HomeMy WebLinkAbout2. PLN-14-00180 - Code AmendmentSTAFF REPORT
PLANNING DIVISION
DATE: NOVEMBER 19, 2014
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBMITTED BY: ALDO E. SCHINDLER, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PREPARED BY: WILLIAM E. DAVIS, CITY PLANNER
SUBJECT: PLN-14-00180 (CODE AMENDMENT) – A REQUEST TO AMEND SECTION
9806 OF THE DOWNEY MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO APPEALS OF
A COMMISSION DECISION AND THE CALLS FOR REVIEW PROCESS
LOCATION: CITYWIDE
REPORT SUMMARY
During its Regular Meeting on August 6, 2014, the Planning Commission initiated a zoning text
amendment of Section 9806 of the Downey Municipal Code regarding the appeals process and
directed staff to prepare an ordinance that adds a call for review regulation. This amendment will
allow the City Council to review Planning Commission decisions on quasi-judicial actions such as
variances, conditional use permits and development plans formally and without having to file a
formal appeal. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following titled
resolution:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DOWNEY RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 9806 OF
THE DOWNEY MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO APPEALS OF A
COMMISSION DECISION AND THE CALLS FOR REVIEW PROCESS
BACKGROUND
Section 505 of the Downey Municipal Code provides that all powers of the City shall be vested in the
City Council. With respect to land use decisions and the Zoning Code, Section 9112.06 states that
the Council’s primary function is to establish land use policies and regulations and to consider various
project applications and recommendations. Nevertheless, the City’s appeals process does not
adequately allow the Council to call for review certain land use issues decided upon by the Planning
Commission.
The Planning Commission often acts as the decision-making body on controversial land use issues.
In the event that a private citizen or a Council Member disagrees with the outcome, their recourse is
to formally request that the matter be decided upon by the City Council through the appeals
process. However, Section 9806 of the Downey Municipal Code, which describes the appeals
process, does not allow the City Council to appeal or review an item in a different manner than the
applicant or the general public.
Agenda Page 1
PLN-14-00180 (Code Amendment)
November 19, 2014 - Page 2
Downey does not have a history of Council members calling Planning Commission decisions up for
review. It was understood that the Applicant or someone else would appeal those decisions to the
City Council or that a council member could appeal a controversial decision if so inclined.
Recently, issues came before the Planning Commission that sparked public concern. In response,
Council Members queried staff on the appeal process and were surprised to discover that a Council
Member who appeals a Planning Commission decision must abstain from hearing the appeal, due to
the appearance of bias and conflict of interest. Consequently, staff determined that an amendment to
Section 9806 is necessary to foster Council level consideration of Planning Commission decisions
when warranted. A “Call for Review” process would enable the Downey City Council to consider such
matters, based on their request and allow them to review an item in an unbiased manner. On August
6, 2014, and the Planning Commission initiated a zoning text amendment of Section 9806 of the
Downey Municipal Code regarding the appeals process and directed staff to prepare an ordinance
that adds a call for review regulation.
DISCUSSION
Due process requires that Council Members reviewing an appeal of a Planning Commission
decision must be impartial, neutral decision makers. Many ordinances, including the Downey
Municipal Code, require that an appellate state the portion of the Planning Commission
decision with which the appellant disagrees and the basis for the disagreement. When a
Council Member is required to state his/her position on the appeal, a bias is established, which
results in disqualification of the Council Member from deciding the appeal when it is reviewed
by the City Council. Courts have therefore ruled that when a Council Member declares himself
an interested party and states his/her disagreement with a Planning Commission decision,
he/she must abstain from hearing the appeal.
However, courts have allowed cities to adopt an ordinance allowing city council members to call
planning commission decisions for review without stating a view or opinion of the merits of the
decision appealed. These ordinances resemble ordinances providing for appeals in that they
provide the deadlines and format to call an item for review. However, they differ in that they do
not require a statement of the reasons for the underlying decision. “These call for review”
procedures allow any council member to initiate reviews of planning commission decisions
without compromising his/her ability to participate in the appeal hearing.
ANALYSIS
The proposed zoning text amendment to Section 9806 is necessary to foster Council-level
consideration of Planning Commission decisions when warranted. A “Call for Review” process would
enable the Downey City Council to consider such matters, based on their request and allow them to
review an item in an unbiased manner. Under the current appeal procedure, if a Council Member
wishes to appeal a Planning Commission decision, he or she must be an appellant and therefore
cannot participate in deciding the appeal.
Some cities adopt call for review procedures which allow a call for review by any single Council
Member. This allows individual Council Members to call for review a matter without discussing the
item with other council members. On the other hand, a procedure which allows a call for review by a
single Council Member can place all Council Members in the position of being asked by would-be-
appellants to call matters for review to save them appeal fees.
Agenda Page 2
PLN-14-00180 (Code Amendment)
November 19, 2014 - Page 3
In addition, a one-Council Member rule may allow a Council Member with different views than his or
her peers to command the Council's time and attention on matters others would prefer not to
address. This method may also become costly and unproductive when the project in question can
only garner support from one Council Member. Conversely, call for review by two Council Members
(as PLN-14-00180 proposes) maintains the integrity of the appeals process prevents unnecessary
costs and minimizes processing delays.
Staff has proposed adding the following language to Section 9806.04 of the Code:
Downey
SECTION 9806.02. INTENT AND PURPOSE.
To avoid results inconsistent with the purposes of this article, decisions of the City Planner and
other Administrative Officials of the City may be appealed to the Commission, and decisions of the
Commission may be appealed to the Council.
SECTION 9806.04. PROCEDURES.
Figure 9.8.1 and Figure 9.8.2 illustrate the processes described below.
(a) Appeals of Administrative Decisions.
(1) Written Notification. Any appeal from a decision of the City Planner or other
Administrative Official of the City in the administration of this article, or where it is alleged
by any person that there is an error in any order, requirement, permit, decision, or
determination made by an Administrative Official of the City in the administration or
enforcement of this article, shall be made in writing to the Commission. The City Clerk
shall not accept for filing a notice of appeal until and unless the appellant or person
requesting the hearing has submitted to the City Clerk a filing fee as determined by
resolution of the Council.
Agenda Page 3
PLN-14-00180 (Code Amendment)
November 19, 2014 - Page 4
Figure 9.8.1. Process for Appeal of an Administrative Decision
Written notification to appeal
decision of the City Planner or
other Administrative Official of
the City filed with City Clerk
within 15 days of the decision.
City Clerk transmits 1 copy of
Notice of Appeal to City
Planner and 1 copy to
Commission Secretary
Hearing
scheduled,
noticed
Commission acts to:
• Affirm City Planner or Admin. Official
decision
• Modify City Planner or Admin. Official
decision
• Reverse original decision
Commission
conducts
hearing
Decision
Final
Agenda Page 4
PLN-14-00180 (Code Amendment)
November 19, 2014 - Page 5
Figure 9.8.2. Process for Appeal of A Commission Decision
The written notice of appeal shall be filed within fifteen (15) calendar days of the original
decision by the City Planner or Administrative Official of the City.
(2) Records. The City Planner or Administrative Official of the City shall then transmit to
the Commission all papers constituting the record upon which the action appealed from
was taken.
(3) Stay. An appeal shall stay all proceedings unless the City Planner or Administrative
Official notifies the Commission that a stay would cause imminent peril to life and
property.
(4) Public Hearings. Public hearings shall be set and notice given in the same manner
and time as provided in Section 9804 of this chapter.
Written notification to appeal
Commission decision filed with
City Clerk within 15 days of
Commission decision
City Clerk transmits 1 copy of Notice
to Appeal to City Planner and 1
copy to Commission Secretary
City Planner transmits all records
pertaining to request for appeal to
the Council
Hearing scheduled,
noticed
Council
conducts
hearing
Council acts to
• Affirm Commission decision
• Modify Commission
decision
• Reverse original decision
Decision
Final
Agenda Page 5
PLN-14-00180 (Code Amendment)
November 19, 2014 - Page 6
(5) Decision. The Commission may hear and decide such matters by the affirmative
vote of not less than a majority of the members present. A tie vote shall be considered
denial of appeal.
(b) Appeals of a Commission Decision.
(1) Written Notification and Timing. A decision of the Commission, within fifteen (15)
calendar days after the date of such action, may be appealed by written notice of
appeal filed in duplicate with the City Clerk. Such appeal shall specify where it is
claimed that the Commission’s findings were in error, and where the decision of the
Commission is not supported by the evidence in the matter, and where the public
necessity, convenience, and welfare require such exception or permit. The City Clerk
shall not accept for filing a notice of appeal until and unless the appellant or person
requesting the hearing has submitted to the City Clerk a filing fee as determined by
resolution of the Council.
(2) Records. Upon the receipt of such notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall transmit one
(1) copy of the notice of appeal to the City Planner with notice of the date, time, and place
when the appeal shall be given before the Council. The City Planner shall transmit to the
Council a copy of all pertinent information contained in the Commission’s permanent file.
The City Clerk shall transmit a copy of such notice of appeal and place such appeal on
the Council’s first available meeting.
(3) Stay. On the date a notice of appeal is filed pursuant to this section, all proceedings
in furtherance of the determination, order, decision, condition, or requirement appealed
from, including the effective date of any permit or variance in question, shall be stayed
until the final determination of the appeal or review by the Council.
(4) Public Hearing. The Council may not approve, reverse, or modify, in whole or in
part, the Commission’s final determination, decision, order, requirement, or condition
which is appealed until the Council has held a public hearing. Such public hearings shall
be set and notice given by the City Clerk in the same manner and time as provided in
Section 9804 of this chapter.
(5) Decision. The Council shall announce its findings and decision in an appeal
proceeding by formal action. Such action shall recite, among other things, the reasons
which, in the opinion of the Council, make the Council’s determination of the matter
necessary to carry out the general purpose of this article and shall order that the
Commission’s decision be affirmed, reversed, or modified. The Council shall effect such
determination, or any portion thereof, by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of
the total membership of the Council present at the hearing; otherwise, the appeal shall be
denied. The action of the Council shall be final and conclusive.
Agenda Page 6
PLN-14-00180 (Code Amendment)
November 19, 2014 - Page 7
(c) Calls for Review
(1) The City Council shall have the right to review the decisions or actions of the Planning
Commission. Except as otherwise provided for herein, any review initiated under this
section must comply with all requirements that would ordinarily apply to an appeal of the
type of decision or action at issue as described in Section 9806.04 (b) of this Code.
(2) Written Notification and Timing. Any two (2) members of the City Council may initiate
a call for review of a decision of the Planning Commission, within fifteen (15) calendar
days after the date of such action, by delivering a written notice of appeal with the City
Clerk. No filing fee shall be required in making a request for review under this section.
(3) Records. Upon the receipt of such notice of the call for review, the City Clerk shall
transmit one (1) copy of the notice of the call for review to the City Planner with notice of
the date, time, and place when the appeal shall be given before the Council. The City
Planner shall transmit to the Council a copy of all pertinent information contained in the
Commission’s permanent file.
The City Clerk shall transmit a copy of such notice of the call for review and place such
the call for review on the Council’s first available meeting.
(4) Stay. On the date a notice of the call for review is filed pursuant to this section, all
proceedings in furtherance of the determination, order, decision, condition, or
requirement appealed from, including the effective date of any permit or variance in
question, shall be stayed until the final determination of the review by the Council.
(5) Public Hearing. The Council may not approve, reverse, or modify, in whole or in part,
the Commission’s final determination, decision, order, requirement, or condition which is
appealed until the Council has held a public hearing. Such public hearings shall be set
and notice given by the City Clerk in the same manner and time as provided in Section
9804 of this chapter.
(6) Decision. The Council shall announce its findings and decision in the call for review
proceeding by formal action. Such action shall recite, among other things, the reasons
which, in the opinion of the Council, make the Council’s determination of the matter
necessary to carry out the general purpose of this article and shall order that the
Commission’s decision be affirmed, reversed, or modified. The Council shall effect such
determination, or any portion thereof, by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of
the total membership of the Council present at the hearing; otherwise, the call for review
shall be denied. The action of the Council shall be final and conclusive.
Agenda Page 7
PLN-14-00180 (Code Amendment)
November 19, 2014 - Page 8
ENVIRONMENTAL
In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff prepared
an Initial Study for a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts. During this analysis, staff
considered the potential impacts from air quality, traffic, noise, and geology among other factors. Staff
determined that the existing codes and mitigation measures found in the Downey General Plan,
which apply to all development projects in the City, already reduce the potential impacts to a level
below significance. As a result of the analysis contained in the Initial Study, staff concluded that the
proposed project will not have a significant effect upon the environment, resulting in the
recommended Negative Declaration.
FINDINGS
A. That the requested amendment is necessary and desirable for the development of the
community and is in the interests of furtherance of the public health, safety, and general
welfare.
The Planning Commission acts as the primary decision-making body on land use issues such
as variances, conditional use permits and development plans. At times, those land use issues
affect the social and cultural mores of the City of Downey and attract the attention of a Council
Member. In the event that a council member disagrees with a Planning Commission decision,
their recourse is to formally request that the City Council decide the matter through the appeals
process. Section 9806 of the Downey Municipal Code, which describes the appeals process,
does not allow the City Council to appeal or review an item in a different manner than the
applicant or the general public; however, a Council Member who appeals a decision must
abstain from hearing the appeal, due to the appearance of bias and conflict of interest.
Consequently, an amendment to Section 9806 is necessary to foster Council level
consideration of Planning Commission decisions when warranted. A “Call for Review” process
would enable the Downey City Council to consider such matters, based on their request and
allow them to review an item in an unbiased manner. The proposed zoning text amendment to
Section 9806 is necessary for the City Council to fulfil its primary function, stated in Section
9112.06 of the Downey Municipal, which is to establish land use policies and regulations and to
consider various project applications and recommendations.
B. The proposed amendment is in general conformance with the General Plan.
The General Plan, Downey Vision 2025, serves as a guide to address the long-term physical
development and growth of the community. It identifies issues confronting the community and
outlines goals to address them, with policies and programs to accomplish the goals of the plan.
The Land Use Chapter of the General Plan establishes the policies for determining where
certain land uses, such as residential, commercial, and industrial, are most desirable. Issue 1.3
of the General Plan recognizes that Downey is a mature community experiencing significant
change. Addressing the changes taking place in Downey is challenging because of the age of
the community the age of its structures and infrastructure, land use patterns, and incompatible
land uses. The General Plan recognizes that as properties are developed, it is important to
resolve inconsistencies among the zoning, general plan, and land use of properties.
Consequently, the General Plan Goal 1.3 entitled “Address changes in land use and zoning
trends” includes policies and programs geared to adjust the City’s codes and policies and
regulations in response to changes in land use trends. The proposed zoning text amendment
Agenda Page 8
PLN-14-00180 (Code Amendment)
November 19, 2014 - Page 9
will allow the City Council to review Planning Commission decisions on quasi-judicial actions
such as variances, conditional use permits and development plans formally and without having
to file a formal appeal. As a result, the proposed amendment will allow Council Members to
exercise their ability to influence City policy on major land use issues decided upon by the
Planning Commission and thereby be in general conformance with the General Plan.
CORRESPONDENCE
As of the date that this report was prepared, staff has not received any correspondence regarding
this matter.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the
Code Amendment (PLN-14-00180).
Agenda Page 9
RESOLUTION NO. 14-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DOWNEY RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 9806 OF
THE DOWNEY MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO APPEALS OF A
COMMISSION DECISION AND THE CALLS FOR REVIEW PROCESS
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Downey does hereby find,
determine and declare that:
1. Section 9806 of the Downey Municipal Code, which describes the appeals
process, hinders the ability of a City Council Member to influence City policy on
major land use issues decided upon by the Planning Commission because a
Council Member who appeals a decision must abstain from hearing the appeal,
due to the appearance of bias and conflict of interest.
2. Consequently, it was determined that an amendment to Section 9806 is
necessary to provide a “Call for Review” process to foster Council level
consideration of Planning Commission decisions when warranted that would
enable the City Council to consider such matters, based on their request and
allow them to review an item in an unbiased manner.
3. On August 6, 2014, the Planning Commission initiated a zoning text amendment
of Section 9806 of the Downey Municipal Code regarding the appeals process
and directed staff to prepare an ordinance that adds a call for review regulation
4. On October 9, 2014, notice of the pending code amendment was published in the
Downey Patriot as a 1/8th page ad and on October 15, 2014 in compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act, a Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative
Declaration was posted at the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office in Norwalk,
California.
5. The Regular Planning Commission meeting scheduled for November 5, 2014,
was cancelled due to a lack of a quorum.
6. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on November 19,
2014, and, after fully considering all oral and written testimony and facts and
opinions offered at aforesaid public hearings, adopted this resolution.
SECTION 2. The Planning Commission further finds, determines and declares that staff
prepared an Initial Study in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), which found that there would be no significant environmental impacts
created by the proposed code amendment, and prepared a Negative Declaration. Based upon
its own independent judgment that the facts stated in the Initial study are true, the Planning
Commission finds that the approval of the proposed code amendment (PLN-14-00180) will not
have any negative environmental impacts.
Agenda Page 10
Resolution No. 14-_______
Page 2
SECTION 3. Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at
said public hearing, the Planning Commission further finds, determines and declares
that:
1. That the requested amendment is necessary and desirable for the
development of the community and is in the interests of furtherance of the
public health, safety, and general welfare.
The Planning Commission acts as the primary decision-making body on land use
issues such as variances, conditional use permits and development plans. At
times, those land use issues affect the social and cultural mores of the City of
Downey and attract the attention of a council member. In the event that a Council
Member disagrees with a Planning Commission decision, their recourse is to
formally request that the City Council decide the matter through the appeals
process. Section 9806 of the Downey Municipal Code, which describes the
appeals process, does not allow the City Council to appeal or review an item in a
different manner than the applicant or the general public; however, a Council
Member who appeals a decision must abstain from hearing the appeal, due to
the appearance of bias and conflict of interest. Consequently, an amendment to
Section 9806 is necessary to foster Council level consideration of Planning
Commission decisions when warranted. A “Call for Review” process would
enable the Downey City Council to consider such matters, based on their request
and allow them to review an item in an unbiased manner. The proposed zoning
text amendment to Section 9806 is necessary for the City Council to fulfil its
primary function, stated in Section 9112.06 of the Downey Municipal, which is to
establish land use policies and regulations and to consider various project
applications and recommendations.
2. The proposed amendment is in general conformance with the General Plan.
The General Plan, Downey Vision 2025, serves as a guide to address the long-
term physical development and growth of the community. It identifies issues
confronting the community and outlines goals to address them, with policies and
programs to accomplish the goals of the plan. The Land Use Chapter of the
General Plan establishes the policies for determining where certain land uses,
such as residential, commercial, and industrial, are most desirable. Issue 1.3 of
the General Plan recognizes that Downey is a mature community experiencing
significant change. Addressing the changes taking place in Downey is
challenging because of the age of the community the age of its structures and
infrastructure, land use patterns, and incompatible land uses. The General Plan
recognizes that as properties are developed, it is important to resolve
inconsistencies among the zoning, general plan, and land use of properties.
Consequently, the General Plan Goal 1.3 entitled “Address changes in land use
and zoning trends” includes policies and programs geared to adjust the City’s
codes and policies and regulations in response to changes in land use trends.
The proposed zoning text amendment will allow the City Council to review
Planning Commission decisions on quasi-judicial actions such as variances,
conditional use permits and development plans formally and without having to file
a formal appeal. As a result, the proposed amendment will allow council
members to exercise their ability to influence City policy on major land use issues
Agenda Page 11
Resolution No. 14-_______
Page 3
decided upon by the Planning Commission and thereby be in general
conformance with the General Plan.
SECTION 4. Based upon the findings set forth in Sections 1, 2 and 3 of this Resolution,
the Planning Commission of the City of Downey hereby recommends that the City Council
amend Section 9806.04 of Article IX of the Downey Municipal Code to read as follows:
SECTION 9806.04. PROCEDURES.
Figure 9.8.1 and Figure 9.8.2 illustrate the processes described below.
(a) Appeals of Administrative Decisions.
(1) Written Notification. Any appeal from a decision of the City Planner or other
Administrative Official of the City in the administration of this article, or where it is
alleged by any person that there is an error in any order, requirement, permit,
decision, or determination made by an Administrative Official of the City in the
administration or enforcement of this article, shall be made in writing to the
Commission. The City Clerk shall not accept for filing a notice of appeal until and
unless the appellant or person requesting the hearing has submitted to the City
Clerk a filing fee as determined by resolution of the Council.
Agenda Page 12
Resolution No. 14-_______
Page 4
Figure 9.8.1. Process for Appeal of an Administrative Decision
Written notification to appeal
decision of the City Planner or
other Administrative Official of
the City filed with City Clerk
within 15 days of the decision
City Clerk transmits 1 copy
of Notice of Appeal to City
Planner and 1 copy to
Commission Secretary
Hearing
scheduled,
noticed
Commission
conducts
hearing
Commission acts to:
• Affirm City Planner or Admin. Official
decision
• Modify City Planner or Admin. Official
decision
• Reverse original decision
Decision
Final
Agenda Page 13
Resolution No. 14-_______
Page 5
Figure 9.8.2. Process for Appeal of a Commission Decision
Written notification to appeal
decision of the City Planner or
other Administrative Official of
the City filed with City Clerk
within 15 days of the decision
City Clerk transmits 1 copy
of Notice of Appeal to City
Planner and 1 copy to
Commission Secretary
City Planner transmits all
records pertaining to
request for appeal to the
Council
Hearing
scheduled,
noticed
Commission
conducts
hearing
Council acts to:
• Affirm Commission decision
• Modify Commission decision
• Reverse original decision
Decision
Final
Agenda Page 14
Resolution No. 14-_______
Page 6
The written notice of appeal shall be filed within fifteen (15) calendar days of the original
decision by the City Planner or Administrative Official of the City.
(2) Records. The City Planner or Administrative Official of the City shall then transmit to
the Commission all papers constituting the record upon which the action appealed from
was taken.
(3) Stay. An appeal shall stay all proceedings unless the City Planner or Administrative
Official notifies the Commission that a stay would cause imminent peril to life and
property.
(4) Public Hearings. Public hearings shall be set and notice given in the same manner
and time as provided in Section 9804 of this chapter.
(5) Decision. The Commission may hear and decide such matters by the affirmative
vote of not less than a majority of the members present. A tie vote shall be considered
denial of appeal.
(b) Appeals of a Commission Decision.
(1) Written Notification and Timing. A decision of the Commission, within fifteen
(15) calendar days after the date of such action, may be appealed by written
notice of appeal filed in duplicate with the City Clerk. Such appeal shall specify
where it is claimed that the Commission’s findings were in error, and where the
decision of the Commission is not supported by the evidence in the matter, and
where the public necessity, convenience, and welfare require such exception or
permit. The City Clerk shall not accept for filing a notice of appeal until and
unless the appellant or person requesting the hearing has submitted to the City
Clerk a filing fee as determined by resolution of the Council.
(2) Records. Upon the receipt of such notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall transmit
one (1) copy of the notice of appeal to the City Planner with notice of the date, time,
and place when the appeal shall be given before the Council. The City Planner shall
transmit to the Council a copy of all pertinent information contained in the
Commission’s permanent file.
The City Clerk shall transmit a copy of such notice of appeal and place such appeal
on the Council’s first available meeting.
(3) Stay. On the date a notice of appeal is filed pursuant to this section, all
proceedings in furtherance of the determination, order, decision, condition, or
requirement appealed from, including the effective date of any permit or variance in
question, shall be stayed until the final determination of the appeal or review by the
Council.
(4) Public Hearing. The Council may not approve, reverse, or modify, in whole or in
part, the Commission’s final determination, decision, order, requirement, or condition
Agenda Page 15
Resolution No. 14-_______
Page 7
which is appealed until the Council has held a public hearing. Such public hearings
shall be set and notice given by the City Clerk in the same manner and time as
provided in Section 9804 of this chapter.
(5) Decision. The Council shall announce its findings and decision in an appeal
proceeding by formal action. Such action shall recite, among other things, the reasons
which, in the opinion of the Council, make the Council’s determination of the matter
necessary to carry out the general purpose of this article and shall order that the
Commission’s decision be affirmed, reversed, or modified. The Council shall effect
such determination, or any portion thereof, by the affirmative vote of not less than a
majority of the total membership of the Council present at the hearing; otherwise, the
appeal shall be denied. The action of the Council shall be final and conclusive.
(c) Calls for Review
(1) The City Council shall have the right to review the decisions or actions of the
Planning Commission. Except as otherwise provided for herein, any review
initiated under this section must comply with all requirements that would ordinarily
apply to an appeal of the type of decision or action at issue as described in
Section 9806.04 (b) of this Code.
(2) Written Notification and Timing. Any two (2) members of the City Council may
initiate a call for review of a decision of the Planning Commission, within fifteen
(15) calendar days after the date of such action, by delivering a written notice of
appeal with the City Clerk. No filing fee shall be required in making a request for
review under this section.
(3) Records. Upon the receipt of such notice of the call for review, the City Clerk shall
transmit one (1) copy of the notice of the call for review to the City Planner with
notice of the date, time, and place when the appeal shall be given before the
Council. The City Planner shall transmit to the Council a copy of all pertinent
information contained in the Commission’s permanent file.
The City Clerk shall transmit a copy of such notice of the call for review and place
such the call for review on the Council’s first available meeting.
(4) Stay. On the date a notice of the call for review is filed pursuant to this section, all
proceedings in furtherance of the determination, order, decision, condition, or
requirement appealed from, including the effective date of any permit or variance
in question, shall be stayed until the final determination of the review by the
Council.
(5) Public Hearing. The Council may not approve, reverse, or modify, in whole or in
part, the Commission’s final determination, decision, order, requirement, or
condition which is appealed until the Council has held a public hearing. Such
Agenda Page 16
Resolution No. 14-_______
Page 8
public hearings shall be set and notice given by the City Clerk in the same manner
and time as provided in Section 9804 of this chapter.
(6) Decision. The Council shall announce its findings and decision in the call for
review proceeding by formal action. Such action shall recite, among other things,
the reasons which, in the opinion of the Council, make the Council’s determination
of the matter necessary to carry out the general purpose of this article and shall
order that the Commission’s decision be affirmed, reversed, or modified. The
Council shall effect such determination, or any portion thereof, by the affirmative
vote of not less than a majority of the total membership of the Council present at
the hearing; otherwise, the call for review shall be denied. The action of the
Council shall be final and conclusive.
SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ________ 2014.
_______________________
Robert Kiefer, Chairman
City Planning Commission
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of a Resolution adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Downey at a regular meeting thereof held on the ___ day of
______________ 2014, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
_____________________________
Mary Cavanaugh, Secretary
City Planning Commission
Agenda Page 17
PROJECT NAME: Code Amendment Amending Section 9806 of the Downey
Municipal Code Regarding Appeals and Calls for Review
PROJECT LOCATION: Citywide
PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Downey
Community Development Department
Planning Division
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, CA 90241
LEAD AGENCY: City of Downey
Community Development Department
Planning Division
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, CA 90241
Contact: William E. Davis, City Planner
(562) 904-7153
wdavisl@downeyca.org
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD: October 10, 2014 to October 30, 2014
This Negative Declaration and Initial Study Checklist have been prepared pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et seq.)
and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et seq.).
Written comments regarding this Negative Declaration shall be made to the Lead Agency listed
above prior to 5:00 p.m. on the last day of the Public Review Period.
INITIAL STUDY FOR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
PLN-14-00180
Agenda Page 18
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION I – INTRODUCTION
City of Downey Page 2 October 1- 2014
SECTION I. INTRODUCTION
1. Description of project:
PLN-14-00180 (Code Amendment) – This code amendment proposes to amend Section
9806 of Article IX of the Downey Municipal Code to allow the City Council to review
Planning Commission decisions. The specific code language changes are listed in Section
V of this Initial Study.
2. Description of project site (as it currently exists):
The proposed code amendment will affect all properties throughout the City.
3. Description of surrounding properties:
The proposed code amendment will affect all properties throughout the City.
4. City Characteristics:
The City of Downey is 12.8 square mile community that is located in the southeastern
part of Los Angeles County. The State of California Department of Finance estimated
that City’s population is 112,201, as of January 1, 2012. The City of Downey is located
about 12 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and is bounded by the Rio Hondo
River on the west; Telegraph Road on the north; the San Gabriel River on the east; and
Gardendale Street and Foster Road on the south. Cities bordering Downey include Pico
Rivera on the north and Santa Fe Springs on the northeast, Norwalk on the east,
Bellflower and Paramount on the south, South Gate on the southwest and west and
Commerce on the northwest.
Regional access to and from the City of Downey is provided by the Santa Ana (I-5)
Freeway; Glen Anderson Freeway (I-105) Freeway; the San Gabriel River Freeway (I-
605) Freeways; and the Long Beach Freeway (I-710); MTA Green Line Light Rail
passenger train services at the Lakewood Boulevard station, and various Metro Bus
Lines that connect throughout the City.
The City of Downey is a Charter City with most municipal services being provided
directly by the City. This includes City Police and Fire services, as well as, Planning,
Building, Housing, Economic Development, Parks and Recreation, Library, and Public
Works. Additionally, the City of Downey oversees operation of the Downey Civic
Theater, the DowneyLINK Transit System, and the Farmer’s Market.
5. Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval,
or participation agreement.)
None
Agenda Page 19
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION I – INTRODUCTION
City of Downey Page 3 October 1- 2014
6. Location Map:
City of Downey Location in Regional Context
Agenda Page 20
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION I – INTRODUCTION
City of Downey Page 4 October 1- 2014
City of Downey
Agenda Page 21
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-13-00056 SECTION II – ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
City of Downey Page 5 October 1- 2014
SECTION II. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist in section III.
Aesthetics Land Use and Planning
Agriculture Resources Mineral Resources
Air Quality Noise
Biological Resources Population and Housing
Cultural Resources Public Services
Geology and Soils Recreation
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Transportation/Traffic
Hazards & Hazardous Materials Utilities & Service Systems
Hydrology & Water Quality Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on
an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least
one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially
significant unless mitigated”. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a)
have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have
been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Signature: Original signed by Date: October 1, 2014
William E. Davis, City Planner
for the City of Downey
Agenda Page 22
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 6 October 1- 2014
SECTION III. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts which may result from the proposed project.
For the evaluation of potential impacts, the questions in the Initial Study Checklist are stated and answers
are provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of the Initial Study. They outline the following
issues:
1. Aesthetics 10. Mineral Resources
2. Agriculture Resources 11. Noise
3. Air Quality 12. Population and Housing
4. Biological Resources 13. Public Services
5. Cultural Resources 14. Recreation
6. Geology and Soils 15. Transportation and Traffic
7. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 16. Utilities and Service Systems
8. Hydrology and Water Quality 17. Mandatory Findings of Significance
9. Land Use and Planning
The analysis considers the project’s short-term impacts (construction-related), and its operational or day-
to-day impacts. For each question, there are four possible responses. They include:
1. No Impact. Future development arising from the project’s implementation will not have any
measurable environmental impact on the environment and no additional analysis is required.
2. Less Than Significant Impact. The development associated with project implementation will
have the potential to impact the environment; these impacts, however, will be less than the levels
or thresholds that are considered significant and no additional analysis is required.
3. Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. The development will have the potential to
generate impacts which will have a significant effect on the environment; however, mitigation
measures will be effective in reducing the impacts to levels that are less than significant.
4. Potentially Significant Impact. Future implementation will have impacts that are considered
significant, and additional analysis is required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce
these impacts to less than significant levels.
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality
of the site and its surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Agenda Page 23
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 7 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Response:
(a through d): The City of Downey is an urban environment with no scenic vistas or scenic highways. Allowing
the City Council to review decisions of the Planning Commission is not expected to create new construction or
need additional light sources.
2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to
use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a
Williamson act contract?
c. Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
Response:
(a through c): The City of Downey is an urbanized area that is mostly built out with only infill development
potential. There are no agricultural lands within the City’s boundaries. Furthermore, the City’s General Plan
(Vision 2025) does not include provisions for agricultural uses in the future. While the City has a variety of zoning
districts, in which agricultural uses are only allowed in the Open Space (O-S) zone, which is not being altered by
this amendment.
3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would
the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to
an existing or projected air quality violation?
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e. Create objectionable odors?
Agenda Page 24
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 8 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Response:
(a through e): The proposed code amendment will allow the City Council to review decisions of the Planning
Commission. While this review could involve any decision of the Planning Commission, this opportunity is not
anticipated to create additional air pollution and objectionable odors, or conflict with existing air quality plans.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources? (i.e. tree preservation ordinance).
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan?
Response:
(a through f): The City of Downey is an urbanized area that is mostly built out with only infill development
potential. According to the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) that was prepared for the Downey Vision
2025 Comprehensive General Plan Update (SCH #2004031159), which was certified on January 25, 2005, there
are no known species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species; no known wetlands; and no
known native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or native wildlife nursery sites within the City. Furthermore, the City of Downey does not have any local
policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, nor is there any adopted Habitat Conservation, Natural
Community Conservation, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plans. Therefore, the
calls for review ordinance will not result in a substandard effect on biological resources.
Agenda Page 25
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 9 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines 5064.85?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
5064.5?
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside
of formal cemeteries?
Response:
(a through c): Historical, archaeological, and/or paleontological resources are not typically encountered within
the City of Downey. The proposed code amendment to allow the City Council to review decisions of the Planning
Commission could involve new construction or development projects. As with all construction in the City, should
any cultural resources be discovered on the site, the applicant is required to comply with the provisions set forth
Section 15064.5 of Title 14, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines).
(d): Since burials within the City of Downey have occurred in the Downey Cemetery since the late 1880’s,
human remains are not typically encountered during construction. The proposed code amendment to allow the
City Council to review decisions of the Planning Commission could involve new construction or development.
Nevertheless, as with all construction in the City, should any human remains be discovered on future
construction sites, the applicant is required to comply with the provisions set forth Section 15064.5 of Title 14,
Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines).
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
2) Strong seismic ground shaking?
3) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
4) Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Agenda Page 26
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 10 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of
the California Building Code (2001), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of water?
Response:
(a1 though a3): The City of Downey is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.
Nevertheless, the City, like much of Southern California, is located in an area that is considered seismically
active. The nearest known fault to the City is the Whittier fault, which is approximately 5 miles from the City’s
boundaries. According to the Southern California Earthquake Data Center, the maximum probable earthquake
that can be generated by the Whittier Fault is a magnitude 7.2. No new construction is anticipated as a result of
the amendment; therefore, the code amendment will not expose people to these types of seismic hazards.
(a4): The City of Downey is relatively flat; therefore, no landslides are anticipated.
(b): The proposed code amendment will allow the City Council to review decisions of the Planning Commission,
and does not involve a particular project. Therefore, the proposed code amendment, in and of itself, will not alter
existing topsoil.
(c and d): The proposed code amendment will allow the City Council to review decisions of the Planning
Commission, and does not involve a particular project. Therefore, the proposed code amendment, in and of itself,
will not alter existing exposure to these types of seismic hazards.
(e): The City of Downey is an urban area that is served by a sanitary sewer system. New septic tanks are
prohibited within the Cit y.
7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION. Would the project:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
Response:
(a and b): Atmospheric gases, which allow solar radiation into the atmosphere but prevent heat from escaping,
thus warming the Earth’s atmosphere, are often referred to as greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gases (GHGs)
are released into the atmosphere by both natural and anthropogenic (human) activity. The principal greenhouse
gases resulting from anthropogenic activity that enter and accumulate in the atmosphere are carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases such as hydrofluorocarbons. The
accumulation of these gases in the atmosphere at levels in excess of natural activity levels increases the Earth’s
temperature result in changing climatic conditions in different parts of the planet, including California.
Agenda Page 27
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 11 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
The proposed code amendment will allow the City Council to review decisions of the Planning Commission, and
does not involve a particular project. As such, to proposed amendment will not create additional GHG.
Nevertheless, the City will continue its review of future projects to ensure that the projects are consistent with all
General Plan goals, objectives, and policies, including those that help the City contribute to regional GHG
reduction efforts. The 2010 California Building Code regulations, adopted by Downey in January 2011, would
further increase energy efficiency in new residential buildings, thus reducing total energy demand and thereby
reducing the level of greenhouse gas emissions generated from coal, natural gas, and oil-based energy sources.
Development of new housing would also be subject to all increasing development and energy efficiency
standards, such as the 2010 California Building Code.
8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of
a public airport or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wild land fires, including where wild
lands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences
are intermixed with wild lands?
Agenda Page 28
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 12 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Response:
(a through c and g): The proposed code amendment will allow the City Council to review decisions of the
Planning Commission, and does not involve a particular project. Therefore, the proposed code amendment, in
and of itself, will not generate hazardous waste
(d): The proposed code amendment will allow the City Council to review decisions of the Planning Commission,
and does not involve a particular project. The proposed code amendment, in and of itself, is not site specific;
consequently, it does not involve a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites.
(e and f): The City of Downey is not located within an airport land use plan nor is it within two miles of an airstrip.
(h): The City of Downey is within an urbanized area in the southeast portion of Los Angeles County. There are
no wild lands within the vicinity.
9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of
pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would
not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of stream
or river, in a manner which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on- or off-site?
e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
Agenda Page 29
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 13 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Response:
(a through f): The proposed code amendment will allow the City Council to review decisions of the Planning
Commission, and does not involve a particular project. As such, to proposed amendment will not require new
construction and, as such, will not impact water quality.
(g through i): Most of the City, is located between the San Gabriel River and the Rio Hondo Channel.
According to the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) that was prepared for the Downey Vision 2025
Comprehensive General Plan Update (SCH #2004031159), which was certified on January 25, 2005, both of
these flood control channels have been designed to meet or exceed the discharge capacity for a 100-year flood.
Furthermore, the FEIR notes that there are no concerns with a potential levee break on either channel.
Notwithstanding this, pursuant to the Letter of Map Change (LOMC) issued by FEMA on September 27, 2008,
the entire City (except for the aforementioned rivers) is within Flood Zone X in which impacts from a 100-year
flood event are not anticipated.
(j): The City of Downey is relatively flat and is not located near a dam, lake, or ocean. As such, impacts from a
seiche, tsunami, or mudflow are not anticipated.
10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established community?
b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
Response:
(a and b): The proposed code amendment will allow the City Council to review decisions of the Planning
Commission, and does not involve a particular project. No new construction or development will occur as a result
of adoption of these regulations. As such, there is no capability to divide an established community. No new
construction or development will occur as a result of adoption of these regulations and will not violate or alter any
policy adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
(c): The City of Downey is a fully developed, urbanized area that is with only a few sites for infill development
available. No habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans that have jurisdiction over the
area.
Agenda Page 30
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 14 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
Response:
(a and b): Because the code amendment will not result in any physical alterations to the site, it will not result in
the loss any mineral resources with local, regional, or State-wide importance.
12. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground
borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of
a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
Response:
(a through d): No additional impacts are expected by allowing the City Council to review decisions of the
Planning Commission.
(e and f): The City of Downey is not located within an airport land use plan, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, or within the vicinity of a private airstrip.
13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
Agenda Page 31
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 15 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Response:
(a and b): The proposed code amendment will allow the City Council to review decisions of the Planning
Commission and does not involve a particular project. This aspect of the appeal process will not induce growth,
require new housing, or result in the displacement of persons.
14. PUBLIC SERVICES.
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
1) Fire protection?
2) Police protection?
3) Schools?
4) Parks?
5) Other public facilities? Response:
(a): The City of Downey is a full service city, with most of the municipal services being provided directly through
the City. Since the code amendment will not induce growth, it will not result in an increase in demand for public
services.
15. RECREATION.
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Agenda Page 32
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 16 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Response:
(a and b): Since the code amendment will not induce growth, it will not result in an increase in the use of or the
demand for recreational facilities.
16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a. Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to
the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system
(i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or
congestion at intersections)?
b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management
agency for designated roads or highways?
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results
in substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access?
f. Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Response:
(a and b): The proposed code amendment will allow the City Council to review decisions of the Planning
Commission and does not involve a particular project. Therefore, the proposed amendment, in and of itself, will
not cause an increased amount of traffic in the city.
(c): The code amendment will not alter existing air traffic patterns or create additional air traffic.
(d through g): It is not expected that the code amendment will create a hazard to pedestrians, emergency
access, bicycles, alternative transportation, or impede on the existing parking.
17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b. Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Agenda Page 33
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 17 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand
in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Response:
(a and g): Since the code amendment will not induce growth, it will not result in an increase in demand for utility
services. Nevertheless, the City of Downey is an urban environment with all utility systems in place.
18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history
or prehistory?
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable? “Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Response:
(a): The City of Downey is an urbanized area that is mostly built out with only infill development potential.
According to the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) that was prepared for the Downey Vision 2025
Comprehensive General Plan Update (SCH #2004031159), which was certified on January 25, 2005, there are
no known species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Additionally, there are no known
wetlands, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, within the City. Furthermore, the proposed project
Agenda Page 34
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
City of Downey Page 18 October 1- 2014
Potentially
Significant
Impact - EIR
Analysis Is
required
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
will not result in the demolition of any existing structures. As such, the proposed code amendment will not
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish
or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples
of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
(b and c): Based on the analysis contained within this initial study, the proposed code amendment is not
anticipated to create a significant impact. When considered with past, current, and other proposed projects in the
City, it is unlikely that the code amendment will contribute towards any cumulative impact. Therefore, the code
amendment will not cause a substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly
Agenda Page 35
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-0003-00180 SECTION IV – REFERENCES
City of Downey Page 19 October 1- 2014
SECTION IV. REFERENCES
The following documents have been referenced in this Environmental Evaluation and are available for
review of the City of Downey, Planning Division, 11111 Brookshire Ave, Downey, CA 90241
1. City of Downey General Plan, adopted January 25, 2005
2. City of Downey General Plan FEIR (SCH #2004031159), certified January 25, 2005
3. City of Downey Municipal Code
4. City of Downey Zoning Map
Agenda Page 36
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION V – EXHIBITS
City of Downey Page 20 October 1- 2014
SECTION V. EXHIBITS
Proposed Code Language
Downey
SECTION 9806.02. INTENT AND PURPOSE.
To avoid results inconsistent with the purposes of this article, decisions of the City Planner and other
Administrative Officials of the City may be appealed to the Commission, and decisions of the Commission
may be appealed to the Council.
SECTION 9806.04. PROCEDURES.
Figure 9.8.1 and Figure 9.8.2 illustrate the processes described below.
(a) Appeals of Administrative Decisions.
(1) Written Notification. Any appeal from a decision of the City Planner or other
Administrative Official of the City in the administration of this article, or where it is alleged by
any person that there is an error in any order, requirement, permit, decision, or determination
made by an Administrative Official of the City in the administration or enforcement of this
article, shall be made in writing to the Commission. The City Clerk shall not accept for filing a
notice of appeal until and unless the appellant or person requesting the hearing has submitted
to the City Clerk a filing fee as determined by resolution of the Council.
Agenda Page 37
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION V – EXHIBITS
City of Downey Page 21 October 1- 2014
Figure 9.8.1. Process for Appeal of an Administrative Decision
Agenda Page 38
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION V – EXHIBITS
City of Downey Page 22 October 1- 2014
Figure 9.8.2. Process for Appeal of A Commission Decision
The written notice of appeal shall be filed within fifteen (15) calendar days of the original
decision by the City Planner or Administrative Official of the City.
(2) Records. The City Planner or Administrative Official of the City shall then transmit to the
Commission all papers constituting the record upon which the action appealed from was taken.
(3) Stay. An appeal shall stay all proceedings unless the City Planner or Administrative
Official notifies the Commission that a stay would cause imminent peril to life and property.
(4) Public Hearings. Public hearings shall be set and notice given in the same manner and
time as provided in Section 9804 of this chapter.
(5) Decision. The Commission may hear and decide such matters by the affirmative vote of
not less than a majority of the members present. A tie vote shall be considered denial of
appeal.
(b) Appeals of a Commission Decision.
(1) Written Notification and Timing. A decision of the Commission, within fifteen (15)
Agenda Page 39
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION V – EXHIBITS
City of Downey Page 23 October 1- 2014
calendar days after the date of such action, may be appealed by written notice of appeal filed
in duplicate with the City Clerk. Such appeal shall specify where it is claimed that the
Commission’s findings were in error, and where the decision of the Commission is not
supported by the evidence in the matter, and where the public necessity, convenience, and
welfare require such exception or permit. The City Clerk shall not accept for filing a notice of
appeal until and unless the appellant or person requesting the hearing has submitted to the
City Clerk a filing fee as determined by resolution of the Council.
(2) Records. Upon the receipt of such notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall transmit one (1)
copy of the notice of appeal to the City Planner with notice of the date, time, and place when
the appeal shall be given before the Council. The City Planner shall transmit to the Council a
copy of all pertinent information contained in the Commission’s permanent file.
The City Clerk shall transmit a copy of such notice of appeal and place such appeal on the
Council’s first available meeting.
(3) Stay. On the date a notice of appeal is filed pursuant to this section, all proceedings in
furtherance of the determination, order, decision, condition, or requirement appealed from,
including the effective date of any permit or variance in question, shall be stayed until the final
determination of the appeal or review by the Council.
(4) Public Hearing. The Council may not approve, reverse, or modify, in whole or in part, the
Commission’s final determination, decision, order, requirement, or condition which is appealed
until the Council has held a public hearing. Such public hearings shall be set and notice given
by the City Clerk in the same manner and time as provided in Section 9804 of this chapter.
(5) Decision. The Council shall announce its findings and decision in an appeal proceeding
by formal action. Such action shall recite, among other things, the reasons which, in the
opinion of the Council, make the Council’s determination of the matter necessary to carry out
the general purpose of this article and shall order that the Commission’s decision be affirmed,
reversed, or modified. The Council shall effect such determination, or any portion thereof, by
the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the total membership of the Council present at
the hearing; otherwise, the appeal shall be denied. The action of the Council shall be final and
conclusive.
(c) Calls for Review
(1) The City Council shall have the right to review the decisions or actions of the Planning
Commission. Any review initiated under this section must comply with all requirements
that would ordinarily apply to an appeal of the type of decision or action at issue as
described in Section 9806.04 (b) of this Code.
(2) Written Notification and Timing. Any two (2) members of the City Council may initiate a
call for review of a decision of the Planning Commission, within fifteen (15) calendar days
after the date of such action, by delivering a written notice of appeal with the City Clerk.
Such appeal shall state the reasons for such review. No filing fee shall be required in
making a request for review under this section.
(3) Records. Upon the receipt of such notice of the call for review, the City Clerk shall
transmit one (1) copy of the notice of the call for review to the City Planner with notice of
the date, time, and place when the appeal shall be given before the Council. The City
Agenda Page 40
CEQA INITIAL STUDY – PLN-14-00180 SECTION V – EXHIBITS
City of Downey Page 24 October 1- 2014
Planner shall transmit to the Council a copy of all pertinent information contained in the
Commission’s permanent file.
The City Clerk shall transmit a copy of such notice of the call for review and place such the
call for review on the Council’s first available meeting.
(4) Stay. On the date a notice of the call for review is filed pursuant to this section, all
proceedings in furtherance of the determination, order, decision, condition, or requirement
appealed from, including the effective date of any permit or variance in question, shall be
stayed until the final determination of the review by the Council.
(5) Public Hearing. The Council may not approve, reverse, or modify, in whole or in part, the
Commission’s final determination, decision, order, requirement, or condition which is
appealed until the Council has held a public hearing. Such public hearings shall be set and
notice given by the City Clerk in the same manner and time as provided in Section 9804 of
this chapter.
(6) Decision. The Council shall announce its findings and decision in the call for review
proceeding by formal action. Such action shall recite, among other things, the reasons
which, in the opinion of the Council, make the Council’s determination of the matter
necessary to carry out the general purpose of this article and shall order that the
Commission’s decision be affirmed, reversed, or modified. The Council shall effect such
determination, or any portion thereof, by the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of
the total membership of the Council present at the hearing; otherwise, the call for review
shall be denied. The action of the Council shall be final and conclusive.
Agenda Page 41