”
0 Number of Accessory Dwelling Units on Lots with Multifamily Dwellings Urgency Ordinance No. 1445 and Ordinance No. 1447 add a new subsection (BMC § 1717.060) to read as follows:
“§ 1 7.17.060. Number of ADUs on Lots with Multifamily Dwellings An applicant may develop multiple ADUs within the portions of existing multifamily dwelling units that are not used as livable space and multiple detached ADUs on lots with existing or proposed multifamily dwellings, provided that the development satisfies all development standards applicable in the underlying zone in which the property is located.”

Staff Report — Ordinance Nos. 1444, 1445, 1446, and 1447 May 12, 2025

DISCUSSION - Continued
This proposed amendment provides for an opportunity to increase the number of allowable ADU for lots containing multifamily dwelling unit. The proposed amendment allows for more ADU on the lot by “combining” the maximum allowable number of units allowed under conversion (Government Code § 66323(a)(3)) and the maximum allowable number of new ADU construction (Government Code -§ 66323(a)(4)). For a project to qualify under the combination scenario, the project must be designed in full compliance with the development standards for the subject lot’s applicable zoning. If the project is unable to meet all zoning development standards, the number of ADU would be based on the “default” statute that 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.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Urgency Ordinance No. 1444 ..................................................................................... 4 B. Urgency Ordinance No. 1445 ..................................................................................... 6 C. Ordinance No. 1446 ................................................................................................... 8 D. Ordinance No. 1447 ................................................................................................. 11 E. Ordinance No. 1443 ................................................................................................. 14 F. April 28, 2025, Staff Report (Without Attachments) .................................................. 39 G. April 14, 2025, Staff Report (Wlthout Attachments). ................................................. 42 H. Gov. Code § 66310—66342 ....................................................................................... 47 .

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
ORDINANCE NO. 1444

AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING BELLFLOWER MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 17 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS) GOVERNING

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE
THE CITY COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

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

A. This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Government Code § 36937 and the Bellflower City Charter. Articles II, III, and IV of the Charter provide that the City may enact all laws governing its municipal affairs. Pursuant to Article |||(B) of the Charter, the City Council finds that the law enacted by this Ordinance will not unduly burden a person’s ability to pursue economic opportunities and safe and legal residential housing. To the contrary, it is intended to increase housing opportunities.
. This Ordinance is necessary to protect the City from the potential effects and impacts of limiting the number of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) and other similar or related effects on property values and the quality of life in the City's neighborhoods.
. The City Council takes note of the California Legislature’s declaration of a housing crisis within the state of California and incorporates by references the assertions set forth in Section 2 of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 for purposes of identifying the urgency needed for adopting this Ordinance. . Because of the findings set forth above, the City Council finds that this Ordinance should be adopted on an urgency basis to preserve the public health, safety, and weffare in accordance with Government Code§§ 36934 and 36937(b).
. The current regulations of the BMC governing ADUs need review, study, and revision. Vlfithout adopting this Ordinance, the number of allowable ADU per lot for multifamily dwelling would be limited and could potentially pose a threat to the public health, safety, and welfare of the community.

SECTION 2. Incorporation by Reference. Except as set forth in this Ordinance, all Sections in Ordinance No. 1446 are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth.

SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance will become effective immediately upon adoption pursuant to Government Code §§ 36934 and 36937 for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety, and welfare. Pursuant to those statutes this Ordinance is adopted by four-fifths vote of the City Council.

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1444

ORDINANCE NO. 1444 WAS DULY PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER AT ITS REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 12, 2025, AS AN URGENCY ORDINANCE.

Ray Dunton, Mayor
ATTEST:

Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
By:

Justin A. Tamayo, Assistant City Attorney

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
ORDINANCE NO. 1445

AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING BELLFLOWER MUNICIPAL
CODE CHAPTER 17 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS) GOVERNING

THE NUMBER OF ALLOWABLE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
THE CITY COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

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

A. This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Government Code § 36937 and the Bellflower City Charter. Articles II, III, and IV of the Charter provide that the City may enact all laws governing its municipal affairs. Pursuant to Article lll(B) of the Charter, the City Council finds that the law enacted by this Ordinance will not unduly burden a person’s ability to pursue economic opportunities and safe and legal residential housing. To the contrary, it is intended to increase housing opportunities.
. This Ordinance is necessary to protect the City from the potential effects and impacts of limiting the number of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) and other similar or related effects on property values and the quality of life in the City's neighborhoods.
. The City Council takes note of the California Legislature’s declaration of a housing crisis within the state of California and incorporates by references the assertions set forth in Section 2 of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 for purposes of identifying the urgency needed for adopting this Ordinance. . Because of the findings set forth above, the City Council finds that this I Ordinance should be adopted on an urgency basis to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare in accordance with Government Code§§ 36934 and 36937(b).
. The current regulations of the BMC governing ADUs need review, study, and revision. Without adopting this Ordinance, the number of allowable ADU per lot for multifamily dwelling would be limited and could potentially pose a threat to the public health, safety, and welfare of the community.

SECTION 2. Incorporation by Reference. Except as set forth in this Ordinance, all Sections in Ordinance No. 1447 are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth.

SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance will become effective immediately upon adoption pursuant to Government Code §§ 36934 and 36937 for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety, and welfare. Pursuant to those statutes this Ordinance is adopted by fourth-fifths vote of the City Council.

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1445

ORDINANCE NO. 1445 WAS DULY PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER AT ITS REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 12, 2025, AS AN URGENCY ORDINANCE.

Ray Dunton, Mayor
ATTEST:

Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
By:

Justin A. Tamayo, Assistant City Attorney

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
ORDINANCE NO. 1446

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING BELLFLOWER MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 17 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS) GOVERNING

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE
THE CITY COUNCIL DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Findings. This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Government Code § 36937 and the Bellflower City Charter. Articles II, III, and IV of the Charter provide that the City may enact all laws governing its municipal affairs. Pursuant to Article lll(B) of the Charter, the City Council finds that the law enacted by this Ordinance will not unduly burden a person’s ability to pursue economic opportunities and safe and legal residential housing. To the contrary, it is intended to increase housing opportunities.

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. Environmental Assessment. This Ordinance incorporates the CEQA findings in Ordinance No. 1443 by reference. The City Manager, or designee, is directed to file a Notice of Determination in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §§ 15075, and any other applicable law.

SECTION 4. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Findings. Pursuant to BMC § 17.104.030, the City Council makes the following findings:

A. 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. The Ordinance would simply update the BMC by providing a maximum size for ADUs consistent with California law.

B. This Ordinance promotes public health, safety and general welfare by ensuring that ADUs are developed in accordance with California law.

C. This Ordinance will not adversely affect the City's General Plan or zoning regulations set forth in the BMC.

D. This Ordinance will not unduly burden a person’s ability to pursue economic opportunities in that it is intended to broaden the availability of legal residential housing within the City’s jurisdiction by allowing a larger size for ADU than the California mandate, which allows for more economic opportunities including, without limitation, increasing property value.

City of BeIIflower
Ordinance No. 1446

SECTION 5. General Plan Findings. The findings set forth in Ordinance No. 1443 are incorporated by reference.

SECTION 6. Amendment. Based on the above findings, the City Council adds a new BMC § 17.17.050 to read as follows:
Ҥ 17.17.050. Maximum Size
An Accessory Dwelling Unit, whether attached or detached, may not exceed 1,200 square feet in gross area.”
SECTION 7. Codification. All subsequent section numbers within BMC Chapter

17.17 are renumbered in accordance with the changes implemented by this Ordinance.

The City Council intends that this Ordinance be harmonized with Ordinance No. 1443 when codified within the BMC.

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

SECTION 9. Enforceability. Repeal of any provision of the 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 10. Validity of Previous Code Sections. If this entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or amendment of the 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 11. 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 12. 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.

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1446

SECTION13. Publication- The City Clerk 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 14. 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 15. Electronic Signatures. This Ordinance 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 16. 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 17. 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 18. Effective Date. This Ordinance will take effect on the 30th day following its final passage and adoption.

ORDINANCE NO. 1446 HAD ITS FIRST READING ON MAY 12, 2025, ITS SECOND READING ON , 2025, AND WAS DULY PASSED,

APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER AT ITS REGULAR MEETING OF , 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

CITY OF BELLFLOWER
ORDINANCE NO. 1447

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING BELLFLOWER MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 17 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS) GOVERNING THE

NUMBER OF ALLOWABLE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
THE CITY COUNCIL ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Findings. This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Government Code § 36937 and the Bellflower City Charter. Articles ll, Ill, and IV of the Charter provide that the City may enact all laws governing its municipal affairs. Pursuant to Article l||(B) of the Charter, the City Council finds that the law enacted by this Ordinance will not unduly burden a person’s ability to pursue economic opportunities and safe and legal residential housing. To the contrary, it is intended to increase housing opportunities.

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. Environmental Assessment. This Ordinance incorporates the CEQA findings in Ordinance No. 1443 by reference. The City Manager, or designee, is directed to file a Notice of Determination in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §§ 15075. and any other applicable law.

SECTION 4. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Findings. Pursuant to BMC § 17.104.030, the City Council makes the following findings:

A. 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. The Ordinance would simply update the BMC by providing flexibility to allow a greater number of ADU for multifamily dwelling.

B. This Ordinance promotes public health, safety and general welfare by ensuring that ADUs are developed in accordance with California law and allows for additional opportunity to build more ADU provided that development standards are complied with.

C. This Ordinance will not adversely affect the City's General Plan or zoning regulations set forth in the BMC.

D. This Ordinance will not unduly burden a person’s ability to pursue economic opportunities in that it is intended to broaden the availability of legal residential housing within the City’s jurisdiction by allowing a greater number of ADUs on lots with multifamily dwellings than that provided by California law, which allows for more economic opportunities including, without limitation, generating additional income, and increasing property value.

SECTION 5. General Plan Findings. The findings set forth in Ordinance No. 1443 are incorporated by reference.

-11-

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1447

SECTION 6. Amendment.'Based on the above findings, the City Council adds a new BMC § 17.17.060 to read as follows:
Ҥ 17.17.060. Number of ADUs on Lots with Multifamily Dwellings An applicant may develop multiple ADUs within the portions of existing multifamily dwelling units that are not used as livable space and multiple detached ADUs on lots with existing or proposed multifamily dwellings, provided that the development satisfies all development standards applicable in the underlying zone in which the property is located." SECTION 7. Codification. All subsequent section numbers within BMC Chapter 17.17 are renumbered in accordance with the changes implemented by this Ordinance. The City Council intends that this Ordinance be harmonized with Ordinance No. 1443 when codified within the BMC.

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

SECTION 9. Enforceability. Repeal of any provision of the 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 10. Validity of Previous Code Sections. If this entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or amendment of the 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 11. 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 12. 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.
-12-

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1447

SECTION 13. Publication. The City Clerk 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 14. 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 15. Electronic Signatures. This Ordinance 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 16. 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 17. 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 18. Effective Date. This Ordinance will take effect on the 30th day following its final passage and adoption.

ORDINANCE NO. 1447 HAD ITS FIRST READING ON MAY 12, 2025, ITS SECOND READING ON , 2025, AND WAS DULY PASSED,

APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER AT ITS REGULAR MEETING OF , 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

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:

W. Findings. The City Council finds and declares as follows:

A Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Case No. ZOTA 2501 is proposed to amend Title 17 of the Bellilower 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 bows. special needs housing, and encourage future development by incentivizing lot consolidation, removing constraints to development, and streamlining the review processes (Project‘); C. The City reviewed this Ordinance pursuant to the Celifomia Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq, 'CEQA’), the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regulations §§15000, et seq, the “CEOA Guidelines”); CEQA, CEOA Guidelines and Bellflower Guidelines collectively referred to es ‘CEQA Regulations”); D. NotioeofPubiicHeerlng beteretheCltyCouncilwas duly given and published intl'retlme,l‘omr,andmamerasrequlredbyiaw;
E. On April 14, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing to receive We 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, testimny and evidence presented to the City Council at its April 14, 2025 hearing.
0 . Planning Agency. Pursuant to BMC § 2.32.050(F), the City Council is acting as the Belltiower Planning Agency for purposes of the Project. m2. Factual Findings and Conclusions. The City Council finds as follows:

Paget Of12

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

A. On January 20, 2022, the City Council adopted the HE for the 2021-2029 planning period. On September 9, 2022, the Department of Housing and Community Development (“HOD”) certified Bellfiower's HE; B. The City’s HE includes the requirements to accommodate Belltlower’s Regional Housing Needs Altercation (“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);
C.TheproposedZOTAalicwsfordeveiopmenttoaccommodatetheCityot BelMower’s 2021-2029 RHNA;
D. The ZOTA establishes a regulatory lramework oi future development and uses byamending Title 170ttheBMCthatwouldbeapplicable citywide. asit pertainstoreievantStatelawsandtheHE asshonmon ExhibitsAthrcugh E; and
E. TheCityCowwfilnifiawdihis Projectmroughitsadopfianotme HE. $939M. Environmental Assessment in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines § 15162, the City Council finds as follows:

A. Resolufion No. 2203 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 BMC is an activity contemplated by MND 2101.

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 net known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time MND 21-01 was approved.
§_§§1!Q___5_. Notice of Detenninatron. The City Manager, or designee, is directed to tile a Notice of Determination in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §§ 15075; and any other applicable law.
-15-

City of Beilflower
Ordinance No. 1443

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 acoonmodate special needs groups and all economic segments of the City'; . Housing Element ~ Goal 3: “Minimize the impact oi governmental constraints on housing production and aflordability';
Housing Element .. Policy 5.3: 'Encourage inlill development and reuse of underutilizedland,wherereuseisomdsternwithdesiredneighborhood character”; and
Housing Element - Policy 5.4: "Encourage recycling of existing, poorly designed, substandard multifamily developments to higher densities as a means of facilitating housing for all economic segments of the community and providing unprovements to housing in need of major upgrades”.

Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Findings. Pursuant to m. 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.
-15-

City of Belli'lower
Ordinance No. 1443

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 BM: in that it is consistent with thegoais and policies of the General Plan, identified in this Ordinance. Furthermore, the ZOTA will not adversely attect 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 adverseiy affect the City’s General Plan in that the proposed ZOTA adheres to changes in State laws.

3. Amendment. BMC § 17.41 (Density Bonus) is repealed and repbced in its entirety as set forth in the attached Exhibit “A” which is incorporated by reference. mg. Amendment. The definition of ”Accessory Dwelling Unit“ within BMC § 1708.010 is removed in its entirety.

W- Amendment. BMC § 17.16.020(L) is repealed.

W— Amendment. BMC § 17.16.1713 is repeated in its entirety. m. Amendment. BMC § 17.20.020(E) is repealed.

W. Amendment. BMC § 17.20200 is repealed in its entirety. mam. Amendment. emc § 17.24.020(M) is repeated.

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

W. Amendment. BMC § 1112.010 is amended as follows:
Ҥ 17.12.010. Zones Enumerated.

For purposes relating to the orderly development oi 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 renewing:
-17-

City of Bellilower
Ordinance No. 1443

SF Single Family Residential
R1 Low Density
AE Agricultural Estate Zone
R-2 Medium Density Residential
Re Multiple Residential
SCH Senior Citizen Housing
C~G General Commercial Zone
T-C Beilflower Town Overlay Zone
M-i Light industrial Zone
PD Planned Development Zone
0-3 Open Space Zoning Zone
P Pubk Uses
MU Mixed Use
DFD DesignforDeveiopmentiortheSouthBeliflowerCommercialArea CENTZ Court Enlormd Neutral Tenancy Zone
DAZL Development Ageemenl Zone Layover
SP Specific Plan
H002 Housing Opportunity Overlay Zone"
mu. Amendment. BMC § 1720.150 Parking Requirements is amemd to read: -
“A. in addition to the Oil-Street Parking requirements at this Title, each single family residencemustpmvideamhflmumoihuoendocedparkingspaceemldraminknum combineddimensionoOleetinlength byZOieelinwicitholan unobstructedtioor spaceandoneopenguestparkingspace."
W. Amendment. BMC § 17.24.110(B) (Parking Requirements) is amendedas follows:
“B. Properties with two or more single family reddenoes must provide a minimum of two enclosed parking spaces and one open guest parking space for each dwelling unit.” §§CTQN 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.”
W. 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 -18-

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

“D.
“E.
front yard setback. Notwithstanding, properties with less than the minimum required front yard setback may be deemed conforming pursuant to this Title." semen 21. Amendment. BMC § 17.23.030(o) 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.” m Amendment. BMC § 17.28.080(E) is amended as follows:

Rear Yards.

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

2. Throughlots musthave arearyardforresidentialbuildingsand structuresof 15 feet for one-story buildings and 20 feet for two-story buildings.” SECTION E. Amendment. BMC § 17.28.080(B) is repealed.

W. Amendment. BMC § 1728.100. is amended to read:
”To minimize building bulk and mass, any new two—story residential structure must satisfy theZ/‘3mle. The2i3mlerequiresthetopstorytobenotmorethan2/3thesizeintotal floor area of the bottom story.”
W.AmendmentBMC§17.32.020isamendedbyaddlnganew
subsectionCasfoilowe:
“C. Mixed use. provided that the real property has a General Plan Land Use designation of MU."
W. Amendment. BMC § 1732.070 is amended as follows:
"No building or structure may exceed three stories or 40 feet in height, whichever is less.” “A.

W. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.080(A) is amended as foliows:

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." -19-

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

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.”
w. 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 iota must have a rear yard for residential [weddings and structures of 15 feel for onestory buildings and 20 feet for Mary buildings.” W. Amendment BMC § 17.32.080iB) is repealed.

SECTlQN 31. Amendment. BMC § 1732.100 is amended to read:
’To minimize building bulk and mass, any new two-story residential structure must satisfy meziarule.1ne2f3rulerequirestnetopslorytobenotmoremanZIISmesizeintotal floor area of the bottom story.”
3 . Amendment. BMC § 1108.010. (DEFlNiT IONS) is amended by removing the definition of “Community Care Facility" in its entirety.

SEQIQE 33. Amendment. BMC § 17.44.2013 l8 repealed in its entirety.

W. Amendment. BMC § 17.16.0230 is amended by repealing subsection ”N. Comuniiy Care Facility serving six of fewer persons.” §EQTIQN 35. Amndmenl. BMC § 1720.020 is amended by repealing subsection “H. Community Care Facility sewing six of fewer persons." §ECTIQu g6. Amendment. BMC § 17.24.0120 is amended by repealing subseodon “0. Community Care Facility serving six of fewer persons“. §§CTIQN 31. Amendment. BMC § 17.28.020(B) is amended by repealing subdivision '6. Community Care Facility serving six of fewer persons.’ W. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.020(B) is amended by repealing subdivision ‘5. Community Care Facility sewing six of fewer persons.” 5:; 01’1l 39. Amendment. BMC § 17.44.030(A) is amended by repealing subdivision ‘22. Community Care Facilities.”
-20-

City of Beiiflower
Ordinance No. 1443

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

W. Amendment. BMC § 17.44.020(A)(45) is repealed.

ECTlQN 43. Amendment BMC § 17.44330 is repealed in its entirety.

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 CEN‘iZ is activated. it 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 addidonai standards:

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

B. Approval of the CENTZ and any development within the CENTZ rests solely within the City Council’s discretion.”

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.
§§6TIQN fl. Amendment. BMC § 17.08.010 (Definitions) is amended by repealing the definition of “Supportive housing” in its entirety.

7. Amendment. BMC § 17.16.180 entitled ’TransitionaiISupportive Housing' is repealed in its entirety.

W. Amendment. BMC 5 17.18.020(M) is repealed.
mg. Amendment. BMC § 17.20.020(e) is repealed.

W— Amendment. BMC § 17.20.040(L) is repealed.
w. Amendment. BMC § 17.24.020(N) is repealed.
sscrrou 52. Amendment. BMC § 17.24.0400) is repeated.
-21-

City of Bellflower
Ordinance No. 1443

W. Amendment. BMC § 17.2e.ozo(e)(5) is repealed.
$011913 54. Amendment. BMC § 17.28.030(A) is repealed.

W. Amendment. BMC § 17.32.020(B)(4) ls repealed.
sermon 56. Amendment. euc § 17.32.030u) is repealed.
5 . Amenwnent. The BMC is amended by establishing a new section entitled “17.72.120 Supportive Housing“ as follows:
"§ 17.72.1510. Supportive Housing.

This section is established to implement applicable law. including, without limitation, GovenmrentCodemctionGSSéOasmaybeamendedfromtimetotime:

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

B. Standards. Supportive housing must satisfy all objective deveiomnt standards in the underlying zoning designafion.

C. Comam.NlunitsaresubjecttoarecordedafioMabflitymsmcfionwhichmwbe submitted.reviemed,andapprovedbytheDirector,inabrmapprovedbytheCtty Attorney"
W. Amendment. BMC § 17.42.0220 is amended to read:
“in order to make specific housing available to an individual with a disability, any person may mquest a modification or excepdon to the rules, standards and practices for the siting, development and use of housing or housing-related laciilties 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 quaiity as disabled pursuant to applicable law, including the California Fair Employment and Housing Act.” SECTION 59. Amendment. BMC § 1142.040 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.
-22-

City of Belltlower
Ordinance No. 1443

8. 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." mm. Amendment. BMC § 17.42.050m) is amended to read:
“A. Any decision on an application under this Chapter wiB 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 it all of the following findings are made:

1. Thehoueingml'ddiismesubiectoitherequestwillbeueedbyadisabled lndlvidualaedeflnedmdermeappimbielaw.

2. Therequestedreasonableaccommodatlonisnecenarytomakespeciilc housing available to an individual with a disability under the Acts.

3. The requested reasonable accommodation would not impose an,_undue financiaioradministrative burdenon theCity.

4. The requesmd reasonable acconunodation would not require a hmdamental alteration in the nature at a City program or law, hciuding, without limitation, land use and zoning.”
$939331. Amendment. BMC § 17.42o is repealed in its entirety.

W. Amendment. The BMC is amended by repealing and replacing Chapter 17.14 as setiorth in the attached Exhibit ‘E’ which is incorporated by reference. . Renumbering. Ali subsections, and subdivisions oi the BMC affected by changes implemented by this Ordinance are appropriately renumbered.

W. 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.

SEQION 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. -23-

City of Belitiower
Ordinance No. 1443